Performance characterisation for risk assessment of striking ship impacts based on struck ship damaged volume

Abstract

Ship collision accidents are rare events but pose huge threat to human lives, assets, and the environment. Many researchers have sought for effective models that compute ship stochastic response during collisions by considering the variability of ship collision scenario parameters. However, the existing models were limited by the capability of the collision computational models and did not completely capture collision scenario, and material and geometric uncertainties. In this paper, a novel framework to performance characterisation of ships in collision involving a variety of striking ships is developed, by characterising the structural consequences with efficient response models. A double-hull oil carrier is chosen as the struck ship to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed framework. Response surface techniques are employed to generate the most probable input design sets which are used to sample an automated finite element tool to compute the chosen structural consequences. The resulting predictor-response relationships are fitted with suitable surrogate models to probabilistically characterise the struck ship damage under collisions. As demonstrated in this paper, such models are extremely useful to reduce the computational complexity in obtaining probabilistic design measures for ship structures. The proposed probabilistic approach is also combined with available collision frequency models from literature to demonstrate the risk tolerance computations.

Keywords

ship collision / hull damage / numerical simulation / structural reliability / risk assessment

References

[1] Alsos HS, Amdahl J. On the resistance of tanker bottom structures during stranding. Marine Structures, 2007, 20(4): 218-237

[2] Ang AHS, Tang WH. Probability concepts in engineering: Emphasis on applications to civil and environmental engineering, 2007, Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 42-154

[3] Atua KI, Assakkaf I, Ayyub BM. Statistical characteristics of strength and load random variables of ship structures. Proceedings of the 1996 ASCE Specialty Conference on Probabilistic Mechanics and Structure Reliability, 1996, 106-109

[4] Ayyub BM, Assakkaf I, 2000. Reliability-based structural design of ships using load and resistance factor design. SSC/SNAME/ASNE Ship Structure Symposium, 1–21.

[5] Baris T, Otay EN. Modeling and analysis of vessel casualties resulting from tanker traffic through narrow waterways. Naval Research Logistics, 1999, 46(8): 871-892

[6] Béghin D. Technical evolution in the ship structural analysis over the last 50 years. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2013, 8(3–4): 337-345

[7] Bourinet JM, Mattrand C, Dubourg V. A review of recent features and improvements added to FERUM software. 10th International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability, 2009

[8] Brown A, Sajdak J. Predicting probabilistic collision damage extents for oil outflow assessment and regulation. SNAME Transactions, 2004, 112: 514-522

[9] Brown AJ. Collision scenarios and probabilistic collision damage. Marine Structures, 2002, 15(4–5): 335-364

[10] Bucher CG, Bourgund U. A fast and efficient response surface approach for structural reliability problems. Structural Safety, 1990, 7(1): 57-66

[11] Couckuyt I, Dhaene T, Demeester P, 2013. ooDACE toolbox -A matlab kriging toolbox: Getting started. Available from http://sumowiki.intec.ugent.be/OoDACE:ooDACE_toolbox [Accessed on 20 February, 2016].

[12] Das PK, Zheng Y. Cumulative formation of response surface and its use in reliability analysis. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2000, 15(4): 309-315

[13] Debnath AK, Chin HC. Hierarchical modeling of perceived collision risks in port fairways. Transportation Research Record, 2009, 2100: 68-75

[14] DNV, 2010. Design against accidental loads. DNV-RP-C204, Det Norske Veritas, Oslo, 10.

[15] Eliopoulou E, Papanikolaou A. Casualty analysis of large tankers. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2007, 12(4): 240-250

[16] Fowler T S E. Modeling ship transportation risk. Risk Analysis, 2000, 20(2): 225-244

[17] Fujii Y, Tanaka K. Traffic capacity. The Journal of Navigation, 1971, 24(4): 543-552

[18] Gaspar B, Teixeira A G, Soares C. Assessment of the efficiency of kriging surrogate models for structural reliability analysis. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2014, 37: 24-34

[19] Geng B, Wang H, Wang J. Probabilistic model for vessel-bridge collisions in the three gorges reservoir. Frontiers of Architecture and Civil Engineering in China, 2009, 3(3): 279-285

[20] Goerlandt F, Kujala P. On the reliability and validity of ship-ship collision risk analysis in light of different perspectives on risk. Safety Science, 2014, 62: 348-365

[21] Guarin L, Konovessis D, Vassalos D. Safety level of damaged RoPax ships: Risk modelling and cost-effectiveness analysis. Ocean Engineering, 2009, 36(12–13): 941-951

[22] Guo JJ, Wang GG, Perakis AN, Ivanov L. A study on reliability-based inspection planning -application to deck plate thickness measurement of aging tankers. Marine Structures, 2012, 25(1): 85-106

[23] Haldar A, Mahadevan S. Reliability assessment using stochastic finite element analysis, 2000, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 251-282

[24] Hänninen M, Kujala P. Weintrit A. The effects of causation probability on the ship collision statistics in the gulf of finland. Marine navigation and safety of sea transportation, 2009, Boca Raton: CRC Press, 267-272

[25] Haris S, Amdahl J. An analytical model to assess a ship side during a collision. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2012, 7(4): 431-448

[26] Hess PE, Bruchman D, Assakkaf IA, Ayyub BM. Uncertainties in material and geometric strength and load variables. Naval Engineers Journal, 2002, 114(2): 139-165

[27] IHS Fairplay, 2012. World casualty statistics. No. 2011, IHS Fairplay, Redhill.

[28] IMO, 2002. Guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process. MSC/Circ.1023 MEPC/Circ.392, International Maritime Organization, London.

[29] IMO, 2007. Formal safety assessment -liquefied natura gas (LNG) carriers. MSC83/INF.3, International Maritime Organization, London.

[30] ITOPF, 2014. Oil tanker spill statistics 2014. Available from http://www.itopf.com/fileadmin/data/Documents/Company_Lit/Oil_Spill_Stats_2014FINALlowres.pdf [Accessed on 27 April, 2015].

[31] Jones N. Some recent developments and future trends in thin-walled sections for structural crashworthiness. Thin-Walled Structures, 1998, 32(1–3): 231-233

[32] Kaneko F. Methods for probabilistic safety assessments of ships. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2002, 7(1): 1-16

[33] Kaymaz I M, Mahon CA. A response surface method based on weighted regression for structural reliability analysis. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2005, 20(1): 11-17

[34] Kim S, Na S. Asian-pacific symposium on structural reliability and its applications response surface method using vector projected sampling points. Structural Safety, 1997, 19(1): 3-19

[35] Koutsourelakis PS, Pradlwarter HJ, Schuëller GI. Reliability of structures in high dimensions, part I: Algorithms and applications. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 2004, 19(4): 409-417

[36] Kujala P H M, Arola T, Ylitalo J. Analysis of the marine traffic safety in the gulf of finland. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2009, 94(8): 1349-1357

[37] Levanger H, 2012. Simulating ductile fracture in steel using the Finite element method: Comparison of two models For Describing local instability due to ductile fracture. Master thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo, 58–87.

[38] Li S, Meng Q, Qu X. An overview of maritime waterway quantitative risk assessment models. Risk Analysis, 2012, 32(3): 496-512

[39] Liu PL, Der Kiureghian A. Optimization algorithms for structural reliability. Structural Safety, 1991, 9(3): 161-177

[40] Liu YW, Moses F. A sequential response surface method and its application in the reliability analysis of aircraft structural systems. Structural Safety, 1994, 16(1–2): 39-46

[41] Lloyd’s Register, 2014. Guidance notes for collision analysis. Lloyd’s Register Group, London, 1–21.

[42] Lophaven SN, Nielsen BN, Sondergaard J. DACE -A matlab kriging toolbox, version 2.0., 2002, Denmark: Informatics and Mathematical Modelling, Technical University of Denmark: Lyngby, 1-28

[43] Lutzen M. Ship collision damage, 2001, Lyngby: Technical University of Denmark

[44] Macduff T. Probability of vessel collisions. Ocean Ind, 1974, 9(9): 144-148

[45] MacElrevey DH, MacElrevey DE. Shiphandling for the mariner, 2004, Centreville: Cornell Maritime Press, 101-241

[46] Minorsky VU. An analysis of ship collision with reference to protection of nuclear power ships. Journal of Ship Research, 1959, 3(2): 1-4

[47] Montewka J, Goerlandt F, Kujala P. Determination of collision criteria and causation factors appropriate to a model for estimating the probability of maritime accidents. Ocean Engineering, 2012, 40: 50-61

[48] Montewka J, Hinz T, Kujala P, Matusiak J. Probability modelling of vessel collisions. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2010, 95(5): 573-589

[49] Myers RH, Montgomery DC, Anderson-Cook CM. Response surface methodology: Process and product optimization using designed experiments, 2009

[50] NORSOK Design of steel structures, 2004, 87

[51] Obisesan A, Sriramula S, Harrigan J. A framework for reliability assessment of ship hull damage under ship bow impact. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2015, 11(7): 700-719

[52] Otto S, Pedersen PT, Samuelides M, Sames PC. Elements of risk analysis for collision and grounding of a RoRo passenger ferry. Marine Structures, 2002, 15(4–5): 461-474

[53] Paik JK, Park JH, Samuelides E. Collision-accidental limit states performance of double-hull oil tanker structures: Pre-CSR versus CSR designs. Marine Technology, 2009, 46(4): 183-191

[54] Pedersen PT. Collision and grounding mechanics. Proceedings of WEMT, 1995, 125-157

[55] Pedersen PT, Zhang S. Effect of ship structure and size on grounding and collision damage distributions. Ocean Engineering, 2000, 27(11): 1161-1179

[56] Rawson C, Crake K, Brown AJ. Assessing the environmental performance of tankers in accidental grounding and collision. SNAME Transactions, 1998, 106: 41-58

[57] Ringsberg JW. Characteristics of material, ship side structure response and ship survivability in ship collisions. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2010, 5(1): 51-66

[58] Roeleven D, Kokc M, Stipdonk HI, de Vries WA. Inland waterway transport: Modelling the probability of accidents. Safety Science, 1995, 19(2–3): 191-202

[59] Sames PC, Hamann R. Towards environmental risk acceptance criteria. Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Berlin, 2008, 2: 277-283

[60] Samuelides M. Recent advances and future trends in structural crashworthiness of ship structures subjected to impact loads. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2015, 10(5): 488-497

[61] Silveira PAM, Teixeira AP, Guedes Soares C. Use of AIS data to characterise marine traffic patterns and ship collision risk off the coast of Portugal. Journal of Navigation, 2013, 66(6): 879-898

[62] Søfartsstyrelsen, 2008. Risk analysis for sea traffic in the area around bornholm. No. P-65775-002, COWI, Kongens Lyngby, 14–26.

[63] Ståhlberg K, Goerlandt F, Ehlers S, Kujala P. Impact scenario models for probabilistic risk-based design for ship-ship collision. Marine Structures, 2013, 33: 238-264

[64] Tuovinen J. Statistical analysis of ship collision, 2006, Espoo: Helsinki University of Technology, 94

[65] Wang G, Arita K, Liu D. Behavior of a double hull in a variety of stranding or collision scenarios. Marine Structures, 2000, 13(3): 147-187

[66] Wierzbicki T. Jones N, Wierzbicki T. Crushing behaviour of plate intersections. Structural crashworthiness, 1983, Oxford: Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd., 66-95

[67] Youssef SAM, Ince ST, Kim VS, Paik JK, Chang F, Kim MS. Quantitative risk assessment for collisions involving double hull oil tankers. Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects Part A: International Journal of Maritime Engineering, 2014, 156: 157-174

[68] Youssef SAM, Kim YS, Paik JK, Cheng F, Kim MS. Hazard identification and probabilistic scenario selection for ship-ship collision accidents. Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects Part A: International Journal of Maritime Engineering, 2014, 156: 61-80

[69] Youssef SAM, Paik JK, Kim YS, Kim MS, Cheng F. Probabilistic selection of ship-ship collision scenarios. Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 2013, 1-13

[70] Zhang S. The mechanics of ship collisions, 1999, Lyngby: Technical University of Denmark, 52-184