Download - Ship Project -Final.pdf
-
AALTO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
Department of Applied Mechanics
Marine Technology
Ship Project A
M/S Arianna
Cruise ship without lifeboats
Jrgen Rosen 338099
Sander Nelis 337498
Justin Champion 397205
-
AALTO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
Department of Applied Mechanics
Marine Technology
Introduction and Feasibility Studies
M/S Arianna
-
1
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... 1
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 2
1.1 FOREWORD .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 VESSEL OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................. 3
2 FEASIBILITY STUDIES ................................................................................................ 4
2.1 MISSION ................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 MARKET .................................................................................................................................. 5
2.2.1 The cruise industry ........................................................................................................................ 5
2.2.2 The luxury cruise market .............................................................................................................. 5
2.2.3 Cruising in England ...................................................................................................................... 6
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................... 7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 - Outboard profile ..................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2-1 - Cruise route ............................................................................................................ 5
Figure 2-2 Past cruiser statistics .............................................................................................. 6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 - Main particulars ....................................................................................................... 3
Table 2-1 - Port limitations ........................................................................................................ 4
-
2
1 Introduction
1.1 Foreword
This project was assigned in conjunction with the course Kul-24.4110, Ship Project A. The
task was to develop further the design completed in the Ship Conceptual Design course by
completing an additional iteration through the ship design spiral.
One major objective is to achieve as holistic a design as possible, with an equal amount of
effort placed on each of the deliverables. This report summarizes the main challenges and
outcomes of each task, along with the methods used for their completion.
1.2 Project schedule
In addition to time reserved for the final report and all corrective measures, the project was
divided into five major phases. For each, background information including a summarization
of completed work, areas for improvement, and additional tasks to be completed were first
presented. The main project tasks were as follows:
Task 1 resistance, propulsion, and machinery
Task 2 general arrangement
Task 3 hull structure
Task 4 lightweight and intact stability
Task 5 cost and ship price
Not included in this structure were additional NAPA considerations, such as the damage
stability and lines drawing.
-
3
1.3 Vessel overview
The final design is for the cruise ship Arianna, a small-scale, luxury cruise ship to be based in
the United Kingdom. The main difference between this ship and existing ones is the fact that
she has no lifeboats onboard, but rather alternative forms of lifesaving equipment.
The vessels final main particulars are provided in Table 1-1 and the outboard profile in
Figure 1-1.
Table 1-1 - Main particulars
Length overall 120 m
Length between perpindiculars 107,5 m
Beam 18 m
Draft 5,4 m
Air draft 18 m
Service speed 17 kn
Froude number 0,25 [-]
Displacement 7023 t
Gross registered tons 6577 GRT
Block coefficient 0,65 [-]
Max. passenger capacity 184 [-]
Max. crew capacity 62 [-]
Total electric power 17,82 MW
Propeller diameter 3,8 m
Fuel HFO [-]
Classification societies DNV and ABS [-]
Figure 1-1 - Outboard profile
-
4
2 Feasibility studies
Though the focus of this project is on the technical characteristics and overall design process,
it is no less important to research the current demand and industry in order to ensure the
projects feasibility. As such, the definition of the vessels mission, research of the market,
and compilation of current ship data served as the starting point of the design process.
2.1 Mission
The vessels mission, as a cruise ship, is straightforward: to transport passengers in a
comfortable setting with overnight accommodations to the decided ports of call. As a luxury
cruise ship, however, a much higher standard will be expected in terms of comfort and
service. Finally, a core mission is to ensure an extremely high level of safety in both normal
operation conditions and emergencies. As the ship has no lifeboats, this is among the most
important considerations throughout the project.
According to SOLAS regulations, vessels without lifeboats must operate no more than 200
miles from the coast, so selecting a suitable area of operation was important. With these
limitations, a route along the coast of the United Kingdom was selected. Many UK ports are
popular among current cruise lines and there is no need to sail long distances in open water. A
typical itinerary starts from the port of Dover and visits, in order, Portsmouth, Plymouth,
Swansea, Holyhead, Douglas, and Liverpool. This results in an open-ended cruise, though it
could be customized to end at the same port of embarkation as well. Known port limitations
are listed in Table 2-1. It should be noted that exact information for the port of Douglas was
not found, though commercial vessels are offered deep-water berths in the outer harbour
while large vessels, including cruise ships, may be restricted to anchoring in the bay and using
tenders to bring passengers ashore. With such a small ship, however, this should not be an
issue. The route, along with estimated distances, is shown in Figure 2-1.
Table 2-1 - Port limitations
Port Max. Length [m] Breadth [m] Max. Draught[m]
Dover 342.5 - 10.5
Portsmouth 285 - 9,5
Plymouth 140 - 18
Swansea 200 26,2 9,9
Holyhead 300 - 10,5
Douglas* - - -
Liverpool 350 - 10.5
-
5
Figure 2-1 - Cruise route
2.2 Market
Even in todays questionable economic climate, the cruise industry is expected to continue
growing in the future. All industry aspects affecting this design show strong trends over recent
years.
2.2.1 The cruise industry
The cruise industry is the fastest growing category in the leisure travel market, with an annual
growth of 7.6% since 1990 (1). Today, the industry demand outstrips supply (based on
berthing), where demand is at 103.2% of such supply (2). As for the future, the industry is
forecast to grow over the next 15 years, expanding from a worldwide base of 16 million
passengers to between 21 and 28 million in 2027 (1). These trends can be seen in current and
future new-build projects, as there are 26 planned cruise ships, carrying from 100 to over
4,000 passengers, to be built in the next two years (2).
2.2.2 The luxury cruise market
The cruise industry as a whole continues to expand and so does the luxury cruise market
specifically, though at a slightly smaller rate. The market is largely successful because of the
high interest and return rate of past cruisers, as highlighted in Figure 2-2. It has been indicated
that 87% of luxury cruisers are repeat cruisers and 43% have taken six or more cruise
vacations (1). In addition, it was found that 80% of the core market group belonged in the
-
6
affluent range in terms of finances, as defined by the CLIA, showing that the future luxury
market is promising. This, along with the new cruiser market, makes the luxury market a
successful yet under capacity market in regards to demand vs. berths. In fact, there are
currently only twenty ocean-going, non-expedition luxury ships in service, with only two
new-build projects planned at this time (3).
Figure 2-2 Past cruiser statistics
2.2.3 Cruising in England
As with the entire industry, the UK-based cruise market is thriving at present, both in terms of
UK cruisers and cruises within the country. Currently, UK ranks second, behind only the US,
in terms of passenger market penetration. As of 2012, nearly 3% of all UK citizens have taken
a cruise, and the annual number of cruisers has increased greatly over the past decade (4). The
UK and northern Europe make up the third largest cruise market, with almost 11% of current
deployments, behind only the Caribbean and Mediterranean (4). The cruise industry in the UK
specifically is experiencing a rapid increase and a record number of cruise ships will call at
UK ports in 2014 (5). Further, 860 cruises are scheduled to depart from British ports while
there has been a 12% rise in the number of cruises starting and ending in the UK. This all
leads to a promising market forecast and validates the choice to base the ship in the UK.
-
7
Bibliography
1. Cruise Lines International Association, Inc. CLIA Overview. 2012.
2. . Cruise Market Profile Study. 2011.
3. Ward, Douglas. Complete Guide to Cruising and Cruise Ships 2012. London : Berlitz,
2011.
4. Cruise Lines International Association. 2013 Cruise Industry Update. s.l. : CLIA, 2013.
5. Travel Magazine. Cruise industry booming as UK sailing forecast to hit all-time high.
2013.
-
AALTO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
Department of Applied Mechanics
Marine Technology
Primary Dimensions and Hull Form
M/S Arianna
-
1
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... 1
1 PARAMETRIC STUDY .................................................................................................. 2
1.1 PRELIMINARY DIMENSIONS ..................................................................................................... 2
2 HULL FORM DEFINITION .......................................................................................... 5
2.1 BOW SHAPE .............................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 MIDSHIP SHAPE ........................................................................................................................ 7
2.3 STERN SHAPE ........................................................................................................................... 7
2.4 PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT ......................................................................................................... 8
2.5 LENGTH OF PARALLEL MID-BODY ........................................................................................... 8
2.6 LOCATION OF MID-SECTION ..................................................................................................... 9
2.7 LONGITUDINAL CENTRE OF BUOYANCY .................................................................................. 9
3 LINES DRAWING ......................................................................................................... 10
4 HYDROSTATIC CURVES ........................................................................................... 11
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 12
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1. Length as a function of number of passengers ........................................................ 3
Figure 1-2. Breadth as a function of number of passengers ....................................................... 3
Figure 1-3. Draft as a function of number of passengers ........................................................... 4
Figure 1-4. Breadth as a function of length ................................................................................ 4
Figure 1-5. Draft as a function of length .................................................................................... 5
Figure 2-1. Shapes of the bow .................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2-2. Modern bulb form .................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2-3. Midship deadrise ..................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2-4. Prismatic coefficient dependent of Froude number ................................................. 8
Figure 2-5. Graph for the parallel mid-body length ................................................................... 8
Figure 2-6. Location of mid - section as a function of Froude number. .................................... 9
Figure 2-7. Longitudinal centre of buoyancy as function of prismatic coefficient .................... 9
-
2
1 Parametric study
In order to identify the initial, major characteristics of the ship, data was collected for cruise
ships and luxury cruise ships specifically. With this database, a parametric study was
completed for both the preliminary dimensions and general cruise ship characteristics.
1.1 Preliminary dimensions
The ships main dimensions are limited by the harbours in which she visits, along with the
fact that the vessel has no lifeboats. From the previous chapter, it can be seen that the main
dimensions are mainly limited by Portsmouth, Plymouth, and Swansea. The Portsmouth
harbour limits the draft of the ship to 9.5 m and Plymouth limits the length to 140 m. Finally,
Swansea limits the vessels breadth to 26.2 m. With no lifeboats, it is important to limit the
total number of passengers in order to comply with regulations, therefore, a maximum
passenger capacity of 184 persons will be considered.
For initial estimations, dimensions were plotted as a function of number of passengers.. The
trend for length, breadth and draft are shown in Figure 1-1, Figure 1-2 and in Figure 1-3. The
regression for length yields 120 m, for breadth 18 m, and for draft 5,4 m corresponding to the
estimation of approximately 184 passengers. In the Figure 1-4 and in Figure 1-5 are shown
breadth and draft as a function of length
-
3
Figure 1-1. Length as a function of number of passengers
Figure 1-2. Breadth as a function of number of passengers
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
50 100 150 200 250 300
Len
gth
(m
)
Number of Passengers
Project ship
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
50 100 150 200 250 300
Bre
adth
(m
)
Number of Passengers
Project ship
-
4
Figure 1-3. Draft as a function of number of passengers
Figure 1-4. Breadth as a function of length
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
50 100 150 200 250 300
Dra
ft (
m)
Number of Passengers
Project ship
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Bre
adth
(m)
Length (m)
Project ship
-
5
Figure 1-5. Draft as a function of length
2 Hull form definition
Hull shape is always designed by considering hydrodynamics, stability, and also the operation
area and ship type should be taken into account. The following subsections summarize the
major criteria taken into account at the very early design stage.
2.1 Bow shape
The shape of the bow of ship project is V-shaped because it has many advantages when
compared with a U-shaped bow.
Greater volume of topsides and more space for wider decks
Greater local width in the CWL and thus greater moment of inertia of the water plane and
a higher centre of buoyancy - both effects increase KM. The heeling accelerations are
smaller and, for a cruise ship, it is one of the most important considerations.
Smaller wetted surface, lower frictional resistance, and lower steel weight
Less curved surface and cheaper outer shell construction
Better seakeeping ability due to a) greater reserve of buoyancy and b) no slamming effects
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Dra
ft (
m)
Length (m)
Project ship
-
6
Figure 2-1. Shapes of the bow
The ships hull includes a bulbous bow because the Froude number is over 0,23. Therefore, a
bulbous bow is recommended. Today, bulbous forms tapering sharply underneath are
preferred since these reduce slamming. Additional advantages are as follows.
Bulbous bows can reduce the powering requirements of the propulsion by 20 %
Course-keeping ability and manoeuvrability are improved
The wetted surface area increasews, which affects the frictional resistance - modern bulbs
decrease resistance often by more than 20%. (1)
Figure 2-2. Modern bulb form
-
7
2.2 Midship shape
In the midship section, deadrise is used, resulting in the following affects.
Improved flow around the bilge
Raised centre of buoyancy KB, which improves stability
Decreased rolled damping, which results in larger rolling angles
Improved course-keeping ability. (1)
Figure 2-3. Midship deadrise
2.3 Stern shape
The shape of the stern is a transom stern for the current ship project because of the fact that Fn
0,3. The transom should be above the waterline. The flat stern begins at approximately the
height of the CWL. There will be a conventional twin-screw arrangement. Therefore, this
form was introduced merely to simplify construction. The transom stern for fast ships should
aim at reducing resistance through the effect of virtual lengthening of the ship. (1)
-
8
2.4 Prismatic coefficient
Figure 2-4. Prismatic coefficient dependent of Froude number
As Froude number is equal to 0,25, the prismatic coefficient using Troosts criteria is
.
2.5 Length of parallel mid-body
Figure 2-5. Graph for the parallel mid-body length
As which is smaller than 0,65, there is an assumed zero parallel mid-body.
-
9
2.6 Location of mid-section
Figure 2-6. Location of mid - section as a function of Froude number.
As Froude number is 0,25, the location
is 0,4 and the mid section location from the
forward perpendicular is m
2.7 Longitudinal centre of buoyancy
Figure 2-7. Longitudinal centre of buoyancy as function of prismatic coefficient
LCB is aft of the mid-ship for small values and ahead of for large values. The location of
the longitudinal centre of buoyancy is from -1,2% to 0,8% of the overall length.
-
Linesdraw
ing
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 210123456789
Scale 1:715.03
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2101.534.55.4
7.5
10.510.8Scale 1:715.03
01
2
3
45678910 111213
14
15
1617
18
19
20
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90
1.5
3
4.5
5.4
7.5
10.510.8
Scale 1:357.51
LoaLwlLppBmaxBwlTdwlLwl/BwlLwl/TdwlBwl/Tdwl
=========
120.00110.61107.49
18.0018.005.406.15
20.483.33
mmmmmm
DispDisvSCbCmCpCwpLCBVCBKMT
=========
699968282564
0.65360.92090.70970.8733-0.933.109.12
tm3m2
%mm
-
total
displa
cement
2
4
6
draught,
moulded
m
2
4
6
draught,
moulded
m
2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000
total displacement t
long. centre of buoy.
56 56.5 57 57.5 58 58.5 59
long. centre of buoy. m
transv. metac. height
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
transv. metac. height m
blockcoef
ficient
0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75
block coefficient
waterl
ineare
a
1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900
waterline area m2
moment t
o change
trim
40 60 80 100 120 140 160
moment to change trim tm/cm
immersio
n/cm
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
immersion/cm t/cm
PROJECT ARIANNA/ADATE 2013-11-05 SIGN TEEKHULL CREATED
HYDROSTATIC CURVES
HULL 2013-10-31
-
12
Bibliography
1. Schneekluth, H and Bertram, V. Ship Design Efficiency and Economy. 2nd. 1998.
-
AALTO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
Department of Applied Mechanics
Marine Technology
Resistance, propulsion and machinery
M/S Arianna
-
1
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. 1
1 RESISTANCE ....................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 ITTC-57 METHOD ....................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 ANDERSEN-GULDHAMMER METHOD .......................................................................................... 5
1.3 NAVCAD SOFTWARE ESTIMATIONS ........................................................................................... 9
1.4 FINAL RESISTANCE COMPARISONS ........................................................................................... 12
1.5 EFFECTIVE POWER PREDICTION ................................................................................................ 14
2 PROPULSION .................................................................................................................... 15
2.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 15
2.2 OPTIMIZATION OF PROPULSION ................................................................................................. 15
2.3 PROPULSION SYSTEM EFFICIENCY ............................................................................................. 17
2.4 CAVITATION .............................................................................................................................. 21
3 MACHINERY ..................................................................................................................... 22
3.1 SELECTING MACHINERY ............................................................................................................ 22
3.2 ELECTRIC BALANCE ................................................................................................................... 25
BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................... 26
APPENDIX 1 ITTC-57 CALCULATIONS .......................................................................... 27
APPENDIX 2 ANDERSEN-GULDHAMMER CALCULATIONS .................................... 29
APPENDIX 3 NAVCAD INPUT PARAMETERS ............................................................... 34
APPENDIX 4 NAVCAD RESISTANCE OUTPUTS ........................................................... 35
APPENDIX 5 ELECTRIC BALANCE ................................................................................. 36
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1. Incremental Resistance Values .................................................................................... 5
Figure 1-2. Bulb Correction Interpolation Plot ............................................................................... 9
Figure 1-3. Resistance Results ...................................................................................................... 12
Figure 1-4. Updated Resistance Results ....................................................................................... 13
Figure 1-5. Effective Power Results ............................................................................................. 14
-
2
Figure 2-1. Wageningen B-series graph ....................................................................................... 17
Figure 2-2. Areas of cavitation (7) ................................................................................................ 21
Figure 3-1. Electric propulsion illustration. (9) ............................................................................ 22
Figure 3-2. Motor output range (12) ............................................................................................. 24
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1. Bulb Correction Table ................................................................................................... 8
Table 1-2. Final Effective Power .................................................................................................. 15
Table 3-1. Generation sets (10) (11) ............................................................................................. 23
Table 3-2. Diesel generator set data (11) ...................................................................................... 24
Table 3-3. Electric motor data (13) ............................................................................................... 25
-
3
1 Resistance
Before choosing the main engine and additional machinery for project ship, a preliminary total
resistance prediction and subsequent power estimation must be performed. Various methods are
used to predict these values, as described in the subsequent sections.
1.1 ITTC-57 Method
The method for predicting the resistance of a ship defined by the International Towing Tank
Conference (ITTC-57 and ITTC-78) is one of the most straightforward procedures with defined
equations (1). By simplifying the process and removing various coefficients, the result is a basic
estimation that is generally sufficient for the preliminary design of a conventional vessel. One
advantage of this method is its simplicity. Total resistance is calculated with the following
formula:
(
)
1-1
where,
total resistance coefficient
density of salt water
v ship speed [m/s]
S wetted surface area of the hull [m2].
For an initial calculation, wetted surface area is estimated using the Holtrop-Mennen method,
which is an empirical formula utilizing many vessel parameters.
( (
) ] (
) 1-2
The total resistance coefficient is calculated as following (1):
1-3
where,
frictional resistance coefficient
residual resistance coefficient
-
4
volume-length resistance coefficient
appendage resistance coefficient
air resistance coefficient
steering resistance coefficient
Of these, the frictional and residual are calculated while the others approximated. Frictional
resistance is calculated by using the ITTC-57 equation, which utilized the Reynolds number,
where v, L, and are the ship speed, ship length, and kinematic viscosity of water, respectively.
1-4
where,
Reynolds number
Reynolds number is calculated as following:
1-5
where,
v ship speed [m/s]
L ship length [m]
kinematic viscosity of water [m2/s]
Following this, we calculate the residual resistance coefficient with the following estimation.
This is not prescribed by the ITTC method itself, but is an appropriate approximation (1).
[
(
)] 1-6
where,
Froude number
prismatic coefficient
volume-length coefficient
B ship breadth
T ship draft
-
5
The volume-length coefficient equation is a simple ratio between the volumetric displacement
and length multiple.
1-7
Remaining resistance coefficients are identified with simple approximations. The incremental
resistance coefficient is dependent on speed (see Figure 1-1). The remaining three
coefficients: appendage, air, and steering, are taken as suggested values given in the procedure.
Figure 1-1. Incremental Resistance Values
All calculated and estimated values are provided in Appendix 1.
1.2 Andersen-Guldhammer Method
A second method of predicting the total resistance of a ship is Andersen and Guldhammer (2),
which refines an earlier method by Guldhammer and Harvald (3). The newer procedure shares
many similarities with the ITTC method, but puts a larger focus on the smaller resistance
coefficients. It also includes several factors that make up for any deviations with the model hull,
including B/T, LCB, hull form, bulb, and appendage factors. Another advantages of this method
is that it was specifically created as a computer-oriented tool for the prediction of propulsive
power, with an emphasis on the preliminary calculation of an optimum propeller. Therefore, it
may be a more accurate prediction method for later use in propeller and machinery calculations.
-
6
Though the input variables are mostly the same, there are some unique definitions for this
method, specifically for the length and longitudinal center of buoyancy (LCB).
1-8
1-9
where,
the length of the bulb forward of the forward perpendicular
length of the waterline aft of the aft perpendicular
longitudinal center of buoyancy
The total resistance equation is the same as before, shown in Equation (1-1), and the total
resistance coefficient differs only in syntax, where represents a combined air and steering
resistance coefficient and the frictional resistance coefficient, which is the same as equation
3-4, assuming that there is minimal appendage effect.
1-10
Incremental resistance coefficient is solved with a single equation, as shown below. It is
dependent only on the volumetric displacement of our hull form.
1-11
The residuary resistance, however, is more complex, as it depends on four arithmetic variables:
E, G, H, and K.
1-12
In turn, the first of these variables, E, depends on four more defined variables:
as well as the Froude number, meaning it changes according to the tested ship speed.
1-13
1-14
-
7
1-15
1-16
1-17
Similarly, the second residuary resistance coefficient, G, is determined by four more defined
variables: , of which and therefore G vary with speed.
In turn, the first of these variables, E, depends on four more defined variables:
as well as the Froude number, meaning it changes according to the tested ship speed.
(
) 1-18
1-19
1-20
1-21
1-22
The final two residuary resistance coefficients are each represented by only one equation each.
( ( )) 1-23
1-24
Following the residuary resistance coefficient calculations, we begin checking for and applying
necessary corrections. The first of these is the correction, which adjusts the results in case the
hull deviates from the required standard characteristics. There are two initial correction checks:
one for the beam to draft ratio and one for the LCB. If the beam to draft ratio is greater than the
standard value of [
], then an additive correction must be implemented, as follows.
1-25
-
8
The requirement for an LCB correction is based on a more lengthy equation, which is in turn
dependent on a predefined standard LCB value.
1-26
If the actual LCB varies from this, a correction according to the following equation must be
implemented.
[
] [
] 1-27
Both factors in the formula must be positive for the correction to work, which for particular ship
calculations was not the case. Therefore, the correction is set to zero.
A hull form correction is not necessary for project vessel, since it has neither a pronounced U
nor V shaped fore or after body. Bulb correction is needed, however, since the standard hull is
defined as one without a bulbous bow. This correction depends on the bulb shape, as defined by
the bulb area ratio . In order to calculate the correction, a double interpolation of a given
table is needed.
Table 1-1. Bulb Correction Table
For this particular vessels is obtained a value of 0.615 (Equation 1-19) so was chosen
from the table. Then was plotted the correction values and fit a power regression to the data,
yielding an interpolation equation and very high coefficient of determination (R2) value.
-
9
Figure 1-2. Bulb Correction Interpolation Plot
These values, however, are only valid for bulb area ratios greater than 1.0, which was not true for
this hull form. Therefore, a proportional reduction was needed. With this correction, the
residuary resistance coefficient can be found, as can the total resistance coefficient. The latter
utilizes suggested values for the air and steering resistance coefficients, with
and respectively. Both values are suggested by the Guldhammer and Harvald
1974 resistance method. The final step in resistance estimation is plugging all variables into
Equation (1-1). Again, the complete results are provided in Appendix 2.
1.3 NavCAD Software Estimations
In order to check hand calculations, additional resistance predictions are completed using the
software tool NavCAD. This tool is specifically for the prediction and analysis of ship speed and
power performance, focusing on hull resistance, propulsion selection, and propeller interaction
and optimization. It features an extremely user-friendly interface and is a good tool for applying
many additional estimation methods that would otherwise be difficult or prone to error. (4)
Another advantage with NavCAD is that it considers the available input parameters and hull
form and suggests which prediction methods are most suitable. Considering this, five additional
calculations were performed, according to the following methods:
y = -85734x5 + 104751x4 - 49867x3 + 11531x2 - 1295.9x + 56.908 R = 0.9992
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.14 0.19 0.24 0.29 0.34
Co
rre
ctio
n
Froude Number
-
10
Holtrop 1984
HSTS
Simple Displacement
Denmark Cargo
Degroot RB
These five methods were chosen because of their high prediction match with the input data; they
were predicted to be the most applicable in accordance to the input parameters that are currently
available for the ship. When information that is more detailed is known, the program may
recommend other resistance prediction methods, but the included information is sufficient for
preliminary resistance estimations.
As with the hand calculations, there are advantages and disadvantages for each method. The
Holtrop 1984 method is intended for commercial vessels, is formulated from a data set of 334
randomly collected models, and is regarded as a reliable method for preliminary resistance
estimations (5). This method was chosen because of its widespread use in early resistance
calculations. It is applicable for vessel speeds in the range of a Froude number between 0.10-
0.80.
The HSTS model is derived from a total of 739 models and 10,672 data points and is a speed-
dependent approach (5). It has many more required input values than other methods. One
potential issue is that its database includes a very diverse set of vessels, though most errors are
encountered only at very low speeds (5). This method was the highest rated for available input
variables, though it uses a 2D method for the residual resistance calculation, which is likely not
as accurate as one utilizing the 3D form factor. It is valid for a 0.15-0.90 speed range.
The simple displacement/semi-displacement method is dependent primarily on the waterline
length and volumetric displacement, and therefore the vessels volume coefficient (5). It is useful
only for very early stage analysis and is derived from a basic power demand relationship. It was
chosen because of its high rating, though it is similar to the ITTC method in that it features many
simplifications. It can be used for Froude numbers between 0.0-0.40.
The Denmark Cargo method is a numerical implementation method using the Guldhammer
procedure (5). Though its focus is on cargo vessels, it is again a very early stage prediction
-
11
method that can be used for generic hulls such as this. It is meant for general purpose early
design estimations only, which is suitable for the current purposes. It does include analysis for
ships with a bulbous bow. It was chosen as a prediction method specifically because of its tie to
the Andersen-Guldhammer procedures, which were followed in the hand calculations. Its speed
range correlates to a Froude number of 0.05-0.33, which is at the limit of the selected speed.
Therefore, it will rely on extrapolation at the extremes.
The final method, DeGroot RB, is based on various model test series, based on a numerical
representation of the published graphical form resistance curves (5). It can be used at preliminary
design stages for general hull types, though it also puts emphasis on hard-chine vessels and
vessels with pronounced round bilges. It is applicable for Froude values between 0.30 and 1.05,
again meaning extrapolation will again be used for the lower speeds.
The input parameters used for all methods, showing also NavCADs interface, are given in
Appendix 3, along with the output data in Appendix 4, for each method.
-
12
1.4 Final Resistance Comparisons
The results from the two hand-calculation methods and five computer-generated ones are shown
in Figure 1-3.
Figure 1-3. Resistance Results
This graph shows that the methods are, as a whole in line, though there are clearly outliers,
specifically the ITTC, Denmark Cargo, and DeGroot methods.
The ITTC method is predictably high, as it does not include correction reductions for important
properties such as the bulbous bow. As one of the most basic numerical prediction methods, it is
unlikely to compare as favourably as those with more considerations are. Therefore, it was
removed from the final prediction analysis.
The Denmark Cargo method was chosen based on its dependence on the Andersen resistance
procedures, though its speed range is limiting and it must rely on extrapolation at some of the
speeds for this vessel. It is clear that its focus on cargo ships results in comparison differences
and it is thus neglected from this point on as well.
The DeGroot method seems to focus too heavily on more unique hull shapes, in contrast to the
generic shape chosen for the cruise ship. Even though it was highly rated by the NavCAD
software, it is also intended for higher Froude numbers, meaning the output is not accurate at our
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Tota
l R
esi
sta
nc
e [
kN
]
Speed [knt]
Andersen-
Guldham
merHoltrop
Ittc
HSTS
Simple
Displacem
entDenmark
Cargo
DeGroot
-
13
speeds, as the other methods have direct computations as opposed to extrapolations. With this
method eliminated, four remaining methods give very comparable results, one from hand
calculations and three from the software. The final resistance graph is given in Figure 1-4.
Figure 1-4. Updated Resistance Results
In summary, a large number of prediction methods were chosen in order to give as holistic an
initial resistance estimation as possible. Though no method is perfectly accurate at such an early
design stage, comparing many methods will give more credibility to consistent results, which is
warranted for important characteristics like the ships resistance, as this will greatly influence the
vessels design, equipment selection, and general characteristics. The final four predictions show
very strong correlations with one another, meaning the resistance prediction should be
reasonable. Though the deliverable only requested basic numerical calculations such as the ITTC
or Holtrop methods, taking the time to compare such approaches with an industry-approved
software such as NavCAD can only improve the quality of the prediction.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
9 11 13 15 17 19 21
To
tal
Res
ista
nce
[kN
]
Speed [kn]
Andersen-
Guldham
merHoltrop
HSTS
Simple
Displacem
ent
-
14
1.5 Effective Power Prediction
With the total resistance estimates, the power needed to power the ship in calm seas, or the
effective power, was calculated.
1-24
The effected power curves for the four selected methods are shown in Figure 1-5.
Figure 1-5. Effective Power Results
An initial design speed of 17 [kn] was chosen in accordance with the selected itinerary around
the English coast. In order to allow for flexibility in future deployment, resistance values are
taken at a more conservative level, corresponding to a maximum speed of 20 [kn]. This will
allow the vessel to complete an array of itineraries without needing to adjust port times in order
to compensate for an underpowered arrangement.
Since the methods agree overall, the average value at the maximum speed was taken as final
power prediction to be used in the machinery selection process. Each method includes a large
preliminary design margin, so this result should be sufficiently conservative. Table 1-2 shows the
calculated power in [kW] for the various prediction methods and speeds. As a summary, the
required effective power can be taken as 7839 [kW].
0.0
1000.0
2000.0
3000.0
4000.0
5000.0
6000.0
7000.0
8000.0
9000.0
10000.0
9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Eff
ecti
ve
Po
wer
[kW
]
Speed [kn]
Andersen
-
Guldham
merHoltrop
HSTS
Simple
Displace
ment
Design
Speed
Max.
Speed
-
15
Table 1-2. Final Effective Power
Effective Power Prediction [kW]
Speed [kn] Andersen-Guldhammer Holtrop HSTS
Simple Displacement Average
17 3139 3758 4198 3217 3652
18 4032 4988 5268 4067 4681
19 5435 6892 6806 5157 6194
20 7357 8795 8343 6247 7839
2 Propulsion
2.1 Introduction
The ship has two controllable pitch propellers (CP-propeller). The propeller is a traditional four
bladed propeller with revolutions of 180 revolutions per minute, which is based on the chosen
electrical motors. A CP-propeller was chosen because it gives the highest propulsive efficiency
over a broad range of speeds and load conditions and it improves maneuverability when
compared to fixed pitch propellers (FP-propeller), which is mainly used on bulkers and tankers
due to the little need for maneuverability. The main advantage of a CP-propeller is fine thrust
control when maneuvering, which can be achieved without necessarily the need to accelerate and
decelerate the propulsion machinery. Fine control of thrust is particular in certain cases, for
example, in dynamic positioning situations or where frequent berthing maneuvers are required
(6). There, it is also possible to use azimuth thrusters, but due to the fact that vessel has quite
small draft, it is not reasonable to use those, as the propeller diameter would be small and it
would not be as efficient.
2.2 Optimization of propulsion
The propeller diameter is roughly estimated based on (7), where it is said that the clearance
between blade tips and hull plating should be 25-30 per cent of diameter. Therefore, it is
estimated that the propeller diameter D is 70% of the draft. Thus, the propeller diameter is
calculated as the following:
[m] 2-1
-
16
For finding the operational point for the propeller, the Wageningen B-series graphs are used. For
that, several parameters should be first calculated. Using simplified equations, the wake fraction
can be calculated as following:
2-2
And the thrust reduction coefficient can be obtained from:
2-3
The speed of advanced is calculated as follows:
[m/s] 2-4
Therefore, the thrust of the propellers is:
[kN] 2-5
The blade area ration is (7):
2-6
Where Z=4 for a propeller with four blades, k=0,1 for two propeller ship and is the
hydrostatic pressure, [Pa] and
is the vapor pressure at , [Pa].
The thrust coefficient is calculated as the following:
2-7
The advanced number for the propellers is:
2-8
From the Wageningen B4-75 series, with the graph seen in Figure 2-1, the P/D ratio is obtained.
Therefore, the P/D ratio is approximately 1 and open water efficiency 0,68. Thus, it is well seen
that, if advance speed increases, the propeller open water efficiency also increases.
-
17
Figure 2-1. Wageningen B-series graph
2.3 Propulsion system efficiency
The propulsion system efficiency is a product of different efficiencies as can be seen in the
following:
2-9
where,
hull efficiency
open water efficiency
relative rotative efficiency
-
18
2.3.1 Hull efficiency
Hull efficiency tells how good the selected propeller to operate behind the hull is. For a
beneficial propeller-hull interaction, hull efficiency has a value exceeding unity. This is often the
case for a single screw vessel with a properly selected propeller. From the definition of hull
efficiency, it is seen that it is beneficial to locate propeller in the region of decelerated flow
(wake). On the other hand, the propeller location should not lead to a high acceleration of hull
flow velocities because this causes an increase of thrust deduction. (8)
Hull efficiency equation:
2-10
As it can be seen, the main variables of the previous formula are wake fraction w and thrust
reduction coefficient t. These can be calculated based on some developed rules or simplified
rules. In this project, it is calculated with two ways.
Wake fraction for twin-screw ships is calculated based on Holtrop and Mennen 1982:
2-11
where,
Block coefficient,
propeller diameter, [m]
draft, [m]
breadth, [m]
viscous resistance coefficient
2-12
where,
factor that describes the viscous resistance of the hull form
frictional resistance of ship according to the ITTC-57 (Equation 1-4)
correlation allowance coefficient:
2-13
-
19
where,
ship length [m]
2-14
Substituting values from Equations 2-4 and 2-5 and other constants to Equation 2-3, the wake
fraction is:
2-15
The thrust deduction factor is calculated as the following:
2-16
Using now Equation 2-2, the hull efficiency can be calculated:
2-17
2.3.2 Simplified equations
Using simplified equations, the wake fraction can be calculated as:
2-18
And the thrust reduction coefficient can obtained from:
2-19
As such, the hull efficiency would then be:
2-20
For ships with two propellers and a conventional aftbody for, the hull efficiency is approximately
between 0.95 - 1.05, so in this particular case both methods gives good results.
-
20
2.3.3 Open water efficiency
Open water efficiency is related to working in open water, i.e. the propeller works in a
homogenous wake field with no hull in front of it. The propeller efficiency depends mostly on
the speed of advance, thrust force, rate of revolution, diameter, and design of the propeller. There
are methods to approximately get open water efficiency but for traditional shaft propulsion
systems, the number can be close to 0,7. It is estimated that it is for this ship 0,69. (8). This
estimation is also in a good agreement with the previously found efficiency based on
Wageningen B-series.
2.3.4 Relative rotative efficiency
The actual velocity of the water flowing to the propeller behind the hull is neither constant nor at
right angles to the propellers disk area, but rather has a kind of rotational flow. Therefore,
compared with when the propeller is working in open water, the propellers efficiency is affected
by the factor , which is called propellers relative rotative efficiency. For ships with a
conventional hull shape and two propellers, this will normally be less than 1, approximately 0,98.
(8)
2.3.5 Propeller efficiency
The ratio between the thrust power , which the propeller delivers to the water and the power
, which is delivered to the propeller, i.e. the propeller efficiency for a propeller working
behind the ship, is defined as (8):
2-21
2.3.6 Total propulsion efficiency
The propulsion efficiency , must not be confused with the open water propeller efficiency, as
it is equal to the ratio between the effective (towing) power delivered to the propeller :
2-22
The total propulsion efficiency is taken into account in the engine selection process.
-
21
2.4 Cavitation
Cavitation occurs when the local absolute pressure is less than the local vapor pressure for the
fluid medium. The critical measurement for cavitation performance is the cavitation inception
point, which is the conditions, i.e. cavitation number, for which cavitation is first observed
anywhere on the propeller. Cavitation will harm propeller blades, so corrosion occurs and also,
cavitation stars causing vibration and noise. Therefore, it is necessary to check the cavitation
limit to be sure that chosen propeller will not start to cavitate.
The cavitation number can be calculated by equation:
( )
2-23
where,
hydrostatic pressure, [Pa]
vapor pressure at , [Pa]
advance speed, [m/s]
According to Equation 2-23, the cavitation number equals 3,42 and, comparing it to the
cavitation graph (see Figure 2-2), it can be seen that cavitation will not occur. (7)
Figure 2-2. Areas of cavitation (7)
Cavitation of suction side
Cavitation free area
Cavitation of pressure
-
22
3 Machinery
3.1 Selecting machinery
3.1.1 Introduction
The space for engines and auxiliary systems is limited and the diesel generators are chosen not to
spend space for extra generators to produce electricity. The advantage of diesel generators is also
the freedom to locate heavy main machines, because there is a pool in the aft area, the engines
should be more in the fore, meaning that, if the shaft is sprightly attached to engine, the shaft line
is long and may cause extra vibrations and noise, which may in turn cause inconveniences for
passengers. Therefore, the propellers are powered by electric engines and electricity is produced
by diesel generators.
Figure 3-1. Electric propulsion illustration. (9)
3.1.2 Diesel generator
Power prediction is done in Chapter 1 and, according to Table 1-2, the effective power is
kW. Also, the propulsion efficiency is taken into account (see Chapter 2.7) and, using
Equation 2-9, the delivered power need is:
[kW]
-
23
Electricity is also needed for the vessels other systems, therefore, an additional 2500 [kW] is
added to power in the first approximation. Additionally, the diesel engine minimum fuel
consumption per kilowatt is in the range of 85 90% of the maximum output and this is taken
into account in selection process.
Finally, the losses in electric circuit are considered and the engine output and needed power
should have about 5% additional cap.
Two or three generators are chosen because it makes maintenance more flexible and adds safety
in case of an accident and helps to fulfil Safe Return to Port regulations. Four or more engines
are not suitable because the total area for machinery is limited. Combinations of different
generating sets are not used in order to be able to have engine maintenance onboard without
docking the ship.
Table 3-1. Generation sets (10) (11)
Producer Type Generator output
[kW]
Weight
[t]
Main dimensions
[mm]
Fuel consumption
[g/kWh]
Wrtsil 12V38 8400 160 11900 x 3600 x 4945 176-185
Wrtsil 16V38 11600 200 13300 x 3800 x 4945 192-204
Wrtsil 16V32 8910 121 11174 x 3060 x 4280 192-204
Wrtsil 18V32 8640 133 11825 x 3360 x 4280 176-185
Rolls Royce B32:40V12 7449 102 10400 x 2310 x 3855 183
Caterpillar C280-12 5200 100 8040 x 2000 x 4085 880,8 [l/h]
From Table 3-1, three Wrtsil 16V32 generator sets are chosen because it fulfils the power
requirements and also is light and small enough for the ship, as the engine room height is 7 [m]
and width 6 [m]. In that case, two engines are used to produce electric energy and the third is in
back-up. The same set of Wrtsil 12V38 engines are not sufficient because they are bigger and
weight more, with an increased weight of about 32%. Using the two Wrtisl 16V38 set does not
fulfil the power requirement and using three is not valid regarding weight. Weight is one of the
main points to be concerned in because of the aim to keep the ships design draft and from Ship
Conceptual design it is known that ship weight is a big concern. Three Rolls Royce B32:40V12
sets are 15% lighter and smaller than Wrtsil 16V32 but fulfils the power need precisely. Using
four Catepillar C280-28 generation sets will take too much deck space and is 10% heavier.
-
24
Table 3-2. Diesel generator set data (11)
Engine Wrtsil 16V32
Output [kW] 9280
Output[kWe] 8910
Cylinders V16
Engine speed [rpm] 750
Output per cylinder [kW] 580
Cylinder bore [mm] 320
Piston stroke [mm] 400
Mean effective pressure [bar] 28,9
Piston speed [m/s] 10,0
Voltage [kV] 0,4 13,8
Length [mm] 11175
Height [mm] 4280
Width [mm] 3060
Weight [ton] 121
Fuel [cSt/50 C] 700
SFOC [g/kWh] 183-191
3.1.3 Electric motors
Electric motors are chosen by taking the power handling into account and selecting reasonable
revolutions of propeller, which is 180 [rpm]. Motor selection is done by using Figure 3-2. The
most reasonable choice at 6 [MW] output and 180 [rpm] is the ABB AMS 1250 electric motor.
Figure 3-2. Motor output range (12)
-
25
Table 3-3. Electric motor data (13)
Output power 1 60 [MW]
Number of poles 4 40
Voltages 1 15 [kV]
Frequency 50 or 60 [Hz]
Protection IP23, IPW24, IP44, IP54, IP55
Cooling IC01, IC611, IC81W, IC8A6W7
Enclosure material Welded steel
Motor type AMS
Mounting type Horizontal and vertical
Standards IEC and NEMA
Marine classification All international societies (ABS, BV, DNV,
GL)
3.2 Electric balance
To be able to choose suitable engines and engine setup, the total electrical power consumption
must be estimated. Electricity is consumed by propulsion electrical motors, ventilation, heating,
and other auxiliary systems. The electricity consumption needs to be calculated for different
operating situations, as the profile of electricity consumption varies in different situations. The
operating situations are open water, manoeuvring, in harbour, at rest, and emergency. A
summary of the electrical balance for the selected engine is provided in Appendix 5.
-
26
Bibliography
1. Birk, Lothar. NAME 3150 Course Notes - Ship resistance and propulsion. New Orleans :
s.n., 2011.
2. Guldhammer, H.E. and Harvald, Sv. Aa. Ship Resistance - Effect of Form and Principle
Dimensions. Copenhagen : Akademisk Forlag, 1974.
3. Andersen, P. and Guldhammer, H.E. A Computer-Oriented Power Prediction Procedure.
Lyngby : Department of Ocean Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, 1986.
4. Hydro Comp PLNC. NavCad. Durham, NH : s.n., 2013.
5. . Appendix H - Resistance Prediction Methods. 2011.
6. Carlton, John. Marine Propellers and Propulsion. 2nd. Burlington : Elsevier Ltd, 2007.
7. Matiusak, Jerzy. Laivan Propulsio. Espoo : s.n., 2005.
8. Basic Principles of Ship Propulsion.
http://www.mandieselturbo.com/files/news/filesof5405/5510_004_02%20low.pdf. [Online] 10 1,
2013.
9. Electric propulsion. Wrtsil. [Online] 10 29, 2012. http://www.wartsila.com/en/power-
electric-systems/electric-propulsion-packages/electric-propulsion.
10. Generating sets. Catepillar. [Online] 10 29, 2012. http://marine.cat.com/cat-C280-12-genset.
11. Generating sets. Wrtsil. [Online] 10 29, 2012.
http://www.wartsila.com/en/engines/gensets/generating-sets.
12. Synchronos Motors Brochure. ABB. [Online] 1 16, 2013.
http://www05.abb.com/global/scot/scot234.nsf/veritydisplay/822ae96e598fd891c125796f0032e7
5d/$file/Brochure_Synchronous_motors_9AKK105576_EN_122011_FINAL_LR.pdf.
13. Electric motor data. ABB. [Online] 1 16, 2013.
http://www.abb.com/product/seitp322/19e6c63b9837b35dc1256dc1004430be.aspx?productLang
uage=us&country=FI&tabKey=2.
-
27
Appendix 1 ITTC-57 Calculations
KNOWN PARAMETERS
length between perpindiculars Lpp 110 m
beam B 18 m
draft T 5.4 m
displacement V 6380 m^3
midship coefficient Cm 0.94 [-]
wetted surface area (Holtrop-
Mennen) S 2562.5362 m^2
block coefficient Cb 0.67 [-]
prismatic coefficient Cp 0.712766 [-]
slenderness coefficient C 0.0047934 [-]
initial design speed v 17 knots
ship speeds to consider v 10 TO 20 knots
CONSTANTS
salt water density 1025.86 kg/m^3
gravitational acceleration g 9.81 m/s^2
kinematic viscosity of water 1.188E-06 m^2/s
1. FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT C'F
V [kn] V [m/s] Rn C'F
10 5.144 476217191.7 0.0016819
11 5.659 523838910.9 0.0016612
12 6.173 571460630 0.0016427
13 6.688 619082349.2 0.0016259
14 7.202 666704068.4 0.0016106
15 7.717 714325787.5 0.0015966
16 8.231 761947506.7 0.0015836
17 8.746 809569225.9 0.0015715
18 9.260 857190945 0.0015603
19 9.774 904812664.2 0.0015498
20 10.289 952434383.4 0.0015399
2. RESIDUARY RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT
V [kn] V [m/s] Fn Cr
10 5.144 0.156605725 0.0027916
11 5.659 0.172266298 0.0028504
12 6.173 0.18792687 0.0029481
13 6.688 0.203587443 0.003099
14 7.202 0.219248015 0.0033196
15 7.717 0.234908588 0.0036286
16 8.231 0.250569161 0.004047
17 8.746 0.266229733 0.0045979
18 9.260 0.281890306 0.0053068
19 9.774 0.297550878 0.0062013
20 10.289 0.313211451 0.0073114
-
28
3. ADDITIONAL COEFFICIENTS
additional resistance coefficient CA 0.0004 from graph
appendenge resistance coefficient CAAP 0.00006 [-]
air resistance coefficient CAA 0.00007 [-]
steering coefficient CAS 0.00004 [-]
4. TOTAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT
V [kn] V [m/s] Fn Ct
10 5.144 0.156605725 0.0050435
11 5.659 0.172266298 0.0050816
12 6.173 0.18792687 0.0051608
13 6.688 0.203587443 0.0052949
14 7.202 0.219248015 0.0055002
15 7.717 0.234908588 0.0057952
16 8.231 0.250569161 0.0062005
17 8.746 0.266229733 0.0067394
18 9.260 0.281890306 0.0074371
19 9.774 0.297550878 0.0083211
20 10.289 0.313211451 0.0094213
5. TOTAL RESISTANCE
V [kn] V [m/s] Fn Rt
10 5.144 0.156605725 175442.64
11 5.659 0.172266298 213891.01
12 6.173 0.18792687 258514.77
13 6.688 0.203587443 311281.13
14 7.202 0.219248015 375008.73
15 7.717 0.234908588 453579.27
16 8.231 0.250569161 552172.54
17 8.746 0.266229733 677524.7
18 9.260 0.281890306 838209.89
19 9.774 0.297550878 1044945.1
20 10.289 0.313211451 1310918.6
6. POWER ESTIMATION
V [kn] V [m/s] R [N] R [KN] PE [Watts] PE [KW]
10 5.144 175442.643 175 902554.93 902.6
11 5.659 213891.0137 214 1210385.5 1210.4
12 6.173 258514.7714 259 1595897.9 1595.9
13 6.688 311281.1323 311 2081779 2081.8
14 7.202 375008.7271 375 2700896.2 2700.9
15 7.717 453579.2686 454 3500120 3500.1
16 8.231 552172.5412 552 4544993.5 4545.0
17 8.746 677524.7021 678 5925329.9 5925.3
18 9.260 838209.8914 838 7761823.6 7761.8
19 9.774 1044945.144 1045 10213758 10213.8
20 10.289 1310918.602 1311 13487896 13487.9
-
29
Appendix 2 Andersen-Guldhammer Calculations
Known Parameters
length between
perpindiculars Lpp 110 m
length of bulf forward
of FP Lfore 3.5 m
length of WL aft of
AP Laft 0 m
beam B 18 m
draft T 5.4 m
displacement V 6380 m^3
midship coefficient Cm 0.94 [-]
waterplane area
coefficient Cw 0.73 [-]
wetted surface area S 2562.536197 m^2
midship CSA Am 91.368 m^2
bulbous bow CSA at
FP Abt 10 m^2
block coefficient CB 0.67 [-]
longitudinal center of
buoyancy LCB 51.33 m
propeller diameter D 3.0 m
no. propeller blades Z 4 [-]
initial design speed v 17 knots
ship speeds to consider v 10 TO 20 knots
Constants
salt water density 1025.86 kg/m^3
gravitational
acceleration g 9.81 m/s^2
kinematic viscosity of
water 1.1883E-06 m^2/s
1. LENGTH DEFINITION
length L 113.5 m
2. LCB DEFINITION
LCB0 -3.67 meters aft of Lpp/2
LCB -0.2175 meters aft of Lpp/2
3. FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT C'F
V [kn] V [m/s] Rn C'F
10 5.144 491369556.9 0.001675044
11 5.659 540506512.6 0.001654511
12 6.173 589643468.3 0.001636094
13 6.688 638780423.9 0.001619422
14 7.202 687917379.6 0.001604213
15 7.717 737054335.3 0.001590245
16 8.231 786191291 0.001577343
17 8.746 835328246.7 0.001565366
18 9.260 884465202.4 0.001554199
19 9.774 933602158.1 0.001543745
20 10.289 982739113.8 0.001533925
-
30
4. INCREMENTAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT
factored 10^3CA 0.4547443 [-]
actual CA 0.000454744 [-]
5. RESIDUARY RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT
M 6.119589657
A0 0.39188691
N1 8.539179315
A1 15869.58731
V [kn] V [m/s] Fn E
10 5.144 0.154172192 0.44052
11 5.659 0.169589411 0.45241
12 6.173 0.18500663 0.46729
13 6.688 0.20042385 0.48686
14 7.202 0.215841069 0.51382
15 7.717 0.231258288 0.55229
16 8.231 0.246675507 0.60842
17 8.746 0.262092726 0.69107
18 9.260 0.277509946 0.81281
19 9.774 0.292927165 0.99102
20 10.289 0.308344384 1.24943
B1 3.629556018 [-]
0.615220359 [-]
B2 0.331893277 [-]
V [kn] V [m/s] Fn B3 G H K 10^3CR CR
10 5.144 0.154172192 67.14125334 0.017941656 5.91634E-10 0.004425061 0.46289 0.000462885
11 5.659 0.169589411 50.63381822 0.023790922 2.03096E-09 0.006296109 0.48250 0.000482501
12 6.173 0.18500663 37.17639717 0.032402958 6.9719E-09 0.008687402 0.50838 0.000508385
13 6.688 0.20042385 26.44668177 0.045549202 2.39332E-08 0.011681799 0.54409 0.000544092
14 7.202 0.215841069 18.12283216 0.066470032 8.21579E-08 0.01536714 0.59565 0.000595653
15 7.717 0.231258288 11.88384567 0.101366618 2.82032E-07 0.019836131 0.67349 0.000673493
16 8.231 0.246675507 7.410317711 0.162560539 9.68161E-07 0.025186235 0.79617 0.000796167
17 8.746 0.262092726 4.3861404 0.274643566 3.32351E-06 0.031519572 0.99724 0.000997241
18 9.260 0.277509946 2.50262006 0.481345635 1.14089E-05 0.038942836 1.33311 0.001333107
19 9.774 0.292927165 1.469122938 0.819962176 3.91647E-05 0.047567205 1.85859 0.001858588
20 10.289 0.308344384 1.040131244 1.158147348 0.000134445 0.057508269 2.46522 0.002465221
6. RESIDUARY RESISTANCE CORRECTION
LCB Correction
B/T 3.333333333
Correction Needed? YES
10^3CR 0.133333333
-
31
V [kn] Fn LCBst/L Factor 2 [+] Factors?
10 0.154172192 -0.026164236 -0.024247936 NO
11 0.169589411 -0.019380659 -0.01746436 NO
12 0.18500663 -0.012597083 -0.010680783 NO
13 0.20042385 -0.005813506 -0.003897207 NO
14 0.215841069 0.00097007 0.00288637 YES
15 0.231258288 0.007753647 0.009669946 YES
16 0.246675507 0.014537223 0.016453523 YES
17 0.262092726 0.0213208 0.023237099 YES
18 0.277509946 0.028104376 0.030020676 YES
19 0.292927165 0.034887952 0.036804252 YES
20 0.308344384 0.041671529 0.043587828 YES
Bulb Correction
ABT/AM 0.109447509
Correction
Needed? YES
Table 12
Fn 10^3Crbulb
0.6 0.15 0.2
0.6 0.18 0.2
0.6 0.21 0.2
0.6 0.24 0
0.6 0.27 -0.2
0.6 0.3 -0.3
0.6 0.33 -0.3
y = -85734x5 + 104751x4 - 49867x3 + 11531x2 - 1295.9x + 56.908 R = 0.9992
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.14 0.19 0.24 0.29 0.34
Co
rre
ctio
n
Froude Number
Bulb Correction Factor
-
32
uncorrected corrected
Fn 10^3Crbulb 10^3Crbulb
0.154172192 0.171653791 0.062206282
0.169589411 0.169717063 0.060269554
0.18500663 0.197442975 0.087995466
0.20042385 0.198115716 0.088668207
0.215841069 0.149519896 0.040072387
0.231258288 0.054979374 -0.054468135
0.246675507 -0.065603907 -0.175051416
0.262092726 -0.184711083 -0.294158592
0.277509946 -0.276167542 -0.385615051
0.292927165 -0.324104088 -0.433551597
0.308344384 -0.331918106 -0.441365615
10^3CR 10^3CRB/T 10^3CRbulb 10^3CRcorr. CR
0.46289 0.133333333 0.062206282 0.65842 0.000658425
0.48250 0.133333333 0.060269554 0.67610 0.000676104
0.50838 0.133333333 0.087995466 0.72971 0.000729714
0.54409 0.133333333 0.088668207 0.76609 0.000766094
0.59565 0.133333333 0.040072387 0.76906 0.000769059
0.67349 0.133333333 -0.054468135 0.75236 0.000752359
0.79617 0.133333333 -0.175051416 0.75445 0.000754448
0.99724 0.133333333 -0.294158592 0.83642 0.000836416
1.33311 0.133333333 -0.385615051 1.08083 0.001080825
1.85859 0.133333333 -0.433551597 1.55837 0.00155837
2.46522 0.133333333 -0.441365615 2.15719 0.002157189
7. AIR AND STEERING RESISTANCE COEFFICIENTS
CAA 0.00007 [-]
CAS 0.00004 [-]
8. TOTAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT
CR C'F CA CAA CAS CT
0.000658425 0.001675044 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003043124
0.000676104 0.001654511 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003040128
0.000729714 0.001636094 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.00307708
0.000766094 0.001619422 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003097774
0.000769059 0.001604213 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003084917
0.000752359 0.001590245 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003052715
0.000754448 0.001577343 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003041363
0.000836416 0.001565366 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003114853
0.001080825 0.001554199 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003359757
0.00155837 0.001543745 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.003850202
0.002157189 0.001533925 0.000454744 0.00007 0.00004 0.00446865
-
33
9. TOTAL RESISTANCE
V [kn] V [m/s] CT R [N]
10 5.144 0.003043124 105858.2361
11 5.659 0.003040128 127962.3657
12 6.173 0.00307708 154136.7847
13 6.688 0.003097774 182113.217
14 7.202 0.003084917 210331.6479
15 7.717 0.003052715 238931.7586
16 8.231 0.003041363 270840.2805
17 8.746 0.003114853 313141.347
18 9.260 0.003359757 378667.3889
19 9.774 0.003850202 483499.2246
20 10.289 0.00446865 621786.7008
10. EFFECTIVE POWER
V [kn] V [m/s] R [N] R [KN] PE [Watts] PE [KW]
10 5.144 105858.2361 106 599039.9958 599.0
11 5.659 127962.3657 128 724124.8092 724.1
12 6.173 154136.7847 154 951537.7512 951.5
13 6.688 182113.217 182 1217932.725 1217.9
14 7.202 210331.6479 210 1514855.269 1514.9
15 7.717 238931.7586 239 1843756.737 1843.8
16 8.231 270840.2805 271 2229316.442 2229.3
17 8.746 313141.347 313 2738595.047 2738.6
18 9.260 378667.3889 379 3506460.021 3506.5
19 9.774 483499.2246 483 4725936.31 4725.9
20 10.289 621786.7008 622 6397494.277 6397.5
11. DESIGN MARGIN
V [kn] V [m/s] PE [KW] PE [KW]
10 5.144 599.0 688.9
11 5.659 724.1 832.7
12 6.173 951.5 1094.3
13 6.688 1217.9 1400.6
14 7.202 1514.9 1742.1
15 7.717 1843.8 2120.3
16 8.231 2229.3 2563.7
17 8.746 2738.6 3149.4
18 9.260 3506.5 4032.4
19 9.774 4725.9 5434.8
20 10.289 6397.5 7357.1
-
34
Appendix 3 NavCAD input parameters
-
35
Appendix 4 NavCAD resistance outputs
Vel Fn Fv Rn Cf Cr Ct Rbare Rtotal Rtotal Rbare/W Pebare Petotal
[kts] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [-] [N] [N] [kN] [-] [kW] [kW]
8 0,125 0,301 3,81E+08 0,001732 0,00055 0,002806 62465 62465 62,465 0,0009 257 257
10 0,157 0,377 4,76E+08 0,001682 0,000599 0,002806 97595 97595 97,595 0,00141 502 502
12 0,188 0,452 5,71E+08 0,001643 0,0008 0,002967 148624 148624 148,624 0,00215 918 918
14 0,219 0,527 6,67E+08 0,001611 0,001216 0,003351 228452 228452 228,452 0,0033 1645 1645
16 0,251 0,603 7,62E+08 0,001584 0,001855 0,003962 352863 352863 352,863 0,0051 2904 2904
17 0,266 0,64 8,10E+08 0,001572 0,002179 0,004275 429740 429740 429,74 0,00621 3758 3758
18 0,282 0,678 8,57E+08 0,00156 0,002695 0,004779 538653 538653 538,653 0,00778 4988 4988
20 0,313 0,753 9,52E+08 0,00154 0,004079 0,006143 854775 854775 854,775 0,01235 8795 8795
22 0,345 0,829 1,05E+09 0,001522 0,004313 0,00636 1070720 1070720 1070,72 0,01547 12118 12118
8 0,125 0,301 3,81E+08 0,001732 0,004433 0,00669 148928 148928 148,928 0,00215 613 613
10 0,157 0,377 4,76E+08 0,001682 0,00263 0,004836 168227 168227 168,227 0,00243 865 865
12 0,188 0,452 5,71E+08 0,001643 0,002316 0,004483 224543 224543 224,543 0,00325 1386 1386
14 0,219 0,527 6,67E+08 0,001611 0,002421 0,004556 310618 310618 310,618 0,00449 2237 2237
16 0,251 0,603 7,62E+08 0,001584 0,002599 0,004707 419119 419119 419,119 0,00606 3450 3450
17 0,266 0,64 8,10E+08 0,001572 0,002679 0,004775 479990 479990 479,99 0,00694 4198 4198
18 0,282 0,678 8,57E+08 0,00156 0,002963 0,005048 568950 568950 568,95 0,00822 5268 5268
20 0,313 0,753 9,52E+08 0,00154 0,003763 0,005827 810842 810842 810,842 0,01172 8343 8343
22 0,345 0,829 1,05E+09 0,001522 0,004234 0,00628 1057285 1057285 1057,285 0,01528 11966 11966
8 0,125 0,301 3,81E+08 0,001732 0,000478 0,002734 60875 60875 60,875 0,00088 251 251
10 0,157 0,377 4,76E+08 0,001682 0,000472 0,002678 93150 93150 93,15 0,00135 479 479
12 0,188 0,452 5,71E+08 0,001643 0,000462 0,002629 131682 131682 131,682 0,0019 813 813
14 0,219 0,527 6,67E+08 0,001611 0,000787 0,002922 199251 199251 199,251 0,00288 1435 1435
16 0,251 0,603 7,62E+08 0,001584 0,001311 0,003419 304449 304449 304,449 0,0044 2506 2506
17 0,266 0,64 8,10E+08 0,001572 0,001564 0,00366 367901 367901 367,901 0,00532 3217 3217
18 0,282 0,678 8,57E+08 0,00156 0,001812 0,003897 439160 439160 439,16 0,00635 4067 4067
20 0,313 0,753 9,52E+08 0,00154 0,002299 0,004363 607128 607128 607,128 0,00877 6247 6247
22 0,345 0,829 1,05E+09 0,001522 0,002775 0,004822 811782 811782 811,782 0,01173 9188 9188
8 0,125 0,301 3,81E+08 0,001732 0,000478 0,002734 60875 60875 60,875 0,00088 251 251
10 0,157 0,377 4,76E+08 0,001682 0,000472 0,002678 93150 93150 93,15 0,00135 479 479
12 0,188 0,452 5,71E+08 0,001643 0,000564 0,002731 136816 136816 136,816 0,00198 845 845
14 0,219 0,527 6,67E+08 0,001611 0,0009 0,003034 206890 206890 206,89 0,00299 1490 1490
16 0,251 0,603 7,62E+08 0,001584 0,001679 0,003787 337208 337208 337,208 0,00487 2776 2776
17 0,266 0,64 8,10E+08 0,001572 0,002482 0,004578 460215 460215 460,215 0,00665 4025 4025
18 0,282 0,678 8,57E+08 0,00156 0,003849 0,005934 668751 668751 668,751 0,00966 6193 6193
20 0,313 0,753 9,52E+08 0,00154 0,007519 0,009583 1333447 1333447 1333,447 0,01927 13720 13720
22 0,345 0,829 1,05E+09 0,001522 0,007968 0,010014 1685973 1685973 1685,973 0,02437 19081 19081
8 0,125 0,301 3,81E+08 0,001732 0,000478 0,002734 60875 60875 60,875 0,00088 251 251
10 0,157 0,377 4,76E+08 0,001682 0,000472 0,002678 93150 93150 93,15 0,00135 479 479
12 0,188 0,452 5,71E+08 0,001643 0,000462 0,002629 131682 131682 131,682 0,0019 813 813
14 0,219 0,527 6,67E+08 0,001611 0,00044 0,002575 175540 175540 175,54 0,00254 1264 1264
16 0,251 0,603 7,62E+08 0,001584 0,000407 0,002515 223919 223919 223,919 0,00324 1843 1843
17 0,266 0,64 8,10E+08 0,001572 0,000388 0,002484 249715 249715 249,715 0,00361 2184 2184
18 0,282 0,678 8,57E+08 0,00156 0,000407 0,002492 280863 280863 280,863 0,00406 2601 2601
20 0,313 0,753 9,52E+08 0,00154 0,000999 0,003064 426292 426292 426,292 0,00616 4386 4386
22 0,345 0,829 1,05E+09 0,001522 0,002092 0,004138 696740 696740 696,74 0,01007 7886 7886
De
Gro
ot
RB
Ho
ptr
op
19
84
HSTS
Sim
ple
dis
pl/
sem
iD
en
ma
rk C
arg
o
-
36
Appendix 5 Electric balance
Open water Manouvering In harbor In harbor at rest Emergency
Quantity Loading
Loading factor Quantity Loading Quantity Loading Quantity Loading Quantity Loading Quantity Loading
Time spend [%] 55 3 39 3 0 Speed [kn] 17 3 0 0 0
Annual running [hrs] 4818 263 3416 263 0 Propulsion
Electric propulsion motors [kW] 2 6124.0 1.0 2 12248.0 2 12248.0 1 6124.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
HFO circulation pump [kW] 3 3.4 1.0 2 6.8 2 6.8 1 3.4 1 3.4 0 0.0
HFO feeding pump [kW] 3 0.8 0.9 2 1.6 2 1.6 1 0.8 1 0.8 0 0.0
HFO separator [kW] 3 5.0 0.9 2 10.0 2 10.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 0 0.0
HFO separator pump [kW] 3 0.6 1.0 2 1.2 2 1.2 1 0.6 1 0.6 0 0.0
Lubrication pump [kW] 3 25.0 1.0 2 50.0 2 50.0 1 25.0 1 25.0 0 0.0
Lubrication oil separator [kW] 3 2.0 0.9 2 4.0 2 4.0 1 2.0 1 2.0 0 0.0
HT - waterpump [kW] 3 6.3 1.0 2 12.6 2 12.6 1 6.3 1 6.3 1 6.3
LT - waterpump [kW] 3 6.3 1.0 2 12.6 2 12.6 1 6.3 1 6.3 1 6.3
Seawater pump [kW] 2 7.5 1.0 2 15.0 2 15.0 1 7.5 1 7.5 0 0.0
Starting air compressor [kW] 1 5.2 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 5.2 0 0.0 0 0.0
Bearing lubrication pump [kW] 2 6.0 1.0 2 12.0 2 12.0 1 6.0 1 6.0 0 0.0
Preheating pump [kW] 3 6.3 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 6.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
Total [kW] 12373.8 12373.8 6198.4 62.9 12.6 Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Group loading [kW] 12373.8 12373.8 6198.4 62.9 12.6
HVAC Boiler burner [kW] 1.0 5.5 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 5.5 0 0.0 0 0.0
Air cooler [kW] 1 2.3 1.0 1 2.3 1 2.3 1 2.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
Air blowers [kW] 3 7.5 1.0 3 22.5 3 22.5 3 22.5 0 0.0 0 0.0
Boiler water treatment [kW] 1 3.6 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 3.6 0 0.0 0 0.0
Fresh water treatment [kW] 1 3.6 1.0 1 3.6 1 3.6 1 3.6 0 0.0 1 3.6
Boiler feed water pump [kW] 1 1.3 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
Warm water supply pump [kW] 1 1.3 0.8 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
Warm water feed pump [kW] 1 1.3 0.8 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
Fresh water supply pump [kW] 1 1.3 0.8 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0.0 1 1.3
Seawater pump [kW] 2 3.5 0.8 2 6.9 2 6.9 2 6.9 0 0.0 1 3.5
Exhaust gas boiler feed pump [kW] 1 1.3 0.8 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0.0
Electric motor air cooler [kW] 2 5.0 1.0 2 10.0 2 10.0 0 0.0 1 5.0 0 0.0
Electric engine drive cooler [kW] 1 3.7 1.0 1 3.7 1 3.7 0 0.0 1 3.7 0 0.0
Total [kW] 54.2 54.2 50.8 10.0 8.4 Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Group loading [kW] 54.2 54.2 50.8 10.0 8.4
Auxillary systems Gray water treatment [kW] 1 3.6 1.0 1 3.6 1 3.6 1 3.6 0 0.0 1 3.6
Gray water pump [kW] 1 0.8 0.8 1 0.8 1 0.8 1 0.8 0 0.0 1 0.8
Black water treatment [kW] 1 3.6 1.0 1 3.6 1 3.6 1 3.6 0 0.0 1 3.6
Black water pump [kW] 1 0.8 0.8 1 0.8 1 0.8 1 0.8 0 0.0 1 0.8
Bilge pumps [kW] 2 4.0 1.0 1 4.0 1 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 4.0
Bilge water feed pumps [kW] 2 2.0 1.0 1 2.0 1 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 2.0
Fire figthing water pumps [kW] 2 7.0 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 14.0
Total [kW] 14.8 14.8 8.8 0.0 28.8 Factor 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Group loading [kW] 7.4 7.4 4.4 0.0 14.4
Deck machinery Achur winch [kW] 2 10.0 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 10.0 1 10.0 0 0.0
Mooring lines winch [kW] 4 12.0 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 12.0 1 12.0 0 0.0
Passanger elevator [kW] 1 5.0 0.8 1 5.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Service elevator [kW] 1 5.0 0.8 1 5.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 0 0.0
Total [kW] 10.0 10.0 32.0 27.0 0.0 Factor 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
Group loading [kW] 4.0 4.0 12.8 10.8 0.0
Lights Cabins [kW] - 150.0 0.8 1 150.0 1 150.0 1 150.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Public rooms [kW] - 150.0 0.8 1 150.0 1 150.0 1 150.0 1 150.0 1 150.0
Machinery rooms [kW] - 30.0 0.9 1 30.0 1 30.0 1 30.0 1 30.0 0 0.0 Outside ligths [kW] - 50.0 0.9 1 50.0 1 50.0 1 50.0 0 0.0 1 50.0
Total [kW] 380.0 380.0 380.0 180.0 200.0 Factor 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
Group loading [kW] 304.0 304.0 304.0 144.0 160.0
Service systems Kitchen machines [kW] - 100.0 0.7 1 100.0 1 100.0 1 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Refridgerators [kW] - 100.0 0.7 1 100.0 1 100.0 1 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Total [kW] 200.0 200.0 200.0 0.0 0.0 Factor 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
Group loading [kW] 160.0 160.0 160.0 0.0 0.0
Navigation, automation Navigation [kW] 1 10.0 1.0 1 10.0 1 10.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 10.0
Communication systems [kW] 1 5.0 1.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 0 0.0 1 5.0
-
37
Navigation lights [kW] 1 5.0 1.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 5.0
Total [kW] 20.0 20.0 5.0 0.0 20.0 Factor 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
Group loading [kW] 16.0 16.0 4.0 0.0 16.0
Special equipment Thrusters [kW] 2 1500.0 1.0 0 0.0 1 1500.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Rudder hydrolic pump [kW] 2 7.0 1.0 2 14.0 2 14.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 14.0
Total [kW] 14.0 1514.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 Factor 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
Group loading [kW] 12.6 1362.6 0.0 0.0 12.6
Total load [kW] 12931.9 14281.9 6734.4 227.7 223.9 Power factor 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
Required power [kVA] 14368.8 15868.8 7482.7 253.0 248.8 Number of engines in use 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Diesel generator loading [%] 84.9 93.7 88.4 3.0 2.9
-
AALTO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
Department of Applied Mechanics
Marine Technology
General Arrangement
M/S Arianna
-
1
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... 1
1 OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 2
2 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................. 2
3 SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................... 3
3.1 SUBDIVISION AND FIRE SAFETY ............................................................................................... 3
3.2 EVACUATION AND LIFESAVING EQUIPMENT ............................................................................ 3
4 PASSENGER COMFORT .............................................................................................. 5
4.1 STATEROOMS ........................................................................................................................... 5
4.2 PUBLIC SPACES ........................................................................................................................ 6
5 CREW AND SERVICE FACILITIES ........................................................................... 6
5.1 CREW ACCOMMODATION ........................................................................................................ 6
5.2 SERVICE SPACES ...................................................................................................................... 7
5.3 ADDITIONAL SPACES ............................................................................................................... 8
6 MATERIAL ACCESS ..................................................................................................... 8
7 TANK ARRANGEMENT ............................................................................................... 9
7.1 FUEL TANKS ............................................................................................................................. 9
7.2 BALLAST TANKS ...................................................................................................................... 9
7.3 FRESH WATER TANKS .............................................................................................................. 9
7.4 BLACK AND GREY WATER TANKS ............................................................................................ 9
7.5 TANKS FOR OTHER SYSTEM ................................................................................................... 10
8 MACHINERY ARRANGEMENT ..........................