Wave-Induced Vertical Motions and Bending Moments in Damaged Ships

Abstract

The wave-induced vertical ship motions and bending moments of a double hull-oil tanker in realistic flooding conditions are studied. The scenarios investigated are represented by water ingress into the starboard ballast tanks for collision damage cases and both starboard and portside ballast tanks for grounding situations. Seakeeping computations are performed for eight damage scenarios and for the intact condition, each corresponding to different changes in displacement, trim, and heel. For each of the damage conditions, transfer functions of vertical motions and loads are calculated using a potential linear 3D panel hydrodynamic code in the frequency domain that includes effect of the motion of the water in flooded tanks. A MATLAB code is developed to facilitate automated hydrodynamic simulation of many damage scenarios. Verification of seakeeping results is performed by comparing transfer functions with results of the previous study. Wave-induced vertical responses of damaged ship are then compared to those of intact ship using two spectral-based methods originating from uncertainty analysis of wave loads, which are convenient tools to assess consequences of damage on short-term ship responses. Generally, observed trend is that vertical wave-induced responses of damaged ship converge toward those of intact ship with increasing wave period. Fairly small differences between responses of asymmetrically damaged ship with respect to the symmetrical incoming wave directions are found. The results of the study are an efficient method for seakeeping assessment of damaged oil tankers and the framework for evaluating consequences of damage scenarios, heading angles, and sea conditions on seakeeping responses of damaged ships. The results can be used to decide if the intact ship model can be used instead of the damaged one for the emergency response procedure or for the risk assessment studies when modeling and computational time represent important limitations.

Keywords

Oil tanker / Collision / Grounding / Seakeeping / Wave-bending moments / Emergency response / Uncertainty analysis

References

[1] Ando S (1998) Quantification of correlation of predicted and measured transfer functions for ship motions and wave loads, RINA, International Conference on Ship Motions and Maneuverability, London, p 1–10

[2] Begovic E, Incecik A, Day AH (2011) Experimental assessment of intact and damaged ship motions in head, beam and quartering seas. In: HSMV Conference. Naples, Italy, p 1–8

[3] Begovic E, Day AH, Incecik A. An experimental study of hull girder loads on an intact and damaged naval ship. Ocean Eng, 2017, 133: 47-65

[4] Chan HS, Incecik A, Atlar M (2001) Structural integrity of a damaged Ro-Ro vessel. Proceedings of the second international conference on collision and grounding of ships, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, p 253–258

[5] Chan HS, Atlar M, Incecik A. Global wave loads on intact and damaged RO-RO ships in regular oblique waves. Mar Struct, 2003, 16: 323-344

[6] DNV (2010) Global performance analysis of deep water floating structures, recommended practice, DNVRP-F205

[7] Downes J, Moore C, Incecik A, Stumpf E, McGregor J (2007) A method for the quantitative assessment of performance of alternative designs in the accidental condition, 10th International Symposium on Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures, Houston, Texas, p 1–8

[8] Folsø L, Rizzuto E, Pino E. Wave induced global loads for a damaged vessel. Ships Offshore Struct, 2008, 3(4): 269-287

[9] Guedes Soares C. Effect of transfer function uncertainty on short-term ship responses. Ocean Eng, 1991, 18(4): 329-362

[10] Guedes Soares C, Teixeira AP. Risk assessment in maritime transportation. Reliab Eng Syst Saf, 2001, 74: 299-309

[11] Hirdaris S, Argiryiadis K, Bai W, Dessi D, Ergin A, Fonseca N, Gu X, Hermundstad OA, Huijsmans R, Iijima K, Nielsen UD, Papanikolau A, Parunov J, Incecik A. Loads for use in the design of ships and offshore structures. Ocean Eng, 2014, 78: 131-174

[12] HydroSTAR (2011) User's manual. Bureau Veritas, Paris

[13] IACS (2012) Harmonized common structural rules, external release, International Association of Classification Societies, London, UK

[14] IACS (2015) Hull girder residual strength. Technical background report on Pt 1, Ch 5, Sec 3. International Association of Classification Societies, London, UK

[15] IMO (2003) Interim guidelines for the approval of alternative methods of design and construction of oil tankers under regulation 13F (5) of annex 1 of MARPOL 73/78, Resolution MEPC 2003;110(49), Annex 16

[16] Jafaryeganeh H, Rodrigues JM, Guedes Soares C. Guedes Soares, Santos. Influence of mesh refinement on the motions predicted by a panel code. Maritime technology and engineering, 2015, London: Taylor & Francis Group, 1029-1038

[17] Ko H-K, Park T, Kim K-H, Kim Y, Yoon D-H. Development of panel generation system for seakeeping analysis. Comput Aided Des, 2011, 43: 848-862

[18] Korkut E, Atlar M, Incecik A. An experimental study of motion behavior with an intact and damaged Ro-Ro ship model. Ocean Eng, 2004, 31: 483-512

[19] Korkut E, Atlar M, Incecik A. An experimental study of global loads acting on an intact and damaged Ro–Ro ship model. Ocean Eng, 2005, 32: 1370-1403

[20] Lee Y, Chan H-S, Pu Y, Incecik A, Dow RS. Global wave loads on a damaged ship. Ships Offshore Struct, 2012, 7(3): 237-268

[21] Lloyd’s Register (2000) World casualty statistics: annual statistical summary of reported loses and disposals of propelled sea-going merchant ships of not less than 100 GT. Lloyd’s Register, London, UK

[22] Luis RM, Teixeira AP, Guedes Soares C. Longitudinal strength reliability of a tanker hull accidentally grounded. Struct Saf, 2009, 31(3): 224-233

[23] Mikulić A (2016) Assessment of global vertical loads in damaged ship, Master’s Thesis, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, Zagreb, p 1–46

[24] Mohammadi M, Khedmati MR, Vakilabadi KA. Effects of hull damage on global loads acting on a trimaran ship. Ships Offshore Struct, 2014, 10(6): 635-652

[25] Parunov J, Ćorak M, Gledić I. Comparison of two practical methods for seakeeping assessment of damaged ships. Analysis and Design of Marine Structures V, 2015, 37-44

[26] Prestileo A, Rizzuto E, Teixeira AP, Guedes Soares C. Bottom damage scenarios or the hull girder structural assessment. Mar Struct, 2013, 33: 33-55

[27] Saydam D, Frangopol DM. Performance assessment of damaged ship hulls. Ocean Eng, 2013, 68: 65-76

[28] Teixeira AP, Guedes Soares C. Guedes Soares C, Parunov J. Reliability assessment of intact and damaged ship structures. Advanced ship design for pollution prevention, 2010, London: Taylor and Francis Group, 79-93

[29] Varela JM, Rodrigues JM, Guedes Soares C. On-board decision support system for ship flooding emergency response. Procedia Comput Sci, 2014, 29: 1688-1700

[30] Varela JM, Rodrigues JM, Guedes Soares C. 3D simulation of ship motions to support the planning of rescue operations on damaged ships. Procedia Comput Sci, 2015, 51: 2397-2405

[31] WAMIT User manual version 6.4, 2006, Boston: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

[32] Wen F (2017) Rapid response damage assessment, In: Kelly, D. (ed) Marine technology (mt), October 2017 issue, SNAME, Alexandria, 40–47