deliverable document template - narec distributed … auxiliary diesel engine..... 43 5.4.3...

D2.3_INOMANSHIP_M39_V1.0 Technical Description of the New Cargo Ship

Models and Vessel Comparison INOMANS2HIP

27/09/2013 PU of 67

Deliverable D2.3

Technical Description of the New Cargo Ship Models and Vessel Comparison

WP2 “Energy Balance Analyse”

Author(s): Hans van Vugt Jonathan Heslop

Reviewer(s): Tony Roskilly

Identifier: D2.3_INOMANSHIP_M39_V1

Dissemination level: PU

Contractual date: M37(contractual date of Deliverable)

Actual date: M39(Actual date of Deliverable)

Number of pages: 67 (No. of pages in Document) Summary This document presents the work of Task 2.4 and Task 2.5. Deliverable D2.3

discusses in detail the new cargo ship designs and the results are compared with the reference vessel. The models shall be incorporated in the simulation tool libraries for use in other tasks and work packages to evaluate and demonstrate the different potential of the new energy systems’ configurations, which will be developed as part of this project.

Approved by Coordinator Date: 31/7/14

Dissemination Levels

PU Public

PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services).

RE Restricted to group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services)

CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services)



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Document History Revision Date Author Comments

V1 31/7/14 Hans van Vugt Jonathan Heslop Prof. A.P. Roskilly (Reviewer)

Submitted

Partners’ Acronym List Beneficiary Number*

Beneficiary Name Beneficiary Acronym

Country

1 Newcastle University UNEW United Kingdom

2 (TERMINATED) Converteam SAS CVT France

3 Nederlandse organisatie voor Toegepast Naturuurwetenschappelijik - TNO

TNO Netherlands

4 Groupement des Industries de Construction et Activités Navales

GICAN France

6 Wärtsilä Finalnd Oy WARTSILA Finland 7 Novamen NOVAMEN France

8 National Renewable Energy Centre Limited

NAREC United Kingdom

9 Germanischer Lloyd SE GL Germany 10

(TERMINATED) Marine Power Industry Consult MPI France

11 (TERMINATED) IMTECH MARINE & OFFSHORE BV IMTECH Netherlands

12 IMTECH MARINE & OFFSHORE BV IMTECH Netherlands



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Table of Contents

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................... 4

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................ 5

GLOSSARY OF TERMS & ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................... 5

1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 NEW BUILD CONFIGURATION OF SHIP ............................................................................................................ 6 1.3 THE GES MODELLING ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................................................ 7 1.4 ASSUMED COST AND EMISSION FACTORS ........................................................................................................ 7

2 REFERENCE SHIP MODELLING ............................................................................................... 9 2.1 OPERATIONAL PROFILE ANALYSES REFERENCE SHIP......................................................................................... 10

2.1.1 Fuel Consumption Reference Vessel................................................................................................ 11 2.1.2 Estimated Costs for the Reference Vessel ....................................................................................... 12 2.1.3 Emissions for the Reference Vessel ................................................................................................. 13

2.2 ATTRIBUTES OF INSTALLED EQUIPMENT ON-BOARD THE REFERENCE SHIP ........................................................... 14

3 NEW RETROFIT SHIP DESIGN MODELS ................................................................................. 16 3.1 SINGLE LINE RETROFIT LOWEST COST CONFIGURATION MODEL ........................................................................ 16

3.1.1 Fuel Consumption for the Lowest Cost Model ................................................................................ 18 3.1.2 Estimated Costs for the Lowest Cost Model .................................................................................... 19 3.1.3 Emissions for the Lowest Cost Model .............................................................................................. 21 3.1.4 Attributes of the Equipment in the Lowest Cost Model .................................................................. 23

3.2 SINGLE LINE RETROFIT FOR THE LOWEST EMISSIONS MODEL ............................................................................ 25 3.2.1 Fuel Consumption of the Low Emission Retrofit Configuration ....................................................... 27 3.2.2 Estimated Costs for the Lowest Emissions Model ........................................................................... 29 3.2.3 Emissions Low Emissions Retrofit Model ........................................................................................ 29 3.2.4 Attributes of the Equipment in the Lowest Emissions Model .......................................................... 30

4 NEW CARGO VESSEL DESIGN MODELLING ........................................................................... 32 4.1 FUEL CONSUMPTION NEW BUILD CARGO SHIP MODEL ................................................................................... 33 4.2 FUEL CONSUMPTION NEW BUILD CARGO SHIP MODEL .................................................................................... 35 4.3 EMISSIONS NEW BUILD CARGO SHIP MODEL ................................................................................................. 36 4.4 ATTRIBUTES OF THE EQUIPMENT PROPOSED FOR THE NEW BUILD SHIP MODEL ................................................... 37

5 INOMANS2HIP LIBRARY UPDATE ......................................................................................... 39 5.1 OVERVIEW BASIC CARGO LIBRARY ............................................................................................................... 39 5.2 OVERVIEW NEW CARGO LIBRARY ................................................................................................................ 40 5.3 OVERVIEW SIMULINK LIBRARY .................................................................................................................... 41 5.4 IMPROVED SIMULATION MODELS ................................................................................................................ 41

5.4.1 Main Diesel Engine.......................................................................................................................... 41 5.4.2 Auxiliary Diesel Engine .................................................................................................................... 43 5.4.3 Auxiliary WHRS Ssystem ................................................................................................................. 44

6 CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER WORK ................................................................................... 48 6.1 FINAL COMPARISON OF THE RETROFIT AND NEW BUILD CONFIGURATION OF SHIP WITH THE REFERENCE SHIP ........... 48

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 50

ANNEXESANNEX A: GENERAL REFERENCE SHIP INFORMATION OPERATIONAL PROFILE ............... 52



31/07/2014 PU of 67

ANNEX B: INPUT REFERENCE SHIP OPERATIONAL PROFILE OF ONE TRIP ..................................... 53

ANNEX C: INPUT LOWEST EMISSION SHIP OPERATIONAL PROFILE OF ONE TRIP .......................... 54

ANNEX D: INPUT FOR NEW BUILD CARGO SHIP OPERATIONAL PROFILE OF ONE TRIP ................... 55

ANNEX E: RESULT EEOI REFERENCE SHIP INFORMATION OPERATIONAL PROFILE ........................ 56

ANNEX F: SIMULATE REFERENCE VESSEL IN GES ......................................................................... 65

List of Figures

Figure 1: single - line of existing reference ship ......................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2: Reference ship model ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 3: Operational profile reference ship ............................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 4: Fuel consumption reference ship ............................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 5: Fuel costs of the reference vessel over a year .......................................................................................................... 13 Figure 6: Emissions reference ship........................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 7: single – line of retrofit lowest cost model................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 8: Low-cost retrofit configuration model in GES ........................................................................................................... 17 Figure 9: Fuel consumption of the low-cost retrofit model without onshore power .............................................................. 18 Figure 10: Fuel consumption of the low-cost retrofit model with onshore power .................................................................. 19 Figure 11: Fuel cost of the low-cost retrofit model without onshore power ........................................................................... 20 Figure 12: Fuel cost of the low-cost retrofit model with onshore power ................................................................................ 21 Figure 13: Emissions lowest cost model without onshore power supply ................................................................................ 22 Figure 14: Emissions lowest cost model with onshore power supply ...................................................................................... 23 Figure 15: single – line of retrofit lowest emission model ....................................................................................................... 25 Figure 16: Lowest emission model in GES ................................................................................................................................ 26 Figure 17: Operational profile lowest emission model fuel consumption lowest emission model ......................................... 27 Figure 18: Fuel consumption lowest emission profile with onshore power ............................................................................ 28 Figure 19: Fuel cost lowest emission model with onshore power ........................................................................................... 29 Figure 20: Emissions lowest emission model with onshore power ......................................................................................... 30 Figure 21: Ring topology of New Building cargo vessel ........................................................................................................... 32 Figure 22: Ring new network design new cargo ship in GES .................................................................................................... 32 Figure 23: Operational profile for new build cargo ship grid ................................................................................................... 33 Figure 24: Fuel consumption new network configuration of ship with onshore power .......................................................... 34 Figure 25: Equivalent fuel consumption of the new network configuration of ship without onshore power ......................... 35 Figure 26: Fuel cost new build cargo ship with onshore power ............................................................................................... 36 Figure 27: Emissions new build cargo ship with onshore power ............................................................................................. 37 Figure 28: INOMANS2HIP libraries ........................................................................................................................................... 39 Figure 29: Basic Cargo Library .................................................................................................................................................. 40 Figure 30: New cargo library .................................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 31: Overview INOMANS2HIP Simulink library ............................................................................................................... 41 Figure 32: Exhaust gas component connect to main engine ................................................................................................... 42 Figure 33: Parameter list of exhaust gas flow and temperature properties. ........................................................................... 42 Figure 34: Table Exhaust gas temperature [C] of main engine as function of % engine load. ................................................. 42 Figure 35: Exhaust gas component connect to auxiliary diesel generator ............................................................................... 43 Figure 36: Auxiliary WHRS for the new cargo ship designs ...................................................................................................... 44 Figure 37: Fuel consumption [g/s] aux. WHRS system as function of load .............................................................................. 45 Figure 38: Power of aux. WHRS (4.5 MW) as function of the generator load ......................................................................... 45 Figure 39: Power of aux. WHRS (1.5 MW with 2.5kg/s) as function of the load ...................................................................... 46 Figure 40: Efficiency aux system with WHRS (blue) and without WHRS (black) ...................................................................... 46 Figure 41: Fuel consumption [g/s] auxiliary power generation system with WHRS (blue) and without WHRS (black) ........... 47 Figure 42: efficiency propeller during the operational trip (black new build) ......................................................................... 49



31/07/2014 PU of 67

List of Tables

Table 1: Main power consumers.............................................................................................................................................. 10 Table 2: Attributes of installed equipment of the reference ship ............................................................................................ 15 Table 3: Attributes of the equipment in the low cost retrofit model ...................................................................................... 24 Table 4: Attributes of the equipment in the low cost retrofit model ...................................................................................... 31 Table 5: Attributes of the equipment included in the new build configuration of ship model ................................................ 38 Table 6: the fuel consuption of the engine in relationship to the speed and load of the propeller ........................................ 43 Table 7: Specific values auxiliary engine .................................................................................................................................. 44 Table 8: Comparison of all the designs .................................................................................................................................... 48

Glossary of Terms & Abbreviations

AE Auxiliary Engine LNG Liquefied Natural gas AES All Electric Ship LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas CET Central Europe Time MCR Maximum Continuous Rating CO2 Carbon Dioxide MDO Marine Diesel Oil CPP Controllable Pitch Propeller ME Main Engine DG Diesel Generator MEPC Marine Environment Protection Committee EBM Energy Balance Modelling MFO Marine Fuel Oil ECA Emission Control Area MGO Marine Gas Oil EEDI Energy Efficiency Design Index MTBF Meantime Between Failures EEOI Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator MTBR Meantime Between Repairs EMS Energy Management System NL Netherlands EPA Environmental Protection Agency NOx Nitrogen Oxides EU European Union PTI Power Take-in FC Fuel Consumption PM Particulate Matter GES General Energy Systems PTO Power Take-off GHG Green House Gas RoRo Roll-on/Roll-off GMT Greenwich Mean Time SFC Specific Fuel Consumption HC Hydrocarbons SFOC Specific Fuel Oil Consumption HFO Heavy Fuel Oil SOx Sulphur Oxides HMI Human Machine Interfaces UK United Kingdom IMO International Maritime Organization WHRS Waste Heat Recovery System



31/07/2014 PU of 67

1 INTRODUCTION

The aim of this report is to present the modelling of all energy relevant components to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for retrofit and new build network designs of cargo ship based on the original reference ship. The objectives are to optimise the energy systems on-board by balancing of the energy sources and consumers on-board a cargo ship enabling the incorporation of alternative energy sources and storage systems. This project aims to reduce GHG emissions by implementing novel, state-of-the-art energy concepts, distribution networks and energy management strategies (EMS). To enable a complete investigation and analysis of the proposed configurations, an effective model of each of the electric systems and their installation on-board ship is very important for meaningful comparison and evaluation.

This document details the work performed in Task 2.4 and Task 2.5 to develop the retrofit and new cargo ship power network topologies, and compare with the network topology of the reference ship. The models and the energy technologies being investigated as part of this project are to be implemented within the General Energy Systems (GES) modelling environment. In Tasks 2.1 and 2.2, a suitable reference cargo ship was chosen, a RoRo cargo ship (the Stena Carrier), and modelled within TNO’s GES modelling software tool. In Task 2.3 a new model library was developed allowing models of the reference ship’s on-board systems and new energy technologies and network topologies to be created in the simulation environment for evaluation and comparison.

The GES tool will be used to simulate the global energy systems, input differing operational profiles and compare the different ship electrical configurations that will be explored in this project. Component libraries will be created for GES, extending the current INOMANS2HIP library with all energy relevant components presented in this report.

1.1 Retrofit Design of Ship

As reported in Deliverable D3.3, two possible retrofit designs were developed. The first, an economic model, simulated the configuration of ship with the lowest implied costs associated with its implementation, in order to reduce emissions and operational costs through reduced fuel consumption. The second environmentally friendly solution enabled the implementation and operation of technologies to maximise environmental impact by minimising the ship’s emissions, largely irrelevant of installation costs, but restricted by the original ship’s design and operation.

Energy technologies were identified that can be implemented on-board certain types of cargo ships. In order to assist in the study and assess the impact of the chosen technologies, models were created, which would be used in the reference ship global model. Chapter 3 will describe in detail the modelling and simulation results of the first iteration of the low cost and low emissions network configurations being investigated in this project.

1.2 New Build Configuration of Ship

In addition to the two retrofit designs for the reference ship, Deliverable D3.3 details a proposed power network system for a new build ship. The second part of this study explores a new build network configuration allowing the flexible integration of different AC and DC power sources, storage systems and consumers on-board a replacement of the reference ship, while ensuring the continuous and safe supply of power for both propulsion and on-board operational needs.

The new build network configuration, as described in Deliverable D3.3, is based on ring network architecture, allowing consumers and sources to be integrated into the network at any point. This architecture ensures



31/07/2014 PU of 67

continuous and safe operation of the ship during failure of individual power sources or consumers, as the power can flow either way around the network. One of the key features of the new build power network is the replacement of the propulsion diesel engines with electric motors and the main engines becoming electrical generators, adding flexibility to the installation and operation. In addition, separate AC and DC ring networks can be integrated into on complete system enabling both DC and AC consumers and sources to be installed with the minimal power electronics and control requirements.

Chapter 4 describes in detail the modelling and simulation results of the first iteration of the new build ship network configuration.

1.3 The GES Modelling Environment

The GES simulation environment is a unique open architecture software package developed over twenty years by TNO at the bequest of the Royal Netherlands Navy to facilitate the study the energy flow on-board marine vessels. GES provides a simulation tool allowing analysis of energy flow of complex processes and systems, modelling at a component or sub-system level. GES is a flexible tool that uses simple connectable building blocks to create component models to create whole ship or process systems can be used to explore and compare different configurations and energy strategies at an operational level.

Due to the open architecture of GES, many other aspects of the system and components can be included into the model. Aspects such as weight, size, failure rates (MTBF), maintenance times (MTBR), costs, efficiency and fuel consumption can all be included as separate parameters into the simulation. In addition, GES can use excel files to import and export real-time operation data for easy analysis and comparison of different system configurations or designs. Some of the typical applications of the GES program are;

• Analysis of installed integrated and interdependent propulsion and power generation systems • Determining and comparing the effects of the application of new technology systems or operational

strategies on the whole system or individual components • Enabling rapid system design and analyses • Optimising operational performance of installed systems • Determining the residual capacity of system in case component malfunction • Cost and environmental impact analyses of entire systems or at a component level

GES’s open object-oriented modelling system allows for the easy development of much large complex systems from basic building blocks of the component and the sub-system models. Libraries of the proposed technology components and sub-system models can be created to allow rapid development and analysis different arrangements and installations for a reference ship (to be decided in Task 1.1 and reported in Deliverable D1.2), as reported in this document.

1.4 Assumed Cost and Emission Factors

For comparing of the various models create during this task, certain cost and emission factors were used. The costs factors used in the models to calculate the fuel costs for each model are given below;

• HFO ~ €445/ton ($600/ton) Bunkerworld • MDO ~ €665/ton ($900/ton) Bunkerworld • LNG ~ €75/ton ($100/ton) Henry Hub (US)

And for the onshore commercial electrical power supply costs, these were taken from EU commission Energy Prices & Costs report [EU, 2014].

• Industry price



31/07/2014 PU of 67

o NL ~ €0.1/kWh o UK ~ €0.12/kWh

• Domestic Price o NL ~ €0.19/kWh o UK ~ €0.18/kWh

It was decided to use an onshore industrial power supply price of €0.12/kWh, as this represents the worst-case scenario and the equivalent fuel consumption can be calculated to compare the onshore power supply with the on-board auxiliary power generation. Within the GES simulation environment, the following values for the emissions and cost factors were used for shore base generation:

• Carbon_dioxide = 0.618658; //kg/kWh

• Carbon_monoxide = 0.000349; //kg/kWh

• Nitrogen_oxides = 0.001229; //kg/kWh

• NMVOC = 0.000144; //kg/kWh

• Sulphur_dioxide = 0.003801; //kg/kWh

• Hydrocarbons = 5.1e-6; //kg/kWh

• elec_cost = 0.12; //euro/kWh



31/07/2014 PU of 67

2 Reference Ship Modelling

The reference ship selected was a RoRo cargo carrier, the Stena Carrier (see Annex A for details), sailing regularly between the ports of Harwich (UK) and Rotterdam (NL), Europort. The Stena Carrier has four main engines driving two CPP propellers. On-board electrical power for the bow thrusters (1MW each) and hotel load (650kW) is provided by two generators augmented by two PTO shaft generators connected to the main propulsion engines through a gearbox. Figure 1 show the on-board power and propulsion drive network arrangement of the reference ship, the Stena Carrier.

Figure 1: single - line of existing reference ship

Figure 2 shows the model of reference ship created in the GES simulation environment. The model is based on the single-line diagram of the existing reference ship. The one line diagram is extended with two economisers connected to the main engines on port and starboard side who are used for generating heating on-board the ship during its voyages. For heating in harbour, two boilers are used front and aft of the ship.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 2: Reference ship model

Diesel generator one (DG1) operates only on MDO and Diesel Generator two (DG2) operates in practice only on HFO, so it is easy to switch over fuel type during sailing for power generation in emission control areas (ECA) or in harbour waters where emissions be further restricted. .

2.1 Operational Profile Analyses Reference Ship

The main power consumers are shown in Table 1 as inputs to the simulation.

AUX_POWER Propeller_PS Propeller_SB Boiler_aft Boiler_fwd Bowthruster_1 Bowthruster_2 Economizer_SB Economizer_PS

Table 1: Main power consumers

Propulsion power depends on the speed of the ship and is set in the operational profile overview. The basic operational profile for a round trip from Europort, Rotterdam, to the port of Harwich and back again is shown



31/07/2014 PU of 67

in Figure 3. The total time line was then extrapolated for one year with 8760 hours, to enable the operational strategy to be defined over longer periods covering several trips allowing the varying weather conditions to be defined for certain components, like wind and solar.

Figure 3: Operational profile reference ship

Details of the operational profile for the round trip are given in Annex B. From the data plot it is clear that the ship uses far more power sailing from Harwich to Europort as it does from Europort to Harwich. This is due to the time difference between the UK and the Netherlands. The UK is one hour behind central Europe, operating on Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) as opposed to Central European Time (CET). In other words, the ship gains an hour sailing east-to-west from Europort to Harwich, but loses one hour going in the opposite direction. This means, if the ship leaves at 5:30pm local time from each port and arrives at its destination port at 9:30am, then the ship has to sail at an increased speed when travelling west-to-east compared to sailing east-to-west. This increase in speed will consequently increase fuel consumption and emissions due to the main engines having to work harder.

2.1.1 Fuel Consumption Reference Vessel

Fuel costs are the main economic drivers for the all operational decisions of a ship, accounting for around 80% of the overall costs during the life of the ship. Consequently, fuel efficiency and, thus, fuel savings can have a major influence on competitiveness of the vessel. In addition, since emissions are related to fuel consumption by reducing one, reductions in the other will occur. To determine the fuel efficiency of any new ship design with alternative energy sources or operational strategy, the fuel consumption of the reference ship needs to be calculated for the round trip between Europort and Harwich. Figure 4 shows the fuel consumptions for the main engines, auxiliary generators and installed boils on-board the Stena Carrier, as well as the accumulated fuel consumption for the all trips over a year.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 4: Fuel consumption reference ship

The speed of the trip, Europort-Harwich-Europort, averaged over a year, means the main diesel engines #1 and #4 are not needed to be operated. In this case it was done to simplify the modelling in the early stages of development. For later analysis, the trip was divided over a year and included the running of engines #1 and #2 being taken into account. The total fuel consumption for a year was found to be about 7030 ton of HFO+MDO, which can be broken down by the different consumers as follows;

• The amount HFO+MDO for one year used by the main engines is 5421.4 ton/year. • The amount HFO used by DG1 (seagoing) is 659 ton/year. • The amount MDO used by DG2 (harbour) is 684.5 ton/year. • For the oil fire boilers (harbour) it is 257 ton/year.

2.1.2 Estimated Costs for the Reference Vessel

Once the fuel consumption was determined for each stage of the trip for an entire year it was then possible to calculate the annual costs associated with each part of the trip and total for fuel costs used by the ship, using €445/ton ($600/ton) of fuel for HFO and €665/ton ($900/ton) of fuel for MDO [Bunkerworld, 2014]. Figure 5 shows the annual fuel costs for each part of the trip and overall costs as calculated using the reference ship model.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 5: Fuel costs of the reference vessel over a year

The annual total fuel cost for the reference vessel was calculated to be about 3487.5 k€/year.

2.1.3 Emissions for the Reference Vessel

It has been established that emissions are dependent on either the fuel being burnt or the combustion conditions in the cylinder. CO2 and SOx emissions depend upon the fuel being combusted, while NOx formation is dependent on the combustion temperature, and hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide emissions air-fuel mix ratio during combustion. For CO2 emissions a ratio of 3.13tons/ton of fuel combusted is commonly used for HFO and 3.19tons/ton of fuel combusted for MDO were used. SOx emissions are calculated using the simple relationship of 20x %S content of the fuel, i.e. if HFO has 3.5% sulphur content then the SOx emissions is 70g/kg of fuel combusted and MDO of 0.5% sulphur content the SOx emissions are calculated to be 10g/kg of fuel combusted.

The formation of NOx emissions is more complicated to determine, as they depend on the combustion cycle temperature of the engine. NOx emissions are mainly formed through high temperature oxidation of the nitrogen in the scavenger air forming a mixture of nitric oxide (NO ~ 80%), nitrogen dioxide (NO2 ~ 20%) and nitrous oxide (N2O >1%). This is highly dependent on the type of engine and combustion cycle. Common NOx emissions factors are 85g/kg of fuel combusted and 56g/kg of fuel combusted for slow-speed and medium-speed diesel engines respectively [IMO, 2009].

Figure 6 shows the annual emissions for the reference ship for the Europort-Harwich-Europort trip using the GES model created in Task 2.3.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 6: Emissions reference ship

From the GES model of the simulated reference ship, it was show to produce the following emissions annually for the round trip (see Annex E for details);

• The total CO2 for the reference ship is 22022.5 ton/year • The total SOx for the reference ship is 112.8 ton/year • The total NOx for the reference ship is 647.5 ton/year • The total HC for the reference ship is 25.3 ton/year • The total CO for the reference ship is 33.5 ton/year

The data from the reference ship model developed in the GES simulation environment will be used to compare the possible benefits of the retrofit new build designs proposed in Chapters 3 & 4 of this document.

2.2 Attributes of Installed Equipment On-board the Reference Ship

Table 2 shows a full list of the installed equipment and their main attributes on-board the reference ship included in the GES model.



27/09/2013 PU of 67

Table 2: Attributes of installed equipment of the reference ship

Component Investment cost [k€] Length [m] Width [m] Height [m] Volume [m^3] Mass [kg] Area [m^2] Spec. mass

[kg/m] Floor area

[m^2] Nominal

power [kW] Nominal

speed [rpm] Nominal

voltage [V] LCC

[€/kWh] MTBF [year]

MTTR [h]

8ZA40s #1 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #2 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #3 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #4 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 BT1 0 0 0 0 0 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 120 BT2 0 0 0 0 0 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 120 DG1 MAN L28/32H 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 DG2 MAN L28/32H 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 Economizer PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 2 24 Economizer SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 2 24 MOT_BT1 1.15884 1.20659 0.754117 1.4807 1.3473 4445.43 0 3684.3 0 1200 1500 450 0 28 120 MOT_BT2 1.15884 1.20659 0.754117 1.4807 1.3473 4445.43 0 3684.3 0 1200 1500 450 0 28 120 oil-fired boiler Aft 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1453 0 0 0 2 0 oil-fired boiler Fwd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1453 0 0 0 2 0 Power plant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99999 0 Renk AG NDSHL3000 PS 0 1.51754 2.62828 1.02783 4.09954 1415.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.4155 5 Renk AG NDSHL3000 SB 0 1.51754 2.62828 1.02783 4.09954 1415.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.4155 5 Saft Gen SB 66.2495 1.8 1 0.908849 1.48623 5000 0 2715.82 0 1700 1800 450 0 1000 0 Shaft Gen PS 66.2495 1.8 1 0.908849 1.48623 5000 0 2715.82 0 1700 1800 450 0 1000 0 Shaft port 79.8653 50 0 0 5.4811 21943.6 0.109622 438.871 0 11000 150 0 0 1000 0 Shaft SB 79.8653 50 0 0 5.4811 21943.6 0.109622 438.871 0 11000 150 0 0 1000 0 Shore Transformer 0.0253871 0 0 0 1.5015 3.98756 0 0 0 0.5 0 450 0 99999 0 Switchboard 450V 0 1 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 450 0 99999 1 Tr 450/230V 21.4566 1.54834 1.54834 1.87706 4.5 3454.55 0 0 0 1000 0 450 0 99999 0 Tr 450/230V 5.53288 1.16126 1.16126 1.55725 2.1 933.333 0 0 0 200 0 450 0 99999 0 WB CPP four quadrant PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 60 WB CPP four quadrant SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 60

D2.3_INOMANSHIP_Mxx_V1.0 Technical Description of the New Cargo Ship


27/09/2013 PU of 67

3 New Retrofit Ship Design Models

Two new retrofit designs were proposed in D3.3, a low-cost and a low-emission network configuration. These were modelled and compared to the reference configuration. Not all new operational conditions and systems are taken into account for the fuel consumption, cost and emission calculations due to the lack of information and necessary data, but the relevant key components in each network design were implemented in the models and to be used in Task 4.2 to optimise the energy exchange between proposed installed equipment. .

The reference ship was converted to a hybrid propulsion system in the retrofit models, by using the shaft generator as a motor and replacing the power electronics with bidirectional converters. This was principally done to allow the shaft generator will be used as an electric motor (PTI) for slow-speed operations, such as manoeuvring. The auxiliary diesel generators must be upgraded to a higher power to enable them to cope with the increase in demand. Both of the auxiliary diesel engines were initially run on MDO to make simulation easier at this stage. In addition, the bow thrusters are also controlled with a frequency converter for improved part loading.

3.1 Single Line Retrofit Lowest Cost Configuration Model

The low cost retrofit configuration is based on the principle of implementing the minimal, lowest cost modifications to the original reference ship power network configuration with the maximum possible fuel saving. Figure 7 shows the low-cost retrofit network design developed by IMTECH in Task 3.3, details of which can be found in Deliverable D3.3.

Figure 7: single – line of retrofit lowest cost model.

The diagram above shows all the major components of the low-cost retrofit network configuration, with the green arrows indicating the direction of electrical power flow. In addition, a shore-to-ship power connection was included in the design to enable the ship to utilise low cost and possibly greener, if renewable or nuclear



31/07/2014 PU of 67

sources are used, shore based electrical generation supply. Note, that a number of power converters have been added compared to the original configuration of the reference ship. This was to allow flexibility in the system to enable optimised power generation during times of part loading on the network.

Using this initial design for the proposed low-cost retrofit configuration solution, extensive models of the ship were created in GES by TNO. The first iteration of the lowest cost retrofit model to be created in the GES simulation program environment is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Low-cost retrofit configuration model in GES

The key feature of the system was the introduction of the PTO/PTI shaft generator/motor into the ship’s main propulsion system. During the transit sailing part of the trip when the ship sialing at a nominal speed, the shaft generator operates as a generator in PTO mode supplying the ship with its power needs and enabling the main engines to operator more efficiently. This means, only one diesel generator will be run in port in the model to provide the necessary power requirements of the ship and over longer simulations when seasonal influences can affect the power demands of the ship, such as rougher sea conditions or bad weather during winter months.

During initial runs of the model, the ship was not run in full electric mode during manoeuvring, when the ship is sailing at slower speeds and the thrusters are engaged. During these periods, all-electrical requirements of the ship would need to be provided by the installed diesel generators running on MDO, which would not be cost effective (~€665/ton) compared to other fuels. However, subsequent iterations of the model will be run in full electrical mode, running the generators on other fuels such as HFO. In addition, these initial simulation runs did not connected the ship to the shore supply while in port, again to simply the initial modelling stages. It should also be mentioned that the exact nature and makeup of shore generated power supply was not fully defined at this stage due to the regional and source variations in each port, in terms of pricing and emissions, For example, Rotterdam has extensive wind turbine generation variations in the port area, which is more environmentally friendly, but more expensive, while Harwich has limited renewable power generation at this present time, however, sizable offshore wind turbine farms are being installed.

The operational profile is the same as the reference ship as given in Figure 3, except for transit sailing conditions when the shaft generator is operated.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

3.1.1 Fuel Consumption for the Lowest Cost Model

As before with the reference ship round trip, the low-cost retrofit simulation was run and the annual fuel consumption for the prime power sources was calculated, using the estimated fuel consumption at each stage for each of the power sources per trip. Figure 8 shows the fuel consumption of the prime power source determined for the low-cost retrofit model without onshore power and was used to determine if any benefit was gained from converting the shaft generator to be run as a motor under certain sailing conditions.

Figure 9: Fuel consumption of the low-cost retrofit model without onshore power

The total fuel consumption for a year is about 6950 ton as estimated using the low-cost retrofit simulations, broken down by machinery as follows;

• The amount HFO+MDO for one year for the main engines is 5045 ton/year. • The amount MDO for the DG1 (harbour & at sea) is 1540.5 ton/year. • The amount MDO for the DG2 (At sea) is 105 ton/year. • Oil fire boilers (harbour) is 257 ton/year.

Comparing this result with the reference ship, which was estimated to use 7030 tons of fuel per year, it can be clearly observed that the first iteration of the low cost retrofit configuration can save about 80 tons of fuel per year just by running the shaft generate as a motor during specific period of the trip. Although, this does not appear to be much at this stage it is believed further iterations of the low cost retrofit configuration model, optimising the operation of the generators and the prime movers (including shaft generator as a motor) that this can be further improved.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

In the second stage of studying the low cost retrofit configuration, the onshore power supply was included in the model and used to provide power to the ship during harbour stays. In this study the shore based power generation fuel consumption was uncertain due to the complex mix of power generation (coal, natural gas, nuclear, waste burning, hydro, solar and wind), but will be investigated at further and be added to the model once a reliable source of data for both UK and Netherlands power generation can be clarified.

Figure 10: Fuel consumption of the low-cost retrofit model with onshore power

The onshore power is related to the onshore equivalent fuel consumption. The total fuel consumption is 6859 ton/year simply by utilising a shore based power supply. This provided a saving of 89 tons of fuel per year on the simplified low cost retrofit configuration without onshore power supply and 179 tons per year compared to the reference ship model. Once again, it must be noted that this only represents estimates for the fuel consumption of the first iteration of the low cost retrofit configuration model with onshore power supply while in harbour. It is believed that with further iterations of the model can increase fuel saving by optimise the operation of power sources and consumers.

3.1.2 Estimated Costs for the Lowest Cost Model

For cost analysis for the low cost retrofit configuration, values of €445/ton of HFO, €665/ton of MDO and €75/ton of LNG were used. Figure 11 shows the fuel cost for the low cost retrofit model without onshore power for a year of sailing between Europort (Rotterdam) and the port of Harwich. The costs used the estimated fuel consumptions for the generators and main engines calculated in chapter 3.1.1 of this document.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 11: Fuel cost of the low-cost retrofit model without onshore power

From the cost calculations the total fuel cost without onshore power was estimated to be 3430k€/year from the low cost retrofit model. Comparing the yearly costs of operation with the reference ship fuel costs 3487.5k€/year, saving of 57.5k€/year. The savings can be further increased by optimising the operation between the power sources and consumers.

Figure 12 shows the annual costs of fuel of the low cost retrofit configuration with onshore power supply while in harbour. This was calculated using the model created in GES and using a shore base power supply cost of €0.12/kWh.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 12: Fuel cost of the low-cost retrofit model with onshore power

The total fuel cost with onshore power is 3344.5 k€/year as estimated using the low cost retrofit configuration model for the ship. This equated to 85.5 k€ saving a year compared to the model being run without a shore based supply and a saving of 143k€/year compared to the reference ship model cost calculations.

3.1.3 Emissions for the Lowest Cost Model

Using the fuel consumption estimates for the lowest cost solution over each stage of the operational sailing profile for the reference trip and the standard factors used within the GES modelling environment, estimations of CO2, SOx, NOx, CO and HC emissions were calculated. Figure 9 shows the estimated annual emissions calculated using the lowest cost retrofit configuration model without onshore power supply while in harbour.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 13: Emissions lowest cost model without onshore power supply

What the plot above shows is estimate annual CO2, SOx, NOx, HC and CO emissions for the low cost retrofit configuration of ship, which were calculated to be;

• The total annual CO2 emissions rate is 21792 ton/year • The total annual SOx emissions rate is98.7 ton/year • The total annual NOx emissions rate is 632 ton/year • The total annual HC emissions rate is 22.8 ton/year • The total annual CO emissions rate is 33.5 ton/year

Comparing this to the emissions from the reference ship model, CO2 emissions reduce slightly by 258 ton/year from 22050 tons/year. This is largely due to the operation of the shaft generator as an electric motor to provide propulsion at certain time of the voyage, i.e. slow speed manoeuvres. This means that the main propulsion engines are not operating at slow speeds, when they are least efficient, and generators are operated close to their optimal efficient loads, leading to a reduction in fuel consumption and, thus, CO2 emissions. Similarly for SOx, NOx and HC emissions are reduced by 12.6%, 2.4% and 9.9% respectively due to the more efficient propulsion power source and use of MDO rather than the higher sulphur containing HFO.

However, CO emissions do not change between the low cost configuration and the reference ship models. In the second stage of modelling of the low cost network configuration the simulation was run with a shore based power supply being used during ship harbour stays.

Note that these values are for fossil fuel (coal) produced shore based power supply. Figure 14 shows the emissions for the low cost retrofit configuration with onshore power supply to the ship while in harbour.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 14: Emissions lowest cost model with onshore power supply

From the simulations of the low cost retrofit configuration with onshore power supply the following emission values were determined;

• • The total CO2 emissions are 21555 ton/year • • The total SOx emissions are 108.5 ton/year • • The total NOx emissions are 600 ton/year • • The total HC emissions are 21.3 ton/year • • The total CO emissions are 29.9 ton/year

3.1.4 Attributes of the Equipment in the Lowest Cost Model

Table 3 shows a full list of the installed equipment, and their main attributes, of power systems and on-board systems recommended to be incorporated in the low cost retrofit ship configuration included in the GES model.



27/09/2013 PU of 67

Table 3: Attributes of the equipment in the low cost retrofit model


[kg/m] Floor area

[m^2] Nominal

power [kW] Nominal

speed [rpm] Nominal

voltage [V] LCC


MTTR [h]

8ZA40s #1 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #2 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #3 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #4 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 AC_Source 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BT1 0 0 0 0 0 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 120 BT2 0 0 0 0 0 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 120 CON_AC_AC BT1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20000 0 1500 0 1000 0 CON_AC_AC BT2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20000 0 1500 0 1000 0 DG1 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 DG2 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 Economizer PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 2 24 Economizer SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 2 24 INV_DC_AC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 480 0 1000 0 INV_DC_AC PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 480 0 1000 0 INV_DC_AC SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 480 0 1000 0 MOT_BT1 1.18355 1.13544 0.709651 1.39339 1.12275 4006.64 0 3528.7 0 1000 1500 450 0 28 120 MOT_BT2 1.18355 1.13544 0.709651 1.39339 1.12275 4006.64 0 3528.7 0 1000 1500 450 0 28 120 oil-fired boiler Aft 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1453 0 0 0 2 0 oil-fired boiler Fwd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1453 0 0 0 2 0 Power plant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99999 0 PTO_PTI PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1200 1500 450 0 0 0 PTO_PTI SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1200 1500 450 0 0 0 REC_AC_DC PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 480 0 1000 0 REC_AC_DC SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 480 0 1000 0 Renk AG NDSHL 3000 PS 0 1.51754 2.62828 1.02783 4.09954 1415.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.4155 5 Renk AG NDSHL 3000 SB 0 1.51754 2.62828 1.02783 4.09954 1415.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.4155 5 Shaft port 79.8653 50 0 0 5.4811 21943.6 0.109622 438.871 0 11000 150 0 0 1000 0 Shaft SB 79.8653 50 0 0 5.4811 21943.6 0.109622 438.871 0 11000 150 0 0 1000 0 Shore Transformer 21.4566 1.54834 1.54834 1.87706 4.5 3454.55 0 0 0 1000 0 690 0 99999 0 SOL_Cells 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOL_Source 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Switchboard 450V, 60 Hz 0 1 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 450 0 99999 1 Tr 450/230V 21.4566 1.54834 1.54834 1.87706 4.5 3454.55 0 0 0 1000 0 450 0 99999 0 WB CPP four quadrant PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 60 WB CPP four quadrant SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 60



27/09/2013 PU of 67

3.2 Single Line Retrofit for the Lowest Emissions Model

In the lowest emissions ship configuration, additional power systems are included to optimise power generation and maximise emission reductions, but increasing cost. Figure 15 shows single line drawing of the low emissions configuration developed and described in detail in Deliverable D3.3.

Figure 15: single – line of retrofit lowest emission model

The main and auxiliary engines used to provide propulsion and electric power on-board the reference ship generate hot exhaust gases, producing 25.5% in lost energy. The waste heat in the exhaust gasses can be directly used to drive an exhaust gas turbine or can be recovered to produce steam in an exhaust gas boiler or economiser. This steam can be used to provide a ship’s steam and hot water needs or used to drive a steam turbine to generate electrical power.

In addition to the WHRS being included in the first iteration of the low emissions ship configuration, a battery energy store and renewable PV energy generation source was included in the models for simulation. However, defining the operational profiles for both of these systems is highly dependent on the operation of other systems on-board the ship and its sailing profile. To define the operational profile of the battery energy store, the discharge and charging cycles needs to fully defined and is highly dependent on the power require of the ship at during a normal operational cycle, i.e. the trip between Europort-Harwich-Europort, and optimise their operational profile to suit sailing demands. This can become more difficult when exploring the operation of an energy store over a complete year as seasonal environmental effects should be taken into account, such as temperature changes. Similarly with PV, seasonal effects have to be taken into account and the time of sunshine and the irradiance energy varies throughout the year. At this stage of the project, the operational profiles of both the batteries and PV systems were not fully defined for a year. Because of this they were not including in the iteration of the model simulations, but will be once they have been defined and optimised as part of Tasks 4.1 and Tasks 4.2 respectively.

The single line drawing was used to develop a model in GES of the low emission configuration, as shown in Figure 16.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 16: Lowest emission model in GES

The main element of the low emissions retrofit configuration compared to the low cost configuration is the WHRS connected to the main engines. The WHRS is used to provide electrical power to the main switchboard for distribution where needed on-board the ship.

The PTO-PTI works normally in PTO-mode, but for slow harbour and manoeuvring speeds the shaft generator is switched to PTI-mode powered by the diesel generators, as in the case of the low cost retrofit configuration. The WHRS only works under high engine loads on the trip between Harwich-Europort during nominal sailing periods, which is based on a mean operational profile. In addition, the model includes a solar circuit using photovoltaic panels for additional power production, but this system is dependent on seasonal conditions, which were not taken into account in the first iteration simulation runs. During sailing, economisers connected to the auxiliary diesel generators to provide heating and hot water, while in port the ship will use the oil fired boils. A full operational profile of the low emissions retrofit configuration using the main power sources and consumers in the first iteration of the model is shown in Figure 17 (see Annex C for details).



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 17: Operational profile lowest emission model fuel consumption lowest emission model

3.2.1 Fuel Consumption of the Low Emission Retrofit Configuration

Using the equipment operational profile of the low emission retrofit ship, the fuel consumption during each phase of the voyage, Europort-Harwich-Europort, was estimated in the GES modelling environment. This was then used to extrapolate the fuel consumption for the low emissions retrofit ship configuration over an entire year, as shown in Figure 18.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 18: Fuel consumption lowest emission profile with onshore power

Using the model in the GES simulation environment, the total annual fuel consumption for the low emissions retrofit ship configuration was calculated to be around 6844 tons. Comparing to the low cost model with shore power supply in harbour it is clear that an annual saving of 15 tons of fuel can be achieved and 185 tons compared to the original reference ship. For individual consumers, running on either MDO or HFO at any time during the round trip, the annual fuel consumption was estimated to be;

• For the operation of the main engines on HFO and MDO is 5195.5 ton/year.

• For the DG1 (harbour and seagoing) running on MDO is 797 ton/year.

• For the DG2 (seagoing) running on MDO is 25.5 ton/year.

• The oil fire boilers (harbour) is 257 ton/year.

• For the shore based power plant is 568 ton/year (equivalent marine fuel consumption)

It must be noted that this first iteration of the low emission retrofit model does not include power generation from the PV units. Although the PV installation is fully defined in the simulation, environmental data, measurements taken over the 20 years in the North Sea region, used to calculate the real-time power generated on a daily basis is still being collated to take into account seasonal variations and provide a realistic simulation. In addition the, battery storage system, although fully modelled, was not included in the simulations as the operational profile (charging/discharging) is linked closely to the energy management system being developed in WP4 (Due in month 41). Without this EMS system in place it is difficult to operate the battery energy storage system efficiently.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

3.2.2 Estimated Costs for the Lowest Emissions Model

Similar to the low cost model, the fuel consumption rates for the low emissions retrofit configuration was used to estimate the annual operation costs of individual systems and the ship as a whole. Figure 19 shows the estimated annual fuel consumption costs at each stage of the trip for the low emissions retrofit ship configuration model.

Figure 19: Fuel cost lowest emission model with onshore power

Form the plot above the total annual operational cost of the low emission retrofit configuration was estimated to be3334.4 k€/year. This is €10,100 less than for the lowest cost retrofit ship configuration with shore based power supply while in harbour and €152,100 less than the reference ship model. However, this will probably be reduced further once the PV and battery storage systems are included in the simulation runs.

3.2.3 Emissions Low Emissions Retrofit Model

The main purpose of the low emissions retrofit configuration was to develop an integrated power system that could be installed on a ship at reasonable cost, where reasonable cost is a payback period no more than 5 years, to maximise the emission reductions. So far in this report, it has been shown that the low emissions retrofit configuration for the reference ship can reduce fuel consumption, which will have a direct influence on CO2, SOx, HC and PM emissions, while the operation of the main and auxiliary engines will influence the production of NOx and CO emissions. Using the model created of the low emissions ship configuration yearly estimates of the CO2, SOx, NOx, HC and CO emissions were determined as shown in Figure 20. These were then compared to the estimated emissions of the reference ship model and the low cost configuration model to determine if there was any additional benefit due to the inclusion of the additional energy generation, storage and recovery systems. However, it must be noted that the PV system models and battery store was



31/07/2014 PU of 67

not operating during the first iterations of the low emissions ship configuration model as the daily seasonal effects and charge/discharge were not fully defined at this stage of the project.

Figure 20: Emissions lowest emission model with onshore power

From the low emissions retrofit ship configuration simulations the following emissions were determined;

• The total annual CO2 emissions rate is 21514 ton/year

• The total annual SOx emissions rate is 108.5 ton/year

• The total annual NOx emissions rate is 603 ton/year

• The total annual HC emissions rate is 20.1 ton/year

• The total annual CO emissions rate is 29 ton/year

The estimated emissions values are reduced by 536 tons/year for COs, 4.5 tons/year for SOx, 44.6 tons/year for NOx, 5.2 tons/year for HC and 4.5 tons/year for CO when compared to the reference ship annual emission rates, which were double, in nearly all cases, those observed when compared to the low cost ship solution. Only SOx emissions in the low cost solution where worse than in the low emissions ship configuration by 9.8 tons/year, largely due an increase in HFO usage in the main engines (HFO: 20.4 kg/ton of fuel burnt and MDO: 2 kg/ton of fuel burnt).

3.2.4 Attributes of the Equipment in the Lowest Emissions Model

Table 4 shows a full list of the installed equipment, and their main attributes, of power systems and on-board systems recommended to be incorporated in the low emissions retrofit ship configuration included in the GES model.

D2.3_INOMANSHIP_Mxx_V1.0 Conventional modelling of all relevant

components INOMANS2HIP

27/09/2013 CO of 67

Table 4: Attributes of the equipment in the low cost retrofit model


[kg/m] Floor area

[m^2] Nominal power

[kW] Nominal speed

[rpm] Nominal

voltage [V] LCC


MTTR [h]

8ZA40s #1 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #2 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #3 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 8ZA40s #4 0 10.381 2.865 0 0 78000 0 0 0 5760 510 0 0 1.14155 5 AC_Source 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Battery Pack 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BT1 0 0 0 0 0 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 120 BT2 0 0 0 0 0 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 120 CON_AC_AC BT1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20000 0 1500 0 1000 0 CON_AC_AC BT2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20000 0 1500 0 1000 0 DG1 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 DG2 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 Economizer PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 2 24 Economizer SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 2 24 INV_DC_AC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 480 0 1000 0 INV_DC_AC PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 480 0 1000 0 INV_DC_AC SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 480 0 1000 0 MOT_BT1 1.15884 1.20659 0.754117 1.4807 1.3473 4445.43 0 3684.3 0 1200 1500 450 0 28 120 MOT_BT2 1.15884 1.20659 0.754117 1.4807 1.3473 4445.43 0 3684.3 0 1200 1500 450 0 28 120 oil-fired boiler Aft 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1453 0 0 0 2 0 oil-fired boiler Fwd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1453 0 0 0 2 0 Power plant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99999 0 PTO_PTI PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 1500 450 0 0 0 PTO_PTI SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 1500 450 0 0 0 REC_AC_DC PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 480 0 1000 0 REC_AC_DC SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 480 0 1000 0 Renk AG NDSHL 3000 PS 0 1.51754 2.62828 1.02783 4.09954 1415.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.4155 5 Renk AG NDSHL 3000 SB 0 1.51754 2.62828 1.02783 4.09954 1415.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.4155 5 Shaft port 79.8653 50 0 0 5.4811 21943.6 0.109622 438.871 0 11000 150 0 0 1000 0 Shaft SB 79.8653 50 0 0 5.4811 21943.6 0.109622 438.871 0 11000 150 0 0 1000 0 Shore Transformer 21.4566 1.54834 1.54834 1.87706 4.5 3454.55 0 0 0 1000 0 690 0 99999 0 SOL_Cells 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOL_Source 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SW BAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SW BAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Switchboard 450V, 60 Hz 0 1 1 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 450 0 99999 1 Tr 450/230V 21.4566 1.54834 1.54834 1.87706 4.5 3454.55 0 0 0 1000 0 450 0 99999 0 WB CPP four quadrant PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 60 WB CPP four quadrant SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 60 WHRS_turbochargers_electric PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5760 0 0 0 0 0 WHRS_turbochargers_electric SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5760 0 0 0 0 0



27/09/2013 PU of 67

4 New Cargo Vessel Design Modelling

As part of the project it is important to explore new configurations of the AC/DC or combined power distribution network that will enable the flexibility for integration of various power generation, storage and energy recovery systems being investigated, as reported in deliverable D3.3. Figure 21 shows the proposed ring network for the new build configuration of ship with certian novel power systems being installed.

Figure 21: Ring topology of New Building cargo vessel

In Figure 22 is shown the network model of the new ship configuration created in the GES simulation environment based on the initial system described in Deliverable D3.3.

Figure 22: Ring new network design new cargo ship in GES

The key features of the first iteration of the new build network configuration model are the electric motors used for propulsion, the larger diesel generators providing the additional power needs of the ship, WHRS, battery storage system, shore based power supply connection, PV array and additional power electronics

Shore power

WHRS

M

PV arrays

Filter

300 kW

ENGINE

G

ENGINE

G

Hotel load

300 kW

M

M

ENGINE

G

ENGINE

G

Filter

Filter

M

Aux eng

G

Aux eng

G

Hotel load

350 kW

Filter

Filter



31/07/2014 PU of 67

required to effectively control and monitor the various power sources. With the network configuration being proposed, additional power sources and consumers can be added at any point in the network. Further additional power source technologies, such as dual fuel generation (LNG + MDO) and fuel cells, can be added in further iterations of the new build network configuration of ship.

Figure 23 shows the operational profile for this new build network configuration. It should be noted that the operation profile of the PV array and the battery storage system has not been included in this first iteration of the new build network configuration simulations, as seasonal effects of weather for the PV array and the charge/discharge profiles of the batteries have not been fully defined at this stage of the project. These will be added to the model once the data has becomes available.

Figure 23: Operational profile for new build cargo ship grid

4.1 Fuel Consumption New Build Cargo Ship Model

Using the operation profile defined above in the new build network configuration, the fuel consumption for the ship during a single trip, Europort-Harwich-Europort, can be calculated and extrapolated to provide the yearly fuel consumption for the ship. Figure 24 shows the annual fuel consumption for the individual power systems defined in the operational profile and the annual fuel consumption for the new build network configuration ship.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 24: Fuel consumption new network configuration of ship with onshore power

The total on-board fuel consumption for a year was calculated from the new build network configuration ship model to be about 6126 tons during sailing, with 5500 tons/year of HFO and 626 tons/year of MDO being used on-board the ship. In harbour the ship operates the two oil burning boilers using 257 tons of fuel oil a year.

Power to the ship is assumed to be provided 100% by an onshore supply source, which is estimated to burn an equivalent amount of marine fuel estimated to be 620 tons/year. If this fuel is included in the final fuel consumption it is estimated that the total equivalent FC for the ship for an entire year will be 6736 tons/year, as shown in Figure 25.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 25: Equivalent fuel consumption of the new network configuration of ship without onshore power

Even if the equivalent FC of the onshore power supply for the ship in harbour is taken into account, the FC is less than that estimated for the reference ship over the same period. The annual FC of the reference ship as calculated from the reference ship model was estimated to be 7030 tons/yea, which is 294 tons/year, a significant saving for the ship. If we then just look at the on-board FC and assume that the shore power supply is outside the ship system and is zero, the FC saving is even greater, being over 900 tons/year with just the diesel/electric propulsion, WHRS and shore power supply being implemented. Further reductions in the FC are envisaged once the charge/discharge and seasonal effects operational profiles of the battery and PV systems are fully implemented in the models.

4.2 Fuel consumption New Build Cargo Ship Model

Using the annual fuel consumption rates, the cost of operating the ship over a trip and in turn, on a yearly basis can be calculated for the new build network configuration ship. Figure 26 shows the annual fuel consumption for each stage of the trip and the total cost of running the ship for an entire year.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 26: Fuel cost new build cargo ship with onshore power

The total annual fuel cost for the new build network configuration derived from the model was estimated to be 3247 k€/year. This is nearly €110,000 less than the low emissions retrofit ship configuration, €100,000 less than the low cost retrofit ship configuration and €240,500 less than the original reference ship.

However, this first iteration of the model only includes the electric driven propulsion system, the additional diesel generator requirements, WHRS and shore-to-ship power supply while the ship is in harbour. Because the charge/discharge operational profile of the battery energy storage system and the operational profile of the PV, based on seasonal variation on the sun’s irradiance, are defined in WP4 this will be included later in the project. It is believed that these installations, with the possible addition of other power technologies, could have an overall effect to reduce the FC of the new build network configuration of ship and, thus, reduce overall operational costs.

4.3 Emissions New build Cargo Ship Model

The emissions for the new network configuration ship were estimated, as shown in Figure 27.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 27: Emissions new build cargo ship with onshore power

From the first iteration of the new network configuration of ship the following emissions were estimated;

• The total CO2 for new network configuration of ship is 19174 ton/year

• The total SOx for new network configuration of ship is 113 ton/year

• The total NOx for new network configuration of ship is 317.7 ton/year

• The total HC for new network configuration of ship is 34.4 ton/year

• The total CO for new network configuration of ship is 32.2 ton/year

Compared to the reference ship, this means a possible CO2 emissions saving of 12.9% and a reduction in NOx emissions of 50.9% due to the efficient operation of the generators at lower engine temperature. Although CO emissions are also marginally reduced, SOx and HC emissions increase due to the increased use of HFO compared to MDO.

4.4 Attributes of the Equipment Proposed for the New Build Ship Model

Table 5 shows a full list of the installed equipment, and their main attributes, of power systems and other on-board equipment recommended to be incorporated in the new build ship configuration included in the GES model.



27/09/2013 PU of 67

Table 5: Attributes of the equipment included in the new build configuration of ship model


[kg/m] Floor area

[m^2] Nominal

power [kW] Nominal

speed [rpm] Nominal

voltage [V] LCC


MTTR [h]

BT1 0 0 0 0 0 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 120 BT2 0 0 0 0 0 4000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 120 CON_AC_AC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20000 0 1500 0 1000 0 CON_AC_AC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20000 0 1500 0 1000 0 CON_AC_AC BT1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20000 0 1500 0 1000 0 CON_AC_AC BT2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20000 0 1500 0 1000 0 DG1 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 DG2 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 DG3 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 DG4 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 DG5 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 DG6 0 8.749 1.614 3.374 47.6439 40700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.08757 10.4379 Economizer SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 2 24 Exhaust 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exhaust 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GB_SISO_DE_1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GB_SISO_DE_1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INV_DC_AC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 480 0 1000 0 MOT_BT1 1.15884 1.20659 0.754117 1.4807 1.3473 4445.43 0 3684.3 0 1200 1500 450 0 28 120 MOT_BT2 1.15884 1.20659 0.754117 1.4807 1.3473 4445.43 0 3684.3 0 1200 1500 450 0 28 120 MOT_synchronous 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 0 0 1000 0 MOT_synchronous 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 0 0 1000 0 oil-fired boiler Aft 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1453 0 0 0 2 0 oil-fired boiler Fwd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1453 0 0 0 2 0 Power plant 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99999 0 Shaft port 79.8653 50 0 0 5.4811 21943.6 0.109622 438.871 0 11000 150 0 0 5.70776 10 Shaft SB 79.8653 50 0 0 5.4811 21943.6 0.109622 438.871 0 11000 150 0 0 5.70776 10 Shore Transformer 21.4566 1.54834 1.54834 1.87706 4.5 3454.55 0 0 0 1000 0 690 0 99999 0 SOL_Cells 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOL_Source 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tr 450/6600V 21.4566 1.54834 1.54834 1.87706 4.5 3454.55 0 0 0 1000 0 6600 0 99999 0 Tr 6600/6600 V 87.2732 2.26883 2.26883 3.78819 19.5 18491.8 0 0 0 6000 0 6600 0 99999 0 Tr 6600/6600 V 87.2732 2.26883 2.26883 3.78819 19.5 18491.8 0 0 0 6000 0 6600 0 99999 0 WB CPP four quadrant PS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 60 WB CPP four quadrant SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6 60 WHRS_turbochargers_electric S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1500 0 0 0 0 0



27/09/2013 PU of 67

5 INOMANS2HIP Library Update

For the INOMANS2HIP project, a pre-library structure was first defined for the reference ship, consisting of a collection of models that are used for building the cargo ship model and a library template for using Simulink models within GES modelling environment, which was described in D2.1. The library is extent for new relevant power sources and storage systems as described in D2.2.

The complete Library structure for the Energy Balance Analyses with all energy relevant components is shown in Figure 28.

Figure 28 INOMANS2HIP libraries

The library contains the models of on-board systems and equipment used to build reference cargo ship model. For this part of the work only the on-board equipment models of the reference ship, the Stena Carrier, are incorporated in the library. All the energy relevant components of this report D2.1 are located in New Cargo Library. In the addition, a new library was created of those power systems being investigated as part of the INOMANS2HIP project, being used to develop the models of the two proposed retrofit and the new network configuration of ship as detailed in D2.2. With these libraries, it is possible to accurately and quickly develop simulations of very complex ship designs within the GES modelling environment.

5.1 Overview Basic Cargo library

Figure 29 shows the basic library of ship components used to develop the reference ship model.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 29: Basic Cargo Library

During this period, the basic cargo library for the reference ship was updated and extended to include heating components, such as an economizer and an oil-fired boiler models.

5.2 Overview New Cargo library

In the new cargo library a number of sub-libraries were created under the titles of Storage, Cold Ironing, Solar Energy, WHRS, Wind Energy, Auxiliary Propulsion, Energy Management System and Electric drives, as shown in Figure 30. Each of the sub-libraries contain all the components needed for the implementation of each of the technologies on-board the retrofit and new build network configurations of the ship being proposed, as described in D2.2.

Figure 30: New cargo library



31/07/2014 PU of 67

The sub-libraries were updated with more detailed and sophisticated models of existing systems as more information became available and with new component models, such as the new switchboard, the PTO-PTI drive and the system controller models.

5.3 Overview Simulink Library

In addition to the GES basic and new cargo model libraries, a third library was created to include pre-existing Simulink models and enable additional Simulink models to be created due to the format of the data or complexity of the modelling required, such as the inclusion of PV seasonal irradiance calculations. Figure31 shows the individual component models created in the Simulink model library.

Figure 31: Overview INOMANS2HIP Simulink library

This INOMANS2HIP Simulink library works together with the GES simulation program, but the Simulink model can be clicked open in GES for adaption and modification. To test the Simulink models the gates are connected with in- and output components with most systems providing results close to those of the real systems being implemented in limited operational modes.

5.4 Improved Simulation Models

The main models improved are the main engine and the auxiliary engines. To allow the integration of the main and auxiliary engine models with additional energy systems as compared to the original model as reported in Deliverable D2.2. These would be at the heart of the development of all the ship models being created for the project.

5.4.1 Main Diesel Engine

The main engine is updated with an exhaust gas flow component to enable connection with an economizer or waste heat recovery system (exhaust gas turbine), providing the gas flow rate and exhaust gas temperature after the turbochargers over its operational profile. Figure 32 shows the updated main engine model with the exhaust flow component being added.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 32: Exhaust gas component connect to main engine

A table was produced listing the parameters of the exhaust gas component providing the exhaust gas temperature as function of the part load of the diesel engine. The exhaust gas flow was derived also from part loading of the engine, with the maximum load of 100% correspond with the maximum exhaust gas flow. Figures 33 and 34 shows the parameters lists for the exhaust gas component added to the main engine.

Figure 33: Parameter list of exhaust gas flow and temperature properties.

Figure 34: Table Exhaust gas temperature [C] of main engine as function of % engine load.

In addition, the specific fuel consumption [g/kWh] model of the main engine is optimized for the propeller load, as compared to the model described in D2.1, were the specific fuel consumption was only correct for constant speed. These values are extrapolated to a propeller curve load of the engine, as shown in Table 6



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Power[kW] Speed [rpm] F_rate [kg/hr] SFC [g/kWh] 5420 495.0 1045.4 192.88 5122 485.5 975.1 190.37 4914 465.0 926.1 188.46 3025 428.0 588.0 205.36 1511 361.0 310.3 223.91 1506 512.6 337.2 223.91 3012 512.0 616.0 204.52 4446 511.0 853.1 191.89 5401 510.0 1035.2 191.66 6000 510.0 1164.2 194.03 6609 510.0 1312.1 198.53

Table 6: the fuel consuption of the engine in relationship to the speed and load of the propeller

This change will of course have an affect the emission rates and running costs estimated from the ship models, as the fuel consumption has changed slightly and is more in-line with data provided about the engines installed on the reference ship.

5.4.2 Auxiliary Diesel Engine

As well as updating the main engine model, the auxiliary engines of the diesel generators model was extended with an exhaust gas flow component for connecting the exhaust of the diesel engine to a economizer or Waste heat recovery system, as shown Figure 35.

Figure 35: Exhaust gas component connect to auxiliary diesel generator

Again, the engines specific fuel consumption and emissions were changed slightly in relation to load to reflect the affect the incorporation of the exhaust gas element of the model. Table 7 shows the specific values of the diesel generator engine as a function of load.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

load [%] SFC [g/kWh]

SNOx [g/kWh]

SCO [g/kWh]

SHC [g/kWh]

SPM [g/kWh]

110 189.88 10.115 0.8378 0.911 0.22083

100 188 9.68872 0.8378 1 0.255

85 187 9.74685 1.01173 1.1698 0.3468

75 192.888 9.7856 1.12768 1.283 0.408

50 204.92 11.7233 1.70492 1.709 1.122

25 233.12 11.7233 0.685 0.5039 0.985575

0 250.04 22.9235 4.03401 3.33 0.84915

Table 7: Specific values auxiliary engine

5.4.3 Auxiliary WHRS Ssystem

For the new cargo ship configuration has a combination of two sets of three auxiliary diesel generators coupled to a WHRS. The diesel generators are the same as those installed in the original reference model, as shown above in Figure 35, and connected to the WHRS exhaust gas turbine through a common exhaust gas connection. A power generation set connected to a WHRS exhaust gas turbine is shown in Figure 36. .

Figure 36: Auxiliary WHRS for the new cargo ship designs

The total installed power of the diesel generators is about 4.5 MW.

Figure 37 shows the fuel consumption as function of the load of the diesel generators in the system.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 37: Fuel consumption [g/s] aux. WHRS system as function of load

In the graph, it is observed that there are a number of steps in the graph and it is not just a continuous smooth curve. This is due to the switching points of the generators on and off when power is needed. In other words, the next auxiliary diesel generator is switch on if the power of the others reaches 80% of the maximum power rating for the unit.

Figure 39 shows the power of the WHRS as function of the total load of the axillary system. The WHRS is activated at a generator load of 2 MW and above, giving a maximum output of 223.8kW.

Figure 38: Power of aux. WHRS (4.5 MW) as function of the generator load



31/07/2014 PU of 67

If 1500kW WHRS system with a required gas flow of 2.5kg/s is in combination with the three diesel generators, the system is activated at 600 kW load producing a maximum WHRS power is about 275 kW, as shown in Figure 39.

Figure 39: Power of aux. WHRS (1.5 MW with 2.5kg/s) as function of the load

However, it must be noted that the more energy recovered by the gas turbine from the exhaust gas means there is less energy available for steam and hot water production in the economiser.

A comparison of the efficiency and the fuel consumption with and without the WHRS is shown in Figures 40 and 41 respectively. The total efficiency and fuel consumption is improved by –up to 6.6%, over the power range of the WHRS exhaust turbine.

Figure 40: Efficiency aux system with WHRS (blue) and without WHRS (black)



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 41: Fuel consumption [g/s] auxiliary power generation system with WHRS (blue) and without WHRS (black)



31/07/2014 PU of 67

6 CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER WORK

The diesel models related to the various configuration of ship were updated and incorporated in the INOMANS2HIP library. The available internal energy and energy flow profiles of various energy sources/operational strategies of a range of systems for the first retrofit designs were not taken into account. This will be included in the models once the work to provide the optimised operational profiles for the various power sources is completed in.WP4. For instance the solar models are already incorporated in the ship models, but not yet active during the operation as seasonal operational profiles throughout the year, based on the irradiance from the sun, needs to be completed.

A continual process to improve and update certain individual component and system models will be performed throughout the rest of the INOMANS2HIP project as more accurate data and information becomes available.

6.1 Final Comparison of the Retrofit and New Build Configuration of Ship with the Reference Ship

The new and retrofit network designs were compared with the reference vessel for fuel consumption emissions and cost with the results described in the following chapter.

The new and retrofit network designs are compared with the reference vessel in Table8.

Reference

model

Lowest cost model with

shore power supply

cost/ reference %

Lowest emission

model

emission/ reference % New build new build/

reference %

Fuel [ton/trip] 7030 6859 2.43% 6844 2.65% 6126 12.86%

Emissions Comparison

CO2 [ton/trip] 22022.5 21555 2.12% 21514 2.31% 19174 12.93%

SOx [ton/trip] 112.8 108.5 3.81% 108.5 3.81% 113.0 -0.18%

NOx [ton/trip] 647.6 600 7.35% 603 6.89% 317.7 50.94%

HC [ton/trip] 25.3 21.3 15.81% 20.1 19.37% 34.4 -35.97%

CO [ton/trip] 33.5 29.9 10.75% 29 13.43% 32.2 3.74%

Cost Comparison

Fuel Costs [k€/yr] 3487.5 3344.5 4.10% 3334.4 4.39% 3247 6.90%

Table 8: Comparison of all the designs

The new build configuration has the highest efficiency with the lowest fuel consumption and biggest saving in operational costs. By carefully examination it is found that the propellers are running on a higher efficiency, which is the most cost effective point in the design. This is possible with electric propulsion system as the motors can be run to maximise the propellers efficiency as shown in Figure 42 (See annex D for the exact propulsion power).



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Figure 42: efficiency propeller during the operational trip (black new build)

Through the first iteration of models of both the retrofit and new build configurations of ship show improvement in fuel efficiency and reducing emissions and costs of its operation. It is expected that further reductions and efficiency saving could be demonstrated in the models once the operational profiles once all the technologies being proposed to be implemented have been fully defined and optimised for the ship’s sailing profile for a calendar year. These optimised operational profiles of the proposed energy technologies for the retrofit and new build configurations of ship will be implemented in the models once they have been fully defined in work package 4.



31/07/2014 PU of 67

REFERENCES

[1] Deliverable D1.1 Market study, D1.1_INOMANSHIP_M06_V1.pdf

[2] Deliverable D3.1 Energy Characteristics Modelling, D3.1_INOMANSHIP_M08_V4.pdf

[3] Cooper D.; “Representative Emission Factors for use in “Quantification of Emissions from Ships Associated with Ship Movements between Port in the European Community” (ENV.C.1/ETU/2001/0090)”; Published by IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute Ltd., 2002

[4] Corbett J.J., Koehler H.W.; “Updated Emissions from Ocean Shipping”; Published by American Geophysical Union, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 108- No. D20, 2003

[5] Corbett J.J., Winebrake J.J., Green E.H., Kasibhatla P., Eyring V. and Lauer A.; “Mortality from Ship Emissions: A Global Assessment”; Published by American Chemical Society, Environmental Science & Technology, Vol 41 (24), pp. 8512-8518, 2007

[6] EPA; “In-Use Marine Diesel Fuels”; Published by US Environmental Protection Agency, 1999

[7] EPA; “Analysis of Commercial Marine Vessels Emissions and Fuel Consumption Data”; Published by US Environmental Protection Agency, 2000

[8] Eyring V., Isaken I.S.A., Berntsen T., Collins W.J., Corbett J.J., Endresen O., Grainger R.G., Moldanova J., Schlager H., Stevenson D.S.; “Transport Impacts on Atmosphere and Climate: Shipping”; Published by Elsevier, Journal Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 44, 2010

[9] Fridell E., Steen E., Peterson K.; “Primary Particles in Ship Emissions”; Published by Elsevier, journal of Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 42, 2008

[10] Hagenow G., Reders K., Heinze H.E., Stieger W., Detlef Z., Mosser D.; “Handbook of Diesel Engines: Chapter 4-Fuels”; Published by Springer, 2010

[11] IMO; “MARPOL 73/78: International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships”; Published by International Maritime Organisation (IMO), ratified 1983

[12] IMO; “MARPOL 93/97 Annex VI: Prevention of Air Emissions from Ships”; Published by International Maritime Organisation (IMO), ratified 2004

[13] IMO; “Second IMO GHG Study 2009”; Published by International Maritime Organisation, 2009

[14] ISO; “ISO 8178: Standard for Emission Test Cycle”; Published by International Standards Organisation, 2006

[15] Johnsen T., Endresen Ø., Sørgård E.; “Assessing Environmental Performance by Ship Inventories”; Published by Det Norske Veritas (DNV), 2000

[16] Lloyds Register; “Marine Exhaust Emissions Research Programme”; Published by Lloyds Registry of Shipping, 1995



31/07/2014 PU of 67

[17] MEPC; “MEPC/Circ471: Interim Guidelines for Voluntary Ship CO2 Emissions Indexing for use in Trials”; Published by International Maritime Organisation (IMO), 2005

[18] MEPC; “MEPC 58/23/Add.1: Resolution MEPC.176(58): Amendments to the Annex of Protocol of 1997 Amend the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as Modified by the Protocol of 1978 Relating Thereto”; Published by International Maritime Organisation (IMO), Annex 13, 2008

[19] MEPC; “MEPC.1/Circ.684: Guidelines for Voluntary use of the Ship Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI)”; Published by International Maritime Organisation (IMO), 2009

[20] Moldanová J., Fridell E., Popovicheva O., Demirdjian B., Tishkova V., Faccinetto A., Focsa C,; “Characterisation of Particulate Matter and Gaseous Emissions from a Large Ship Diesel Engine”; Published by Elsevier, Journal of Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 43, 2009

[21] Wang C., Corbett J.J. and Firestone, J.; “Improving Representation of Global Ship Emissions Inverntories”; Published American Chemical Society, Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 42 (1), pp. 193-199, December 2008

[22] IMO;” resolution msc.137(76) standards for ship manoeuvrability”; Published by International Maritime Organisation, 2002

[23] Deliverable D2.1 Conventional cargo ship model and simulation, D2.1_INOMANSHIP_M12_V1.3.pdf

[24] Deliverable D3.1 Energy Characteristics Modelling.

[25] Deliverable D2.2 Conventional cargo ship model and simulation, D2.2_INOMANSHIP_M12.pdf



31/07/2014 PU of 67

ANNEXESANNEX A: General reference ship information operational profile

General Ship Information

Ship type

Ice class Tier

Ship identification Carrier 5 1 2 Date of file

Author Hans van Vugt

Main Particulars Parameter Value Dimension Comment

Length, overall Loa 182.77 [m] Length, between parpendiculars Lpp, or 96% Loa 166.4 [m] EEDI

Breadth moulded B 25.52 [m] Depth moulded D 7.4 [m] Design draught moulded T 10048 [tonne] Gross tonnage G 21089 [grt] Deadweight at desig draught Dwt 12359 [tonne] EEDI

Displacement at design draught Delta 0 [tonne] Lightweight Delta_Dwt

[tonne]

Vref [kn] 21 [kn] EEDI Draft [m] 7.4 [m]

No of pax [-]

[-]

block coefficient Cb 0.6 [-]

displacement

20709 [tonne]

lightweight

10048 [tonne] deadweight

10661 [tonne]

Ballast

5800 [tonne] bunkers

1630 [tonne]

freshwater

240 [tonne] cargo

2991.4 [tonne]



31/07/2014 PU of 67

ANNEX B: Input reference ship operational profile of one trip

Operational Profile, Required Power [kW] AUX_POWER Propeller_PS Propeller_SB Boiler_aft Boiler_fwd Bowthruster_1 Bowthruster_2 Economizer_SB Economizer_PSEuroport wait ; 1702.32 hr/trip 650 0 0 600 0 0 0 0 0Europort leave ; 149.355 hr/trip 850 734.661 734.661 0 0 416.842 416.842 258 258No_2 ; 149.355 hr/trip 850 734.661 734.661 0 0 0 0 258 258WP59 ; 113.183 hr/trip 850 2605.85 2605.85 0 0 0 0 258 258WP56 ; 224.48 hr/trip 850 2605.85 2605.85 0 0 0 0 258 258WP57 ; 104.695 hr/trip 850 2605.85 2605.85 0 0 0 0 258 258WP80 ; 835.671 hr/trip 850 2605.85 2605.85 0 0 0 0 258 258WP81 ; 343.323 hr/trip 850 2605.85 2605.85 0 0 0 0 258 258WP14 ; 103.751 hr/trip 850 2605.85 2605.85 0 0 0 0 258 258WP7 ; 55.4599 hr/trip 850 2605.85 2605.85 0 0 0 0 258 258WP82 ; 79.0397 hr/trip 850 2605.85 2605.85 0 0 0 0 258 258enter harbour Harwich ; 128.59 hr/trip 850 981.074 981.074 600 0 0 0 258 258mooring harbour Harwich ; 128.29 hr/trip 850 979.276 979.276 0 0 416.842 416.842 258 258Harwich wait ; 2579.95 hr/trip 650 0 0 0 600 0 0 0 0Harwich leave ; 99.955 hr/trip 850 714.906 714.906 0 0 416.842 416.842 258 258MVN ; 99.955 hr/trip 850 714.905 714.905 0 0 0 0 258 258WP63 ; 74.2878 hr/trip 850 4188.91 4188.91 0 0 0 0 258 258WP65 ; 123.286 hr/trip 850 4188.92 4188.92 0 0 0 0 258 258WP12 ; 1191.77 hr/trip 850 4188.92 4188.92 0 0 0 0 258 258WP55 ; 67.9654 hr/trip 850 4188.92 4188.92 0 0 0 0 258 258WP16 ; 44.2565 hr/trip 850 4188.92 4188.92 0 0 0 0 258 258WP21 ; 37.9342 hr/trip 850 4188.92 4188.92 0 0 0 0 258 258enter Europort ; 161.415 hr/trip 850 856.207 856.207 0 0 0 0 258 258mooring Europort ; 161.415 hr/trip 850 856.207 856.207 0 0 416.842 416.842 258 258



31/07/2014 PU of 67

ANNEX C: Input lowest emission ship operational profile of one trip

Operational Profile, Required Power [kW] AUX_POWER Propeller_PS Propeller_SB Boiler_aft Boiler_fwd Bowthruster_1 Bowthruster_2 Economizer_SB Economizer_PS WHRS_SB WHRS_PSEuroport wait ; 1702.32 hr/trip 650 0 0 600 0 0 0 0 258 0 0Europort leave ; 149.355 hr/trip 850 734.662 734.662 0 0 416.842 416.842 0 258 0 0No_2 ; 149.355 hr/trip 850 734.778 734.778 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0WP59 ; 113.183 hr/trip 850 2605.84 2605.84 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0WP56 ; 224.48 hr/trip 850 2605.84 2605.84 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0WP57 ; 104.695 hr/trip 850 2605.84 2605.84 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0WP80 ; 835.671 hr/trip 850 2605.84 2605.84 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0WP81 ; 343.323 hr/trip 850 2605.84 2605.84 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0WP14 ; 103.751 hr/trip 850 2605.84 2605.84 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0WP7 ; 55.4599 hr/trip 850 2605.84 2605.84 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0WP82 ; 79.0397 hr/trip 850 2605.84 2605.84 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0enter harbour Harwich ; 128.59 hr/trip 850 981.074 981.074 600 0 0 0 0 258 0 0mooring harbour Harwich ; 128.29 hr/trip 850 979.276 979.276 0 0 416.842 416.842 0 258 0 0Harwich wait ; 2579.95 hr/trip 650 0 0 0 600 0 0 0 258 0 0Harwich leave ; 99.955 hr/trip 850 714.903 714.903 0 0 416.842 416.842 0 258 0 0MVN ; 99.955 hr/trip 850 714.903 714.903 0 0 0 0 258 258 0 0WP63 ; 74.2878 hr/trip 850 4188.95 4188.95 0 0 0 0 0 258 181.841 181.841WP65 ; 123.286 hr/trip 850 4188.95 4188.95 0 0 0 0 0 258 181.795 181.795WP12 ; 1191.77 hr/trip 850 4188.95 4188.95 0 0 0 0 0 258 181.795 181.795WP55 ; 67.9654 hr/trip 850 4188.95 4188.95 0 0 0 0 0 258 181.795 181.795WP16 ; 44.2565 hr/trip 850 4188.95 4188.95 0 0 0 0 0 258 181.795 181.795WP21 ; 37.9342 hr/trip 850 4188.95 4188.95 0 0 0 0 0 258 181.795 181.795enter Europort ; 161.415 hr/trip 850 856.229 856.229 0 0 0 0 0 258 0 0mooring Europort ; 161.415 hr/trip 850 856.208 856.208 0 0 416.842 416.842 0 258 0 0



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Annex D: Input for new build cargo ship operational profile of one trip

Operational Profile, Required Power [kW] AUX_POWER Propeller_PS Propeller_SB Boiler_aft Boiler_fwd Bowthruster_1 Bowthruster_2 Economizer_SB Economizer_PS WHRS_SB WHRS_PSEuroport wait ; 1702.32 hr/trip 650 4.42569E-16 4.42569E-16 600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Europort leave ; 149.355 hr/trip 850 349.763 349.763 0 0 416.842 416.842 0 0 161.707 0No_2 ; 149.355 hr/trip 850 349.763 349.763 0 0 0 0 0 0 99.4009 0WP59 ; 113.183 hr/trip 850 2260.7 2260.7 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP56 ; 224.48 hr/trip 850 2260.7 2260.7 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP57 ; 104.695 hr/trip 850 2260.7 2260.7 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP80 ; 835.671 hr/trip 850 2260.7 2260.7 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP81 ; 343.323 hr/trip 850 2260.7 2260.7 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP14 ; 103.751 hr/trip 850 2260.7 2260.7 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP7 ; 55.4599 hr/trip 850 2260.7 2260.7 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP82 ; 79.0397 hr/trip 850 2260.7 2260.7 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0enter harbour Harwich ; 128.59 hr/trip 850 192.754 192.754 600 0 0 0 0 0 75.6194 0mooring harbour Harwich ; 128.29 hr/trip 850 194.11 194.11 0 0 416.842 416.842 0 0 129.97 0Harwich wait ; 2579.95 hr/trip 650 1.28935E-12 1.28935E-12 0 600 0 0 0 0 0 0Harwich leave ; 99.955 hr/trip 850 410.404 410.404 0 0 416.842 416.842 0 0 169.809 0MVN ; 99.955 hr/trip 850 410.404 410.404 0 0 0 0 0 0 107.79 0WP63 ; 74.2878 hr/trip 850 3842.71 3842.71 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP65 ; 123.286 hr/trip 850 3842.71 3842.71 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP12 ; 1191.77 hr/trip 850 3842.71 3842.71 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP55 ; 67.9654 hr/trip 850 3842.71 3842.71 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP16 ; 44.2565 hr/trip 850 3842.71 3842.71 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0WP21 ; 37.9342 hr/trip 850 3842.71 3842.71 0 0 0 0 258 0 239.705 0enter Europort ; 161.415 hr/trip 850 277.078 277.078 0 0 0 0 0 0 85.554 0mooring Europort ; 161.415 hr/trip 850 277.078 277.078 0 0 416.842 416.842 0 0 139.788 0



27/09/2013 PU of 67

ANNEX E: Result EEOI reference ship information operational profile

Port Comment Operational time hrs

Distance N-miles

Fuel consumption

tonne

CO2 tonne

SO2 tonne

NOx tonne

IMO-limit NOx

tonne

EEOI g.CO2/(t.nm)

average EEOI g.CO2/(t.nm)

0.00

0316E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

No. 2 0:33:29 8.5 1.48 4.63 0.00 0.14 0.00 656.14 656.14

WP59 0:23:38 6 1.10 3.44 0.02 0.11 0.00 671.47 662.48

WP56 0:46:53 11.9 2.18 6.82 0.04 0.21 0.00 671.47 666.53

WP57 0:21:52 5.55 1.02 3.18 0.02 0.10 0.00 671.47 667.39

WP80 2:54:31 44.3 8.12 25.38 0.17 0.79 0.00 671.47 669.76

WP81 1:11:42 18.2 3.34 10.43 0.07 0.33 0.00 671.47 670.09

WP14 0:21:40 5.5 1.01 3.15 0.02 0.10 0.00 671.47 670.17

WP7 0:11:35 2.94 0.51 1.60 0.00 0.05 0.00 656.14 669.76

WP82 0:16:30 4.19 0.73 2.28 0.00 0.07 0.00 656.14 669.23

enter harbour 0:16:30 6 0.73 2.28 0.00 0.07 0.00 458.21 658.03

0316W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 658.03

MVN 0:21:33 6 1.26 3.95 0.03 0.11 0.00 290.86 612.82

WP63 0:16:53 4.7 0.99 3.09 0.02 0.09 0.00 290.87 584.49

WP65 0:28:01 7.8 1.64 5.13 0.03 0.15 0.00 290.87 547.08

WP12 4:30:54 75.4 15.84 49.62 0.32 1.41 0.00 290.87 405.67

WP55 0:15:27 4.3 0.90 2.83 0.02 0.08 0.00 290.87 402.17

WP16 0:10:04 2.8 0.59 1.84 0.01 0.05 0.00 290.87 400.00

WP21 0:08:37 2.4 0.48 1.50 0.00 0.04 0.00 284.23 398.10

enter harbour 0:30:32 8.5 1.70 5.31 0.00 0.14 0.00 284.23 391.84

0317E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 391.84

No. 2 0:35:49 8.5 1.28 4.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 566.01 395.38

WP59 0:25:17 6 0.95 2.97 0.02 0.08 0.00 579.23 397.99

WP56 0:50:08 11.9 1.88 5.90 0.04 0.16 0.00 579.23 402.94

WP57 0:23:23 5.55 0.88 2.75 0.02 0.08 0.00 579.23 405.16

WP80 3:06:39 44.3 7.00 21.96 0.14 0.60 0.00 579.23 421.04

WP81 1:16:41 18.2 2.88 9.02 0.06 0.25 0.00 579.23 426.75



31/07/2014 PU of 67

WP14 0:23:10 5.5 0.87 2.73 0.02 0.08 0.00 579.23 428.40

WP7 0:12:23 2.94 0.44 1.38 0.00 0.04 0.00 566.01 429.19

WP82 0:17:39 4.19 0.63 1.97 0.00 0.05 0.00 566.01 430.30

enter harbour 0:17:39 6 0.63 1.97 0.00 0.05 0.00 395.26 429.90

0317W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 429.90

MVN 0:21:18 6 1.28 4.01 0.03 0.11 0.00 295.17 425.92

WP63 0:16:41 4.7 1.00 3.14 0.02 0.09 0.00 295.17 422.97

WP65 0:27:42 7.8 1.66 5.21 0.03 0.15 0.00 295.17 418.35

WP12 4:27:42 75.4 16.08 50.36 0.33 1.42 0.00 295.17 386.46

WP55 0:15:16 4.3 0.92 2.87 0.02 0.08 0.00 295.17 385.13

WP16 0:09:56 2.8 0.60 1.87 0.01 0.05 0.00 295.17 384.29

WP21 0:08:31 2.4 0.49 1.52 0.00 0.04 0.00 288.43 383.52

enter harbour 0:30:11 8.5 1.72 5.39 0.00 0.14 0.00 288.43 380.91

0318E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 380.91

No. 2 0:40:46 8.5 1.08 3.38 0.00 0.09 0.00 479.41 381.92

WP59 0:28:47 6 0.80 2.52 0.02 0.07 0.00 490.61 382.70

WP56 0:57:04 11.9 1.59 4.99 0.03 0.14 0.00 490.61 384.22

WP57 0:26:37 5.55 0.74 2.33 0.02 0.07 0.00 490.61 384.92

WP80 3:32:28 44.3 5.93 18.57 0.12 0.54 0.00 490.61 390.15

WP81 1:27:17 18.2 2.44 7.63 0.05 0.22 0.00 490.61 392.15

WP14 0:26:23 5.5 0.74 2.31 0.02 0.07 0.00 490.61 392.74

WP7 0:14:06 2.94 0.37 1.17 0.00 0.03 0.00 479.41 393.02

WP82 0:20:06 4.19 0.53 1.67 0.00 0.05 0.00 479.41 393.41

enter harbour 0:20:06 6 0.53 1.67 0.00 0.05 0.00 334.79 393.03

0318W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 393.03

MVN 0:20:20 6 1.36 4.28 0.03 0.12 0.00 314.75 391.72

WP63 0:15:55 4.7 1.07 3.35 0.02 0.09 0.00 314.75 390.72

WP65 0:26:26 7.8 1.77 5.56 0.04 0.15 0.00 314.75 389.12

WP12 4:15:27 75.4 17.15 53.74 0.35 1.48 0.00 314.75 376.54

WP55 0:14:34 4.3 0.98 3.06 0.02 0.08 0.00 314.75 375.95

WP16 0:09:29 2.8 0.64 2.00 0.01 0.06 0.00 314.75 375.58

WP21 0:08:08 2.4 0.52 1.62 0.00 0.04 0.00 307.57 375.22

enter harbour 0:28:48 8.5 1.83 5.75 0.00 0.15 0.00 307.57 373.98

0319E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 373.98

No. 2 0:33:24 8.5 1.49 4.65 0.00 0.14 0.00 659.08 375.94

WP59 0:23:35 6 1.10 3.45 0.02 0.11 0.00 674.48 377.38



31/07/2014 PU of 67

WP56 0:46:46 11.9 2.19 6.85 0.04 0.21 0.00 674.48 380.20

WP57 0:21:48 5.55 1.02 3.19 0.02 0.10 0.00 674.48 381.50

WP80 2:54:04 44.3 8.15 25.50 0.17 0.79 0.00 674.48 391.45

WP81 1:11:31 18.2 3.35 10.48 0.07 0.33 0.00 674.48 395.34

WP14 0:21:37 5.5 1.01 3.17 0.02 0.10 0.00 674.48 396.50

WP7 0:11:33 2.94 0.51 1.61 0.00 0.05 0.00 659.08 397.08

WP82 0:16:28 4.19 0.73 2.29 0.00 0.07 0.00 659.08 397.90

enter harbour 0:16:28 6 0.73 2.29 0.00 0.07 0.00 460.26 398.18

0319W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 398.18

MVN 0:20:12 6 1.38 4.33 0.03 0.12 0.00 318.97 397.25

WP63 0:15:49 4.7 1.08 3.39 0.02 0.09 0.00 318.97 396.54

WP65 0:26:16 7.8 1.80 5.63 0.04 0.16 0.00 318.97 395.39

WP12 4:13:52 75.4 17.38 54.46 0.35 1.50 0.00 318.97 385.79

WP55 0:14:29 4.3 0.99 3.11 0.02 0.09 0.00 318.97 385.32

WP16 0:09:26 2.8 0.65 2.02 0.01 0.06 0.00 318.97 385.01

WP21 0:08:05 2.4 0.52 1.65 0.00 0.04 0.00 311.69 384.73

enter harbour 0:28:37 8.5 1.86 5.83 0.00 0.15 0.00 311.69 383.72

0320E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 383.72

No. 2 0:33:44 8.5 1.46 4.57 0.00 0.14 0.00 647.96 385.09

WP59 0:23:49 6 1.09 3.39 0.02 0.11 0.00 663.10 386.10

WP56 0:47:13 11.9 2.15 6.73 0.04 0.21 0.00 663.10 388.08

WP57 0:22:01 5.55 1.00 3.14 0.02 0.10 0.00 663.10 388.99

WP80 2:55:48 44.3 8.02 25.06 0.16 0.79 0.00 663.10 396.08

WP81 1:12:13 18.2 3.29 10.30 0.07 0.32 0.00 663.10 398.89

WP14 0:21:50 5.5 1.00 3.11 0.02 0.10 0.00 663.10 399.72

WP7 0:11:40 2.94 0.51 1.58 0.00 0.05 0.00 647.96 400.14

WP82 0:16:38 4.19 0.72 2.25 0.00 0.07 0.00 647.96 400.74

enter harbour 0:16:38 6 0.72 2.25 0.00 0.07 0.00 452.49 400.91

0320W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 400.91

MVN 0:21:14 6 1.28 4.02 0.03 0.11 0.00 296.21 399.97

WP63 0:16:38 4.7 1.01 3.15 0.02 0.09 0.00 296.21 399.25

WP65 0:27:37 7.8 1.67 5.23 0.03 0.15 0.00 296.21 398.06

WP12 4:26:54 75.4 16.14 50.54 0.33 1.42 0.00 296.21 387.89

WP55 0:15:13 4.3 0.92 2.88 0.02 0.08 0.00 296.21 387.38

WP16 0:09:55 2.8 0.60 1.88 0.01 0.05 0.00 296.21 387.04

WP21 0:08:30 2.4 0.49 1.53 0.00 0.04 0.00 289.45 386.73



31/07/2014 PU of 67

enter harbour 0:30:05 8.5 1.73 5.41 0.00 0.14 0.00 289.45 385.66

0321E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 385.66

No. 2 0:32:42 8.5 1.54 4.81 0.00 0.14 0.00 682.69 386.89

WP59 0:23:05 6 1.14 3.58 0.02 0.11 0.00 698.64 387.80

WP56 0:45:46 11.9 2.27 7.10 0.05 0.22 0.00 698.64 389.59

WP57 0:21:21 5.55 1.06 3.31 0.02 0.10 0.00 698.64 390.41

WP80 2:50:23 44.3 8.45 26.42 0.17 0.80 0.00 698.64 396.84

WP81 1:10:00 18.2 3.47 10.86 0.07 0.33 0.00 698.64 399.41

WP14 0:21:09 5.5 1.05 3.28 0.02 0.10 0.00 698.64 400.18

WP7 0:11:18 2.94 0.53 1.67 0.00 0.05 0.00 682.69 400.56

WP82 0:16:07 4.19 0.76 2.37 0.00 0.07 0.00 682.69 401.11

enter harbour 0:16:07 6 0.76 2.37 0.00 0.07 0.00 476.75 401.32

0321W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 401.32

MVN 0:21:22 6 1.27 3.99 0.03 0.11 0.00 294.11 400.54

WP63 0:16:44 4.7 1.00 3.13 0.02 0.09 0.00 294.11 399.93

WP65 0:27:46 7.8 1.66 5.19 0.03 0.15 0.00 294.11 398.94

WP12 4:28:29 75.4 16.02 50.18 0.33 1.42 0.00 294.11 390.25

WP55 0:15:19 4.3 0.91 2.86 0.02 0.08 0.00 294.11 389.80

WP16 0:09:58 2.8 0.59 1.86 0.01 0.05 0.00 294.11 389.51

WP21 0:08:33 2.4 0.48 1.52 0.00 0.04 0.00 287.40 389.24

enter harbour 0:30:16 8.5 1.71 5.37 0.00 0.14 0.00 287.40 388.31

0322E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 388.31

No. 2 0:32:27 8.5 1.56 4.87 0.00 0.14 0.00 690.98 389.35

WP59 0:22:54 6 1.16 3.62 0.02 0.11 0.00 707.12 390.13

WP56 0:45:25 11.9 2.30 7.18 0.05 0.22 0.00 707.12 391.65

WP57 0:21:11 5.55 1.07 3.35 0.02 0.10 0.00 707.12 392.35

WP80 2:49:05 44.3 8.55 26.75 0.17 0.80 0.00 707.12 397.86

WP81 1:09:28 18.2 3.51 10.99 0.07 0.33 0.00 707.12 400.06

WP14 0:21:00 5.5 1.06 3.32 0.02 0.10 0.00 707.12 400.72

WP7 0:11:13 2.94 0.54 1.69 0.00 0.05 0.00 690.98 401.06

WP82 0:16:00 4.19 0.77 2.40 0.00 0.07 0.00 690.98 401.53

enter harbour 0:16:00 6 0.77 2.40 0.00 0.07 0.00 482.53 401.72

0322W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 401.72

MVN 0:21:30 6 1.27 3.96 0.03 0.11 0.00 291.96 401.05

WP63 0:16:50 4.7 0.99 3.10 0.02 0.09 0.00 291.96 400.52

WP65 0:27:56 7.8 1.65 5.15 0.03 0.15 0.00 291.96 399.67



31/07/2014 PU of 67

WP12 4:30:05 75.4 15.90 49.80 0.32 1.41 0.00 291.96 392.04

WP55 0:15:24 4.3 0.91 2.84 0.02 0.08 0.00 291.96 391.64

WP16 0:10:02 2.8 0.59 1.85 0.01 0.05 0.00 291.96 391.37

WP21 0:08:36 2.4 0.48 1.51 0.00 0.04 0.00 285.29 391.14

enter harbour 0:30:27 8.5 1.70 5.33 0.00 0.14 0.00 285.29 390.31

0323E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 390.31

No. 2 0:36:37 8.5 1.24 3.90 0.00 0.10 0.00 552.30 390.79

WP59 0:25:51 6 0.93 2.90 0.02 0.08 0.00 565.20 391.15

WP56 0:51:15 11.9 1.84 5.76 0.04 0.16 0.00 565.20 391.87

WP57 0:23:54 5.55 0.86 2.68 0.02 0.07 0.00 565.20 392.20

WP80 3:10:49 44.3 6.83 21.42 0.14 0.59 0.00 565.20 394.80

WP81 1:18:24 18.2 2.81 8.80 0.06 0.24 0.00 565.20 395.85

WP14 0:23:41 5.5 0.85 2.66 0.02 0.07 0.00 565.20 396.17

WP7 0:12:40 2.94 0.43 1.35 0.00 0.04 0.00 552.30 396.32

WP82 0:18:03 4.19 0.61 1.92 0.00 0.05 0.00 552.30 396.54

enter harbour 0:18:03 6 0.61 1.92 0.00 0.05 0.00 385.69 396.52

0323W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 396.52

MVN 0:23:13 6 1.13 3.55 0.02 0.11 0.00 261.49 395.80

WP63 0:18:11 4.7 0.89 2.78 0.02 0.08 0.00 261.49 395.25

WP65 0:30:10 7.8 1.47 4.61 0.03 0.14 0.00 261.49 394.33

WP12 4:51:41 75.4 14.24 44.55 0.29 1.36 0.00 261.49 386.12

WP55 0:16:38 4.3 0.81 2.54 0.02 0.08 0.00 261.49 385.68

WP16 0:10:50 2.8 0.53 1.65 0.01 0.05 0.00 261.49 385.39

WP21 0:09:17 2.4 0.43 1.35 0.00 0.04 0.00 255.52 385.14

enter harbour 0:32:53 8.5 1.52 4.77 0.00 0.14 0.00 255.52 384.25

0335E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 384.25

No. 2 0:33:44 8.5 1.46 4.57 0.00 0.14 0.00 647.96 384.93

WP59 0:23:49 6 1.09 3.39 0.02 0.11 0.00 663.10 385.44

WP56 0:47:13 11.9 2.15 6.73 0.04 0.21 0.00 663.10 386.44

WP57 0:22:01 5.55 1.00 3.14 0.02 0.10 0.00 663.10 386.91

WP80 2:55:48 44.3 8.02 25.06 0.16 0.79 0.00 663.10 390.56

WP81 1:12:13 18.2 3.29 10.30 0.07 0.32 0.00 663.10 392.03

WP14 0:21:50 5.5 1.00 3.11 0.02 0.10 0.00 663.10 392.47

WP7 0:11:40 2.94 0.51 1.58 0.00 0.05 0.00 647.96 392.69

WP82 0:16:38 4.19 0.72 2.25 0.00 0.07 0.00 647.96 393.01

enter harbour 0:16:38 6 0.72 2.25 0.00 0.07 0.00 452.49 393.12



31/07/2014 PU of 67

0324W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 393.12

MVN 0:22:10 6 1.21 3.80 0.02 0.11 0.00 280.27 392.59

WP63 0:17:22 4.7 0.95 2.98 0.02 0.09 0.00 280.27 392.18

WP65 0:28:49 7.8 1.58 4.94 0.03 0.14 0.00 280.27 391.51

WP12 4:38:34 75.4 15.27 47.79 0.31 1.39 0.00 280.27 385.40

WP55 0:15:53 4.3 0.87 2.73 0.02 0.08 0.00 280.27 385.07

WP16 0:10:21 2.8 0.57 1.77 0.01 0.05 0.00 280.27 384.86

WP21 0:08:52 2.4 0.46 1.44 0.00 0.04 0.00 273.87 384.67

enter harbour 0:31:24 8.5 1.63 5.12 0.00 0.14 0.00 273.87 383.99

0325E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 383.99

No. 2 0:34:47 8.5 1.36 4.26 0.00 0.11 0.00 602.86 384.50

WP59 0:24:33 6 1.01 3.17 0.02 0.09 0.00 616.95 384.87

WP56 0:48:42 11.9 2.00 6.29 0.04 0.18 0.00 616.95 385.62

WP57 0:22:43 5.55 0.93 2.93 0.02 0.08 0.00 616.95 385.96

WP80 3:01:19 44.3 7.46 23.40 0.15 0.66 0.00 616.95 388.68

WP81 1:14:29 18.2 3.06 9.61 0.06 0.27 0.00 616.95 389.78

WP14 0:22:31 5.5 0.93 2.91 0.02 0.08 0.00 616.95 390.11

WP7 0:12:02 2.94 0.47 1.47 0.00 0.04 0.00 602.86 390.28

WP82 0:17:09 4.19 0.67 2.10 0.00 0.06 0.00 602.86 390.51

enter harbour 0:17:09 6 0.67 2.10 0.00 0.06 0.00 421.00 390.56

0325W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 390.56

MVN 0:21:08 6 1.29 4.05 0.03 0.11 0.00 298.06 390.18

WP63 0:16:33 4.7 1.01 3.17 0.02 0.09 0.00 298.06 389.88

WP65 0:27:28 7.8 1.68 5.26 0.03 0.15 0.00 298.06 389.38

WP12 4:25:30 75.4 16.24 50.86 0.33 1.43 0.00 298.06 384.88

WP55 0:15:08 4.3 0.93 2.90 0.02 0.08 0.00 298.06 384.64

WP16 0:09:52 2.8 0.60 1.89 0.01 0.05 0.00 298.06 384.48

WP21 0:08:27 2.4 0.49 1.54 0.00 0.04 0.00 291.26 384.33

enter harbour 0:29:56 8.5 1.74 5.44 0.00 0.15 0.00 291.26 383.82

0326E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 383.82

No. 2 0:34:52 8.5 1.35 4.24 0.00 0.11 0.00 599.78 384.27

WP59 0:24:36 6 1.01 3.15 0.02 0.09 0.00 613.79 384.60

WP56 0:48:48 11.9 1.99 6.25 0.04 0.17 0.00 613.79 385.27

WP57 0:22:46 5.55 0.93 2.92 0.02 0.08 0.00 613.79 385.57

WP80 3:01:41 44.3 7.42 23.28 0.15 0.65 0.00 613.79 388.00

WP81 1:14:38 18.2 3.05 9.56 0.06 0.27 0.00 613.79 388.98



31/07/2014 PU of 67

WP14 0:22:33 5.5 0.92 2.89 0.02 0.08 0.00 613.79 389.27

WP7 0:12:03 2.94 0.47 1.47 0.00 0.04 0.00 599.78 389.42

WP82 0:17:11 4.19 0.67 2.09 0.00 0.06 0.00 599.78 389.63

enter harbour 0:17:11 6 0.67 2.09 0.00 0.06 0.00 418.84 389.67

0326W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 389.67

MVN 0:20:01 6 1.41 4.42 0.03 0.12 0.00 325.03 389.43

WP63 0:15:41 4.7 1.10 3.46 0.02 0.10 0.00 325.03 389.24

WP65 0:26:02 7.8 1.83 5.74 0.04 0.16 0.00 325.03 388.93

WP12 4:11:37 75.4 17.71 55.51 0.36 1.53 0.00 325.03 386.07

WP55 0:14:21 4.3 1.01 3.17 0.02 0.09 0.00 325.03 385.91

WP16 0:09:21 2.8 0.66 2.06 0.01 0.06 0.00 325.03 385.81

WP21 0:08:01 2.4 0.53 1.68 0.00 0.04 0.00 317.61 385.71

enter harbour 0:28:22 8.5 1.89 5.94 0.00 0.16 0.00 317.61 385.37

0327E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 385.37

No. 2 0:35:13 8.5 1.32 4.13 0.00 0.11 0.00 584.20 385.75

WP59 0:24:52 6 0.98 3.07 0.02 0.09 0.00 597.84 386.03

WP56 0:49:19 11.9 1.94 6.09 0.04 0.17 0.00 597.84 386.59

WP57 0:23:00 5.55 0.91 2.84 0.02 0.08 0.00 597.84 386.84

WP80 3:03:34 44.3 7.23 22.67 0.15 0.63 0.00 597.84 388.89

WP81 1:15:25 18.2 2.97 9.31 0.06 0.26 0.00 597.84 389.71

WP14 0:22:47 5.5 0.90 2.81 0.02 0.08 0.00 597.84 389.96

WP7 0:12:11 2.94 0.46 1.43 0.00 0.04 0.00 584.20 390.09

WP82 0:17:22 4.19 0.65 2.04 0.00 0.05 0.00 584.20 390.26

enter harbour 0:17:22 6 0.65 2.04 0.00 0.05 0.00 407.97 390.29

0327W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 390.29

MVN 0:21:11 6 1.29 4.03 0.03 0.11 0.00 297.04 389.97

WP63 0:16:36 4.7 1.01 3.16 0.02 0.09 0.00 297.04 389.72

WP65 0:27:33 7.8 1.67 5.24 0.03 0.15 0.00 297.04 389.31

WP12 4:26:16 75.4 16.18 50.68 0.33 1.43 0.00 297.04 385.52

WP55 0:15:11 4.3 0.92 2.89 0.02 0.08 0.00 297.04 385.31

WP16 0:09:53 2.8 0.60 1.88 0.01 0.05 0.00 297.04 385.18

WP21 0:08:29 2.4 0.49 1.53 0.00 0.04 0.00 290.26 385.06

enter harbour 0:30:01 8.5 1.73 5.43 0.00 0.14 0.00 290.26 384.62

0328E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 384.62

No. 2 0:37:07 8.5 1.22 3.84 0.00 0.10 0.00 543.49 384.90

WP59 0:26:12 6 0.91 2.86 0.02 0.08 0.00 556.19 385.10



31/07/2014 PU of 67

WP56 0:51:58 11.9 1.81 5.66 0.04 0.16 0.00 556.19 385.52

WP57 0:24:14 5.55 0.84 2.64 0.02 0.07 0.00 556.19 385.71

WP80 3:13:27 44.3 6.72 21.08 0.14 0.58 0.00 556.19 387.22

WP81 1:19:29 18.2 2.76 8.66 0.06 0.24 0.00 556.19 387.84

WP14 0:24:01 5.5 0.83 2.62 0.02 0.07 0.00 556.19 388.02

WP7 0:12:50 2.94 0.42 1.33 0.00 0.03 0.00 543.49 388.11

WP82 0:18:18 4.19 0.60 1.89 0.00 0.05 0.00 543.49 388.24

enter harbour 0:18:18 6 0.60 1.89 0.00 0.05 0.00 379.54 388.23

0328W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 388.23

MVN 0:20:38 6 1.33 4.16 0.03 0.12 0.00 306.03 387.97

WP63 0:16:10 4.7 1.04 3.26 0.02 0.09 0.00 306.03 387.77

WP65 0:26:49 7.8 1.72 5.40 0.04 0.15 0.00 306.03 387.44

WP12 4:19:15 75.4 16.67 52.23 0.34 1.45 0.00 306.03 384.36

WP55 0:14:47 4.3 0.95 2.98 0.02 0.08 0.00 306.03 384.19

WP16 0:09:38 2.8 0.62 1.94 0.01 0.05 0.00 306.03 384.08

WP21 0:08:15 2.4 0.50 1.58 0.00 0.04 0.00 299.04 383.98

enter harbour 0:29:14 8.5 1.78 5.59 0.00 0.15 0.00 299.04 383.62

0329E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 383.62

No. 2 0:33:24 8.5 1.49 4.65 0.00 0.14 0.00 659.08 384.06

WP59 0:23:35 6 1.10 3.45 0.02 0.11 0.00 674.48 384.38

WP56 0:46:46 11.9 2.19 6.85 0.04 0.21 0.00 674.48 385.03

WP57 0:21:48 5.55 1.02 3.19 0.02 0.10 0.00 674.48 385.33

WP80 2:54:04 44.3 8.15 25.50 0.17 0.79 0.00 674.48 387.70

WP81 1:11:31 18.2 3.35 10.48 0.07 0.33 0.00 674.48 388.67

WP14 0:21:37 5.5 1.01 3.17 0.02 0.10 0.00 674.48 388.96

WP7 0:11:33 2.94 0.51 1.61 0.00 0.05 0.00 659.08 389.10

WP82 0:16:28 4.19 0.73 2.29 0.00 0.07 0.00 659.08 389.31

enter harbour 0:16:28 6 0.73 2.29 0.00 0.07 0.00 460.26 389.39

0329W leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 389.39

MVN 0:21:30 6 1.27 3.96 0.03 0.11 0.00 291.96 389.11

WP63 0:16:50 4.7 0.99 3.10 0.02 0.09 0.00 291.96 388.89

WP65 0:27:56 7.8 1.65 5.15 0.03 0.15 0.00 291.96 388.52

WP12 4:30:05 75.4 15.90 49.80 0.32 1.41 0.00 291.96 385.13

WP55 0:15:24 4.3 0.91 2.84 0.02 0.08 0.00 291.96 384.94

WP16 0:10:02 2.8 0.59 1.85 0.01 0.05 0.00 291.96 384.82

WP21 0:08:36 2.4 0.48 1.51 0.00 0.04 0.00 285.29 384.71



31/07/2014 PU of 67

enter harbour 0:30:27 8.5 1.70 5.33 0.00 0.14 0.00 285.29 384.32

0330E leave harbour 0:00:00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 384.32

No. 2 0:34:21 8.5 1.41 4.42 0.00 0.14 0.00 627.34 384.68

WP59 0:24:15 6 1.05 3.29 0.02 0.11 0.00 642.00 384.95

WP56 0:48:05 11.9 2.09 6.52 0.04 0.21 0.00 642.00 385.48

WP57 0:22:25 5.55 0.97 3.04 0.02 0.10 0.00 642.00 385.73

WP80 2:58:59 44.3 7.76 24.26 0.16 0.78 0.00 642.00 387.68

WP81 1:13:32 18.2 3.19 9.97 0.07 0.32 0.00 642.00 388.48

WP14 0:22:13 5.5 0.96 3.01 0.02 0.10 0.00 642.00 388.72

WP7 0:11:53 2.94 0.49 1.53 0.00 0.05 0.00 627.34 388.84

WP82 0:16:56 4.19 0.70 2.18 0.00 0.07 0.00 627.34 389.01

enter harbour 0:16:56 6 0.70 2.18 0.00 0.07 0.00 438.09 389.06

end of the day 7:24:46 0 5.88 18.34 0.01 0.69 0.00 0 392.85

end of the day 9:54:25 0 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0



27/09/2013 PU of 67

ANNEX F: Simulate reference vessel in Ges

The necessary files are located in: X:\GES\ges_macros_Com.xls

Start sequence:

1. Ges model: OP_xxxxxxxxx.ges

2. Excel macro: RunOperationalProfile located in ges_macros_com.xls

3. Operational input/output Excel file: OP_Carrier_xxxxxxx.xls

Setup sequence:

Set maximum number of steps in Ges: Simulation->SimulationSetup

Set simulation mode in Ges: Tools->Options->Simulation

Set iteration method in Ges: Tools->Options->Solution process



31/07/2014 PU of 67

Run simulation

1. Maximize Ges model <OP_carrier_xxxx.ges>.

2. Run Ges model from Excel.

3. Maximize operational Excel file OP_xxxxxx.xls

Run macro: RunOperationalProfile by View=>Marcos->View Macros



31/07/2014 PU of 67

The macro RunOperationalProfile in GES_macros_com.xls start the Ges simulation end put all the results in Sheet1. After the calculation the user can make graphical pictures from the results by running the macro TNOGES

After running the sheets: Operational Profile, Totals, Cash out, LCC, Profile Investment Costs, length, Width, Volume, Mass, Efficiency, MTBF, MTTR, Availability, Maintenance Costs, Maintenance Costs 2, Fuel consumption, Total fuel consumption, Fuel Cost, Fuel Cost 2, CO2 emission, SOx emission, NOx emission, HC emission, CO emission, PM10 emission and Total emission are updated with the new results.

For this part of the simulation only the fuel and emission results are of interest.

deliverable document template - narec distributed … auxiliary diesel engine..... 43 5.4.3...

Documents