gseas- scm cap_final

SCM Ships Classification Malaysia

of 40

Department/Unit : PAN/NB Distribution Lists: GSEAS No. : PAN/FSG/2009-01 Unit Managers Issue date : 01.12.2009 Ships in Operation Surveyors

Last revision date : - Ships New Building Surveyors Revision no. : 01 Plan Approval Engineers Prepared by : Eng. Khairulmuzammil Yuzri Shipboard Auditors Verified by : Ir. Chalis Umar Technical Support Staffs

For Internal Distribution Only

GSEASver.4

Guidelines to Surveyors, Engineers and Auditors

Title:

SCM SHIPS CONDITION ASSESSMENT PROGRAM FOR HULL STRUCTURAL STRENGTH, MACHINERY &CARGO SYSTEM

Introduction Application

Objective SCM CAP Management and Operation

CAP and Rating Principles Hull and Structural Strength Rating Assessment Machinery & Cargo System Rating Assessment

1.0 Introduction

Condition Assessment Program (CAP) is a very significant tool now days, in assessing vessel’s overall condition, maintenance and performance in respect to effectiveness of its structural integrity and strength and operational capability of its machinery and cargo equipment, installation and system by having an independent rating scheme applied from the principle of criticality assessment. The risks of failure from corrosion and from poor design through fatigue are to be taken into consideration in case of larger vessels. CAP is neither classification nor mandatory requirement. It is an Oil Major requirement adopted in connection with vetting survey for the purpose of denying carriage of oils by poorly maintained and substandard vessels. However, classification works is an added value and complementary to CAP as the class based skill, knowledge and experience are being applied in performing CAP works. CAP requirements are above CAS (Condition Assessment Scheme) and ESP (Enhanced Survey Program) and far above requirements of Class Periodical Surveys. Hence, the execution and acceptance criteria of CAP are more extensive and stringent. In principle, Oil Majors should have confidence prior to chartering the vessel that its structures, machinery and cargo system shall survive to the end of the contracted service without reaching the stage that would need renewal under class requirements. Generally, results from visual examination of primary and secondary structures including its internal structural members, thickness measurement analysis, and strength analysis (global, local and buckling) are used as a basis in determining the vessel’s sub rating which in turn concludes the overall vessel’s CAP Rating which will be stated in the CAP Declaration form, issued at the completion of CAP works.


of 40

2.0 Application In general, most of the oil majors require all tankers of more than 20,000DWT and of 15 years old to undergo CAP. This includes fatigue analysis in identifying critical structural areas and life expectancy of the vessels. Individual oil majors may have different or an alternative arrangement and acceptance criteria for smaller size tankers and tankers serving in coastal states in aligning requirements of the National Administrations. Alternatively, a mini CAP program may be carried out to vessels of lesser requirements than stipulated. For SCM Classed Oil Tankers intents to serving PETRONAS CARIGALI, following requirements shall be complied with before any vetting inspection can be considered:

a) CAP report review is applicable for vessels of any size and of 20 years old and above b) Fatigue analysis report review is applicable for vessels of more than 10,000DWT and of 20 years old c) Vessels of 25 years old and above will not be considered for vetting. d) Age of vessel shall be determined from the date the vessel is delivered fro its builder SCM may also perform CAP to non-classed SCM Vessel on request by Ship Owner and acceptance by Oil Majors. However, it should be specifically addressed in the CAP Contract in order to avoid conflict on differences in class requirements particularly with respect to scantling requirements. Hence, the application of IACS Common Structural Rules for Oil Tankers may be preferable. SCM may extend the CAP program or CAP concepts to the following service areas on request by the prospective clients: a) CAP advisory to Oil Majors requiring third party advice in screening CAP performance carried out by

other Organization. b) In connection with condition valuation survey irrespective of types, sizes and ages c) In connection with screening of new purchased vessel

3.0 Objective The principle objective of CAP is to ensure that only good and quality vessels are serving the oils seaborne trade by means of removing or minimizing the known risks which in turn providing and promoting further confidence in protecting life, property and environment. CAP will provide objective evidence of the condition and sate of maintenance of the vessels allowing owners, charterers, shippers and terminal operators making objective judgements. Hence, the objective of this GSEAS is to guide SCM CAP Project Team Members in executing and delivering quality and effective CAP works to SCM existing and potential Ship Owners as well as Oil Majors.

4.0 SCM CAP Management and Operation 4.1 Application of Rules and Guides SCM CAP works are executed based on SCM GSEAS-CAP, prepared from the basis of SCM strength and machinery rule requirements, principles of naval architects, general principle of strength, collective knowledge and experiences of SCM technical personnel and CAP Guidelines from Oil Majors as well as experiences and feedback from IACS CAP Works. 4.2 Agreement of Contract

SCM format agreement of contract shall be signed prior to execution of any CAP works. Scope of works is to be clearly specified in contract, mutually agreed and accepted by SCM and Clients. The scope of works shall be based on technical requirements of individual oil majors and therefore clients are advised to seek clarification with the oil majors. Otherwise, scope proposed by SCM in line with this guideline will be used in executing the CAP works. The contract is governed by terms and condition stipulated in SCM Rules


of 40

Depending on the size and age of the vessels, CAP main fees are based on calculated man-hours spent by SCM CAP Project Team Members providing main CAP works at site and in the office. Additional fee will be charged for additional time spent in verifying and witnessing works and/or testing in relation to major repairs and upgrading of hull and structures, machinery and cargo system and re-assessment of the CAP rating. 4.3 Transparency CAP rating is deemed non negotiable as it is an objective based result with supporting document evidence, measurements, testing, analysis and calculations of actual works done. Therefore, CAP pre-assessment is recommended in order to judge possible CAP rating expected by Clients. In the other hand, the Client in advance would have a brief idea on repair and upgrading works as well as budgeting in reaching to the expected CAP rating.

4.4 Technical Support and Assistance SCM CAP works are readily and technically supported by Indonesian Classification Bureau (BKI) and Indian Register of Shipping (IRS) i.e. SCM Class Partners particularly with respect to Fatigue Calculation and Assessment. SCM CAP works is also supported by the Members of SCM Technical & Advisory Committee comprises the Administration, Shipping Company, Maritime Institution, Naval Architect Firm, Welding Institute and Maritime Associations. Internally, SCM is technically assisted by Hull and Machinery Expert from Rules Development Unit providing technical solutions in any problems arises during the CAP works.

4.5 CAP and CLASS Works Though CAP works is independent of Class works, both may interface each others since class knowledge, principle and concept are applied in performing CAP works. Furthermore, prior to ensuring compliance with CAP, class minimum requirements shall be first complied with. Thus, Class Status Records will be used by CAP Surveyors to get an initial impression on the overall vessel’s minimum class maintenance. CAP is normally done in conjunction with Class Intermediate Survey or Class Special Survey. When CAP Surveyor performs CAP works, deficiencies relating to class non-compliances shall be given as Condition of Class which is to be repaired. Class deficiencies relating to equipment and installation, upon satisfactorily repairs and/or functional tested, may be considered in analysis of visual CAP rating. However, in several occasions, normal and/or minimal repair accepted by class may not contribute to an improvement of CAP rating as major repairs, further modification and/or upgrading are required in excelling the vessel life expectancy period. 4.6 SCM CAP Organization, Coordination and Communication SCM Ships in Service and Class Entry (SIS&CE) Division is responsible for SCM CAP services, supported by SCM Plan Approval and Newbuidling (PAN&NB) Division in providing CAP Strength Analysis. Figure 1.0 shows how SCM CAP services is organized, coordinated and communicated internally and externally. SCM CAP Project Team comprises of CAP Project Responsible, Project Manager, CAP Surveyors and CAP Hull Engineers are the main organiser in the overall management and operation of SCM CAP works from planning till execution of works and has an open indirect communication with the external clients. However, main and direct communication shall be centred between CAP Project Responsible and Clients particularly when involving CAP problem solving and in case of any contractual issue arises. Members of SCM CAP Rating Committee comprises of SCM General Manager, SCM Manager PAN&NB, SCM Manager SIS&CE, Expert Personnels from SCM Rules Development Unit, CAP Project Responsible and CAP Project Manager.


of 40

Figure 1.0: SCM CAP Organization, Coordination and Communication

4.7 Tasks, Responsibilities and Obligations CAP tasks, responsibilities and obligations of SCM Rating Committee, Project Team Members, Support Group and Clients are summarized in Table 1.0 below. For smaller size of vessels, CAP Surveyors (Hull) is normally assigned as the CAP Project Manager.

Table 1.0: Tasks, Responsibilities and Obligations RATING COMITTEE Review and Approval of CAP Final Rating SCM General Manager SCM Manager PAN&NB SCM Manager SIS&CE Expert Personnels CAP Project Responsible CAP Project Manager.

• Review final CAP report and supporting documents • Approve and award final CAP rating • Approve issuance of Final CAP Declaration • May re-adjust the final CAP rating based on objective reasons and

collective judgment • Request assistance from Support Group

PROJECT TEAM Overall CAP Management and Operation Project Responsible • Lead overall CAP Project from initial phase till completion phase

• Managing contractual requirements, issues and conflicts • Main communicators with the clients • Commercial and Technical problem solving • Appoints CAP Project Team Members • Manage Internal CAP Planning Meeting • Verify CAP Final Report and Overall Rating • Request CAP Rating Committee Meeting • Members of CAP Rating Committee. • Issue Preliminary and Final Statement of CAP Declaration • Involve in CAP Closing Meeting with Clients • Involve in CAP Presentation to Oil Majors if requested

CAP Project Responsible SIS&CE DIV

CAP Surveyors Machinery & Cargo System

SIS&CE DIV

CAP Rating Committee

CAP Hull Engineers Strength Analysis

PAN&NB

CAP Project Manager SIS&CE DIV

CAP Surveyors Hull & Structures

SIS&CE DIV

SCM TAC Technical and Advisory

Committee

Hull & Machinery Expert Rules Development Unit

SCM Class Partners BKI and IR Class

EXTERNAL CLIENTS


of 40

Table 1.0: Tasks, Responsibilities and Obligations (Cont.)

PROJECT TEAM Overall CAP Management and Operation Project Manager • Managing effective running, coordination and communication of the

overall project at site and in SCM HQ. • Manage external CAP Planning Meeting • Manage CAP and Class work interface • CAP Trainer and Advisor for Hull Visual Examination • Coordinate and Complete CAP Final Report and Overall Rating • Present CAP Final Report and Justify CAP Final Rating • Members of CAP Rating Committee • Recommend issuance of Preliminary CAP Declaration • Manage follow-up CAP Works subjected to Monitoring Program • Involve in CAP Closing Meeting with Clients • Involve in CAP Presentation to Oil Majors if requested

CAP Surveyors • Effective planning and execution of surveys at site • Review Classification Status and History • Monitor and review TCAP measurement and report • Issue and manage CAP Defect Lists and communicating with clients. • Maintain smooth flow of coordination and communication with CAP

Project Manager, CAP Hull Engineers, Class Surveyor, Clients and Sub-Contractors at site.

• Witness, verify, monitor and manage CAP testing, trials, repairs, modifications and/or upgrading works

• Manage CAP Preliminary Report at site • Complete CAP Visual Hull/Machinery/Cargo System CAP Final

Report and Sub-Rating • Manage amendment to CAP reports. • Manage CAP supporting documents (records, reports, checklists,

etc.) • Involve in CAP Closing Meeting with Clients • Involve in CAP Presentation to Oil Majors if requested

CAP Hull Engineers

• Prepare TCAP Lists • Perform CAP Strength Analysis • Issue and manage CAP Defect Lists and communicating with clients • Maintain smooth flow of coordination and communication with CAP

Project Manager, CAP Hull Surveyors and Clients • Manage CAP Preliminary Report • Complete CAP Final Report and Sub-Rating • Manage amendment to CAP reports. • Manage CAP supporting documents (records, reports, checklists,

etc.) SUPPORT GROUP Technical Support, Assistance and Solutions Hull & Machinery Expert • CAP Trainer and Advisor for Strength Analysis and Machinery

System • Lead CAP Rating Committee Meeting • Providing technical assistance and problem solving

SCM Class Partners SCM TAC

• Providing technical solutions to CAP Rating Committee • Providing technical support for Fatigue Analysis


of 40

Table 1.0: Tasks, Responsibilities and Obligations (Cont.)

CLIENTS Contractual Obligation Owner’s Representative - Technical Superintendent - Manager - Consultant - Etc.

• Maintaining and ensuring fitness of contract agreement and payment • Ensuring that SCM is accepted by Oil Majors prior to carrying out

CAP works • Ensuring full compliance and commitment to scope of works

specified in the contract and additional or specific requirements specified in External Kick-Off Meeting and CAP Defect Lists

• Attending CAP External Planning Meeting • Effective management of repairs, modifications and/or upgrading

specified in CAP Defect Lists • Arranging TM CAP works by SCM Approved TM Service Providers • Request CAP Surveyors verify closing of CAP defects • Ensuring safe means of access for inspection, measurement and

verification in connection with CAP works • Assist CAP Surveyors in ensuring smooth execution of CAP works

at site • Full submission of supporting CAP Document (repairs, tests,

measurements, analysis, trials records and/or reports requested by CAP Surveyors.

4.8 CAP Process Control SCM CAP management and operation have been developed to closely monitor, control and track the entire CAP processes from the date of receiving of request from Client till to following-up the CAP works (see Fig. 1.0). For successful CAP works, joint monitoring, controlling, tracking and following-up between CAP Project Manager and Client’s Representative is prerequisite. 4.8.1 Internal Planning Meeting In the planning phase, on signing of contract agreement, CAP Project Responsible (PR) will assign CAP Project Team. The project team, headed by CAP PR will then formally start the project in the Internal Planning Meeting. The meeting is focusing in strategic management of CAP works in the execution phase. CAP Project Manager (PM) on completion of the meeting will start coordinate and communicate with CAP Project Team Members (PTM) and Clients. 4.8.2 Documentation and Information Important and necessary information and documents shall be prepared, gathered and requested in order to have an initial impression on the condition of the vessel in question. Necessary drawings shall be requested for performing initial strength review and for the purpose of pre-survey planning before CAP surveyors mobilize to worksite. Preparation for external kick-off meeting shall also be carried out in the office. The meeting agenda and other additional information relating to CAP works shall be furnished to the Client in advance for them to work out necessary plan prior to starting of CAP works at site. 4.8.3 Equipment, Tools and Gears SCM CAP Surveyors shall be fully equipped with equipment, tools and safety gears in performing the CAP surveys. Laptop shall be carried out for performing day to day communication and reporting. Good and robust digital camera shall be brought for capturing defect pictures during an inspection. 4.8.4 External Planning Meeting In the execution phase, CAP works is kicked-off in the External Planning Meeting. It is an important meeting between SCM CAP Project Manager, CAP Surveyors and Client’s Representative where the entire scope, process and requirements of CAP works will be clarified and justified to the Client.


of 40

Fig 2.0: CAP Process Control

Process Request

CAP Request

Survey Preparation

Completion Phase

Additional Work Order

Main Work Order

Scope of Main Works

Scope of Additional

Works

Main Contract Signing

Internal Planning Meeting

Tests &Trials Thermograph Vibration LO Analysis

Coordinate & Communicate

with Clients

Accumulative Distribution Curve

Critical Structural Areas (Hot Spots)

External Planning Meeting

Calculation

Monitor Repairs or Upgrading

Issue CAP Defect List

Onboard Visual Inspection And TM Verification

Global SM

Fatigue Assessment

TM Based Rating

Assigning CAP Project Team

Signing Order Confirmation

Mobilisation At Site

Request Initial Document

Review Class Documents & Drawings

CAP Hull Visua

CAP Machinery & Cargo

CAP Strength Analysis

Start Works at SCM HQ

Review TM Reading

Witness Review Verify

Discuss with Client

Prepare Preliminary CAP Report & Rating

Execution Phase 2

Local TCAP

Buckling Check

(L>130m)

Fatigue DWT>10,000 Age=20yrs

TCAP Lists

Analysis

Prepare Preliminary CAP Report & Rating

Analysis

Issue CAP Defect List

Onboard Verification

Final Reporting

Rating Committee Meeting

R

Issue CAP Declaration

Re-Assessment

Review Re-inspection Re-test Re-calculate (Additional Fee)

Closing Meeting with

Client

Prepare Complete CAP Report Main Folder & Sub Folders

Delivering Final Document to Owner

N

Request Completion of Payment

Oil Presentation (If Requested)

Critical Structural Plan & Monitoring Program (Additional Fee)

END

Initiation Phase

Planning Phase

Execution Phase 1


of 40

Any additional queries and issues should be addressed and agreed in the meeting. It is also strongly recommended that Representative from Subcontractors involving CAP works (such as Shipyard, UT Service Providers, Paint Manufactures, Repairers and etc.) attend the meeting so that clear information received by the respective parties. Safety and safe access shall be specifically discussed and addressed. Minutes of External Planning Meeting shall be prepared, monitored and followed-up. 4.8.5 Manage Inspection, Testing, Defects and Repairs On completion of meeting, visual hull and machinery inspections are to be carried out immediately. Thickness measurement should be carried out concurrently by the UT Operators. All findings and defects are to be marked at site and written down in CAP Defect Lists. (See format Figure 2.0) The inspection shall be carried out jointly with Client Representative. This is to ensure that repairs on the defective structural members, equipment, piping, components, fittings and etc. can be carried out immediately and agreeable by clients.

Figure 3.0: CAP Defect Lists

TM readings shall be reviewed in day to day basis. Finding or defects (structural readings below TCAP) shall be immediately reported to the Client’s Representative. It is also recommended that the TM defects shall be written down in CAP defect lists in ensuring overall monitoring and controlling of the repair works. 4.8.6 CAP Machinery and Cargo System For CAP Machinery and Cargo System, functional and running tests, thermograph scanning (if applicable), vibration analysis (if applicable) , LO Analysis, Engine Endurance Trials and Cargo Trials are to be carried out, witnessed, reviewed and verified by CAP Surveyors. 4.8.7 CAP Hull and Machinery Preliminary Report and Sub Rating CAP Surveyors shall effectively manage CAP preliminary reports daily at site. On completion of CAP hull and machinery works at site and on consultation with CAP PM and CAP PR, CAP hull and machinery preliminary report with preliminary sub-average rating shall be submitted to Client’s Representative. The client shall be advised on necessary action and follow-up repairs that should be taken in case result of sub average Rating did not reach to the client’s expectation. 4.8.8 CAP Strength Analysis Concurrently, at SCM HQ CAP Hull Engineer will prepare TCAP lists and forward to CAP Surveyors at site for his reference while reviewing TM Readings. Critical Structures Areas Plan (if applicable) shall be prepared and forwarded to CAP Surveyor for verification during hull inspection. Meanwhile, input from TM readings and updated CAP Defect Lists shall be provided to CAP Hull Engineers for his input in performing CAP Strength Analysis. CAP Surveyors at site shall be immediately informed should non-compliances to CAP Strength rating requirements (TCAP 3) is observed. CAP Surveyors should then request Client’s Representative carrying out necessary repairs or upgrading. On completion of CAP strength works and upon consultation with CAP PM and CAP PR, CAP Strength Preliminary report with preliminary sub-average rating shall be submitted to Client’s Representative. The client shall be advised on necessary action and follow-up repairs.


of 40

4.8.9 Final Reporting, Review and Approval Upon request by CAP Project Responsible, CAP final report and the final rating, will be presented by CAP Project Manager to CAP Rating Committee chaired by Head of Rules Development Unit. Should the deliverable of the report and rating satisfy the Committee, approval will be then granted. Otherwise should it is being rejected, the report shall be reviewed again by CAP Project Team and resubmitted for re-approval. A copy of CAP declaration may be forwarded to Client prior to completion of CAP Report Folders (Main and Sub Folders). The main report folders should be of narrative writing report having the main contents specified in Table 2.0.

Table 2.0 CAP Final Report Contents Main Report Folder Statement of CAP Declaration Statement of Facts with particulars of owners, managers and vessels Executive summary, generally describe the CAP program and re-cap the vessel Rating Status of Classification, summarizing class records and reports Report of CAP Hull Visual Inspection and Sub Average Rating with colored photograph Report of CAP Strength Analysis and Sub Average Rating Report of Report of Machinery and Cargo System and Sub Average Rating Report of Structural/Fatigue Analysis and Sub Average rating (if applicable) Critical Structural Areas Plan and Monitoring Program (if applicable) Sub Report Folder (Annexes to Main Report Folder) Inspection reports and records of hull, equipment and outfitting repairs and upgrading Inspection reports and records of machinery and cargo system repairs and upgrading CAP TM Document CAP TM Analysis of Individual Tanks CAP Local Strength of Longitudinal Members of Individual Tanks CAP Global Strength Analysis (Section Modulus) of Individual Tanks CAP Buckling Strength Analysis of Individual Tanks CAP Structural/Fatigue Details Analysis


of 40

SCM Rating Committee shall be consulted should re-assessment of the approved CAP Final Rating requested by Client. On agreement by the Rating Committee, re-inspection and/or re-testing and/or re-calculation of some particulars in CAP rating elements will be conducted at additional cost to Client.

4.9 CAP General Requirements

4.9.1 Inspection a) Vessel is to be docked for visual examination of external bottom plating and side plating. This is

normally done in connection with class bottom surveys in drydock. b) Complete close-up examination of hull and structural members are to be carried out by means full and

safe temporary staging whilst the vessel in drydock or by means of rafting while vessel at anchorage or underway.

c) Machinery items and cargo system are visually inspected. Repair and overhaul items are to be inspected. All machinery items which are due for class inspection are to be opened-up and inspected.

4.9.2 Tests and Trials a) Test and trials to be carried out in accordance to class requirements and/or international accepted

standards. b) All machinery equipment and cargo system are subjected to function and running tests c) Main engine endurance trials shall be carried out at engine Continous Service Rating d) Steering gear trials to be conducted e) All alarms and shut down functions are to be tested

4.9.3 Condition Analysis a) Lub oil sampling analysis is to be carried out for machinery and cargo system as applicable b) Vibration measurement should be carried out if found applicable. c) Thermograph may be requested if found necessary d) Megger Tests for Main switchboard to be carried out e) Foam analysis for fixed deck foam system to be carried out

4.9.4 Document a) Relevant past and current hull/machinery/electrical/cargo system records and/or reports of inspections,

maintenance, measurements, services, overhauls, tests, trials, analysis, modifications, repairs, renewals and replacement are to be completely documented and submitted for application and consideration in analysis of CAP Rating.

b) Machinery operation and maintenance manual shall be made available onboard for reference to the CAP Surveyors when reviewing machinery performance parameters as compared to manufacturer’s recommended allowances.

4.9.5 Drawing Vessel’s drawings are important document in calculation, analysis, review and verification of vessel strength, visual inspection and thickness measurements. When major repairs and upgrading are carried out, “as built drawing” will guide the repairers in ensuring similar specifications and standards are used for replacement. As minimum, drawings specified in table 3.0 shall be made available:

Table 3.0 Minimum Drawing Requirements HULL AND STRUCTURES

General arrangement Lines plan Midship section & other typical section Longitudinal section Framing plan Deck plan Shell expansion Deep tank structure Fore ship structures


of 40

After ship structures Stern frame and rudder horn Longitudinal strength Intact & damage stability MACHINERY AND CARGO SYSTEM Machinery installation layout Main shafting and Propellers Reduction gears & couplings Boiler, Pressure vessels and Oil firing equipment SCHEMATIC & DETAILS DRAWING FOR PIPING Rudder Arrangement Hydraulic and pneumatic systems Torsional vibration analysis Cargo lines, cargo pumps and driving machinery Cargo tank level indicating systems Bilge & ballast water lines in cargo areas Steam heating & steaming outlines Fire extinguishing equipment for cargo area Fixed tank washing equipment Sounding & Ullage arrangement Tank alarm & overflow control system Details of liquid cargoes to be carried Inert gas system ELECTRICAL SYSTEM General arrangement of main electrical equipment Single line diagram of the electrical power plant system and distribution system Electrical load analysis Battery size and loading calculation Schematic diagram of main switchboard Schematic diagram of AC distribution board Schematic diagram of DC distribution board Controllable pitch propeller system Main and Emergency lighting arrangement Machinery control, monitoring and alarm system for main engine and auxiliary engine

4.9.7 Thickness Measurement (TM) SCM may accept TM readings which have been measured less than 12 months from the date of contract signing. An evident of TM CAP works and reading full monitored, controlled and reviewed by IACS CAP Surveyors shall be provided by the clients.

However, SCM CAP Surveyors, during his visual hull inspection, may request full or partly re-measurement of selected plating and structural members should the TM reading fails in presenting the actual and current condition of the vessel. IACS Procedural Requirement on TM monitoring and controlling the TM works is fully applied by SCM. SCM TM requirements for TM CAP specified in table 4.0 below, are to be fully complied as deemed necessary by the CAP Surveyors

Table 4.0: TM CAP Requirements No. Location/Areas Min. points per

Plate/Web/Flange 1 Main deck plating, full length/areas 5 2 Bottom plating, full length/areas 5 3 Wind and water strakes, full length/areas 5 4 Inner bottom plating, full length/areas 5 5 Longitudinal stringer decks, full length/areas 5 6 Three transverse belts in all tanks/spaces/cofferdam within cargo areas

– all plate strakes, web frames and adjacent structural members 2

7 All longitudinal and transverse bulkhead plating and stringers including stiffening members

2

8 Fore Peak Tank 2


of 40

- All transverse webs with associated plating and longitudinal - Transverse bulkhead complete with associated structure - Stringers and decks with associated structure

9 Aft Peak Tank - All transverse webs with associated plating and longitudinal - Transverse bulkhead complete with associated structure - Stringers and decks with associated structure

2

10 Additional measurement for corrosion assessment of areas exceeding TCAP 2 and suspected substantial corrosion areas. - All elements/bays represented by that element are to be measured to assess extent of corrosion for that element.

Extent

4.10 Critical Structural Areas Plan and Monitoring Program

On completion of CAP works , CAP 3 Rating may be accepted on approval by SCM Rating Committee, with a provision of planned inspection and program and schedule for monitoring, controlling and following up critical structural areas or any specific areas/locations/tanks as specified below:

4.10.1 Repaired within 4 month upon completion of CAP works. CAP 3 or 4 resulted from crack at less critical structural areas and away of cargo tank areas, not defined by Fatigue Assessment and first time crack. Repairs by means of reinforcement are required.

4.10.2 Inspected on an Annual or 2.5 years basis a) CAP 3 in Strength Analysis with no substantial corrosion and no history of failures b) CAP 2 or 3 in Fatigue Assessment with the following conditions:

• No cracks revealed a the time of CAP Surveys • First time cracks repaired with reinforcement • Re-occurrences of cracks repaired by means of structural modifications

c) Smaller size vessel (less than 100m length) which is not holding CAP Rating 3 in some parts of the rated element may be accepted on special consideration of the followings: • Fatigue stress is not applicable • Calculation and analysis of global and buckling strength for individual element is better than CAP2 • Local substantial corrosion where the corrosion acceleration rate has been stopped or retarded by means of coating and/or local substantial corrosion away of cargo tank length. • An ESP program vessel

5.0 CAP and Rating Principles

5.1 Visual Hull Inspection Rating

The main purpose of the visual CAP hull inspection is to detect and report deficiencies and local corrosion and evaluate and report the general visual condition of the vessel. All main structure elements in tank and space as stated below are rated independently. • Deck overhead • Side • Bottom • Inner bottom • Longitudinal Bulkhead • Transverse Bulkhead • Internal Structure (stringers, web frames, girders, etc)

Longitudinal and vertical stiffeners etc. are rated together with plating of the main structural element they are attached to. Only visual condition as observed from inside the tank which is rated is taken into account for that tank. Visual condition from the other side of the main structural element is described and rated in connection with other tanks or with external structure.

A criterion as stipulated in Table 5.0 is used in assessing Visual Hull Examination CAP Rating. However, criteria for allowable local corrosion as specified in Table 6.0 should be applied in combination, when any grey areas arise in determination of rating on the elements.


of 40

Table5.0: CAP Hull Visual Examination Rating Criteria Conditions Descriptions 1 Very Good

Items examined and measured found with only superficial reduction from “as new” or current rule scantlings. No maintenance or repair required.

2 Good

Items examined and measured found to have deficiencies of a minor nature not requiring correction or repairs and or found to have thickness significantly above class limits

3 Satisfactory

Items examined and measured either found to have deficiencies which do not required immediate correction actions, or found to have thickness, although generally above class renewal levels, with substantial corrosion.

4 Poor

Items examined and measured either found to have deficiencies, which may affect the ship’s potential to remain in class, or found to have, in some areas, thicknesses that are at or below the class renewal levels.

Table 6.0: Allowable Local Corrosion

CAP Rating Allowable local corrosion 1 Very Good Condition Less than 1/3 of the allowable margin wasted 2 Good Condition Between 1/3 and 2/3 of the allowable margin wasted 3 Satisfactory condition Between 2/3 and 3/3 of the allowable margin wasted 4 Poor condition Below the allowable margin

The allowable margin is defined by SCM minimum class requirements for ship in operation. Acceptance criteria for other deficiencies are divided and rated in a similar manner. (Ref. GSEAS 2004 Standardise and Enhanced Classification Requirements for Ultrasonic Thickness Measurement/Gauging (UTM). Relevant deficiencies and local corrosion evaluated are:

• Edge corrosion / thinned down • Grooving • Pitting • Indent • Hole • Crack • Fracture • Any other local defect

In accordance with SCM Class Rules, cracks or heavily buckles are not accepted. Critical crack found in main structural element may lead to a CAP 3 or 4 rating even after repairs if no design modifications are carried out to avoid new crack of similar type re-occur in near future.

Evaluation of Coating and coating rating for Ballast Tanks Condition of coating form an integral part of the rating of main structural elements in ballast tanks. All main structural elements in ballast tanks are evaluated and rated independently. The coating condition rating is included in the rating table for ballast tank.

Table 7.0: Coating Rating Principle for Ballast Tanks Rating Conditions Descriptions 1 Good Conditions with only minor spot rusting 2 Fair

Condition with local breakdown at edge, stiffeners and weld connections and/or light rusting over 20% or more of areas under considerations but less than as defined for POOR condition


of 40

3 Poor No coating or condition with general breakdown of coating over 20% or more of areas or hard scale at 10% or more areas under consideration

4 - N/A

5.2 CAP Thickness Measurement Analysis (CTMA) The main purpose is to establish the extent of general corrosion for each and every tank or space rated. All main structural elements in tanks and spaces are to be evaluated and rated independently as according to the following division: • Deck • Side • Bottom • Inner Bottom • Longitudinal Bulkheads • Transverse Bulkheads • Internal Structure (stringers, web frames, girders, swash bulkheads, etc)

The CAP rating criteria for all main structural elements is expressed in Table 8.0 below:

Table 8.0: CTMA Rating Criteria CAP Rating Allowable Local Corrosion 1 – Very Good condition Less than 1/3 of the allowable margin wasted/utilized 2 – Good condition Between 1/3 & 2/3 of the allowable margin wasted/ utilized 3 – Satisfactory condition Between 2/3 & 3/3 of the allowable margin wasted/ utilized 4 – Poor condition Below class minimum requirements

Assumptions • Calculation is based on empirical formula in SCM Rules Volume II Section 3.K.1.2 • Torignal is based on the scantling data on drawings and the vessel is built accordingly to the drawings. • Longitudinal and vertical stiffeners are rated together with plating of the main structural element they

attached to. • A 10% allowance for measurements below the rating criteria is accepted, provided these readings are

widely scattered. This is to allow for random single pits, inaccuracy and uncertainty in measurements etc. • The UTM based rating for each element is determined by which sector the specific element curve crosses

the 90% percentile margin line.

5.3 CAP Strength Calculation Analysis (CSCA)

5.3.1 GLOBAL STRENGTH ANALYSIS The global strength is calculated and expressed by the section modulus of a representative cross-section for any tank or space, on the basis of having sufficient stability. The global strength is usually evaluated and analysed for the midship region of a vessel within 0.4L from amidships. For global strength calculation and analysis, the section modulus of a representative cross section is being compared to the New-building requirement. The Ships in Service (SIS) class minimum requirement is defined as 90% of the New-building requirement, therefore the CAP rating criteria is expressed below:

Table 9.0: Global Strength Rating Criteria

CAP 1 CAP 2 CAP 3 CAP 4 Section Modulus (Safety Factor)

Zactual

> 97% Zrule Zactual > 93% Zrule

Zactual > 90% Zrule

Zactual < 90% Zrule

The cross-section is taken to be symmetrical of the centreline, meaning the port and starboard is similar in terms of structures and dimensions. 5.3.2 LOCAL STRENGTH ANALYSIS The local strength is calculated and expressed in plate thickness and stiffener section modulus. All the main longitudinal structural elements are involved in the calculation whereas the transverse elements are included only when relevant. Therefore the list of main longitudinal structural elements is shown as below:


of 40

• Bottom plating, flat keel plating, bottom girder, bottom longitudinal • Side plating, side longitudinal • Deck plating, deck girder, deck longitudinal • Longitudinal bulkhead plating, longitudinal For local strength calculation and analysis, the thicknesses of all the longitudinal structural elements are evaluated and rated as per similar assumption and rating criteria of CTMA. 5.3.3 BUCKLING STRENGTH ANALYSIS For buckling strength calculation and analysis, the actual thickness of the shell plating of a representative cross section is being compared to the critical thickness under buckling condition. The critical minimum requirement under buckling condition is defined as 90% of the New-building requirement as specified in Table 10.

Table 10.0 Buckling StregthRating Criteria CAP 1 CAP 2 CAP 3 CAP 4 Thickness

Tactual

> 97% Tcritical Tactual > 93% Tcritical

Tactual > 90% Tcritical

Tactual < 90% Tcritical

Criteria • According to SCM Rules Volume II Section 5.C, the total permissible bending moment of the vessel is

calculated on the basis of Rule-required section modulus Zrule. • The maximum permissible still water hogging and sagging moments do not exceed the approved still

water bending moments. • For small vessel, the buckling strength is calculated and expressed in critical thickness of the shell

plating.

5.3.4 CAP MACHINERY AND CARGO SYSTEM

Fig. 4.0 describes an overall concept for determination of CAP Machinery and Cargo System Rating Guidance shall also be made to Machinery and Cargo Rating System Checklist (see Fig. 5)when performing inspection and testing. Generally, an overall CAP machinery and Cargo System rating (MCR) comprises an evaluation of:

• Machinery technical condition (MTC), weight 70% • Evaluation of maintenance standard and spare parts condition and storage (EMS), weight 20% • Investigation in ship history files (ISH), weight 10%

Hence, MCR = (MTC x 0.7) + (EMS x 0.2) + (ISH x 0.1)

Main functions of MTC are categorized as follows: • Propulsion • Steering • Electric power generation and transfer • Auxiliary systems (including Cargo System) • General Ship and support functions • Cargo System

Performance data which have impact on the assessment are: • General performance of machinery • Visual external inspection • Spot check of main safety functions as level switches, automatic shutdown • Operation from engine control room with instrumentation and remote operation • Monitoring of operation of cargo system • Oil sample analysis • Vibration measurement

Risk based principle has been applied in the analysis of CAP Machinery Rating with respect to: • Safety for personnel and others • Safety environment • Commercial availability


of 40

• Safety of ship and equipment • Safety of cargo

Criticality values based on class and industry experiences are expressed in Table 11.0

Table 11.0: Criticality Values

System Criticality value Propulsion 20 Steering 15 Electric Power Generation and Transfer 13 Auxiliary Systems 21 General Ship and Support Functions 17 Cargo System 18

Fig. 4.0: CAP Rating Concept

Hence Final rating for MTC =


of 40

6.0 Hull & Structural Strength Rating Assessment

6.1 Visual Hull Inspection Rating (VHIR) The overall process of VHIR Rating Assessment is shown in figure 6.0.

Typical Example – Rating Assessment for Cargo Oil T ank (See Fig. 7.0)

Fig. 5.0: Machinery and Cargo Rating System Checklist

Fig 6.0: VHIR Rating Process


of 40

a) On completion of visual inspection and verification of thickness measurement, CAP rating assessment is immediately performed by the CAP Surveyors using the reporting format shown in Fig. 7.0.

b) Information gathered from visual inspection and thickness measurement are used as a guidance in assessing the tank rating

c) Inspection revealed structural thinning at edges (substantial corrosion) and hole observed at the tank’s forward bulkhead

d) Therefore, rating 3 (Satisfactory) and 4 have been given to the respective structural element. Rating 3 is within class requirement and not subjected to immediate repairs. However, individual element with Rating 3 may not be accepted by the Oil Majors and as such, the areas of concerned shall be upgraded to Rating 2 by means of partial steel renewals. Rating 4 (POOR) has been issued since cracks and holes are required to be repaired. In this case, the subject tank in entirety shall be automatically rated at CAP 4.

e) Longitudinal bulkhead is rated 1 (Very Good) as neither notable defects nor substantial corrosion observed during the inspection. Thickness Measurement revealed very minimal wastage as compared to the original as built thickness. Likewise, though visually, condition of bottom plating is in very good condition, it is rated as CAP 2 since TM revealed significant reduction above class reduction limits

f) On satisfactorily partial renewal of plating, transverse bulkhead rating is automatically changed to Rating 1 and consequently, the average sub rating is changed from 2.17 to 1.67 i.e., CAP rating 2.

g) In line with IACS requirements requiring good maintenance of water ballast tanks coating, condition of coating in cargo tank is not being assessed during the rating process. However, special consideration will be given in determination of final overall rating of the cargo tanks

Fig 7.0: Typical COTNo.1P Rating Assessment


of 40

6.1.1 CAP Thickness Measurement Analysis (CTMA)

The overall process of CTMA Rating Assessment is shown in figure 8.0.


of 40

Fig 8.0: CTMA Rating Process

Preparation of Tmin & Tcap List a) This list serves as a guide to CAP rating as well as a tool for possible steel renewals. The list has

columns for Toriginal, CAP1, CAP2, and CAP3=Tmin in nominal terms (as shown in Fig.9).

Tmin = Toriginal – corrosion allowance Tsubstantial = Tmin + 0.75 x (Trule –Tmin)

b) The corrosion margin Toriginal - Tmin is divided by 3, each column corresponding to the CAP ratings.

In cases where vessels are built with additional scantlings, vessels may be given credit by replacing Torig with Trule where Trule is the minimum scantling to be approved as new-building.

CTMA Example

a) Conducting manual calculation based on SCM rules, a column of Trule for each and every main structural element is worked out as shown below.

b) For example, bottom shell plating thickness = 1.9 * nf * a * √(pB * k) + tK = 1.9 * 0.83 * 0.6 * √(72.996 * 1.00) + 2.00 = 10.084mm

c) Based on the actual drawings, a column of Toriginal for each and every main structural element is listed out (as shown in Fig.9).

d) Arranging the main structural elements as according to the division method mentioned in 2nd Clause in the “General” Section (as shown in Fig. 9).

e) Working out a column of Tminimum for each and every main structural element (as shown in Fig.9) by having the corrosion allowance deducted from the Toriginal.


of 40

f) Preparing the Tcap List based on the Tmin List, as well as, the CAP rating principle (as shown in Fig.9).

g) Inputting all the UTM gauged readings for each and every main structural element into the CAP Thickness

h) Measurement Analysis table (as shown in Fig.10)

i) Based on the two sets of data, Toriginal and Tgauged, the percentage of steel diminution is calculated against the allowable margin (as shown in Fig.10).

j) Compiling all the results gathered from above step (as shown in Fig.11).

Figure 9.0: TCAP Lists


of 40

Figure10.0: TM Data Input

Figure 11.0: Diminution Percentage

k) Plotting out the Relative Diminution Distribution Curve for the respective tank or space (as shown

in Fig.12.0).

l) Reading the interception point of the respective curve for each and every main structural element crosses with the 90% margin line in order to locate the CAP region where the respective element falls into (as shown in Fig.12.0).

m) Summing up the rating of each and every main structural element and calculating the TM Sub-

Average Rating for the respective tank or space (as shown in Fig.13 & 14).


of 40

Figure 12.0: Relative Diminution Distribution Curve

Figure 13.0: TM Sub Average Rating


of 40

Figure 14.0: TM Sub Average Rating shown in Final O verall Rating Table


of 40

6.2 CAP Strength Calculation Analyses (CSCA)

6.2.1 GLOBAL STRENGTH ANALYSIS (GSA) The overall process of CSCA Rating Assessment is shown in Fig.15.0.

Fig 15.0: CSCA Rating Process Typical Example

a) As shown in fig. 16.0, by applying the basic mechanical formula, the sectional area, 1st moment, 2nd moment to the reference axis and 2nd moment to the local axis for each and every longitudinal structural element are calculated.


of 40

Fig 16.0: Sectional area, 1 st moment, 2 nd moment calculation

Fig 17.0: Zactual vs. Zrule

b) According to the CAP rating criteria, the safe factor is obtained by comparing the lower actual

section modulus Zactual with the rule-required section modulus Zrule(as shown in Fig.17)


of 40

c) From the example shown in Fig.17, a CAP rating of 1 is assigned for the global strength d) Subsequently, Global Strength sub-rating is obtained for all the other tanks or spaces (as shown in

Fig.18).

Fig 18.0: Global Strength Rating Shown in Final Ove rall Rating Table


of 40

6.2.2 LOCAL STRENGTH ANALYSIS (LSA)

The overall process of LSA Rating Assessment is shown in Fig.19.0.

Fig 19.0: LSA Rating Process Typical Example

a) Using the final CAP Thickness Measurement Analysis table obtained in “CTMA ” Section to input the thickness readings for all the longitudinal structural elements (as shown in Fig.20).

b) Compiling all the selected results for longitudinal elements (as shown in Fig.21)

c) Plotting out the Accumulative Distribution Curve of Local Strength for the respective tank or space (as shown in Fig.22).

d) Reading the interception point of the curve for the respective tank or space with the 90% margin line in order to locate the CAP region where the local strength of the tank or space falls into (as shown in Fig.23).


of 40

Fig 20.0: TM Readings for All Longitudinal Members


of 40

Fig 21.0: Percentage of Diminutions


of 40

Fig 22.0: LSA Accumulative Distribution Curve


of 40

Fig. 23.0: LSA Rating in Overall Rating Table


of 40

6.2.2 BUCKLING STRENGTH ANALYSIS (BSA)

The overall process of BSA Rating Assessment is shown in Fig.24.0.

a) By applying the basic mechanical formula, σ = M/W, the two permissible stresses for the respective tank or space, σb and σd, with reference made to the baseline and deck respectively, are calculated (as shown in Fig.25).

b) Furthermore, by applying the SCM Rules Volume II Section 6.B.2, the two critical thicknesses, Tcrit(bottom) and Tcrit(deck), with reference made to the two permissible stresses abovementioned, are calculated (as shown in Fig.25).

Fig 24: BSA Rating Process


of 40

c) As according to the CAP rating criteria, the Buckling Strength sub-rating for the respective tank or space is obtained by comparing the two critical thicknesses, Tcrit(bottom) and Tcrit(deck), with the two respective actual thicknesses (as shown in Fig.25).

d) From the example shown in Fig.26, a CAP rating of 1 is assigned for the buckling strength of the tanks evaluated and analysed, Cargo Tank No.3 (Port & Starboard). Subsequently, we can obtain the Buckling Strength sub-rating for all the other tanks or spaces (as shown in Fig.27)

Fig 25: Buckling Check

Fig 26: BSA Sub Rating


of 40

Fig 27: BSA Sub Rating in Overall Rating Table


of 40

7.0 Machinery & Cargo System Rating Assessment

How to Derive Overall CAP Machinery and Cargo System? The CAP Machinery and Cargo System is derived through a systematic process as detailed in hereunder:

Stage I - Preparation and CAP Machinery Survey and Trials CAP Machinery checklist as shown in Fig 28 below shall be fully guided when performing CAP Machinery and Cargo System

Fig. 28: CAP Machinery and Cargo System Checklist

CAP Machinery and Cargo System Checklist Item/input of survey required is defined based on their main system and subsystem function. Item/input represents what to inspect/check during Machinery and Cargo System Survey and Trials. Item/input has to be defined in conjunction with following:

• General performance of machinery • Visual external inspection • Spot check of main safety functions as level switches, automatic shutdown • Operation from engine control room with instrumentation and remote operation • Monitoring of operation of cargo system • Oil sample analysis

Rating Point Rating point is defined as below:

1. Examine Applicable for Item/Input that needs visual examine/inspection during Survey and Trials 2. Test Applicable for Item/Input that needs running test or other required test 3. Measure Applicable for Item/Input that needs to measure their gauge and/or reading 4. Verify Applicable for Item/Input that needs verification on site regarding their logbook,

certificate and record Machinery rating definitions Rating categories for item/input as specified below are to be granted at site during Inspection and Trials

Rating 1 (Very Good Condition) Items and Systems examine and function tested, found with no deficiencies affecting safe operation and/or performance. Document and maintenance practices considered good. No maintenance or repair required Rating 2 (Good Condition) Items and Systems examine and function tested, found with some minors deficiencies and do not effect safe operation and/or performance. Document and maintenance practices considered adequate. No immediate maintenance or repair considered necessary Rating 3 (Acceptable Condition) Items and Systems examine and function tested, found with deficiencies and do not effect safe operation and/or performance. Document and maintenance practices considered to be of minimum standard. Some maintenance or repair may be considered necessary


of 40

Rating 4 (Poor Condition) Items and Systems examine and function tested, found with deficiencies significantly affecting safe operation and/or performance. Document and maintenance practices considered inadequate. Maintenance or repair required to reinstate serviceability Inspection and Test Instructions and Guidelines The instruction/guidelines is written under each Item/Input to additionally guide the CAP Surveyors when perform CAP Machinery and Cargo System (see Fig. 29)

Fig. 29: Instruction & Guidance

Any remarks or notes that have been observed during survey and trials are to be recorded in the Observations/Notes

Stage 2 - DERIVING THE OVERALL CAP MACHINERY AND CARGO SYSTEM RATING (EXCEL VERSION)

On completion of CAP Machinery and Cargo System Survey and Trials, the completed checklist, records and other related documents are to be compiled in one folder. Completed checklist is to be filled in the CAP Machinery and Cargo System Excel Version.

Fig. 30: CAP Machinery and Cargo System Checklist (Excel Version)

Process Flow to Derive Final CAP Rating based on Ma chinery and Cargo System Checklist There are five (5) main stages in deriving the Machinery and Cargo System Final CAP Rating as shown in Figure 31. Stage 1 Individual CAP rating can be extracted from the Machinery and Cargo System Checklist. Sample of individual CAP rating as shown in fig.31 Stage 2 Subsystem CAP Rating is derived from the average of CAP Input Individual Rating. Sample of Sub System CAP rating as shown in fig.31 Fig. 31: Indi vidual and Subsystem CAP Rating


of 40

Figure 31: Machinery and Cargo System Rating Proce ss


of 40


of 40

Stage 3 Subsystem CAP Rating is derived from the average of CAP Subsystem Rating. Sample of Sub System CAP rating as shown in fig.5

Stage 4 Define Machinery and Cargo System Technical Condition based on their criticality value

Stage 5:

Combine Technical Condition Rating, Maintenance System Rating and Ship History Files based on their weight factor

Final Rating for CAP Machinery and Cargo System MCR = (MTC x 0.7) + (EMS x 0.2) + (ISH x 0.1)

Assumption (example): EMS = 2.5 ISH = 2.3

Thus, MCR = (2.09x0.7) + (2.5x0.2) + (2.3x0.1) = 2.2 ≈ 2

END OF GSEASEND OF GSEASEND OF GSEASEND OF GSEAS

Fig. 32: Main System CAP Rating

gseas- scm cap_final

Documents

cap requirements

operation cap

overall vessels cap

completion of cap

mini cap program

acceptance criteria

cap declaration form

vessels overall condition