FOUNDATION FOR SAFETY OF NAVIGATION AND ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION

 

ILAWA, POLAND

 

 

 

International Workshop on

DYNAMIC STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS IN SHIP DESIGN

 

HELD IN ILAWA, POLAND, Hotel STARY TARTAK

 

13-16 September 2009

 

 

 

PROCEEDINGS

Lech Kobyliński, Editor

 

 

 

 

ILAWA 2009

 

ORGANIZING COMMITTEE:

 

Chairman: Lech Kobyliński, Professor, Foundation for Safety of Navigation and Environmet Protection

Scientific Secretary: Miłosz Frackowiak, Assistant Professor, Technical University of Gdańsk

 

INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE AND PARTICIPATION:

Vadim Belenky            Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (David Taylor Model Basin) United States

Bulian Gabriele            Dept. of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Environmental Engineering (DINMA), University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy

Chris Bassler               Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (David Taylor Model Basin) United States

Frąckowiak Miłosz      Techical University of Gdansk, Poland

Francescutto Alberto,  Dept. of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Environmental Engineering (DINMA), University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy

Grochowalski Stefan,   Polish Register of Shipping, Gdansk, Poland

Hinz Tomasz ,              Polish Register of Shipping, Gdansk, Poland

Kobyliński Lech,          Foundation for Safety of Navigation and Environmet Protection, Poland

Kostas Spyrou             National Technical University Athens, Greece

Pereira Ricardo            Germanischer Lloyd, Hamburg, Germany

Szozda Zbigniew          Marine Academy, Szczecin, Poland

Umeda Naoya              Department of Naval Architecture and OceanEngineering, Osaka University, Japan

Yamamura Shinya         Department of Naval Architecture and OceanEngineering, Osaka University, Japan

 

 

© Copyright by Foundation of Safety of Navigation and Environment Protection 2009

 

ISBN 83-922935-1-7

 

Electronic version only.

 

 

 

 

 

 

PREFACE

The world’s fleet is changing and responding to market needs, geometries of novel ship designs have become considerably different from “conventional” forms. These considerable differences in geometry may invoke dynamic behavior that is drastically different from historical experience.

A classic example of this phenomenon is parametric roll of large containerships. The buttock flow stern with large overhang and well-developed bow flare provides a natural solution for a combination of requirements that includes relatively high speed, volumetric capacity, and fuel economy. However, such a hull form is characterized by significant changes of waterplane area and shape in longitudinal waves. Periodically changing stability places the ship into principal parametric resonance, either in head or following seas, depending on loading conditions and speed. Capsizing still seems unlikely for these large ships; however, large roll angles and accelerations may pose an obvious danger for both cargo and crew. Such behavior is outside of historical expectations for a ship; therefore dynamic stability concerns are well grounded.

Another phenomenon related to changes of waterplane is pure loss of stability, when a prolonged sailing near the wave crest may cause significant roll angles or even capsizing. Increased speed also elevates the danger of broaching for types of vessels where it would not be expected otherwise. A ship of novel design may exhibit unexpected behavior, even in the case of well-studied dead ship conditions.

Because the cause of these problems is rooted in hull geometry, increased awareness of potential problems is needed relatively early in the design stage. However, sometimes these problems cannot be solved with design modifications, due to additional constraints. In this case, the risks posed by such behavior need to be evaluated and ship-specific operator guidance may be needed to help the crew attempt to avoid dangerous situations where the ship may become dynamically unstable.

While working with these new designs, it is important to remember that existing stability standards are based mostly on previous experience. So when geometry and/or operations depart significantly from the historical experience, the applicability and safety margin of existing criteria may no longer be as comprehensive.

These stability failures are essentially large motions and accelerations phenomena occurring in random seas. The challenge is that these phenomena result from a significantly nonlinear dynamical system under stochastic excitation. These types of problems can be solved by direct assessment methods: either by a model test or numerical simulation with an advanced hydrodynamic code in time-domain. However, direct assessment is expensive and time-consuming. Because the design process often includes the analysis of many alternatives, application of direct assessments has to be well-justified.

It means that a designer should also have relatively simple tools that allow quick evaluation to determine if a proposed design may be vulnerable to stability failures related to these phenomena. If such a tool indicates possible dynamic stability problems, for example, caused by parametric roll or broaching, then application of direct assessment methods can be formally justified.

For different modes of stability failure, it may be appropriate to have such tools be of several levels of different complexity, ranging from simple formulae to computer software. Simple tools need to be more conservative, so if a first-level analysis shows no vulnerability to a particular type of stability failure, it means that this type of failure is practically impossible for this type of ship. If a first-level analysis indicates possible problems, then the second-level method is applied and so forth, until the direct assessment is found to be necessary. The outcome of this analysis is either a change of design or the development of ship-specific operational guidance.

Design tools for first and second level vulnerability analysis were the primary focus of this workshop. However, some contributions also considered direct assessment analysis and the development of ship-specific operational guidance.

The contributions from leading experts included in the proceeding of this workshop may be useful for organizations and individuals involved in the development of new generation of stability criteria and related design tools.

 

Prof. L. Kobylinski,

Chair of the Organizing Committee

 

  

CONTENTS

1.    PURE LOSS OF STABILITY

1. Vadim Belenky, Christopher Bassler: Vulnerability level 2 criterion for pure-loss of stability

2. Gabrielle Bulian,  Alberto Francescutto: Vulnerability to pure loss of stability in following waves: ideas for a framework

2.    PARAMETRIC ROLL

1. Vadim Belenky , Christopher Bassler : Vulnerability level 2 criterion for parametric roll

2. Naoya Umeda, Y. Sogawa, T Tsukamoto: New generation intact stability criteria- Parametric rolling

3. Gabrielle Bulian,  Alberto Francescutto: An assessment methodology for 1st level vulnerability check with respect to parametric rolling

3.    SURF-RIDING. BROACHING

1. Naoya Umeda, Atsuo Maki, Hiroyouki Sano: New generation intact stability criteria- broaching

2. Shinya Yamamura, Atsua Maki, Naoya Umeda, Hiroyouki Sano: Numerical study towards physics-based criteria for avoiding broaching and capsizing in following/quartering waves

 

4.    DEAD SHIP CONDITION

1. Naoya Umeda, S. Izawa. E Maeda: New generation intact stability criteria –stability under dead ship condition

2. Gabrielle Bulian,  Alberto Francescutto, Alessandro Maccari: An approach for 2nd level vulnerability criteria for dead ship condition

5.    OTHER IDEAS ON FUTURE STABILITY CRITERIA

1. Naoya Umeda: New generation intact stability criteria – general structure

2. Stefan Grochowalski,  Tomasz Hinz: Development of  new  intact  stability  criteria. Comments  on  some  factors  affecting  dynamic  stability  of  ships  in waves.

3. Vladimir Shigunov, Ricardo Pereira: Direct assessment procedure and operational guidance for avoidance of cargo loss and damage on container ships in heavy weather

4. Lech Kobyliński: Remarks on future generation stability safety norms