LLOYD' S REGI STER

TECHNOLOGY DAY
PROCEEDI NGS
Working together for safer,
more sustainable ships

L
L
O
Y
D
'
S
R
E
G
I
S
T
E
R
T
E
C
H
N
O
L
O
G
Y
D
A
Y
P
R
O
C
E
E
D
I
N
G
S
Lloyds Register EMEA
T +44 (0)20 7709 9166
F +44 (0)20 7423 2057
E emea@lr.org
71 Fenchurch Street
London EC3M 4BS, UK
Lloyds Register Asia
T +852 2287 9333
F +852 2526 2921
E asia@lr.org
Suite 3501 China Merchants Tower
Shun Tak Centre
168200 Connaught Road Central
Hong Kong, SAR of PRC
Lloyds Register Americas, Inc.
T +1 (1)281 675 3100
F +1 (1)281 675 3139
E americas@lr.org
1401 Enclave Parkway, Suite 200
Houston, Texas, 77077, USA
www.lr.org
February 2009
Services are provided by members of the Lloyds Register Group.
Lloyds Register, Lloyds Register EMEA and Lloyds Register Asia are exempt charities under the UK Charities Act 1993.
cover1.qxd 10/2/09 17:07 Page 1
LLOYD' S REGI STER
TECHNOLOGY DAY
PROCEEDI NGS
FOREWORD
The Lloyds Register Technology Day has been
established to provide an introduction to technologies
that we are considering and developing in support
of our mission to promote safety and environmental
protection in the marine industry. The papers
presented at the seminar are intended to give
an insight into the research and development work
we are undertaking within Lloyds Register, as well
as through co-operation with others.
The Technology Day is not just an opportunity
for us to provide information. It also creates
a forum for discussion, through which we can
gain an understanding of the views of technology
practitioners and users within the industry. This
knowledge sharing will help strengthen our work
and our contribution to the global marine community.
Our political and commercial independence enable
us to adopt a broad, long-term approach to research
and innovation. We pursue some projects that
underpin the advancement of our technical
knowledge base. Other projects are targeted
at satisfying the identified business needs of the
different ship-type markets and the product lines
that we offer to our marine stakeholders. These
projects utilise: the outcomes of the underpinning
technology projects; the knowledge, experience
and expertise of Lloyds Registers technical
employees; and knowledge gained from external
sources, either from published information or from
collaborative ventures.
This years Technology Day comprises ten lectures
and discussions the accompanying papers for which
are presented in this publication. The papers embrace
subjects ranging from statutory and risk issues,
through propulsion and control, to structural,
metallurgical and environmental topics.
I hope that you find them interesting and a useful
contribution to your work within the marine industry.
John Carlton
Global Head of Marine Technology
Lloyds Register.
February 2009
i
ii
LLOYDS REGISTER
TECHNOLOGY DAY PROCEEDINGS
Contents
Lloyds Registers Approach to Research 1
and Innovation. Vaughan Pomeroy M.A.,
C.Eng., F.I.Mech.E., F.I.Mar.EST., F.R.I.N.A.
Implications of Forthcoming 11
International and Regional Legislation.
Robert Smart B.Sc., C.Eng., M.R.I.N.A.
Ship Steels: A History of Continuous 21
Development. David Howarth B.Met., C.Eng.,
F.I.M.M.M., F. Weld.I.
Structural Design Issues and Ongoing 33
Developments. Alex Johnston C.Eng., F.R.I.N.A.
Ship Hydrodynamic Propulsion: 51
Some Contemporary Issues of Propulsive
Efficiency, Cavitation and Erosion.
John Carlton D.Sc., B.A., C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E.,
M.R.I.N.A., M.I.Mar.EST.
Design Assessment of Engineering Systems 65
with Particular Reference to Shaft Alignment.
Andrew Smith B.Sc., C.Eng., F.I.Mech.E.
The Potential for Energy. Ed Fort B.Sc. 75
Configuration Management as a Risk- 87
Based Tool in Managing Dependability
of Complex Software-Based Systems.
Bernard Twomey B.Eng., C.Eng., F.I.E.T., M.I.Mech.E.
and Renny Smith B.Sc., C.Eng., M.I.E.T.
The Influence of Ship Underwater 101
Noise Emissions on Marine Mammals.
John Carlton D.Sc., B.A., C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E.,
M.R.I.N.A., M.I.Mar.EST. and Emma Dabbs.
The Assurance of Safety in the 111
Marine Environment. Vince Jenkins B.Sc.,
C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E.
Author biographies 119
Lloyd's Register, its affiliates and subsidiaries and their respective
officers, employees or agents are, individually and collectively, referred
to in this clause as the Lloyd's Register Group. The Lloyd's Register
Group assumes no responsibility and shall not be liable to any person
for any loss, damage or expense caused by reliance on the information
or advice in this document or howsoever provided, unless that person
has signed a contract with the relevant Lloyd's Register Group entity for
the provision of this information or advice and in that case any
responsibility or liability is exclusively on the terms and conditions set
out in that contract.
Lloyds Register 2009
iii
iv
PAPER 1
LLOYDS REGISTERS APPROACH
TO RESEARCH AND INNOVATION
Vaughan Pomeroy M.A., C.Eng., F.I.Mech.E.,
F.I.Mar.EST., F.R.I.N.A.
1
2
LLOYDS REGISTERS APPROACH TO RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Vaughan Pomeroy

SUMMARY

As an introduction to this collection of papers, which outlines the current position of Lloyds Register in key areas
of technology, this paper explains why research and innovation is important to a classification society. The
approach taken to maintaining the technology base of Lloyds Register has changed over the years to reflect the
structural changes within the marine industry. After a very short look backwards, the paper describes the aims of
the considerable investment that we are making in research and innovation, how the objectives of this research
are achieved and our increased dependence on collaboration and co-operation with clients, academia and
industry.

Finally, the role of the separate and independent charity, the Lloyds Register Educational Trust, in funding
research activities is described.

1. INTRODUCTION

Lloyds Register commits a considerable effort to the
continual development of its technology base and to
the improvement of its products and services. This
investment is essential to help ensure that:

the Rules and the supporting procedures, which
form the basis of classification, are up-to-date
and reflect best available technical knowledge
and the current and likely future solutions that
are, or will be, employed by industry
the tools and methods used by Lloyds Register in
the classification process for verifying that ship
designs are compliant with the Rules and the
requirements of statutory regulations are efficient
and make use of sound methodologies
the totality of the technology base of Lloyds
Register, which is largely retained in the form of
knowledge, experience and skills, is adequate to
meet the demands of the provision of
classification, statutory certification and
consultancy services.

Our programme of research, development and
innovation covers a large range of activities, from
investigating new technologies and design concepts,
which might become important in the future,
through systematic development of analysis tools and
the study of new approaches to the Rules, to the
creation of new Rules, products and services. Our
approach has evolved as industry has changed and is
now more collaborative than before, depending more
on co-operation with industry, research institutes and
universities.

2. RETROSPECTIVE AND PERSPECTIVE

The approach taken to research and innovation has to
reflect the relationship between the classification
society and the industry that it serves and this
relationship changes with time. A review of Lloyds
Registers publications illustrates this clearly, through
the changing balance between reporting
fundamental research over a wide spectrum (with the
underlying technology often significantly in advance
of an industry which was made up of a large number
of suppliers) and more focused research which
supplements the contribution of industry. By way of
example, it is unlikely, nowadays, that Lloyds Register
would develop and publish new analytical methods
for the stress analysis of crankshafts as it did in the
last century, in the late thirties and early eighties. The
focus is now on developing appropriate methods for
assessing designs and incorporating the appropriate
assessment criteria into the Rules.

There are now quite distinct areas in which industry
expects Lloyds Register to undertake fundamental
work. There are others where the fundamental work
is undertaken by industry: Lloyds Register uses this
knowledge as an input to development processes
which determine the appropriate standards relating
to safety, and then publishes these standards as Rules.
This rule-making, or standards formulation, is a key
element of the research and development activity of
Lloyds Register. For any major classification society,
the development and maintenance of rules represents
a critical core competence.

The Rules represent a collection of requirements for
ship design and construction, and, thereafter,
maintenance in operation. They are based on
knowledge and experience. The style and form of the
Rules varies, reflecting the relationship with industry.
However, they are a somewhat unusual form of
standardisation in that they represent a
comprehensive set of requirements for a complete
artefact, a ship of a specific type. The ship is, in effect,
treated as a system, with the requirements
disaggregated down to component level where
appropriate.

The depth of the Rules determines the focus of our
programme of research and development. The Rules
3


relating to the hull structure provide very detailed
requirements, whereas for many of the engineering
systems the focus is on arrangements and system
level requirements. The approach to research and
innovation is based on the different requirements for
each topic. Furthermore, the overall scope is
continually widening. Our involvement in human
element matters and cold climate operations, for
example, is increasing, which reflects the changing
and expanding expectations of industry.

The challenge is to construct a programme of
research and innovation which provides the necessary
outcomes across a wide range of technologies,
industry expectations and applications.

3. APPROACH AND OBJECTIVES

Therefore, the approach taken to research and
innovation by Lloyds Register has to be balanced. It is
imperative that the Rules and the supporting
procedures, which form the basis of classification,
reflect current technology.

Conversely, the classification society is working at
arms length from the principal research and
development arena, which sits within academia and
with industry, where decisions are made on which
technologies will be adopted and offered to the
marine industry for application.

The essentials of the approach which is taken by
Lloyds Register are illustrated in Figure 1, which
shows that the development programme takes
knowledge and experience as its inputs and translates
these into new or improved products and services.
The development programme also provides input to
the skills and technology base of Lloyds Register,
which maintains the value of the human capital and
enhances service delivery.



Figure1: Essential elements
The research and innovation approach of Lloyds
Register is, therefore, quite complex because of the
interactions and outputs involved.

Firstly, there are projects that underpin the
technological knowledge base of Lloyds Register.
These projects will not usually result in the direct
development of a specific product or service, but
provide the groundwork for further projects that will
take the knowledge and use it to develop exploitable
applications. These projects tend to focus on the
technology sectors that have been identified as those
in which Lloyds Register needs to carry out
fundamental work. These projects include:

evaluation of new analysis methods in the core
technology areas and assessment of their
potential usefulness and relevance to Lloyds
Register
monitoring developments in other technology
sectors and evaluating the potential for their
application in the marine sector
developing fundamental engineering concepts
into analysis tools and methods that could be
used by Lloyds Register in providing its services
to marine customers.

There are also a number of relatively small projects
that look forward to develop a future research and
development strategy. These projects include:

tracking of scientific and technological research
to determine any potential impact on Lloyds
Registers marine business
developing future strategic plans for research and
development
preparing briefings for the marine industry on
technology trends.

A number of activities in this programme of projects
will be carried out collaboratively with other
organisations.
Knowledge
from research
and innovation
Experience
from survey
and application

Secondly, there are a number of projects targeted at
satisfying the identified business needs of one or
more of the segments or product lines that Lloyds
Register offers, or wishes to offer, to its marine clients.
These projects utilise: the outcomes of the
underpinning technology projects; the knowledge,
experience and expertise of Lloyds Registers
technical employees; and knowledge gained from
external sources, either from published information or
from collaborative ventures. These projects include:
Development
programme
Technology
and skills base
Products and
services

development of new or revised Rules for
Classification for all types of marine vehicles
development of new or revised procedures for
analysis or survey or other processes that form
part of the classification system
4


preparation and maintenance of guidance
documents for customers and surveyors
development of new or revised tools and
capabilities for specialist services that form part of
the portfolio of services and products offered by
Lloyds Register to marine clients, such as the
investigation of engineering or materials failures
or the analysis of substances.

The overall development programme comprises a
number of individual projects that are a balance of
the aforementioned types. These help:

ensure that Lloyds Register retains a sound
understanding of current and future technologies
that are relevant or potentially relevant to the
marine business
deliver new products to the marketplace that
enable Lloyds Register to provide a high quality
service to its marine clients which reflects up-to-
date knowledge and understanding of marine
science and technology.

4. EXPERIMENTAL METHODS

Until 1988, Lloyds Register operated a large research
laboratory in Crawley which provided extensive
facilities for metallurgical examination, NDE and
mechanical testing. Major contributions were made
by the work at a time when advances were being
made in marine engineering and in the design of
marine and offshore structures.



Figure 2: Fatigue testing of shaft components at
Crawley

Work of particular note included:

determination of the fatigue strength of marine
shafting systems (see Figure 2)
investigation of the fretting fatigue behaviour of
propeller/tailshaft connections, in particular the
effect of keyways and the keyless arrangement
development of design parameters for stress
concentration at nodal joints for offshore
structures based on small scale models
development of procedures for reducing the risk
of brittle fracture in ship steels
determination of an improved approach to
crankshaft stress analysis using experimentally-
derived factors
derivation of fracture mechanics assessment
formulations for pressure vessels and piping.

The work at Crawley also involved failure
investigations of a wide range of engineering
components, making use of electron and optical
microscopy, NDE and mechanical testing. This work
was transferred in 1988 to a new laboratory in
Croydon, where it continues to this day.

Major experimental work has been undertaken in
more recent times to fill gaps in the available
knowledge base, by arranging contracts with research
institutes and universities. This work has included
large scale model testing in the open water basin of
the Krylov Institute, in St Petersburg, to determine
appropriate wave loads for special service craft (see
Figure 3). Tests were conducted on monohull and
catamaran models. The information derived from this
test programme filled a gap in available knowledge
and the results form part of the Rules for Special
Service Craft.



Figure 3: Model catamaran in the open water basin

The Krylov Institute also carried out some large scale
fatigue tests of double hull oil tanker and bulk carrier
sections to establish good design practice. A typical
test specimen used to determine the fatigue
behaviour of bulk carrier side frame connections is
shown in Figure 4. The fatigue test programme
carried out at the Krylov Institute, on both large scale
and small scale specifics, has provided the baseline
data which underpins the fatigue assessment
approach of Lloyds Register for hull structures.


5




Figure 4: Large scale fatigue testing of bulk carrier
structure

The other major contribution in terms of experimental
methods has been the resort to full scale
measurement of strain, vibration and other
engineering parameters on ships in operation. Lloyds
Register has, for more than sixty years, provided a
skilled investigation service to shipowners to establish
an understanding of the fundamental reasons for
technical problems and to develop a solution. The
output from these investigations often provides an
essential input into the development of improved
Rules or better assessment methodologies for use
during the review of new designs.

Less well known are the full scale measurement
programmes that are instigated from time to time.
These are generally carried out to acquire data of ship
or system behaviour under realistic operating
conditions. The data from full scale hull monitoring is
analysed and used to confirm that the measured
response is comparable with the calculated response,
which is determined from the application of the Rules
and the current or proposed assessment procedures.
In recent years full scale measurements have been
conducted for a double hull oil tanker, a fast
container ship, an icebreaker and, currently, a post-
panamax container ship. A collaborative programme
to carry out full scale measurements on a LNG ship,
which Lloyds Register is part funding, is currently
being initiated. These exercises are carried out over
extended periods to ensure that the likelihood of
meeting more extreme operating conditions is
sufficient to justify the expenditure. The results form
part of the feedback mechanism which validates the
Rules and the approaches used in assessing ship
designs and these results are usually published.

5. COLLABORATION

Research and innovation is often carried out in
collaboration with others who share a common
interest in the specific topic, sometimes even
competitors. The degree of collaboration depends on
the stage within the research, innovation and product
development cycle, as illustrated in Figure 5. Lloyds
Register has found working with other organisations
advantageous, particularly at the basic and applied
research stages, following a number of different
collaboration models.



Figure 5: Relationship between opportunities for
collaboration and development stage

Of course, collaboration is also valuable, in terms of
gaining access to specific technologies and expertise,
in the product design and development stage,
providing that ownership of the research outcomes
and any intellectual property is clear. This usually, as
far as Lloyds Register is concerned, results in sub-
contracting of some tasks and this arrangement,
while increasingly common, is not developed further
in this paper. Suffice it to say; where a particular
capability, which may be to access experimental
facilities or particular individual expertise, is required,
Lloyds Register will make use of sub-contractors
where appropriate.

Returning to the main theme, Lloyds Register has
used a number of approaches to collaboration with
organisations in industry and academia. Examples of
these collaborative approaches include:

funding of post-graduate studies
joining Joint Industry Projects established by
research institutes or similar organisations as a
funding body
P
r
o
d
u
c
t

d
e
s
i
g
n

A
p
p
l
i
e
d

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h



B
a
s
i
c

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

I
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g

s
c
o
p
e

f
o
r

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

s
h
a
r
i
n
g

N
e
e
d

f
o
r

i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
c
e

t
o

p
r
o
t
e
c
t

i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t

6
taking an active part in a Joint Development
Project, sharing funding with other project
participants
participating in a project with other organisations,
with work packages divided amongst the
participants, and sharing the research outcomes,
often as part of a funded research programme
such as those operated by the European Union.

Collaboration undoubtedly brings benefits through
working with other organisations who share a
common interest. However, achieving individual aims
in a collaborative environment can be a challenge,
since each organisation will come to the project with
similar but fundamentally different needs and
objectives. Collaboration also comes with an
overhead attached, as a result of the need to manage
across several organisations and to ensure that as
many of the individual aims as possible are realised at
the end of the project.

Lloyds Register is a knowledge-intensive organisation,
which means that the research and innovation
investment has to enhance the corporate library of
knowledge and advance the application of that
knowledge in the delivery of classification, statutory
certification and consultancy services. The link
between the innovation programme and the
acquisition and application of knowledge is illustrated
in Figure 6. In practical terms, the knowledge
generally derives from fundamental research, which is
most effectively carried out in universities and
specialist research institutes. Through collaboration
with universities and research institutes, Lloyds
Register gains the benefit of improved corporate
knowledge. This basic tenet forms an essential part of
the rationale for the relocation of Lloyds Registers
Marine London activities to Southampton,
immediately alongside a premier research-led
university with a keen focus on maritime sciences and
technologies and wider interests in the maritime
sector. Lloyds Register intends, with the active and
essential collaboration of the University of
Southampton, to promote a Maritime Institute,
located on the Universitys campus. This will physically
link Lloyds Register and the university, and will
actively encourage collaboration between industry
and the research community.

The application of research and the application of
knowledge, in the development of innovative
products and services, can be more effective when
there is active collaboration with industry. Lloyds
Register will continue to work with other
organisations in joint projects whenever such an
arrangement is advantageous. In fact, many
developments cannot be undertaken without the
active support and participation of others, such as
shipowners who make their ships available for
measurement programmes or to allow Lloyds
Register employees to observe operations.




Knowledge
from
research
Improved
application of
knowledge

Innovation
funded by
investment
Fig 6: The wheels of knowledge

Lloyds Register will also play a part within major
research programmes, such as those funded by the
European Union. When external funding is an
essential element of a collaborative programme there
is an additional concern about the total benefit which
must be addressed, as preparing proposals can be
costly and the project may be unsuccessful. It is
unlikely that collaboration that is dependent on
funding by others will ever form a significant part of
the essential development programme of Lloyds
Register simply because of the uncertainties involved.
However, involvement in such projects can be
beneficial in terms of gaining knowledge from shared
experience. It is another example of the need for a
pragmatic and balanced approach to research and
innovation.

6. EXPERIENCE

A key input to Lloyds Registers research programme
is feedback from operational experience. The Rules,
which form the primary vehicle for transferring the
outcomes from research and innovation to industry
for exploitation, provide a set of standards for
materials, equipment, components, systems and
structures that relate to the complete life cycle of the
ship from concept, through design, manufacture,
construction, installation and testing, to operation
and eventual recycling. One of the most important
facets of the Rules is that they are not just a reflection
of theory and design but they take full account of
operational experience.

As early as 1960, Lloyds Register began to gather
data from periodical survey reports relating to
7
damages and defects, and to build a database
containing this information in a structured format to
aid extraction of studies on actual service experience.
This systematic collection of data relating to the total
experience with the classed fleet continues and the
database provides valuable input to the research and
development programme.

By carrying out specific studies it is possible to detect
trends in service experience in terms of changes in
defect incidence rates or changing patterns in the
type of defects found. It is also possible to detect
common issues across the fleet and, where
appropriate, the Rules, or the guidance given during
design review or survey, can be modified to reduce
the risk of repetition in later designs or in future
operation.

The importance of the database is that it allows
feedback to be kept in proportion. Feedback on
failures is often accompanied by a suggestion that the
Rules could be modified, but Lloyds Register has to
make sure that additional requirements are only
introduced when they are justified. A single major
incident may indicate that a change is necessary,
simply because of the risk involved. More often, it is a
trend involving a number of similar incidents which
provokes investigation to find a solution which would
reduce the risk while still being proportionate to that
risk.

The primary source of data is the periodical survey
report and this represents a snapshot in time. For the
hull structure the database is reasonably complete
since any significant damage or defect will result in a
surveyor attending and reporting on the damage or
defect and the recommended repair. With machinery
and systems the database is less complete as many
minor incidents are dealt with by the ships crew as
routine maintenance. Nevertheless, this lengthy
record of damage and defect history for a very large
number of ships provides a very useful source of
operational experience, particularly when
supplemented by the experience from technical
investigations and from anecdotal evidence collected
from regular contact with shipowners.

7. LLOYDS REGISTER EDUCATIONAL TRUST

For many years, Lloyds Register has given donations
to organisations in pursuit of its charitable objective,
which is clearly defined within the Constitution of
Lloyds Register. The current version requires Lloyds
Register to undertake:

The advancement of public education within the
transportation industries and any other engineering
and technological disciplines, by the conducting of
and support of research and the publication of the
useful results of all such research and by the provision
of training, and the collation and dissemination of
statistical data.

The remainder of this paper illustrates how Lloyds
Register discharges this objective through additional
funding provided through the Lloyds Register
Educational Trust.

Since 2000, Lloyds Register has taken a much more
active approach to funding of organisations and the
scale of the money available for this support
programme, which is set aside for these purposes
from the operating surpluses generated by the
businesses of Lloyds Register, has been increased
significantly. The support programme has been
developed to provide funding, throughout the world,
for:

activities in schools to promote interest in
engineering, science and technology
undergraduate and postgraduate studies for
exceptional science and engineering students
vocational training and professional development
research programmes at leading universities in
transportation, engineering, science and
technology in fields related to Lloyds Registers
business activities.

This funding activity is now established within a
separate charity, the Lloyds Register Educational
Trust, which receives annual donations from Lloyds
Register and is governed by its own Trustees who
determine the distribution of the available funds.
Since its establishment as an independent charity in
2004, the Lloyds Register Educational Trust has
received a total of more than 30 million, which
makes it a large funding organisation in the science,
engineering and technology field. Once established
the Lloyds Register Educational Trust took over all
related funding activities from the Lloyds Register
Group.

In terms of funding research the Lloyds Register
Educational Trust sets out to fund programmes of
work, rather than a larger number of smaller projects,
in defined subjects at internationally-renowned
centres of excellence. The funding is granted for a
fixed period, usually five years, although programmes
may be extended by agreement. The current
beneficiaries, along with their scope, are as follows:

Cardiff University, UK marine human element
issues.
Imperial College London, UK transportation,
particularly rail, risk management.
Lancaster University, UK nuclear engineering
and decommissioning.
Loughborough University, UK systems
engineering.
8


Open University, UK materials fabrication.
Pusan National University, Korea ship structures.
Seoul National University, Korea hydrodynamics
and hydroelasticity.
National University of Singapore offshore
engineering and LNG.
University of Southampton hydrodynamics,
hydroelasticity and composite structures.

The funding, now totalling some 10 million, is
provided to support fundamental research with an
obligation to publish and disseminate the results for
the benefit of all. The research programmes are
determined by the university with advice provided by
the relevant experts, including Lloyds Register.

In September 2008, the first international Marine
Research Workshop was organised by the University
of Southampton which brought together the five
universities that are funded by the Lloyds Register
Educational Trust and which are working in the
marine field. The workshop was attended by invited
participants from academia and industry. The
objective was to encourage co-operation within the
community that is supported by the Lloyds Register
Educational Trust, to share ideas and to maximise the
benefit to industry and the wider public.

8. CONCLUDING REMARKS

Research and innovation is critically important to
Lloyds Register in order to ensure that the services
that are available to the marine industry are
maintained at a high level. The demands from
industry for investment and innovation are increasing
and Lloyds Register is committed to providing
appropriate and effective regulation, through
classification, of ship safety along with a high quality
portfolio of support through marine consultancy.

The approach described in this paper, including the
need for collaboration and sharing of fundamental
research, will deliver the innovation necessary to
develop the products, including the Rules, and
services to meet the highest demands of the marine
industry, taking full account of the opportunities
offered by new technologies.

9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of
his colleagues in developing this paper and the
rationale explained therein.
9
NOTES
10
PAPER 2
IMPLICATIONS OF FORTHCOMING
INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL
LEGISLATION
Robert Smart B.Sc., C.Eng., M.R.I.N.A.
11
12
IMPLICATIONS OF FORTHCOMING INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL LEGISLATION

Robert Smart

SUMMARY

This paper considers aspects of some of the more important regional and international legislation, from that
which is imminent through to recently proposed agenda items. The potential impact of this legislation on ships
and their operation is discussed in some detail. Included in the discussion will be the revised SOLAS requirements
for subdivision and damage stability, the developing ship recycling convention, the Maritime Labour Convention,
which is expected to enter into force in 2011, and the marine underwater noise pollution debate, which is just
commencing in the MEPC forum.

The examples used highlight the complexity and diversity of topics that have materialised within the marine
regulatory environment. The proliferation of legislation over the last few decades has made it more difficult for
interested parties, irrespective of the level of detail needed, to keep abreast of actual requirements, present
developments and future ideas. Awareness of legislation is not sufficient as it is also important in this highly
competitive industry to understand its implications, both technically and commercially.

1. INTRODUCTION

During the last 20 to 30 years, there has been a
considerable increase in the regulatory publications
applicable to ships; it is believed the volume has
increased by some 300 to 400%. Part of this increase
is due to expansion within existing areas, such as
safety equipment and classification Rules. However,
some are the result of the increasing diversity of
topics (Annexes V and VI of MARPOL, for example).

The number of initiators has also increased over this
period, expanding from flag states and classification
societies to include both international and regional
organisations, such as the EU, port state control
organisations (MOUs), the International Labour
Organisation and coastal states.

Keeping abreast of developments and understanding
their implications has become a significant task, not
only necessitating many specialists but requiring
continuous engagement, which means it is no longer
a part-time job. Consequently, many shipowners and
managers can no longer address this in house and
need reliable expert advice to manage the associated
risks.

While the regulatory changes encompass both
hardware and operational requirements, this paper is
generally restricted to safety and pollution prevention
aspects.

2. RECENT LEGISLATION

2.1 SOLAS CHAPTER II-1

On January 1, 2009, the revisions to SOLAS Chapter
II-1, Part B [1], which deals with subdivision and
stability, came into force. The revised version has
been referred to as SOLAS 2009, which is unusual
as SOLAS versions are normally identified by the year
of adoption: this seems to be an exception.

2.1 (a) Background

Previously, subdivision and damage stability for
passenger ships and cargo ships were developed on
completely different concepts: the deterministic
concept was used for passenger ships and
the probabilistic concept for cargo ships.
Deterministic damage calculations were based upon
clearly defined damages. A passenger ship, for
example, should withstand two-compartment
flooding. The probabilistic concept is a sum of all the
probabilities of a given particular water-tight
compartment flooding, multiplied by the ability to
survive that particular flooding. This is calculated for
all possible damage scenarios along the length of the
ship. In the probabilistic concept, even if a water-tight
compartment is relatively large, if the probability of
damage in such a location is low, and/or the ability of
the ship to survive the damage is high, the overall
impact on the ships survivability will be small.

In SOLAS 2009, in addition to the harmonisation of
the damage stability requirements, there has also
been revision to various flooding scenarios, including
the assumed degree of damage, as initially this
caused substantial differences in the results under the
new requirements. In practice, these changes are
likely to mean greater flexibility in the design of cruise
ships and more subdivision on car carriers and small
coastal ships.

2.1 (b) Noticeable Impacts

The new assumed side penetration (B/5 to B/2) will
consider that all piping is damaged, i.e. in order to
avoid progressive flooding, pipes in water-tight
compartments must be fitted with non-return valves.
13
The minimum height of double bottoms is now
clearly stated as 500mm, along with how they should
be measured; however there is provision for
alternative calculation using the deterministic
concepts in areas such as below the main engines
where this figure is not achievable.

In calculating the necessary bilge pump capacity,
crew spaces below the bulkhead deck are now to be
included, which may increase the required number of
bilge pumps.

Under the deterministic concept, it was easier for a
Master to assess whether his ship would sink or
capsize under the damage conditions. However,
under the probabilistic concept it is not possible for
Masters to assess the situation. A supporting
information tool will need to be employed, usually by
means of a limiting GM (or KG) curve(s).


















Figure 1: Car carrier with list

2.1 (c) Stockholm Agreement

The Stockholm Agreement implemented in European
Waters is a regional agreement, adopted under the
auspices of IMO, which requires calculation of the
effects of water on deck. Presently it is still not clear
whether SOLAS 2009 covers the Stockholm
Agreement. Therefore it may become an addition to
the Convention.

2.2 PROTECTION OF NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT
WHALES SHIP SPEED REDUCTION

2.2 (a) Background

With only between 300 and 400 in existence, North
Atlantic right whales are among the most
endangered whales in the world. Their slow
movements and the time they spend at the surface
and near the coast make them highly vulnerable to
ship strikes, especially in US East Coast waters where
shipping lanes into ports cut across their migration
routes.

A new regulation, which came into effect on
December 9, 2008, requires that ships operating in
the South-Eastern Atlantic and mid-Atlantic US
waters must adhere to speed restrictions to protect
endangered right whales.

2.2 (b) Noticeable Impacts

The regulation requires ships of 65 feet (19.8 metres)
or longer to restrict their speed to 10 knots or less in
certain areas where right whales gather. The speed
restrictions are now in effect in waters from Rhode
Island to south of Jacksonville, and they will take
effect in certain areas off New England from January,
2009, when whales begin gathering in the area as
part of their annual migration.

The 10-knot speed restriction will extend out to 20
nautical miles around major mid-Atlantic coast ports.
The speed restriction also applies in waters off New
England and the South-Eastern US, where whales
gather seasonally.

The speed restrictions apply each year in the
following approximate locations and at the following
times. This is based on the times that whales are
known to be present in each area:

South-eastern US areas, from St. Augustine,
Florida to Brunswick, Georgia, from November 15
to April 15.
Mid-Atlantic US areas, from Rhode Island to
Georgia, from November 1 to April 30.
Cape Cod Bay, from January 1 to May 15.
Off Race Point at the northern end of Cape Cod,
from March 1 to April 30.
Great South Channel of New England, from April
1 to July 31.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) will also call for temporary
voluntary speed limits in other areas at times when
the presence of right whales is confirmed. Scientists
will assess the regulations effectiveness before expiry
in 2013.

In the next session of the Maritime Environmental
Protection Committee there will be some
consideration of the influence noise emissions from
ships have on marine mammals [2].

A compliance guide is available at:
http://www.nero.noaa.gov/shipstrike/doc/compliance
guide.pdf

14
3. FUTURE LEGISLATION

3.1 THE MANDATORY INTERNATIONAL
MARITIME SOLID BULK CARGO (IMSBC)
CODE

3.1 (a) Background

Amendments to SOLAS will make the BC Code
mandatory. It will now be called the International
Maritime Solid Bulk Cargoes (IMSBC) Code. It can be
implemented voluntarily from January 1, 2009, and is
expected to become mandatory from January 1,
2011.

3.1 (b) Noticeable Impacts

There are a number of changes made to the
requirements, the impact of which will depend on
cargoes carried. These changes may include possible
alterations to the ship structure and/or equipment.
Details are contained in the relevant IMO publications
[3].

Procedurally, although the Code will be mandatory,
IMO has not included any survey and certification
requirements; this could cause problems if some port
authorities look for compliance before
implementation.

3.2 AMENDMENTS TO MARPOL ANNEX VI

3.2 (a) Background

Revisions to Annex VI of the MARPOL Convention will
enter into force on July 1, 2010; these define a
reduced sulphur oxide (SOx) emission limit in the
Baltic Sea and North Sea Emission Control Areas
(ECAs).

3.2 (b) Noticeable Impacts

From July 1, the current limit of 1.50% m/m will
reduced to 1.00% m/m; and from January 1, 2015, it
will further reduced to 0.10% m/m. The SOx emission
limits outside ECAs will change from the current
4.50% to 3.50% from January 1, 2012: then, subject
to a review of fuel availability, it is also proposed that
a 0.50% fuel sulphur limit will be introduced from
January 1, 2020 [4].

Lower nitrogen oxide (NOx) emission limits will come
into effect for diesel engines installed on ships
constructed after January 1, 2011. For ships built
after January 1, 2016, operating in ECAs, an 80%
reduction, approximately, in NOx emissions will be
required.

Large diesel engines installed on ships constructed
between 1990 and 2000 will also be required to
meet current NOx emission limits [5], provided that
an Approved Method of achieving the required
reduction is available. It is assumed that engine
manufacturers are designing and testing
modifications to subsequently submit for approval.

4. POSSIBLE LEGISLATION

4.1 BALLAST WATER TREATMENT

4.1 (a) Background

The International Convention for the Control and
Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments
will enter into force 12 months after ratification by 30
States, representing 35% of world merchant shipping
tonnage. To date, there are 16 states (including
South Africa, France and Liberia), representing 14.4%
of the worlds tonnage, which have ratified the
Convention.

Countries that have been unable to ratify the
Convention until the main guidelines are adopted will
now be in a position to begin the ratification process
due to the substantial progress made in developing
guidelines and in approving ballast water treatment
systems.

4.1 (b) Noticeable Impacts

Once it enters into force, this Convention will apply
to ships engaged on international voyages that carry
ballast water on board. Existing ships (built before
January 1, 2009) with ballast capacity over 1500 m
3
,
will be required to retrofit ballast water treatment
systems.

IMOs 25
th
Assembly adopted a resolution [6] which
provides a period of grace for ships built in 2009 in
order to accelerate ratification of the convention.

Shipbuilders and shipowners are being encouraged to
consider installation of the ballast water treatment
system for ships scheduled to be built in 2010. At
the least, owners should now be ensuring the vessel
has space for fitting a ballast water treatment system,
along with the necessary power capacity and ballast
piping arrangements for the system to be installed.

Crude oil tankers will be required to have an
approved VOC management plan. A draft MEPC
Circular on the guidelines for the plan prepared at
MEPC 57 is subject to approval at MEPC 60 next year.

15


4.1 (c) Lloyds Registers Ballast
Treatment Technology Guide
Water

Lloyds Register has prepared and updated a version
of its Ballast Water Treatment Technology Guide
publication.

4.2 SHIP RECYCLING

4.2 (a) Background

The IMO is developing requirements covering:
prohibited material; maintenance of inventories of
hazardous materials on board; and survey and
certification schemes, including approval of ship
recycling plans. The text of the convention is
scheduled to be adopted at the Diplomatic
Conference in May 2009; however there are still
substantive items to be concluded before the final
adoption of the text.

4.2 (b) Noticeable Impacts

During recent lengthy discussions, the Committee
decided not to include dismantling in non-party states.
Instead, a Conference resolution dealing with the
issue will be developed. However, a couple of states
have expressed reservation over this position.
















Figure 2: Present beach scrapping arrangements

At the last Committee meeting it was recognised that
when a ship is sold to a cash buyer, the ship may no
longer fly the flag of a particular state for a limited
period immediately before her delivery to the
recycling facility. It was suggested that it might be
necessary to review this provision before its final
adoption.
A formulation for the Article concerning the entry
into force, which would require a minimum number
of states, a tonnage threshold and a factor based on
the ratio of ship recycling capacity to the combined
tonnage of merchant shipping, has been proposed. It
was agreed the issue would need further discussion.

A large number of member states have expressed
concerns over the possible existence of two standards
(i.e., those developed by IMO and by ISO) which
might confuse stakeholders, as the convention and its
guidelines should be a primary instrument on issues
relating to ship recycling.















Figure 3: Scrapping arrangements for MSC Napoli

A diplomatic conference for the adoption of the
Convention is scheduled from May 11 to 15, 2009, in
Hong Kong. Following this, it is anticipated that the
guidelines will be adopted at MEPC 59 in July 2009.

4.3 INTERNATIONAL MARITIME LABOUR
CONVENTION (MLC, 2006)

4.3 (a) Background

The MLC, 2006 sets minimum standards in areas
relating to the health, safety and welfare of seafarers.
This Convention has been referred to as a bill of
rights for seafarers and, in this respect, it is clearly
intended to address maritime employment issues. The
Convention has also been referred to as the fourth
pillar of maritime legislation, which hints at its
complexity and depth. It is designed to supersede all
previous ILO conventions which have, at best, been
implemented in a piecemeal fashion.

To enter into force the Convention must be ratified
by 30 ILO Member States representing 33% of the
worlds gross tonnage. To date it has been ratified by
the Bahamas, Liberia, and the Marshall Islands,
representing an estimated 17% of world gross
tonnage. The EU has advised that member states
should have ratified the Convention by the end of
2010, which, with the years grace implementation,
will probably be in 2011.
16


















Figure 4: facilities on board a detained ship

4.3 (b) Noticeable Impacts

With the enforcement and compliance through both
flag state and port state inspections, ships may, in the
future, be detained against this Convention, on issues
such as incorrect payment of wages, lack of shore
leave, poor working and living conditions, non
compliance with hours of work and rest requirements.

Lloyds Register understands that the Convention
should be based on onboard ship inspections, rather
than relying on any shore inspections. The
Convention requires certain documentation,
procedures and policies to be in place. It will be the
responsibility of the owners representative on board
(usually the Master) to provide evidence that such
policies and practices are effectively being followed
and that the vessel is in compliance with the
requirements of the Convention.

Through Title 5 of the Convention, which addresses
control and enforcement, and through a
certification process, the no more favourable
treatment requirement of the Convention should be
achieved. However, there are characteristics of the
Convention which could allow wide variations in
interpretation of the requirements by flag states, port
states and recognised organisations and which could
ultimately be counter productive to achieving a level
playing field. The Convention includes Part A, which
contains the mandatory items to be inspected, and
Part B which contains the non mandatory items
(guidelines) on how Part A can be implemented.
Since Part B is quite extensive in its scope and is open
to different interpretations it is here where variations
in inspection standards will most likely occur.

5. CONCLUSIONS

The regulatory regime will continue to expand and be
dominated by IMO and, increasingly, by regional
interests like the EU. It is expected, however, that
there will be increased pressure from industry on the
EU to work within the international framework and
to step back from regional solutions for international
shipping, as recently indicated by the Commission.

The focus at IMO has shifted to the environment,
although a large number of wide-ranging initiatives
continue which will impact on the certification activity
of owners and Lloyds Register alike. In terms of
following developments, Lloyds Register is well
placed to track and assess submissions, attend
meetings and provide active support through IACS or
administrations.

Attendance at all external regulatory events is now
arranged so that for every appropriate work item
reports are provided, along with synopses, for
inclusion in our RuleOutlook Live service (available
within ClassDirect Live). This is aimed at facilitating
dissemination of knowledge and enhancing the
implementation phase of these regulatory changes.
The effective and timely management of information
should encourage surveyors, owners and managers to
rely on Lloyds Register for awareness of regulatory
changes.

Using this knowledge, and in order to enhance safety
and reduce pollution incidents, Lloyds Register will
listen to all interested parties so that, where
appropriate, we can endeavour to influence future
regulations and legislation to benefit the industry as a
whole.

All of these initiatives are designed to support Lloyds
Registers mission, which through its constitution, is
directed to secure for the benefit of the community
high technical standards of design, manufacture,
construction, maintenance, operation and
performance, for the purpose of enhancing the safety
of life and property at sea, on land, and in the air,
and to advance public education within engineering
and technological disciplines.

However, Lloyds Registers efforts are proving more
difficult to implement against a backdrop of a more
litigious environment for recognised organisations.
The issues they face include:

the potential for fines under the soon to be
published 3
rd
Maritime Safety Package (3MSP)
the investigation of IACS under competition
legislation by DG/COMP
the potential criminal charges under the revised
Ship Sources Pollution Directive
17


unfair exposure to unlimited liability imposed by
some EU flag states;

All of these issues can encourage an air of caution
and lead to less creativity.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author would like to thank, in addition to those
colleagues listed below, the numerous colleagues
who attend IMO, IACS, ISO and other industry
meetings on behalf of Lloyds Registers External
Affairs team and provide reports and synopses for
inclusion in RuleOutlook Live.

Specifically the author gratefully acknowledges the
support and help from John Carlton, Graham
Greensmith, Roland Ives, Stephen Machado, Vaughan
Pomeroy, Gillian Reynolds, Manuela Sarris, Robin
Townsend, Motonobu Tsuchiya and Rhoda Willson.


7. REFERENCES

1. IMO Resolutions MSC.194(80) and MSC.216(82),
2. MEPC Paper MEPC 58/19
3. IMO Resolution MSC.269(85),
4. IMO Resolution MEPC.176(58),
5. IMO Resolution MEPC.177(58),
6. IMO Resolution A.1005 (25) - Application of the
International Convention for the Control and
Management of Ships Ballast Water and
Sediments, 2004,

18
NOTES
19
NOTES
20
PAPER 3
SHIP STEELS: A HISTORY OF
CONTINUOUS DEVELOPMENT
David Howarth B.Met., C.Eng., F.I.M.M.M., F. Weld.I.
21
22
SHIP STEELS: A HISTORY OF CONTINUOUS DEVELOPMENT

David J Howarth

SUMMARY

Constructional steels used in shipbuilding have a history that goes back to the end of the second world war, yet the
steels of today bear no resemblance to those earlier steels. This has resulted from a process of continual
improvement that has taken place since then, but, these materials are increasingly asked to perform in more
onerous operating environments, where dangers of continuous service at low temperature are commonplace.
Consequently, continuous improvement is needed to maintain the safety of commercial shipping. Constructional
steels for ships have traditionally been benign in terms of processing, easy to fabricate and reliable in service. This
may change as a move to more sensitive higher tensile steel may threaten this tradition. This paper looks at the
developments that have taken place, especially applications at lower temperatures such as are found in the Arctic,
the use of high strength steels, thick steel plates and new developments in terms of fatigue.

1. INTRODUCTION

At the time of the second world war, the Rules for
structural steel only specified tensile strength as a
requirement for the material. However, following the
instance of brittle fractures of the Liberty Ships, post
war investigations [1] clearly identified the need for a
minimum toughness in marine steels. Therefore, in
1957, Lloyd's Registers Rules introduced for the first
time minimum requirements for toughness of the steel
with the aim for the steel to show some resistance to
low temperature applications and or high strain rate.
This was achieved by the introduction of requirements
for the Charpy V-notch impact test; this was 47 Joules
at 0C. This requirement was quickly followed in 1961
by the use of standard steel grades with minimum
toughness controlled by differences in Charpy
requirements and the birth of the modern
requirements for steel had begun.

Since that time, standard shipbuilding steels have been
continually improved and developed. Even so, these
steels are increasingly asked to perform in more
onerous operating environments where dangers of
continuous service at low temperature are
commonplace. Continuous improvement is therefore
required to maintain the safety of commercial shipping.
Constructional steels for ships have traditionally been
benign in terms of processing easy to fabricate and
reliable in service. This may change as a move to more
sensitive higher tensile steel could threaten this
tradition. This paper looks at the developments that
have taken place, especially applications at lower
temperatures such as are found in the Arctic, the use
of high strength steels, thick steel plates and new
developments in terms of fatigue.

2. SHIP STEELS

Requirements for steels intended for the construction
of ships are today based on the IACS Unified
Requirement W11 [2]. As indicated by the title these
are unified requirements and are the same for all
classification societies.

The steels are categorised in two groups based on the
yield strength. The two groups are normal strength
ship steel, more commonly referred to as mild steel,
and higher strength ship steel, more commonly
referred to as higher tensile steel.

The majority of steel used in ship construction is still
mild steel. It is perceived that higher tensile steels are
related to fatigue cracking problems based on the
memories of such difficulties when these steels were
first used in a large way in tanker designs of the 1980s.

Table 1 shows the basic mechanical property
requirements of these steels. Higher tensile steels have
a minimum specified yield strength which varies from
315 N/mm
2
to 390 N/mm
2
. The Charpy V-notch impact
minimum average requirement, measured in Joules, is
also shown in this table and increases in the traditional
way with the yield strength of the material.


Table 1: Basic material properties

Within each strength level, a further categorisation into
grades provides the required Charpy V-notch impact
test temperature (Table 2).

Grade Normal strength
steels
Higher tensile
steels
A - 0C
B 0C
D -20C -20C
E -40C -40C
F -60C -60C
Strength
level
Yield Strength
(N/mm
2
)
Minimum energy
(Joules)
Mild steel 235 27
Grade 32 315 31
Grade 36 355 34
Grade 40 390 41
23



Table 2: Charpy V-notch impact test temperature
requirements

It can be seen that mild steel grade A has no
requirement for impact testing as a release test during
manufacture of the material where the thickness does
not exceed 50 mm. There is no higher tensile grade B.

Again the absence of a requirement to test grade A
steel is considered by some [3, 4, 5] to be an issue and
this will be discussed in a little more detail later in the
paper.

The driver continuously to improve the quality of
constructional ship steels used has been based on a
number of factors:

increased productivity by the utilisation of new
construction designs and new materials
improvements in safety through product reliability
and structural sound design
structural weight saving through use of higher
tensile steels
increased productivity by use of new processes
such as high heat input welding techniques
the need to weld without preheat.

These points can be illustrated by the developments
that have taken place. The 1960s saw the development
of controlled rolled steels with the use of niobium to
retard recrystallisation during the rolling process. This
enabled steels with good toughness properties to be
manufactured without a separate normalising process,
a heat treatment that was both costly and production
throughput limiting.

Figure 1: Benefits of TMCP steel

The late 1970s and early 1980s saw the biggest and
most beneficial advance in steel production for use in
ships. This was the development of TMCP steel:
Thermo-Mechanical Controlled Processed Steel.

Figure 1 provides a good pictorial representation of the
benefits of TMCP steels. The Y axis is yield stress; the X
axis is the International Institute of Welding (IIW)
Carbon Equivalent Value of the steel based on its
composition.

15 5 6
Cu Ni V Mo Cr Mn
C CEV
+
+
+ +
+ + =

When compared to traditional normalised steels, TMCP
steels can be either produced with a higher strength
level at the same carbon equivalent as normalised
steels, or alternatively steels can be produced at the
same yield stress as normalised steels, but at a lower
carbon equivalent.



Figure 2: Gravilles diagram (weldability of steels)

As stated earlier, the aim is to weld without preheat to
reduce costs and increase productivity, therefore the
TMCP process is used to produce steels at a lower
carbon equivalent: a leaner composition. Leaner steels
also allow the use of high heat input welding, again
increasing productivity.

Some commercial organisations within the industry, e.g.
Intertanko, have held reservations [6] concerning the
use of TMCP steel in ship construction, primarily with
regard to accelerated corrosion in cargo oil tanks.
There has never been any hard evidence to support this
view. Indeed, research has been carried out which
supports the view that there is no difference between
conventionally rolled steel and TMCP steel. Chevron [7]
reported that it found that general corrosion rates and
pitting corrosion rates are similar for TMCP and
conventional steels, although it stated that further
research was required. Two joint Japanese industry
reports [8, 9], based on two approaches actual
24
corrosion tests and on-board measurements also
concluded that there is no difference between TMCP
and conventional steels.
The end of the 20
th
century began to see a slow but
steady progression to the use of higher tensile steels.
These steels typically have a specified minimum yield
stress of 400 N/mm
2
steel for the hull structure. More
recently designs for container ships have started to
propose steels with a specified minimum yield stress of
470 N/mm
2
in way of the thick sections of the deck and
hatch coamings. We also see deck cranes where steel
with a specified yield stress of 690 N/mm
2
is in
common use and up to 980 or even 1100 N/mm
2
is
being considered.

This is a major step change from the use of simple
materials in shipbuilding leading to a need for a new
set of skills for ship surveyors and constructors to
understand the difficulties that face them with these
higher strength materials. Figure 2 illustrates these
problems in terms of the weldability of these new
materials and clearly shows a move from the use of
readily weldable materials to the use of materials that
are difficult to weld. This can only increase the risk of
in-service problems and difficulties of repair.

For the determination of hull girder section modulus a
higher tensile steel factor k
L
is required. With the use of
higher tensile steels new factors are required, see Table
3.


Specified minimum yield stress N/mm
2

(kgf/mm
2
)
k
L

235 (24) 1.0
265 (27) 0.92
315 (32) 0.78
355 (36) 0.72
390 (40) 0.68
470 (46) 0.62*

* To be agreed by IACS

Table 3: Values of k
L


The material requirements for steel plates in terms of
strength and Charpy V-notch impact toughness are
shown in Tables 1 and 2. Table 4 shows how the
construction material selection of steel takes place in
terms of impact toughness grade. It can be seen clearly
that this decision is based on thickness of material and
risk of fracture by location in the ship.

The grade of steel required for the construction of a
ship is identified within Table 4 according to one of
three classes, designated by the Roman numerals I, II
and III. Material Class III identifies the most critical
locations and Class I the least. In general the parts of
the ship structure most highly stressed fall into Class III
and tend to be within the mid 40% of the vessels
length, where the highest bending moments exist.





Material Class

Thickness
(mm)
I II III
t 15 A, AH A, AH A, AH
15 < t 20 A, AH A, AH B, AH
20 < t 25 A, AH B, AH D, DH
25 < t 30 A, AH D, DH D, DH
30 < t 35 B, AH D, DH E, EH
35 < t 40 B, AH D, DH E, EH
40 < t 50

D, DH

E, EH

E, EH


Table 4: Plate grade according to thickness and
material class

It should also be noted that for worldwide service the
design temperature is minus 10 C [10]. This design
temperature is not the absolute minimum temperature
but is defined as the Lowest Mean Daily Average air
temperature. This temperature is calculated from a
data set of average temperatures collected over a
minimum period of 20 years. This design temperature
can then be combined with standard nautical
temperature charts, such as the one shown in Figure 3,
which shows the geographical extent of the acceptable
trade of a vessel built for worldwide service. Indeed,
minus 10C will allow Baltic trade in the winter.


Figure 3: Standard temperature Isotherms

As we look to the future of shipping, low temperature
service will become more and more of an issue. There
is now a general need to look at cold water service as
new oil and gas fields are being found in much colder
waters. Therefore ships with design temperatures
below minus 10C will be required.

25
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Temperature (C)
E
n
e
r
g
y

(
J
o
u
l
e
)
LR Lake Carling Tests
CTSB Lake Carling Results
CTSB ZGornoslaska
LR ZGornoslaska

Table 5: Toughness test results both longitudinal and
transverse samples

There is also the effect of global warming to be
considered. The polar ice caps are receding and it is
estimated from global warming predictions that
summer ice free passage could be the norm by 2050.
This will provide a much shorter route from North East
Asia to Northern Europe, making the possible use of
such a route a very attractive proposition to shipping. It
is therefore important to understand the effects of
colder temperatures on the materials used in the
construction of ships. In such cases Table 4 would have
to be modified by moving the more impact resistant
grades of steel to lower thicknesses.

On March 19, 2002, the bulk carrier Lake Carling a
DNVclassed vessel, was sailing in the Gulf of St
Lawrence when it suffered a major brittle fracture in its
side shell. The fracture was about 6 m in length,
initiating below the water line. This caused major
flooding of the hold and a rescue was mounted by the
Canadian Coast Guard. The vessel was accompanied
into port and an investigation initiated by the Transport
Safety Board of Canada [11].

At the time of the casualty the air temperature was
minus 6 C but the crack initiation temperature was
considered to be 0 C because initiation was found to
be below the waterline. The site of initiation was found
to be a pre-existing fatigue crack.













Figure 4: Lake Carling Charpy V-notch test results

The hull steel was grade A, which, as can be seen from
Table 2, has no requirements for a Charpy V-notch
impact test to be carried out during steel manufacture.
However, the steel was subsequently impact tested
during the investigation and found to just comply with
implied toughness requirements of 27 J at +20 C for
Grade A steel. This result raises concerns in the industry
by suggesting that current design rules can specify the
use of steel grades that may provide a situation where
a brittle fracture can initiate in ships operating within
the envelope of normal worldwide service, as was the
case with Lake Carling.

Table 5 summarises subsequent Charpy V-notch and
fracture toughness tests [12] carried out by Lloyds
Register on steel supplied by the Transport Safety
Board of Canada from Lake Carling and one of her
sister ships. The results confirm the borderline nature of
the material used to construct this vessel. The results
from the sister ship are marginally worse, however this
ship has no history of cracking problems.

Figure 4 shows a summary all the Charpy V-notch
impact test results both from the Transport Safety
Board of Canadas investigation and Lloyds Registers
subsequent tests. These results are of concern, and
Lloyds Register continues to lead discussions within
IACS on this subject. It should be remembered however
that such incidents are extremely rare.

Why are such incidents of the type seen on Lake
Carling so uncommon? The explanation for this
anomaly would appear to lie in the general high level
of Charpy V-notch impact properties of steel supplied
to the industry today. This can be seen in the results
shown in Figure 5, which are taken from a study
carried out by Lloyds Register in 1997 [13]. It shows
that the distribution of impact toughness of steel plates
from 40 different manufacturers is indeed very good,
being well above the values actually measured on the
steel taken from Lake Carling. This high toughness of
steels is probably a major factor in the prevention of
similar incidents. However, a word of warning:
Steel Source Lake Carling ZGornoslaska1
[Note 1]
Charpy V-notch 27J
transition temperature
L= +10C
T= +10C
L= +20C
Fracture appearance
transition temperature
FATT (50% Crystalline)
L= +10C
T= +15C
L= +15C
FATT (70% Crystalline) L= -5C L= +5C
Minimum CTOD (BS 7448)
Tested at minus 19C.
0.01 mm -
Minimum CTOD (BS 7448)
Tested at 0C.
0.25 mm -
Note 1, Z Gornoslaska is a sister ship to the Lake Carling.
26


Lake Carling was built in 1992, a time when you would
expect steel to have had good toughness.
Figure 5: Grade A steel properties

Lloyds Register continues to work to optimise its
requirements for low temperature service. The
consideration of the application of steel to cold
climates is not restricted to hull steels. Deck equipment
that may be made of forgings and castings will also
need to operate at low temperatures, and therefore
consideration needs to be given to mooring equipment,
windlasses, deck piping systems, life boats, davits and
deck cranes.

Another major fracture issue under review within the
industry deals with the thick section steel used in the
hatch coamings and decks of container ships. Today,
ships of 9,000 TEU are commonplace and ships up to a
nominal 13,000 TEU are under consideration with steel
thicknesses up to 90 mm. These vessels are designed
with wide cargo openings and as a result hull bending
stresses are carried in the structure around these
openings, requiring thick section steel to carry the
increased loads.

At the same time higher strength steel with a specified
minimum yield stress of 400 N/mm
2
is commonplace
and material with a minimum yield stress of 470 N/mm
2

is now used to keep the thickness within reasonable
limits.

In 2005 a possible problem was brought to the
attention of the classification societies. A number of
large scale wide plate tests had been initiated to
investigate the design of a new series of larger
container ships. Figure 6, courtesy of Nippon Steel,
shows the first test on a 70 mm thick EH40 steel
containing a high heat input single pass electro-gas
weld [14].












Figure 6 Brittle fracture in 70 mm EH40
wide plate test
35
Mean impact energy 169J
30
Standard Deviation 55J
25
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

20
15

10

5

0

120 150 180 210 240 30 60 270 300
90 0
Figure 6: Brittle fracture in 70 mm EH40 wide plate test
Charpy impact energy (J)

It was anticipated that the crack, once initiated in the
heat affected zone, would deviate and run into parent
material where it would arrest. This assumption was
based on the detailed research by the 147th
Committee of the Shipbuilding Research Association of
Japan who investigated the brittle crack arrestability of
the high heat input welds of ship building steels in the
1980s. The Committee concluded that a long-running
crack would be arrested by the crack deviating from
the weld into the base material. The work was carried
out on ship steels up to 40 mm thick by wide plate
testing. In Figure 6 the crack in the test failed to
deviate or stop. Further tests were carried out to
investigate the effects seen, culminating in a plate with
welded stiffeners across the projected line of fracture
to aid arrest. This test was carried out at minus 10 C,
and the plate still failed in a totally brittle manner.

Lloyds Register is taking the results of this work
extremely seriously even though it must be emphasised
that no problems have been experienced with fractures
in the operation of such large container ships to date.

Lloyds Register, in collaboration with TWI, the UK
based welding research establishment, is carrying out
research to provide a better understanding of the
science of the fracture effects seen. The initial literature
review [15] looked at the issues raised with the crack
arrestability of ship steel and the findings were quite
interesting:

The results obtained in Japan could be predicted by
existing research.

Todays ship steel requirements are based on steels
produced in the 1940s and 1950s, but for todays
modern steels these relationships no longer apply.

The problem is not limited to thicker steels (>65
mm); it is a problem throughout the thickness
range, the problem being less acute below 40 mm.

27


A series of tests is being funded by Lloyds Register at
TWI to support the initial findings and the study will
also look at establishing testing relationships for
modern steels.

Other work ongoing in Japan [16] suggests that ships
would reach their second special survey (a service life of
10 years) before any fatigue cracks would be of a
critical size for catastrophic fracture. Based on this
information, Lloyds Register has initiated a project to
monitor and assess existing container ships by non-
destructive examination techniques. Assessments and
examinations may be continued throughout the life of
the ship.
S
t
r
e
s
s

r
a
n
g
e

f
o
r

l
i
f
e

o
f

1
0
6

c
y
c
l
e
s
(
N
/
m
m
2
)
400
100
500
800
Tensile strength N/mm
2



Figure 7: Effect of steel strength on fatigue strength

3. FATIGUE

Ships are large complex structures which operate under
stresses and strains that are difficult to quantify. Add
to this the move by shipyards to optimise and reduce
steel weight through the use of higher tensile steel and
we have a recipe for fatigue cracking. It is well known
[17] that fatigue behaviour in welded construction is
based on the joint detail and not the material strength
(Figure 7). Additionally owners are beginning to
demand ships that will stay in service for up to 40 years.


















Figure 8: S-N Fatigue curves using different welded
joint improvement techniques:

1 as-welded
2 after UIT, using indenters of diameter 3 mm and 5
mm (random impacts)
3 after air hammer peening
4 after shot peening
5 after TIG dressing
6 after TIG dressing and UIT using indenters of
diameter 5 mm (random impacts)
7 after UIT using indenters of diameter 3 mm (with
impact parameter control).

The fatigue life improvement benefit of toe grinding,
shot peening and Tungsten Inert Gas weld dressing has
been known for many years (Figure 8) [18]. These
processes can provide repeatable results but are not
practical on large structures such as ships. Hammer or
needle peening can also show improvements but here
the results are inconsistent and the application process
is difficult to monitor in terms of quality control.

Ultrasonic Peening (UP) and Ultrasonic Impact
Treatment (UIT) of welds are two similar techniques
that have only been commercialised recently. They are
promising technologies that have emerged from
extensive development in Ukrainian and Russian
research institutes.

The results of fatigue testing show that the UP and UIT
processes are the most efficient and economical
technique for fatigue life improvement of welded
elements and structures when compared to the existing
improvement treatments such as toe grinding, TIG-
dressing, shot peening or hammer peening. More
importantly it is a process that can be used easily in the
production environment of a shipyard.

The equipment is lightweight and easy to use. Process
parameters are controlled and can be recorded by a
28


computer to ensure application is uniformly applied
throughout the structure. Such data recording facilities
are essential to satisfy shipyard quality control
requirements. The witness of peening is also easy to
see (Figure 9). This makes it easy for the surveyor to
confirm the process has been carried out on the
fabrication, essential for quality control purposes.


Figure 9: Comparison of welded surfaces; the right
hand weld has been peened

Two effects arise from the peening process. The first is
dimensional, the action of the process results in a
smooth radius at the weld toe reducing stress
concentration effects at that point: improving fatigue
life (Figure 10). Secondly, deformation and
transformation of the surface microstructure occurs to
a depth of approximately 300 microns which
introduces a beneficial compressive residual stress
retarding crack growth.



Figure 10: Radius formed by ultrasonic peening at the
toe of the weld

In conclusion, ultrasonic peening is an exciting process
that has a huge implication in the fight to improve the
fatigue life of weld detail in ship construction.

As an alternative to improvement techniques, new
steels are constantly being developed and improved.
One that is finding application in ship building is
known as FCA steel or Fatigue Crack Arrest steel.




Figure 11: Microstructures of conventional steel
compared with FCA steel

These steels have a dual phase ferritic-bainitic
microstructure (Figure 11) and have been shown to
have an effect in retarding crack initiation and growth
in the parent material. Two effects are reported [19]:
first, the dual phase boundaries prove to be effective
barriers to crack growth and secondly, the hard bainitic
phase is effective in retarding crack growth.


100
1000
1.0E+04 1.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.0E+07
Number of cycles to failure
S
t
r
e
s
s

r
a
n
g
e
,

M
P
a
J , untreated, 66
J ,R=10mm,66
J ,R=16mm,66
G, untreated,66
G, treated,66
J ,untreated,100
J ,R=15mm,100
J ,R=25mm,100
G,untreated,100
G, treated,100


Figure 12: Comparison of fatigue tests on FCA steel
versus conventional steel

Figure 12, taken from tests carried out by Lloyds
Register, also shows a comparison of fatigue crack
growth data between the FCA steel and conventional
steels, and provides an indication of the benefits that
arise [20].

Ships, however, are welded structures and FCA steels
need to show benefits where the weld detail defines
fatigue performance and not the parent material. Even
here we can see that benefits accrue from the use of
FCA steel, especially in the low stress high cycle regime
[19].

29


4. CONCLUSIONS

This paper has taken a brief look at the development of
structural steels intended for ship construction.
Traditionally, ship steels are forgiving in that they are
easy to fabricate with little control and perform well in
service. Occasionally, problems occur but the quality of
steel produced today is sufficient to keep the risk of
major incidents to an acceptable minimum. However,
with the increased use of higher strength steels
additional care during manufacture is necessary and
this will mean greater vigilance during survey when
compared to conventional steels.

With demand for new, more efficient designs, greater
life expectancy new steels and fabrication processes are
becoming available to increase the fatigue life of
welded components.

5. REFERENCES

1. US Government Printing Office, Washington [1947].
The Design and Methods of Construction of Welded
Steel Merchant Vessels,

2. International Association of Classification Societies],
[Rev.7 April 2008]. UR W11 Normal and higher
strength hull structural Steels.

3. Sumpter et al, Fracture Toughness of Ship Steels,
[Royal Institute of Naval Architects], [Transactions 131
(1989), pp.169-186].

4. Bannister et al, Literature Review of the Fracture
Properties of Grade A Ship Plate, 18th Int. Conf. on
Offshore Mechanics and Artic Engineering, [July 1999].

5. BSC Swindon Technology Centre, Fracture Properties
of Grade A Ship Plate, [HSE Offshore Technology
Report OTO 2000 001, 2000].

6. Intertanko Tanker Specification Awareness Guide
Appendix 1, Intertanko, Norway, 2003.

7. Chevron Shipping Company Corrosion Protection of
Cargo Ballast Tanks, Tanker Structure Co-operative
Forum 2000 Shipbuilders Meeting, Tokyo [October
2000].

8. Yasunaga et al, Study on Cargo Oil Tank Upper Deck
Corrosion of Oil Tanker, SNAME World Maritime
Technology Conference, [San Francisco 2003].

9. Katoh et al Study on Localised Corrosion on Cargo
Oil Tank Bottom Plate of Oil Tanker, SNAME World
Maritime Technology Conference, [San Francisco 2003].




10. Technical Background, IACS UR S6 Use of steel
grades for various hull members - ships of 90 m in
length and above, International Association of
Classification Societies, Revision 5, September 2007.

11. Transportation Safety Board of Canada, [19 march
2002], Marine Investigation Report - M02L0021 - Hull
Fracture - Bulk Carrier Lake Carling - Gulf of St.
Lawrence, Quebec.

12. British Standards Institution [BS 7448-1:1991],
Fracture mechanics toughness tests - Part 1: Method
for Determination of KIc, Critical CTOD and Critical J
Values of Metallic Materials.

13. Lloyds Register, [1999], Review of the Fracture
Properties of LR Grade A Ship Steel.

14. Inoue et al, Long Crack Arrestability of Heavy-Thick
Shipbuilding Steels, ISOPE, [May 28-June 2, 2006].

15. Wiesner C, Review of Crack Arrest Properties and
Characterisation Tests for Thick Section Steel Ship
Applications, TWI, [18202/1/08 June 2008].

16. Japan Ship Technology Research Association,
[Undated 2007], Safety Related Issue of Extremely Thick
Plates Letter to IACS.

17. Maddox, Fatigue Strength of Welded Structures,
[ISBN 1 85573 013 8], Woodhead Publishing, 2nd
Edition 1991.

18. Statnikov et al, Comparison of Ultrasonic Impact
Treatment (UIT) and other Fatigue Life Improvement
Methods, IIW Doc.XIII-1817-00, 2000.

19. Konda et al, Study on Improvement of Fatigue
Strength of Welded Joints in Bridges by New Functional
Structural Steel Plates, IIW Doc.XIII-2163-07, [2007].

20. Polezhayeva et al, Effect of Plate Thickness and
Corner Machining on Fatigue Strength of EH40 Steel
Thick Plates: Phase 2, ISOPE, 2009 tbc.


30
NOTES
31
NOTES
32
PAPER 4
STRUCTURAL DESIGN ISSUES AND
ONGOING DEVELOPMENTS
Alex Johnston C.Eng., F.R.I.N.A.
33
34

STRUCTURAL DESIGN ISSUES AND ONGOING DEVELOPMENTS

Alex Johnston

SUMMARY

This paper has been written to increase the readers understanding of some of the projects which Lloyds
Registers has been, or is currently, involved in, both internally and externally, to enhance our structural
capabilities and increase our technical reputation at a time when the industry faces many challenges from
external bodies and a rapidly expanding shipbuilding industry in the Far East. It has become clear that some of
the main concerns which will affect structural issues in the next decade will be the quality, or more correctly lack
of quality, of orders emerging from very inexperienced yards, not only in terms of the quality of design and
fabrication in the yards, but also in terms of the supply chain problems experienced with forgings and castings.
The problems which other yards have experienced and solved over the years seem doomed to repeat themselves,
perhaps in part due to a lack of knowledge transfer. Owners and class societies alike need to be aware of the
problems of fatigue, buckling and yielding caused by lack of good detail design and fabrication inaccuracies.


1. INTRODUCTION

As a class society, it is crucial to keep abreast of
developing structural issues. This cannot be stressed
too highly and is of particular importance when one
considers some of the marine transport developments
and issues which have come to light in recent years.
These include:

the new oil exporting locations and the new
trade routes which they will demand, and, in
particular, the differing environmental loads with
respect to fatigue effects on the structure in
association with differing operational procedures
for VLCCs which are not presently catered for by
traditional analytical methods
structural integrity of vessels in an ice and cold
environment in areas which export oil and gas
from newly emerging oil and gas fields
increasing use of Sandwich Plate System (SPS)
construction for ship repair and construction
increasingly high cargo loading rates on bulk
carriers
studies pertaining to sloshing in LNG ships
whipping and springing of ships hulls.

All of these issues, and more, are set against a
background of the Goal Based New Ship
Construction Standards (GBS) being debated within
the Intermational Maritime Organization (IMO). Such
standards, which have been referred to as Rules for
Rules may see class societies, acting on behalf of flag
administrations as their recognised organisation, re-
examining the basic principles upon which their
structural rules have been founded and used
successfully for generations.



2. DESIGN ISSUES

2.1 TRENDS AND DEVELOPMENTS IN
FATIGUE ISSUES

2.1 (a) Background

The Lloyds Register Structural Design Guide (FDA
Level 1) [1] and Spectral Fatigue Analysis procedure
(FDA Level 2 and Level 3) [2] [3] were first developed
more than 15 years ago. Since then some features
have become outdated and there is a need to update
the procedures to meet market and client
expectations.

In the era of the IACS Common Structural Rules for
Double Hull Oil Tankers (CSR DHOT) it is vital that we
do not lose sight of the fact that, although the design
life enhancement to 25 years and the default wave
environment of the North Atlantic has been taken as
a design basis, there are new routes and operational
practices developing which may induce harsher
fatigue environments when used on a regular basis.
Examples of such trades are:

shuttle trade, US-Mongstad or US to Europe, for
example
West Africa to West Coast of US via Cape Horn.

The CSR DHOT scantling criteria for fatigue are based
on an idealisation of operating profile and structural
response of standard oil tanker designs. The
idealisation is sufficiently representative of typical oil
tanker operation to be used reliably to design new
ships to a common minimum standard. For loads
induced by the sea, the CSR DHOT uses an idealised
wave environment referred to here as North Atlantic
with Equal Probability of Headings (NAEPH). This
idealised wave environment is based on documented
35


wave statistics corresponding to sea conditions in the
North Atlantic (Figure 1).




Figure 1: Marsden areas used for IACS NAEPH wave
environment

This assumption is normally conservative since the
North Atlantic is generally accepted as the most
hostile wave environment. The wave environment is
derived assuming the tanker design has equal
probability of headings in accordance with IACS
Recommendation 34 Standard Wave Data. It should
also be noted that CSR NAEPH is more onerous than
the pre-CSR minimum class society standards for
worldwide trading. Also, the assumption of equal
probability of heading is normally conservative and
may generally be disregarded as an issue for the
owners specification. However for some specialised
or new trade routes, a detailed investigation may be
required and Lloyds Register can advise on the exact
requirements.

Several recent damage cases on various oil tanker
designs have encouraged Lloyds Register to re-assess
its fatigue philosophy and put in place several projects
to update its fatigue analysis procedures. This has
been done with a view to incorporating the
knowledge gained from over 15 years of in-service
experience and taking account of the advances in
fatigue industry knowledge of both high and low
cycle fatigue.

The objective of our wave induced high cycle fatigue
(HCF) project is to prepare a revision of correction
factors to existing SN curves, Stress Concentration
Factors and thickness corrections used in Lloyds
Registers Fatigue Analysis procedures: FDA Level 1,
FDA Level 2 and FDA Level 3

The wave induced high cycle fatigue (HCF) project will
look at the following:

Revision of stress concentration factors for:
angular misalignment of joints, weld flank angle,
cold laps, internal and external weld defects. This
research work is also important for the
development of Guidelines for Weld Defect
Tolerances required by Lloyds Register surveyors
and is supported by the Materials Department.
Revision of the free edge S-N curves for mild steel
by fatigue tests at laboratory. (The existing S-N
curves for mild steel were developed more than
30 years ago).
Development of correction to free edge S-N curve
for D-grade HT steel by fatigue tests at laboratory.
Update of hot spot S-N curves and extrapolation
methods currently used in FDA Level 3 fatigue
analysis.
Implementation of all the above into FDA Level 3
software and procedures.

The Lloyds Register low cycle fatigue (LCF) project
addresses industry requirements to consider low cycle
fatigue damage due to loading and unloading of
FPSOs and tankers, but will have generic applicability
to all ship types where large changes in still water
stress occur over a period of hours or days. Low cycle
fatigue is caused by large cycles of plastic strain which
can cause significant fatigue damage from a relatively
low number of cycles.

The low cycle fatigue (LCF) development programme
is part of an ongoing Joint Industry Programme which
aims to:

deliver a generic procedure and software for
calculating low cycle fatigue damage due to long
period (more than one hour) load cycles and
combine them with high cycle fatigue damage
combine low and high cycle fatigue in the time
domain
rationalise analysis of tanker and FPSO loading
histories and implement it into procedure
implement loading histories procedure software,
linking it to time domain combination of HCF and
LCF
validate fatigue life criteria for plastic strain, strain
life curves and SN curves with plasticity
corrections.

This project will deliver a FDA low cycle generic
procedure. The project will implement an LCF
procedure in the LR-SDA/FDA ShipRight software. A
separate project is planned for validation of the
procedure with real strain data.

In addition, we are also developing the following
projects:

A procedure for fatigue arising from springing
and whipping response and an upgrade to our
FDA2 software to make it more generally
applicable with regard to ship type and the
structural details it covers
36
4
A revised ShipRight FDA1 & FDA3 guide
incorporating: new S-N curves for HT steel;
revisions to thickness correction and extension to
thick plates (up to 100mm); guidance on use of
S-N curves in corrosive environment; and revised
guidance on weld improvement techniques
A revision of the approach to mean stress effect
on fatigue loading, which looks at the fatigue
performance of welded connections in steel ship
hulls and is aimed particularly at establishing
whether some relaxation of the classification
Rules is justifiable for joints subjected to part-
compressive applied loading. A programme of
fatigue tests on welded panels representing a
typical welded ship detail has been carried out to:

establish fatigue design guidance for
welded joints subjected to compressive
loading
investigate CrackFirst fatigue sensors
for typical ship weld details
evaluate the relaxation of the residual
stresses after loading cycles.

Completion of these projects will help provide
confidence to industry that all modern technologies
with regard to fatigue design assessment are
reviewed and implemented and will strengthen
Lloyds Register's profile as an innovative and
technically leading class society.

2.2 TRENDS AND TECHNOLOGY FOR SHIPS
NAVIGATING IN COLD CLIMATES

Lloyd's Register has seen an increase in orders for ice
class ships, both for trade in first year ice, such as in
the Baltic, and in the harsh environments of the Arctic
and Antarctic. Alongside this increase in ice class
ships, there has been a corresponding increase in the
technology and innovation used in the construction
of these specialised ships. The following overview
highlights some of the notable studies and
investigations undertaken by Lloyd's Register for ships
operating in cold climates.

2.2 (a) Fatigue of Ship Hull Structures When
Navigating in Ice

Ice loads are seen as one of the most challenging
disciplines in naval architecture. Lloyd's Register has
been actively involved in developing its knowledge of
ice loads and, in particular, the interaction with the
hull structure. One example of this is the investigation
into the fatigue of ship hull structures when
navigating in ice by Bridges et al [4]. Bridges
highlights that there are an increasing number of LNG
ships and oil tankers which are intended for
navigation in ice, and as such there is a necessity to
assess the risk of fatigue damage during the ice
navigation phase in these ships. There is currently
little knowledge of the fatigue performance of ships
operating in ice and the intention of this study was to
address this deficiency and resolve some of the
outstanding questions associated with operation in
ice.

The investigation was carried out, based on analysis
of full scale measurements during navigation in the
Baltic. The study consisted of evaluating the following
components in relation to ice thickness and distance
travelled:

Impact frequency.
Load distribution.

The ice loads are determined for different winter
conditions and ice thicknesses, based on ship routes
and operational profiles. Using the ice load
distributions and structural responses to the loads,
the fatigue damage is estimated. From this, fatigue
life assessment models were developed. In addition,
the effects of low temperature on the material
properties are discussed.

The results can be used for establishing if measures
need to be taken to reduce the risk of fatigue
damage in the structural elements of ship hulls, with
the preliminary analysis of results indicating that
fatigue may be an issue for severe winters. In the
future, an enhanced reliability of the ship structure
will be achieved by combining Lloyd's Registers
current fatigue design assessment procedure for open
water service with the developed fatigue procedure
for navigation in ice.

2.2.(b) Methods and Approaches for the
Classification of Ships Designed for Cold Climates

There have been significant advancements in the
classification requirements for ships in cold climates.
Lloyd's Register recently introduced the International
Association of Classification Societies (IACS) Polar
Ship Rules into the Rules and Regulations for the
Classification of Ships [5]. The new Rules allow the
latest methodology to be applied for the
determination of hull scantlings and machinery
systems of ships intended for Polar waters. The
impact of the Polar rules is examined by Bridges et al
[6] in the EU project ArcOp which discusses the
equivalency between the IACS and Russian Maritime
Register of Shipping (RMRS) Ice Class Rules and
investigates the underlying assumptions they contain.

Development activity has also been undertaken in co-
operation with the Finnish Maritime Administration,
and, in particular, the development of the Guidelines
for the Application of the Finnish Swedish Ice Class
Rules (FSICR) [7]. An aspect that Lloyd's Register was
37
specifically involved in was the development of
requirements for longitudinal frame arrangements for
Suexmax and Aframax tankers which are outside the
conventional scope of the FSICR.

There has also been the emergence of new trade
routes in cold regions, which pose new design
conditions and challenges. In addition, not all builders
have experience of designing ships intended for ice
and cold environments. As a result there is a pressing
need for rules and standards to give clear
requirements for shipbuilders to develop suitable
designs for cold climate operation. A major inclusion
to Lloyd's Registers Rules is the development of
requirements for the winterisation of ships. The paper
on this subject, by Bridges [8], provides an insight into
the background and development of winterisation
rules, an introduction to the framework of the Rules
and explanation of some of the key features. The
development of the winterisation Rules has included a
number of notable aspects, including the balance
between prescriptive requirements and diversity in
arrangements and environmental conditions.




Figure 2: Stern first ice class ship, Mastera

2.2. (c) Stern First Operation in Ice

The first purpose-built large tankers optimised for
stern first operation in ice, Mastera and Tempera
entered service in 2002 and 2003 (Figure 1). These
ships were designed and constructed under survey to
Lloyds Register standards and have now had over five
years operational service in the Baltic Sea.
Application of podded propulsion units and
azimuthing thrusters has subsequently been applied
on a number of ice class ships. Podded propulsion
units, or azimuthing thrusters, have enabled the
development of commercial ships with hull forms
optimized for bow first operation in open water, or
light ice conditions, combined with an icebreaking
stern optimized for stern first operation in ice.
Methods and approaches for the classification of
ships designed for stern first operation in ice, by
Hindley et al. [9], provides an overview of some of the
associated issues for classification using two ships
specified and designed for stern first operation in ice.
The paper discusses the interpretation of classification
and ice class rules, as well as the adoption of first
principle methods to assess the ship structural
arrangements and propulsion systems.

The phrase stern first ice class ship has been used in
the paper to identify ships equipped with podded
propulsion units or azimuthing thrusters, that have
been designed to operate stern first in ice as part of
their operational profile. The case studies considered
in the paper are:

Ice class 1AS aframax tankers, Tempera and
Mastera, built to Lloyd's Register class (included
as examples of stern first ice class ships for Baltic
Sea service).
LU6 ice category shuttle tankers Mikhail Ulyanov
and Kiril Lavrov, under construction to Russian
Register and Lloyd's Register dual classification
(included as examples of stern first ice class ships
for Pechora Sea service, further details of which
may be found in the paper by Tustin et al. [10]).

The paper summaries the methods and approaches
adopted for classification of stern first ice class ships,
as follows:

Application of classification and ice class rules for
bow first operations.
Approval of structural design of the stern to
withstand loads identified by the stern first
operational scenario.
Approval of structural design of the propulsion
unit and adjacent structure to withstand loads
identified by the stern first operational scenario.
Approval of design of the propulsion unit and
components to withstand loads identified by the
stern first operational scenario.
Approval of design of the bridge and location of
navigational equipment for operating bow first
and stern first.

For both cases described, a consistent approach has
been adopted for classification, even though sea
areas of operation and the ice class rule sets are
different

2.2 (d) Summary

As new trade routes emerge and shipping activity
increases in cold climates, there are many challenges
in store for the future. These include Arctic LNG
carriers [11], drill ships, and icebreakers, as well as
merchant ships operating in harsher and more
38
demanding regions for longer periods of time. Lloyd's
Register is actively involved in the technology and
innovation for ships in ice and cold operations, and is
committed to furthering its expertise and capability to
ensure the safety of the ship, crew and environment.

2.3 TRENDS AND DEVELOPMENTS
IN SANDWICH PLATE SYSTEMS

2.3 (a) Advances and Examples of the Sandwich
Plate System

Since the introduction of the Sandwich Plate System
(SPS) technology, its use in ship repair and
construction has evolved steadily over the years.
Responding to this situation, Lloyd's Register
developed and published in 2006 the Provisional
Rules for the Application of Sandwich Panel
Construction to Ship Structure (Sandwich
Construction Rules) [12] to provide the framework
and standards for its use within the maritime industry.

Classification rules depend on the feedback of service
experience to establish that they are effective in
achieving an appropriate level of safety and reliability.
Feedback from designers and builders are, in the
same way, important as the rules must provide a
suitable framework for the owner and builder in
achieving a suitable new product.

The following highlights briefly some of the studies
and investigations Lloyd's Register has undertaken,
since the publication of the Sandwich Construction
Rules to update them.

2.3 (b) The Rule Updates

Recognising that the use of SPS would have its major
advantages in certain applications, Lloyd's Register
has focused initially on developing a series of
amendments to address:

Watertight and deep tank bulkheads

Net scantling calculation of the sandwich panel is
developed from the principles of mechanics and
direct calculation using finite element analysis
methods with a safety factor calculation check
against the development of a simplified plastic
mechanism. The first criterion is based on reaching
some flexural capacity defined as the development of
a plastic hinge on the long edge over a limited length.

The second criterion is based on limiting the
maximum shear bond stress to a value defined
statically by tests and specified in the Rules to give the
desired level of safety for a given surface preparation.

The final thickness is determined as the net thickness
plus the appropriate corrosion margin as required for
the given application, half of which may be applied to
both faceplates.

Design example: Deep tank bulkhead

The design example is a section of an all-steel deep
tank bulkhead illustrated schematically in Figure 3
and designed in accordance with the Lloyd's
Registers Rules. The Rule calculation for plating of
deep tank bulkheads for the design pressure results in
an 11 mm plate and 250x90x10/15 stiffener
combination.

The SPS scantlings, sized in accordance with the
proposed rule formulation, result in an SPS panel of
5.5-25-5.5 plate with a single 250x90x10/15 vertically
oriented stiffener with a weight of 122 kg/m
2
. The
corresponding weight for the all-steel structure is 123
kg/m
2
.








Figure 3: Schematic Illustration of all steel deep tank
bulkhead and SPS bulkhead

Decks loaded by wheeled vehicles

Realising the difficulties in not having a closed form
solution, the proposed Rules for SPS decks loaded by
vehicles were based on several thousand FE
39
simulations for geometries (plan dimensions),
faceplate and core thicknesses, aspect ratios, wheel
load dimensions and locations that will cause the
maximum load effect and for the range of loads and
expected geometries.

The derivation of the equation for normal stress due
to flexure from which the faceplate and core
thicknesses is developed is founded on the same
engineering principles as closed form solutions with
the net scantling being calculated on the basis of a
limiting flexural stress and elastic behaviour. The
semi-empirical portion of the calculation relates to
determining the curvature factor.

The curvature factor, is directly related to the
deformed shape and in turn is a function of the plate
aspect ratio, smallest plate dimension, the faceplate
and core thicknesses, and the ratio of the normal
stress to the wheel load. Since there are numerous
combinations of wheel load position and sandwich
plate geometry, it is expedient to calculate the
curvature factor from a semi empirical equation
which has been determined as a function of the
variables and numerical coefficients given below.

=
P
d t b a
b
a
f
c f

, , , or ,

where
is the curvature factor
a, b are SPS plate dimensions
tf is the SPS face plate thickness
dc is the elastomer core thickness
P

is the ratio of normal stress to concentrated wheel

load for that given load

A general description of this relationship is given in
the following :

( )
( )
3
9 8
2
7 6 5
4 3 2 1
10

+ + +
+ + +
=
C
b
a
C
b
a
C C s C
C t C d C t C
f c f


where s = a or b, whichever is the shortest span.

The numerical coefficients (C
1
to C
9
) for the curvature
factor were determined by conducting a series of
finite element analyses on the vehicle deck model
illustrated in Figure 4 for varying geometry ranges
that are representative and wheel load positions and
wheel load dimensions.

The proposed Rules give an equation for determining
the net scantlings for any given wheel load for vehicle
decks governed by truck loads or for lighter decks
specifically designed for transporting cars. The
general equation is based on limiting the flexural
stresses in the faceplates of an SPS plate so that the
combination of the maximum value due to the wheel
loads in conjunction with the maximum due to in-
plane loading from hogging and sagging is consistent
with current Rule limits.

The modification factor for wheel load width provides
a mechanism to use these simple formulations for
varying wheel load dimensions. The corrosion, wear
and wastage margins that have been defined are
used with the simple variation that the total value is
distributed and applied to both faceplates.

Comparisons with the proposed equations with the
results of advanced finite element analyses for similar
structures show excellent correspondence with a very
small coefficient of variation.

Design example: liftable car deck

A liftable car deck has been analysed by finite
element methods and the stress results are compared
to Rule formulations. The car deck plating is
composed of a SPS 3.2-19-3.2 supported by
longitudinal and transverse girders spaced as
illustrated in Figure 4. A single wheel load placed
centrally between the longitudinal and transverse
girders is analysed. The average normal stress in the
longitudinal direction is 72 MPa, and is comparable to
the predicted normal stress of 68 MPa from the Rules.

Summary

Lloyds Registers Provisional Rules for the Application
of Sandwich Panel Construction to Ship Structure
were developed and published in 2006 to provide the
framework and standards for the use of SPS within
the maritime industry.

As new technologies emerge and start being used
there are many challenges and problems to overcome.
Considerable investigations have been undertaken in
the development of these Rules and Lloyds Register is
continuously seeking feedback to its Rules to improve
safety and reliability.

Lloyd's Register is actively involved in the application
of emerging technologies to address the difficulties
imposed on ships. Areas where sandwich structure
can be used with benefit are structure designed to
resist high impact loading, bulk carriers with high
loading rates, for example.
40


Figure 4: Design example of liftable car deck


2.4 RISK INVESTIGATION OF BULK CARRIER
AT HIGH CARGO LOADING RATE

2.4 (a) Background

Demand in the iron ore and coal markets is rapidly
expanding and is expected to continue developing
over the next few decades. Most major iron ore and
coal port authorities have significant investment plans
in place to improve the infrastructure of their port
terminals to better expedite the transfer of these
commodities. In addition, terminals are demanding
that ships are loaded in the shortest possible time.
This would imply the use of maximum possible
loading rate, single loading pour for each cargo hold
and minimum ballast (i.e. shallow draught) condition
during some stage of the loading procedure. Of these
development works, the intention to increase cargo
loading rates is of critical interest to the shipping
community.

Current loading rates for iron ore and coal carriers
can be in excess of 16,000 t/hr (Figure 5). Some
shipowners and operators are of the opinion that
these loading rates are already pushing the limits for
the safe loading and operation of such vessels. There
is real concern as to whether current bulk carriers and
ore carriers have adequate local and global structural
strength to withstand the consequences of the
highest cargo loading rates, particularly pertinent for
older vessels. An additional concern is that the ships
load indicators (loading computers) are not advanced
enough to protect the vessel from becoming
overloaded.




Figure 5 : Loading of Iron-ore cargo onto bulk carrier
at port


As a significant and high profile safety issue, it is
imperative that Lloyds Register investigates the
implications of increased cargo loading rates on bulk
carrier structures. Such an investigation will help
ensure the integrity of Lloyds Register classed vessels
operating under likely future cargo loading conditions.

2.4 (b) Project

Currently, it is commonly understood that
undesirable loading conditions and loading sequences
can result from employing high cargo loading rates
which can cause high stresses in the hull girder and
primary and secondary structure. The effect in a static
sense can be investigated using existing analytical
(Rules) and finite element (SDA) type analysis based
on the distribution of cargo and ballast by considering
the cargo loading rates into the holds and the pump
deballasting capacities. However, the dynamic
response of the structure as a result of the impact
loads generated by high cargo loading rates is yet to
be understood.

This project aims to study the static and dynamic
response of the hull structure of typical bulk and ore
carrier designs under high cargo loading rates. The
objectives of the work are to establish suitable
methods for accessing the cargo impact loads and the
resulting structural responses for a range of
parameters as shown in the following:

Static and dynamic responses of hull girder.
Cargo impact loads under high loading rates.
Hull girder springing/whipping response.
Strength of structural details.

The proposed project framework consists of two
phases. For the first phase, the objective is to carry
out the investigation upon the static and dynamic
response of the ship structure under the cargo impact
load by numerical simulations and model tests.
41
Typical FE analyses for hull girders and local structures
will be simulated and studied under continuous cargo
loads (see Figures 6 and 7). Phase one of the project
also includes measurement of hull girder response for
correlation with theoretical analysis on one ship. In
phase two, further full full-scale measurement is to be
carried out for the study of response of localized
structure. The aim is to validate and calibrate the
theoretical results obtained through phase one.

2.4 (c) Cargo Impact Model Tests

The dynamic loading (load-time history) due to the
impact of a continuous stream of ore particles (or ore
like materials) is to be investigated using drop impact
tests. The tests will also establish the cushion effect of
build-up cargo.

The tests are to be carried out at a UK University or
similar test facility. The drop-test will be simulating,
under laboratory conditions, the free drop of an ore
like substance into a small scale stiffened panels. The
main objectives of the tests are:

To obtain the impact load time history and
distribution due to the continuous pour (drop) of
cargo at different heights and different rates.
To measure the dynamic response of the
structure in way of the local structures (stiffened
panels).
To calibrate numerical simulation procedures.



Figure 6: Dynamic Impact Simulation modeled from
LS-DYNA software

2.4 (d) Static Response of Hull Girder

The static response of the hull girder under various
loading sequences will be investigated based on
Lloyds Registers in-house/NAPA software. Various
loading sequences, cargo loading rates and
deballasting capacities are considered using still water
load calculation. In addition, asymmetric cargo
distributions within the cargo holds are also
considered. The objectives of this task are:

To investigate hull girder bending moment and
shear force in all possible loading scenarios.
To assess and compare with the Rules criteria,
permissible shear force, bending moment and
cargo-hold mass curves.
To establish the relationship between deballasting
capability and loading rate.
To perform 3D FE full ship model static response
analyses and to compare 2D and 3D FE results to
establish a suitable approach for future analyses.




Figure 7: Finite Element Analysis for hull girder stress
response

2.4 (e) Dynamic Response of Hull Girder

The dynamic response of the hull girder under
continuous cargo impact will be investigated based
on:

a 2D beam model for the hull girder
a 3D FE model for the full ship.

Added mass effect of surrounding water should be
taken into account. Possible single and multi-
pour/hold loading sequences are considered. In
addition, various mass distributions, impact loads and
positions are simulated to identify critical
combinations that excite hull girder responses. The
objectives of this task are:

To examine the hull girder vibration frequencies
and modes.
To investigate hull girder dynamic response at
high cargo rates.
To compare 2D and 3D results and to establish a
suitable approach for future analyses.
42


2.4 (f) Full Scale Measurements

It is proposed to carry out full scale measurement on
board ships to collect cargo impact loads and
stress/hull responses during cargo loading to verify
the theoretical calculations. This will involve
installation of a dedicated full scale measurement
system on board a Lloyds Register classed ship to
collect a wide range of data, including:

accelerations
stress responses of hull girder
stress response of secondary structural members
and structural details
impact loads on tank bottom.

Information on ships draughts, loading sequence,
loading rate, cargo properties are also to be collected
for simulation of the dynamic responses by
calculation using different levels of modelling.

2.5 STUDIES PERTAINING TO SLOSHING IN
LNG SHIPS

With ever increasing demand for cleaner forms of
alternate fuels like liquefied natural gas (LNG), the
LNG fleet has come a long way, from the converted
5,000 m
3
Methane Pioneer in 1958, to the first
purpose built LNG Ship, the 27,000 m
3
Methane
Princess, in 1964, to the worlds largest LNG ship, the
266,000 m
3
Mozah, in 2008. Mozah is the first Q-
max sized vessel, classed by Lloyds Register and built
by Samsung Heavy Industries, Korea, for Qatar Gas
Transport Company Limited (Nakilat). Lloyds Register
is the worlds leading classification society for LNG
vessels, with more than 33% of LNG ships in service
and on order under its class.

Construction of these LNG ships is governed by the
classification rules and the International Code for the
Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying
Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code). Lloyds Register
has put considerable effort into establishing
assessment procedures for tank structures due to
sloshing loads and comparative and absolute
assessment of containment systems in addition to the
analysis of pump tower and its base in LNG tanks [13
- 17].

2.5 (a) Sloshing Issues

Figure 8: Bore wave impact in an LNG tank
Carrying liquid cargo in a seaway has always been a
challenge due to the additional hydrodynamic loads
caused by the violent motion of liquid within the
enclosed tanks due to the motion of the ship in a
seaway. The large size of the tanks in LNG ships, due
to the complicated structure of the containment
system and associated equipment, has resulted in a
further increase in hydrodynamic loads acting on both
the containment system and the hull structure.
Design and construction of the containment system
and hull structure therefore needs to ensure they can
withstand these enormous hydrodynamic impact
loads. Accurate assessment of ship tank structures of
partially filled tanks and the pump tower used for
transporting LNG due to sloshing loads is the key to
the safe and successful transportation of Liquid
Nitrogen Gas (LNG) by sea and this is one of the
greatest challenges that designers and assessors
currently face.

Rectangular shaped tanks with sharp chamfers
(membrane containment systems) are prone to severe
impact loads depending upon the fill level. Further,
the severity of the sloshing phenomena and the
resulting impact loads depend upon the loading
condition and the seakeeping characteristics of the
ship. Additionally, resonance between encountering
the period of the waves, and the natural period of
liquid motion within the tank, and natural response
period of the combined containment system and hull
structure and the rise time of sloshing pressure
impulses could substantially increase the intensity of
the sloshing loads. Recent experiences of damages to
membrane containment systems due to partial filling
conditions indicate the complexity of LNG
transportation and the need for better design and
operation practices.

2.5 (b) Experimental studies on sloshing loads

The traditional method of predicting sloshing loads is
through experiments on a scale model cargo tank
using water, considering the different critical ship
motion conditions. In support of design appraisal
studies for the new generation of large LNG carriers,
Lloyds Register has initiated several model test
programmes on obtaining membrane impact
pressures and pump mast forces on a 1:60 model of a
138,000 m
3
ship tank [18] and 1:50 model of a
210,000 m
3
ship tank [19 and 20] for regular and
irregular ship motions. However, insufficient
knowledge exists in extrapolating sloshing loads from
model to full scale and water-air to LNG-LNG vapour.
43


To fill this gap, Lloyds Register, together with the
designers of containment systems, shipowners and
operators, is progressing in acquiring full-scale data
on sloshing loads and corresponding ship motions
from a selection of standard-size to large LNG ships.

2.5 (c) Numerical Predictions of Sloshing Loads

Lloyds Register was the first to develop a
comprehensive numerical assessment procedure
through ShipRight SDA Sloshing software [ 13 ]. With
the emergence of improved computational
techniques and computer hardware, significant
progress has been made by the industry in general,
and by Lloyds Register in particular, to explore the
feasibility of using Computational Fluid Dynamics
(CFD) techniques as an improved design and
assessment tool for analysing sloshing loads on
containment systems and pump towers. Figure 8
shows a typical numerical simulation of bore wave
type sloshing impact in an LNG tank.
Figure 9 : Flow around Pump Tower in an LNG


Another study by Reddy & Radosavljevic, [21] has
identified different uncertainties involved with the
present numerical and experimental techniques in
obtaining fluid forces on pump towers in an indirect
way using Morisons equation. As an alternative to
the use of the Morison equation, further
investigations into the feasibility of direct numerical
estimation of fluid forces on a pump tower within an
enclosed tank resulting from the sloshing of liquids is
carried out (Figure 9).

Lloyds Register made further progress in establishing
both the commercial and open source CFD codes for
sloshing applications [22] and passed on this
knowledge to the shipyards and other customers for
the wider benefit of the industry. These studies
pertain to both 2D and 3D tanks by considering tank
motions in 3 or 6 degrees of freedom both in
frequency domain, similar to the current LR-SDA
procedure, and time domain considering a particular
sea spectrum. The present ShipRight SDA Sloshing
software is currently being enhanced to consider 3D
LNG tanks and compressibility effects during sloshing.

2.5 (d) Strength Analysis of Containment
Systems and Hull Structure

Lloyds Register is currently working on a number of
projects related to LNG sloshing. The recent orders of
large membrane LNG ships to class has focused
attention on the need to consider the interaction
between the containment system and the hull
structure. The aim is to review the effect of the
sloshing impact loads on the containment system,
taking into account the local hull flexibility. The
review of the resulting dynamic responses of the
containment system and the local and global hull
structures will allow the procedures presently applied
for this aspect to be refined. In association with the
sloshing work, we are undertaking a combined
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and FE analysis
to review fluid-structure interaction (FSI) effects. The
aim of this research is to understand FSI better and to
optimise the use of FE analysis, CFD and combined
FE/CFD tools.

An absolute approach to addressing all aspects of
sloshing is very complex in that it demands better
knowledge of the sloshing loads and the containment
system load capacity. This work is already
contributing to our review of the containment
systems of the current large membrane LNG ships on
order, and is likely to play a key role in the approval
of floating LNG process, storage and regasification
vessels, which will need to have maximum flexibility
of tank filling levels. This work is necessary for the
approval of new containment systems and could also
help to optimise filling levels in both new and existing
membrane LNG ships in the future.

2.6 WHIPPING AND SPRINGING OF SHIPS
HULLS

It has long been recognised that slender and high
speed ships are prone to whipping and springing of
the hull girder. Fast slender containerships, cruise
ships and Great Lakes bulk carriers are typical ship
types that fall into this category (Figure 10).

Whipping and springing are both vibratory dynamic
responses of the hull girders. Whipping response is
usually excited by wave slamming impact causing the
hull structure to vibrate which decays with time.
Springing is a continuous vibratory response excited
by waves with frequencies close to the natural
resonance frequencies of the hull. Slamming induced
whipping normally occurs in high sea states hence it
44
has a relatively lower probability of occurrence than
that of a springing response. However, the induced
dynamic hull stress amplitude can be significant due
to the magnitude of the wave impact load involved.
Springing can occur in low and modern sea states.
Although the springing dynamic hull stress level is
lower in comparison with a whipping response,
springing is an important phenomenon in considering
the fatigue properties of the hull structure due to the
many stress cycles involved.


Raw measurement data


After application of frequency filter showing
component of springing and whipping responses



Figure 10: Whipping and springing hull girder stress
responses measured on a large container ship from a
recent full-scale measurement project

Hydroelasticity analysis is an advanced computation
method studied by Lloyds Register for the prediction
of whipping and springing responses of hull
structures. This technique involves modelling of the
fluid-structure interaction, i.e. integration of
hydrodynamic loads and structural mechanics, to
determine the behaviour of a flexible structure
moving through a fluid. The technique allows the
mode shapes and responses of the hull at resonance
frequencies to be determined, which cannot be
encompassed in the rigidity body assumption used in
normal analysis. Where considered relevant,
hydroelasticity analysis can be applied in the design
stage to provide a better estimation of hull stress
responses for the assessment of hull strength and
fatigue damages. This technique is also applied to
determine the service factor of specific ship types
(Figure 11).
Any analysis method must be validated to ensure that
its prediction is an adequate representation of the
phenomenon which occurs in reality. Lloyds Register
has been carrying out full-scale measurement on
board ships for many years.







Twisting

Vertical Bending


Figure 11: Hydroelasticity analysis - mode shapes of a
container ship

The typical data collected are hull stresses, ship
motions, loads, and ships navigation information, as
well as the associated sea wave information obtained
by dedicated wave radar measurement systems
installed on board and from wave buoys. This
measurement provides invaluable data for the
validation and correlation of many analysis
procedures. The correlation with the full-scale
measurement data so far has indicated that the
hydroelasticity analysis technique can predict hull
vibration response with reasonably good accuracy.
However, more work still has to be done to further
improve the accuracy and reliability of the analysis
method before it can be applied on a routine basis in
the design process. The development work is ongoing.

0.00E+00
1.00E+10
2.00E+10
3.00E+10
4.00E+10
5.00E+10
6.00E+10
7.00E+10
8.00E+10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
we (r/s)
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
l

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
k
N
m
)
^
2

s
H1/3=2.1m,T1=5.5s
H1/3=3.0m,T1=5.5s
H1/3=4m,T1=5.8s
measured

Figure 12: Comparison of amidships vertical wave
bending moment response spectra (kNm)
2
s predicted
hydroelasticity analysis against full scale
measurements for a Great Lakes bulk carrier

[23]
45


2.7 GOAL-BASED CONSTRUCTION
STANDARDS FOR NEW SHIPS
The premise behind the development of goal-based
standards (GBS) is that the IMO should play a larger
role in determining the fundamental standards to
which new ships are built. There is no intention that
the IMO would take over the detailed work of the
classification societies, but rather that the
Organization would state what has to be achieved,
leaving classification societies, ship designers and
naval architects, marine engineers and ship builders
the freedom to decide on how best to employ their
professional skills to meet the required standards. At
present there is no international legislation or
guidance on these matters.

Figure 12 : IMO five tier system
2.7.(a) Background
The notion of GBS was introduced within the IMO at
the 89
th
session of the Council in November 2002,
through a proposal by the Bahamas and Greece
suggesting that the IMO should develop initial ship
construction standards that would permit innovation
in design but ensure that ships are constructed in
such a manner that, if properly maintained, they
could remain safe for their entire economic life. The
standards would also have to ensure that all parts of
a ship can easily be accessed to permit proper
inspection and ease of maintenance.
The IMOs Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) agreed
to a proposal for the development of GBS based on a
five tier system following proposals by the Bahamas,
Greece and IACS (Figure 12).
2.7 (b) Current Status
At its 82
nd
session in 2006, the MSC approved the
plan for a pilot project on trial application of the Tier
III verification process using the CSR for oil tankers to
benchmark the verification process. The objective of
the pilot project was to conduct a trial application of
Tier III for CSR oil tankers and bulk carriers with the
intention of validating the Tier III verification
framework, identifying shortcomings and making
proposals for improvement.
Lloyds Register, through its IACS hull panel member,
assumed the project managing role of the GBS-CSR
project team in 2008 to provide a documentation
package for the IMO pilot panel [24]. The objective of
this submission from IACS was to provide the pilot
panel with a working example of how class societies
in the future may provide the background
documentation illustrating how class rules will meet
GBS.
Submission of this report in March 2008 allowed the
pilot panel to finalise its deliberations and submit a
draft SOLAS amendment to the MSCs 85
th
session
(MSC 85) to make GBS for bulk carriers and oil
tankers mandatory [25]
In essence, the process for establishing that class rules
meet the Tier III verification criteria is dependant on
verifying that 15 differing Tier II functional criteria
have been satisfied, covering:
Design
II.1 Design life
II.2 Environmental conditions
II.3 Structural strength
II.4 Fatigue life
II.5 Residual strength
II.6 Protection against corrosion
II.7 Structural redundancy
II.8 Watertight/weather tight Integrity
II.9 Human element consideration
II.10 Design transparency
Construction
II.11 Construction quality procedures
II.12 Survey
In-service Considerations
II.13 Survey and maintenance
II.14 Structure accessibility
Recycling
II.15 Recycling considerations.

Tier I
Tier III
Tier V
Tier IV
Tier II
Applicable Industry Standards &
Codes of Practice
Prescriptive Regulations &
Class Rules
Verification
Process

Goals
Functional
Requirements
46


2.7 (c) Future Work
The draft SOLAS amendment proposed by the Pilot
Panel was not adopted at MSC 85. Many delegations
were of the opinion that there were currently still too
many uncertainties with regards to the verification
process, the financial resources needed and liability
issues. They considered that the complete package of
SOLAS amendment, draft GBS guidelines, verification
process guidelines, contents of SCF and financial and
resource issues should be considered holistically.
Many other delegations considered that significant
progress had been made and that the draft SOLAS
amendment should be approved at MSC 85 to give
members a level of certainty and provide a basis for
further work in the matter. The Committee agreed to
postpone approval of the draft SOLAS amendment to
MSC 86 on the understanding that the text of the
draft amendments and the draft standards had been
agreed by the Committee and would form the basis
for any further work at MSC 86.
In conclusion, the Committee invited member
governments and international organisations to
submit proposals to MSC 86 with a view to finalising
the GBS for bulk carriers and oil tankers. In particular,
submissions should address:
finalisation of Part A of the Guidelines for the
verification of compliance with goal-based ship
construction standards for bulk carriers and oil
tankers (MSC 85/WP.5, annex 3), taking into
account the discussions of the working group
finalisation of the Guidelines for the information
to be included in a Ship Construction File
development of an alternative verification process
based on self-assessment only, taking into
account the comments in paragraph 37 of
document MSC 85/WP.5
The possible need for amendments to other IMO
instruments, following the finalization of the GBS
for bulk carriers and oil tankers, taking into
account document MSC 84/5/1.

















Figure 10: IMO 5 tier system as of Nov. 2008 at
MSC85

3. CONCLUSIONS

This paper has taken a brief look at some of the
ongoing structural issues affecting the marine
industry in general and Lloyds Register in particular.

As mentioned in the introduction it is imperative that
we try to learn from the lessons of the past if we are
to prevent their recurrence in the future and in an era
of new inexperienced shipyards in Asia, and reducing
technical departments within the owning community,
it is vital that Lloyds Register stays abreast of the
latest developments to help ensure safe and
sustainable shipping operation.

Lloyds Register is doing its utmost to help ensure that
this knowledge is shared with the industry and is
heavily involved in the IMO GBS issues.

4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author would like to acknowledge the help, time
and effort given to him in the preparation of this
paper by his colleagues within Lloyds Register, in
particular, Rob Bridges, Hasan Ocakli, Reddy
Devalapalli, Nigel White, Shengming Zhang, Jimmy
Tong, Norbert Bakkers and Chris Thornton.

5. REFERENCES

1. Lloyds Register ShipRight FDA - Structural Detail
Design Guide.

2. Lloyds Register ShipRight FDA - Software User
Manual.

3. Lloyds Register ShipRight FDA Level 3 Guidance
on direct calculations.
Tier I
Tier III
Tier V
Tier IV
Tier II
Applicable Industry Standards &
Codes of Practice
Prescriptive Regulations &
Class Rules
Verification
Process
Functional
Requirements
Goals
Tier I
Tier III
Tier V
Tier IV
Tier II
Applicable Industry Standards &
Codes of Practice
Applicable Industry Standards &
Codes of Practice
Prescriptive Regulations &
Class Rules
Prescriptive Regulations &
Class Rules
Verification
Process
Finalized
but not
Approved
Verification
Process
Functional
Requirements
Functional
Requirements
Goals Goals
Not
Finalized
47



4. Bridges et al., Preliminary Results of Investigation
on the Fatigue of Ship Hull Structures when
Navigating in Ice, IceTech, 2006

5. Lloyd's Register, Rules for Ice and Cold Operation,
Part 8 of the Rules and Regulations for the
Classification of Ships, July 2008

6. Bridges et al., Current Hull and Machinery Ice
Class Rules Requirements and impact of IACS
Polar Rules, ARCOP Report W2.2.2, 2005

7. Finnish Maritime Administration, Guidelines for
the Application of the Finnish Swedish Ice Class
Rules, Bulleting No. 14/20.12.2005

8. Bridges, Development of Requirements for the
Winterisation of Ships, IceTech, 2008
9. Hindley et al, Methods and approaches for the
classification of ships designed for stern first
operation in ice, lce Tech, 2008.

10. Tustin et al, Development of Arctic double acting
shuttle tankers for the Prirazlomnoye project,
TSCF Shipbuilders Meeting, 2007

11. Tustin, Recent developments in LNG and Ice Class
Tanker design and the potential application to
future Arctic LNG ships, Arctic Shipping, 2005

12. Lloyds Registers Provisional Rules for the
Application of Sandwich Panel Construction to
Ship Structure 2006

13. Lloyds Register, Sloshing loads and scantling
assessment for partially filled tanks. 2004

14. Lloyds Register, Comparative Sloshing Analysis
of LNG ship Containment Systems, 2005

15. Lloyds Register, Rules and Regulations for the
construction and classification of ships for the
carriage of Liquefied gases in bulk, 2008(a)

16. Lloyds Register Procedure for analysis of pump
tower and pump tower base. 2008(b)

17. Lloyds Register, Absolute Sloshing Assessment
Procedure for Membrane LNG Ships, Draft.
2008(c)

18. Sloshing loads in partially filled prismatic LNG
Tanks-Phase II, MARINTEK. (2003): Report no.
MT60 F03-069/820013.00.01

19. Sloshing Model Test of DSME 210k LNG Ship
with 5 tanks for Partial Filling Conditions,
MARINTEK. (2006a): Report no. MT57 F06-
012/570026.00.02

20. Fluid force Measurements on Pump Tower in an
LNG tank, MARINTEK. (2006b): Report no. MT57
F06-012/570026.00.02

21. Reddy, D.N. and Radosavljevic, D. (2006):
Verification of Numerical Methods applied to
Sloshing studies in Membrane Tanks of LNG Ships,
RINA Lloyds Register, London, UK

22. Reddy, D.N. (2008): Review of CFD software
OpenFOAM for its application to Sloshing
simulations, Lloyds Register internal report no.
MPD/08/03, V1.

23. Spyridon E. Hirdaris

, Norbert Bakkers
*
, Nigel
White
*
, Pandeli Temarel, Service Factor
Assessment of a Great Lakes Bulk Carrier
Incorporating the Effects of Hydroelasticity,
24. IACS Documentation Package for the IMO GBS
Pilot Project [2
nd
Trial Application]

25. Goal-Based New Ship Construction standards,
Draft SOLAS amendments to make the GBS for
bulk carriers and oil tankers mandatory and
related matters MSC 85/5


48
NOTES
49
NOTES
50
PAPER 5
SHIP HYDRODYNAMIC PROPULSION:
SOME CONTEMPORARY ISSUES OF
PROPULSIVE EFFICIENCY, CAVITATION
AND EROSION
John Carlton D.Sc., B.A., C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E., M.R.I.N.A.,
M.I.Mar.EST.
51
52
SHIP HYDRODYNAMIC PROPULSION: SOME CONTEMPORARY ISSUES OF
PROPULSIVE EFFICIENCY, CAVITATION AND EROSION

John Carlton

SUMMARY

A number of topics ranging from the analysis of hull flows through to propeller design are
considered. In particular, the interaction between measures to enhance efficiency and the
possible consequences these measures may have for cavitation development are explored, both
in terms of enhancing the potential for material erosion and ship vibration. This is achieved in the
context of both Lloyds Registers ongoing research activities and the practical application of
these initiatives to ship operation. Additionally, a new method for the detection of propeller
erosion based on acoustic emission techniques is introduced.

1. INTRODUCTION

In keeping with earlier periods in history,
most notably in the early 1970s and then
more recently, marine fuel prices have
shown significant increases in the last few
years. While the underlying price behaviour
for both marine diesel oil and heavy fuel oil
has demonstrated increasing trends, there
have been perturbations about these mean
trends: sometimes these have shown
marked reductions, as is presently the case,
while at other times the opposite has been
true. From a historical description of the
price of fuel, and set against the
background of international politics and
relationships, there is little reason to
suppose that marine fuel prices will not
continue to exhibit a generally increasing
trend, albeit, from time to time, with some
intermittent and localised reductions.
Furthermore, history suggests that when
fuel prices rise, ship speeds tend to reduce.
Alternatively, when fuel prices stabilise and
freight rates increase for a reasonable
period of time, there is then a tendency for
ship speeds to increase.

Such a background scenario demands
careful consideration in terms of its
implications for ship design and operation.
The ship propulsion hydrodynamic
considerations in this context embrace the
initial hull and propulsion concept design in
the case of new ships or, more generally,
the introduction of energy saving systems
for existing ships. In either case, it is helpful
if the enhancement to the propulsion
efficiency sought is significant enough for it
to be distinguished from the normal scatter
of the in-service data returned from the
ship.

When considering the design or retro-fitting
implications of efficiency improvements, the
pay-off between the steps necessary to
improve the propulsion efficiency and the
potential introduction of more onerous
cavitation, which may lead to an increased
erosion and vibration potential, requires
careful consideration.

This paper, which is based on Lloyds
Registers research and development
activities in ship propulsion technology,
considers some of the contemporary issues
in design and the application of various
techniques to aid that process. Additionally,
the paper discusses some of the innovative
techniques that Lloyds Register has
introduced and demonstrates the ways in
which these are being developed to improve
the understanding of marine propulsion
technology.

2. HULL DESIGN AND PROPULSION

It is self evident that there is no substitute
for a well designed hull which endeavours
to maximise propulsion efficiency within the
constraints of good seakeeping and
manoeuvrability, as well as cargo handling
and port and operational constraints. When
considering the propulsion aspects of the
design, the use of model testing and
analysis centred on computational fluid
dynamics, coupled with sound design
experience, is advisable. Indeed, given this
scenario it is surprising that only some 5%
or so of newbuild projects have the benefit
of resistance and propulsion and propeller
cavitation model testing during their design
and construction phases. This is particularly
significant when one considers the through-
life financial implications of poor
performance against the initial cost of
53
model testing. Model testing, however, is
subject to uncertainties regarding scale
effects which need careful consideration. In
particular, the choice of model scale can
assist, in some way, to resolving these
issues, but care also needs to be taken
when selecting the appropriate test
establishment, particularly in relation to its
experience with the type of ship being
considered in terms of scaling factors and
correlation allowances.

Analysis by computational fluid dynamics
procedures has matured significantly in
recent years and, as well as beginning to
yield good quantitative estimates of
resistance, it enables the designer to gain
insights into the flow field around the ship.
This is particularly important in the after-
body region of the hull where unpleasant
vorticity and separation effects may
manifest themselves and adversely affect
propeller performance. Within the context
of a numerical analysis carried out by Lloyds
Register, Figure 1 illustrates this point in
connection with the flow around the after-
body of a container ship destined to be
fitted with a system of vortex generators in
order to resolve a propeller cavitation
induced vibration problem.

In comparison to model testing,
computational fluid dynamic analyses are
relatively new and the correct choice of
turbulence modelling has been an issue
throughout its development in ship
analytical practice. It has been established
that the computationally intensive Reynolds
stress models have both improved the
accuracy of the numerical prediction for the
finer hull forms and, moreover, extended
the range of applicability to full form ships.
Nevertheless, from Lloyds Registers
experience in using these methods the less
computationally demanding k- SST
method of turbulence modelling has also
been shown, in many cases, to give
acceptable engineering results. At present,
fully integrated friction and free surface
models can present some difficulties;
consequently the residual resistance
components are mostly estimated from the
use of inviscid panel methods. However,
methods based on the transportation of
species concentration are under
development and show promise for the
implementation of an integrated resistance
computational fluid dynamic solution.
Notwithstanding these advances in the
mathematical modelling processes, it is
considered that they should not at present
totally replace the conventional and well
validated model testing procedures for
which much correlation data exists. Rather,
they should be used to augment the design
approach by allowing the designer to gain
insights into the flow dynamics and develop
any necessary remedial measures before the
hull is constructed.

A further application of computational fluid
dynamics techniques is in the prediction of
the wake field that enters the propeller disc.
Over the last quarter of a century this has
been estimated using a number of scaling
techniques, sometimes dependent on ship
type, which transform the model nominal to
the ship effective wake field. However, the
developments in computational fluid
dynamics have, in their current state of
development, permitted the investigation
and quantification of flow features that
would not normally be possible when using
model tests. This can be appreciated by
recognising that at model scale, the typical
computational grid size would be about 2
mm and it is unusual to see model test data
with such a high resolution: indeed, this
would be unattainable when using
conventional pitot tubes. Typical of these
features is vorticity in the wake field which










Figure 1: CFD flow study of a container ship hull fitted with vortex generators

54
is demonstrated by Figure 2 and is the result
of a full scale flow computation around the
ship.

Figure 2: CFD computation of a ship full
scale wake field

A considerable research effort is being
expended internationally on the subject of
drag reduction methods, particularly in
relation to the ships boundary layer. The
potential benefit for this is significant. For
example, in the case of a container ship the
approximate ratio of the frictional to total
resistance is of the order of 0.65.
Consequently for these types of ship, those
initiatives dealing with the frictional
resistance are directed towards influencing
the major component of resistance. In the
alternative case of a bulk carrier or tanker,
this ratio will rise to around 0.8 to 0.85.
Within the spectrum of methods focussed
on reducing the frictional resistance are
fluid injection methods and coating
development.

Methods involving the injection of small
quantities of long-chain polymers, such as
polyethylene oxide, into the turbulent
boundary layer of underwater vehicles were
shown in the 1960s to significantly reduce
resistance, provided the molecular weight
and concentration were chosen correctly.
This type of approach, which worked by
stabilising the inner parts of the ships
boundary layer by fluid injection, however,
is unlikely to be environmentally acceptable
today. Current research efforts, therefore,
are focussing on a range of approaches
involving boundary layer fluid injection and
manipulation without the need to inject
foreign fluids into the sea. Typical of such
methods is the use of air-injection
techniques, where some benefit in the case
of small fishing boats and passenger ferries,
of the order of 15 to 20% in the frictional
component of resistance, has been claimed
by the inventors of the system [1, 2]. These
types of systems rely on air at low pressure
being injected through a piping system
comprising a number of underwater outlets,
into the ships boundary layer in the
forward parts of the hull. Figure 3 shows a
typical injection port. The injected air is
formed into a micro-bubble layer, with
bubbles nominally of the order of 10
microns in diameter, by the outlet geometry
of the injection port which relies on the
KelvinHelmholtz principle. The injected air
is then assumed to follow the flow
streamlines around the hull.



Figure 3: WAIP air injection port

Should such systems be contemplated for
large seagoing cargo or passenger ships,
then care in selecting the orifice positions in
the hull is required. From research carried
out, these penetrations in the hull, since
there will be many of them, need to be
considered in the context of the hull
bending moments and shear forces with
respect to the global and local stresses
introduced. Nevertheless, it has been found
possible to establish positions in the hull
that satisfy both the streamline flow and
hull integrity constraints in a seaway. This
may imply that the orifices need to be
positioned such that they are not aligned in
vertical lines, but in curvelinear lines set
around particular longitudinal stations.
Additionally, from these research studies, it
is not anticipated that the pipe flow
dynamics, when the ship is working in a
seaway, are likely to be a source of
significant concern. The ships intact and
damage stability behaviour, however, needs
careful evaluation, particularly in relation to
the location of the various components of
the system and the possible ingress of sea
water into the ship should part of the
internal piping system rupture. Within a
related context, the air-water emulsion that
is created over the hull surface is likely to
influence the roll-damping and frequency
roll characteristics of the ship. This also
55
requires consideration when contemplating
an installation of this technique.

Recent IMO developments have resulted in
a restriction on the use of hull coatings with
bio-active compounds designed to kill
fouling. This represents a significant
challenge given that the fouling sequence
normally commences with slime, comprising
a mixture of bacteria and diatoms, which
then progresses to algae. Following this,
animal foulers, such as barnacles, tend to
take up residence, which then culminate in
the climax community. Prior to the
introduction of bio-active compounds, hull
fouling led, in ship performance terms, to
regular and frequent increases in hull
resistance which originated from periodic
increases in the ships apparent wake
fraction over a docking cycle. This then had
adverse implications for propulsion
efficiency. With the introduction of anti-
fouling paints, the saw-tooth form of the
apparent wake fraction largely disappeared
and the necessity to dry-dock for fouling
reasons was reduced.

Hull roughness, in both its temporary and
permanent forms, plays an important role in
maintaining a low ship resistance. In this
context, permanent roughness refers to the
unevenness of the plates and the results of
contact damages, while temporary
roughness includes the amount and
composition of marine fouling and local
damage to a coating, including that caused
from the debris from earlier coatings. Since
only limited action can be taken with
permanent roughness, the focus of
attention has to be on the temporary
roughness component. A number of
coating solutions have been evolved for use
in the post-biocide era, with various benefits
claimed. In the case of faster ships that do
not spend too much time alongside in port
or at anchor, a potential solution for the
hull may lie in the silicone-based elastomeric
coatings. The properties of silicone coatings
are such that they prevent marine life from
adhering to the hull surface provided that
the ship speed is maintained above certain
critical values, typically in the region of 17
to 18 knots and sometimes lower, as a
result of more recent developments in this
type of painting technology. Furthermore,
some advantage in terms of a reduced
turbulent flow wall shear stress is also likely.



3. PROPELLER DESIGN

When designing the propeller for a
particular application, the expected
operational profile of the ship needs to be
carefully considered, particularly if the ship
has a number of operating modes, for
example, in the case of a cruise ship. Not
only is this important in order to achieve the
most efficient performance over the
spectrum of operation, but also to minimise
the probability of unwelcome harmonic or
broadband cavitation excited vibration
when operating over the range of powering
conditions [3].

In previous times of high fuel prices and
poor freight rates, it has been found that an
effective way of reducing operating costs
has been to reduce ship speed. While such
action is clearly beneficial from a fuel
consumption point of view, under the
simple considerations of the cube law,
relating absorbed power to ship speed,
further financial savings can frequently be
made by changing the propeller design if a
prolonged service at a different operating
condition is anticipated. By deploying
conventional propeller design techniques, in
which a re-designed slow running propeller
is permitted to have the same margins
against cavitation as an existing higher
speed design, it is possible to optimise the
benefit in terms of enhanced efficiency. In
effect this permits the blade area to be
reduced and, hence, also the drag of the
blade sections. Following such an analysis
for a particular ship, and including the
implicit engine efficiency changes, it is then
possible to assess whether it is beneficial to
incur the cost of redesigning and
manufacturing a new propeller for a slower
service speed.

Notwithstanding these broad palliative
considerations of efficiency versus cavitation
excitation, there is significant scope to
enhance performance in the propeller
design process by correctly considering the
balance of permissible face and back
cavitation in relation to section chord length
and hence drag of the blade sections. This
subject is far from trivial since it also
involves material erosion considerations and
is currently the subject of considerable
research, both within Lloyds Register and at
other institutes around the world.

Much inter-disciplinary research has been
taking place on the subject of cavitation in
56
Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids. This
applies to: ships propellers and
appendages; steel and rock cutting
processes; and hydraulic machines and
medical applications involving heart valves
and the breaking up of kidney stones. From
research of this type, a consensus of
cavitation dynamics statistics has been
derived for hydrodynamic machinery and
Table 1 summarises some of these dynamic
properties.

The collapse of a 10 mm radius vapour
filled cavity takes about one millisecond
The duration of the final phase of a
cavitating vortex collapse or that of a
bubble is about 1 microsecond
The pressures induced by cavitation
collapse are considered to be in the region
of 100 MPa to upwards of 1 GPa

Table 1: Some cavitation statistical
parameters

The prediction of the cavitation
characteristics of a propeller is a complex
process. In terms of numerical analysis, the
computations are frequently based on lifting
surface methods. From these, good
predictions of the blade sheet cavitation on
the suction side of the propeller blades can
be obtained given that a proper scaling of
the ships wake field has been undertaken
or, alternatively, that the wake field has
been derived from computational fluid
dynamics procedures. In recent years,
Lloyds Register has actively participated
with other collaborative partners in
developing an advanced boundary element
method for the analysis of propeller
characteristics. Figure 4 shows a typical
result of such a computation in terms of the
leading edge cavitation extent on a highly
skewed propeller.



Figure 4: A propeller cavitation prediction
using based on a CFD wake prediction

The results of this boundary element code,
together with the results of other
engineering initiatives, are validated using
our in-house investigation capabilities by
comparing the results to full scale
behaviour. Within this context of the
validation of ship hydrodynamic
computational procedures or, alternatively,
of hypothesis testing, validation is often
achieved through the use of boroscope
techniques which were pioneered by Lloyds
Register some years ago. This technique has
proved particularly beneficial when
undertaking hydrodynamic investigations
without incurring the necessity of
drydocking the ship [4].

Sheet cavitation, which most commonly
forms the subject of numerical prediction
capabilities, is generally only problematic if
instability in its behaviour is detected.
However, this is only one form of cavitation
and Figure 5 shows schematically the
majority of the other types of cavitation that
may be encountered.



Figure 5: Common types of cavitation on
propellers

These other forms of cavitation, within the
current state of the art, do not readily lend
themselves to analysis by computation,
although significant progress is being made
using advanced computational fluid
dynamics codes. Among the most
problematic of these cavitating structures
are the various forms of cavitation relating
to the tip vortex and the blade root. These
forms of cavitation normally have to be
assessed by undertaking tests in large
cavitation tunnels or in the depressurised
towing tank. Indeed, cavitation tunnel
studies are still the most helpful procedures
to adopt when considering the behaviour of
cavitating structures on ships propellers.
However, it is critical to this process to
simulate the actual wake field as accurately
57
as possible. Moreover, recognising the
industry knowledge of current testing
practices, it is insufficient to model the
wake field by simple grid structures as was
the case several years ago. To do so may
lead to misleading or incorrect results in
relation to the eventual performance of the
propeller.

Erosive cavitation is induced by the way in
which the cavitating structures collapse and
break up and the energy that is transferred
within that process. Since all merchant
propellers cavitate to some extent, but only
a smaller number suffer erosion, the energy
clearly varies and is dependent upon the
cavitation structures and dynamics
encountered. In the case of sheet cavitation
the behaviour of the re-entrant jet is
particularly important since this has been
found to determine the subsequent
structure of the cavities during collapse. In
Figure 6 it can be seen that the re-entrant
jet tends to stimulate vortices which are
broadly parallel to the trailing edge
geometry of the cavity.



Figure 6: Idealisation of the re-entrant jet
mechanism

When this occurs these vortices eventually
separate and form, because of Kelvins
Theorem of vorticity, closed loop ring or
doughnut type structures.

These structures, based on experimental
holographic images [5], are thought to
comprise systems of micro-bubbles, which
due to the flow direction, tend to
congregate at the sides of the doughnut
rings which are parallel to the direction of
flow. These bubbles then collapse, probably
initiated by a single bubble in the cluster
collapsing, in a rapid manner, the speed of
which is indicated by Table 1, and energy is
then transferred to the propeller blade
surface.
Indeed, from our model and full scale
observations, whenever these discrete ring
structures have been observed it has always
been a precursor to severe erosion being
encountered. Figure 7 shows just such an
example manifesting itself in the root of a
full scale propeller blade: this blade suffered
complete penetration of the section in just a
few hours.


Vortex Loop

Figure 7: Vortex loop structure in the root of
a propeller blade

The mechanism of energy transfers from
macro to micro-bubbles and then into the
material surface has been explored by
Fortes-Patella and her colleagues [6]. It is
this model, shown schematically in Figure 8,
which forms the present basis of Lloyds
Registers research into propeller blade, and
for that matter rudder, erosion mechanisms.
As can be seen from the Figure the model
comprises a system of energy transfers
encompassing the behaviour from macro-
cavity structures through to the response of
the material.


Figure 8: The Fortes-Patella model energy
transfers during cavitation collapse

Face cavitation has long been an anathema
to propeller designers, principally because of
its potential link to the possibility of material
erosion, coupled with the knowledge that
the face of the propeller blade, under
normal operational circumstances, has a
tensile stress field distributed over its
surface. This may then facilitate crack
propagation if the erosion potential
becomes critical. Consequently, an
operational margin against face cavitation
occurring was commonly introduced; this
58
was sometimes of the order of 25% of the
thrust coefficient. However, recent research
within the EROCAV grouping, of which
Lloyds Register was a member, has
suggested that this level of conservatism is
perhaps not as well founded as previously
thought. This is, in part, due to a greater
understanding of the physics associated
with face cavitation. Experience from
modern propeller designs shows that face
cavitation tends not to be as erosive as
originally anticipated and by permitting
greater flexibility in considering margins
against face cavitation, gives an enhanced
potential to deal with propeller blade back
cavitation issues.

The underlying physical basis for these
considerations stems from the realisation
that the blade surface pressure distribution
giving rise to face cavitation, is of a rather
different character to that which develops
into back cavitation and, furthermore, that
face cavitation tends to have a more two-
dimensional character than its back
cavitation counterpart. This then influences
the behaviour of the re-entrant jet into the
cavity which results in different shedding
mechanisms.

Recognising that these enhanced
understandings of face cavitation dynamics
[7] give greater flexibility to the designer in
controlling back cavitation, it is then
important to understand the relationship
between back cavitation collapse and
material erosion. This is a complex issue
since the presence of erosion always implies
the presence of cavitation, but not vice-
versa. Lloyds Register has been undertaking
an ongoing research programme into the
fracture mechanics of the underlying
erosion process. This study has included
endeavouring to define energy threshold
values above which erosion will occur and
gaining an understanding of the
fundamental mechanism of the erosion
process. While this is a continuing initiative,
some success has been achieved with the
use of acoustic emission techniques in
defining threshold energy levels for the
incidence of erosion and in understanding
the work hardening and polycrystalline
plasticity regimes that accompany the initial
development of erosion. Figure 9
demonstrates the work hardening process
that occurs in nickel-aluminium bronze
during the development of the erosion
process. Similar changes are also observed
in duplex stainless steels.











400
350
300
250

Figure 9: Increase in material hardness with
cavitation damage development

These increases in hardness imply that the
ductility of the material in the vicinity of the
erosion reduces and, consequently, the
fracture mechanics process comprises
fracture dynamics within a material of
varying mechanical properties. Moreover,
the fracture mechanism for cracks
developing from the surface of the material
must include a contribution from corrosion.
This is due to the presence of the sea water
if the erosion process takes a significant
time to manifest itself. This is perhaps not
the case for very aggressive erosion
situations. However, any sub-surface
developing cracks are unlikely to be subject
to such an influence of corrosion. Indeed,
within our present knowledge it is believed
that both crack mechanisms apply in the
erosion process.

A further complication in describing the
fracture mechanics model for erosion is
suggested because sometimes, in cases of
cavitation erosion damage to propeller
blades, a discolouration, reminiscent of
blueing during metal tempering, is
observed. This may imply that the
temperature of the propeller blade has
significantly increased during the cavitation
attack. Furthermore, from considerations of
the collapse of single or streams of bubbles
in the vicinity of the blade surface, it is not
difficult to support a simple heat transfer
description of the collapse process where
surface heating of the material is induced.
This then introduces an additional factor in
the complex fracture mechanics process
previously described.

Given the eventual ability to quantitatively
play-off the back and face cavitation and
erosion characteristics of propeller blade
sections, it is then possible to consider the
0
50
100
150
200
1 2 3 4 5
Increasing Cavitation Damage (Sample No.)
Base Material
59
required chord length at each radial station
of the propeller in order to provide the
minimum surface area for the propeller and,
hence, minimise its drag while satisfying the
harmful cavitation constraints.

Recognising that the prediction of cavitation
erosion is still some way in the future from a
theoretical standpoint, Lloyds Register has
been examining the potential of using
acoustic emission methods to predict
propeller blade erosion. This research is, in
effect, extending the particularly successful
application of this technique to the
prediction of rudder erosion which was
again pioneered by Lloyds Register some
years ago. Figure 10 shows an installation
fitted to the shaftline of a tanker in which
acoustic emission signals, developed on the
propeller blade surfaces, are transmitted
from a shaft mounted telemetry system. At
present, the only constraint on the system is
thought to be that the propeller is fitted to
the shaft by means of a shrink fitting
method.



Figure 10: Shaft mounted acoustic emission
system

Typical results from this innovation are seen
in Figure 11. This figure illustrates that the
level of acoustic emission is periodic with
the propeller blade passage, which suggests
that cavitation is the source of the emission
and the travelling direction of the signal
reinforces this conclusion. Then by
superimposing previous material laboratory
tests, which were conducted to define
threshold levels for erosion to take place,
the acoustic emission signature on the
actual propeller can be analysed in the
context of its susceptibility to blade erosion
as seen in the Figure.



Figure 11: Typical acoustic emission
signature for a propeller

4. PROPELLER DIMENSIONING
AND MAINTENANCE

The tolerances to which propeller blades are
manufactured have a profound influence on
the cavitation and power absorption
characteristics of marine propellers. In the
case of merchant ship propellers, the ISO
484/1 and 484/2 dimensional specifications
form the basis of the manufacturing
tolerances. However, for the majority of
ship applications it is only the Class S and 1
tolerance specifications that are of practical
interest, since Classes 2 and 3 only impose
very limited control over the finished blade
geometry. Table 2 highlights some of the
primary and secondary effects of the various
blade geometrical parameters

In many instances of propellers having a
high power density it has been found
necessary to enhance the propeller blade
specifications beyond those given in the ISO
standards. These measures have been
introduced in order to control the cavitation
performance of the propeller effectively.
This has been found to be particularly true
when trying to control cavitation in the
propeller root regions by maintaining tight
tolerances on the blade fillet design.
Similarly, control is frequently necessary at
the blade tips. Additionally, it has been
found on occasions that it is necessary to
enhance the leading edge template
specification, again where greater control is
required over cavitation inception and
development. It is particularly important,
however, that each application is considered
60
on its merits.

Parameter Primary Effect Secondary Effect
Diameter Power absorption. -
Mean Pitch Power absorption. Cavitation extent.
Local section pitch Cavitation inception and extent. Power absorption.
Section thickness Cavitation inception, blade strength Power absorption.
Section camber Power absorption, cavitation inception. Blade strength.
Section chord length Cavitation inception and extent. Blade strength and power
absorption.
Blade form Generally small effects on cavitation
inception and shaft vibratory forces at
frequencies dependent on wake
harmonics and blade irregularities.
-
Leading edge form Critical to cavitation inception. -
Rake and axial position Cavitation control and minor
mechanical vibration.
-
Surface finish Blade section drag and hence power
absorption.
-
Static balance Shaft vibratory loads. -

Table 2: Principal effects of the various propeller geometric variations

Propeller maintenance is another important
consideration since fouling will increase the
blade section drag. If this occurs, the
hydrodynamic efficiency of the sections will
deteriorate. It is consequently beneficial for
the propeller to be polished at regular
intervals by personnel experienced in
propeller cleaning and maintenance. If they
are not experienced then inadvertent
damage can be done to the propeller
blades, particularly in their leading and
trailing edge regions. If leading edge
damage occurs then this most commonly
affects the cavitation inception and
development characteristics of the blade
sections. This is because the flow in this
region of the blade is particularly sensitive
to the subtleties of the blade sections
geometric curvatures. In contrast, the power
absorption characteristics of the propeller
blade are sensitive to changes in the trailing
edge geometric configuration.

5. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The paper has given an overview of a
number of the research and development
initiatives in ship propulsion hydrodynamics
that are currently active within Lloyds
Register. In addition, some commentary has
been given on the practical application of
these techniques to ship practice.




6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Author wishes to thank Mr P.A.
Fitzsimmons, Mr A. Boorsma and Dr D.
Radosavljevic for their valuable contributions
to, and advice on, various parts of the work.

7. REFERENCES

1. Takahashi, Y. Reduction Loss by
Injecting Negative Pressure Type Micro
Bubbles. J Code N20040336, pp528-
531, 2003.
2. WAIP Development of a New
Technology for Reduction of Frictional
Resistance. The Motor Ship, April 2007.
3. Carlton, J.S. Some Current Issues with
Cavitation and Propeller Rudder
Interaction. SWZ Journal, December
2008.
4. Carlton, J.S. and Fitzsimmons, P.A.
Cavitation: Some Full Scale Experience
of Complex Structures and Methods of
Analysis and Observation. Proc. 27
th

ATTC, St Johns Newfoundland, August
2004.
5. Kawanami, Y., Kato, H., Yamaguchi, H.,
Maeda, M and Nakasumi, S. Inner
Structure of Cloud Cavity on a Foil
Section. Proc. CAV2001, 2001.
6. Fortes-Patella, R. Rebould, J.L. and
Briacon-Marjoilet, L. A
Phenomenological and Numerical
Model for Scaling the Flow
Aggressiveness in Cavitation Erosion.
61
EROCAV Workshop, Val de Reuil, May
2004.
7. Bark, G. Berchiche, N. and Grekula, M.
Application of Principles for Observation
and Analysis of Eroding Cavitation
The EROCAV Observation Handbook.
Edition 3.1. Dept. of Naval Architecture
and Ocean Engineering. Chalmers
University of Technology, 2004.
62
NOTES
63
NOTES
64
PAPER 6
DESIGN ASSESSMENT OF
ENGINEERING SYSTEMS WITH
PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO
SHAFT ALIGNMENT
Andrew Smith B.Sc., C.Eng., F.I.Mech.E.
65
66
DESIGN ASSESSMENT OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE
TO SHAFT ALIGNMENT

Andrew B Smith

SUMMARY

The length of time between design conception and delivery for all ship types is becoming shorter. This introduces
problems associated with reduced manufacturing and installation times, including prototype testing, and these
have the potential to increase manufacturing defects and operational issues. This scenario creates two principal
areas of concern: first is the control of sub-contractors during manufacture and second is the available time to
complete design approval in a meaningful fashion. Classification rules are written to be fairly simplistic, easy to
use and to apply to all ship types. By definition, this leads to most designs being conservative. In the general
engineering world this is thought of as undesirable, but in the world of marine engineering this conservatism
allows for the unknowns and variable parameters which can occur during the operational life of the ship
imposing higher than expected design loads. One area which is still proving to be problematic is shaft alignment;
recent alignment problems required Lloyds Register to look more closely at the methods of assessing alignment
issues.

1. INTRODUCTION

The control of quality in design and manufacturing is
at the heart of the classification process. In past years,
when life moved at a more sedate pace, this control
was relatively easy and classification societies had the
time to become involved in all aspects of the design
and manufacturing cycle. This led to a fundamental
understanding of the design and operation of the
component or system.

Now the aim is to make the time to delivery as short
as possible. This is understandable, but it has left
classification societies with very little time for
approval before production starts and clients are not
willing to wait. Lloyds Register has to adapt to this
new way of working while maintaining acceptable
standards and quality of service.

2. DESIGN APPROVAL

Over the last few years, manufacturers have
significantly reduced the time between design
completion and production, so much so that
production has started almost before the plans have
arrived at the classification society. Obviously, this is
undesirable since any discussions on the design will
be carried out late in the production cycle, making
any required modifications costly to undertake.

The aim must be for classification societies to become
involved at the design concept stage and move the
class approval much further forward in the design
cycle. By doing so, they will be able to give a clean
classification approval earlier, thereby avoiding time
consuming discussions of equivalence to the rules for
those designs outside the classification acceptance
criteria. In addition, earlier involvement can remove
the potential for failures during operation, while the
class societys in-depth experience and knowledge
can be passed back into the marine industry to the
benefit of all. Furthermore, appraisal over and above
routine class approval can be considered at this time.

As an example, stern bearing failures are still high on
the list of machinery failure statistics. Defect statistics
over the last 20 years indicate that the aft stern bush
represents 10% of shaft line failures, with the
forward stern bush representing 4% of total failures.
Interestingly, the aft stern gland and forward stern
gland represent 43% and 24% of failures
respectively. A number of these bush failures have
been attributed to poor shaft alignment. It can be
conjectured that the glands have also been affected
by poor alignment. Lloyds Registers Rules have been
modified regularly since they were introduced in
1976, to take account of the experience that has
been gained, but problems still arise. This is an
indication of designs evolving and moving outside the
scope of the Rules, no matter how meaningful and
relevant they are made. It can be argued that these
problems have followed the emergence of ship
building nations over the last 30 years or so, since the
same trend of failures has been repeated in
approximately 10-yearly cycles. Classification societies
are the guardians of knowledge and many technical
papers have been written and presented detailing
these failures and their solutions in order to pass this
knowledge on. Class rules are written to be fairly
simplistic and easy to use. By definition, this leads to
most designs being conservative. In the general
engineering world this is thought of as undesirable,
but in the sphere of marine engineering this
conservatism allows for the unknowns and variable
parameters which can occur during the operational
life of the ship imposing higher than expected design
loads. In light of the above factors, Lloyds Register
looked more closely at the methods of assessing
alignment issues. This paper explores our ongoing
investigations in detail.
67
3. SHAFT ALIGNMENT APPRAISAL

Figure 1 shows a failure in the top half of an aft stern
bearing. This is an unusual occurrence and has
happened on three ships of differing design. Stern
bearings tend to fail in the bottom half; the
subsequent check and recheck of the theoretical
analysis did not suggest any errors in the assumptions
which were made. As a result, we looked in more
detail at the shafting system.



Figure 1: Bearing failure in top half of bearing

The following parameters influence shaft alignment:

stiffness of bearing supports
shaft stiffness
propeller mass and dynamic loads
bearing material and lubrication.

3.1 STIFFNESS OF BEARING SUPPORTS

This value is taken to be the summation of the
bearing material, lubrication and the support stiffness.
Experience over the years has given Lloyds Register a
good understanding of the overall value of stiffness
to be used in the analysis. However, the introduction
of thinner scantlings for the hull structure has started
to affect the overall stiffness of the aft end, including
the bearing supports, thereby negating the
generalised assumptions made during analysis. The
advent of more efficient and powerful computers has
allowed this to be investigated theoretically in an
easier fashion than was the case ten or so years ago.

Figure 2, which is a model of an LNG Carrier,
provides an example. This vessel is in a fully laden
condition and the aft end is experiencing a deflection
of 50mm relative to the plummer bearings; this is not
inconsiderable and needs to be taken into account
during the design phase. Figure 3 has been included
to show, in easier terms, the deflection to be
expected at the aft end under various loading
conditions when afloat. It has been the assumption in
the past that the aft end will remain relatively rigid,
with a standard value, based on experience, being
used for a change between full and ballast
conditions.

Figure 2 shows that we need to rethink the rules of
thumb for generalised cases. It is interesting to note
that the deflection is not symmetrical about the ship
centre line. This was due to the differences in the
load capacity of the port and starboard heavy fuel oil
tanks, situated aft on the vessel. A twisting moment
(torsion) was generated along the length of the
vessel, causing a list, and was reacted against by the
buoyancy effects of the generated list. This will
introduce misalignment in the athwartship direction.
Normal convention dictates that alignment of the
shaft line is a straight line in the horizontal plane,
which is not the case in this example. The vertical
alignment is also affected by the positioning of hot
tanks in way of bearing stools, which is a fact often
not appreciated during analysis.


.
Figure 2: Vertical deflection fully loaded



Case 1- Light ballast condition with aft peak tank empty
Case 2- Normal ballast condition with aft peak tank empty
Case 3- Normal ballast condition with aft peak tank full
Case 4- Loaded condition with aft peak tank empty
Case 5- Loaded condition with aft peak tank full

Figure 3: Tank top deflections
68
3.2 SHAFT STIFFNESS

Shaft stiffness, meanwhile, has moved in the


cal shaft systems stiff
.3 PROPELLER MASS AND DYNAMIC LOADS
ith increases in power come increases in propeller
yds Register has been examining the problem over
igures 6 and 7 indicate the change that the shaft
opposite direction. Ships have been ordered with
greater installed power for higher speed and the
machinery space has been moved further aft to
increase the cargo carrying capacity; therefore the
shaft system has become stiffer. The stiff shaft
somehow has to follow the flexible aft end structure.
Ship designs with more flexible shaft arrangements,
such as twin screw, have also given rise to concerns.
Shaft designs using electric motors as prime movers
and using high ultimate tensile strength shaft
material have become more flexible. The Rules allow
for a smaller shaft scantling when driven by electric
motors and this, coupled with the fact that these are
often twin screw with long shafts, has resulted in the
shaft system becoming rather more flexible. As a
result, it cannot resist the dynamic loads being
applied and therefore is more susceptible to taking
up a position dictated by the direction of the
propeller force vector. Compare Figures 4 and 5.
There are two avenues to explore; aft end flexibility
with stiff shafts and flexible shaft lines.

Figure 4: Typi











Figure 5: Typical shaft systems flexible

3

W
size and mass. It follows therefore that there is an
increase in propeller dynamic loads which is well
known and predictable in the ahead maximum
continuous rating operation condition. Less well
known are the forces applied during ship turning
manoeuvres and, with the increase in power and
speed, these too have been increasing.

Llo
the last few years to establish exactly what happens.
With the help of full scale trials undertaken by Lloyds
Registers Technical Investigations department, and
with the full co-operation of a Lloyds Register owner,
a better idea of what occurs is beginning to emerge.

F
experiences during manoeuvring operations. The
shaft would normally operate in the bottom half of
the bearing at approximately the 4 oclock or 8
oclock position. However, during a turning
manoeuvre the shaft tends to be lifted to operate, in
the case shown, at 10 oclock.


A.P.
T

Figure 6: Shaft position during 35 degree turn


Figure 7: Shaft position readings during
C.W.T
Sump
35 degree turn
69
Engine Stopped
30rpm
40 rpm
50 rpm
60 rpm
70 rpm
80 rpm
86 rpm
92rpm
98rpm
104rpm
116rpm
114rpm
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Transverse Di splacement (mm)
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)
To Port To STBD
Shaft
Lift
These m e been taken from a single
ring manoeuvres at high speed, the propeller in-
.4 BEARING MATERIAL AND LUBRICATION
f all the parameters, this is perhaps the one that has






Figure 8: Comparison of measured and

a quasi-static analysis, the position of the oil
his approach is also being extended to research into
easurements hav
screw container ship of less than 10, 000 teu. It is
interesting to note that for this bearing the oil wash
ways were positioned at 10 oclock and 2 oclock. In
the normal course of events this can be a desirable
move to counteract the shaft movement during
turning, but in this case it highlights that sometimes
forces act against well founded and accepted
assumptions and serves to highlight the thread of the
argument in this paper.

Du
plane loads can increase five to six times over and
above the full ahead position. This may be more
critical for the slender shafts of electric motor driven,
twin screw designs, since the shafting system does
not have the stiffness to react to these forces and,
therefore, is more willing to move to align with the
propeller. That is not to say that the stiffer shaft
systems are less problematic: they are equally
affected since they will be installed in aft end designs
which have become flexible through modern design.

3

O
not altered. The majority of systems are white metal
with oil lubricated gravity feed. The influence of the
oil is one of those factors taken into account in the
overall stiffness value. However, recognising the
importance of the lubrication medium, Lloyds
Register has been assessing this influence using
hydrodynamic analysis and combining this with the
action of the propeller shaft system. Figure 8
indicates results of a quasi-steady static analysis,
based on mean propeller forces and moments, to
assess the lateral movement of the shaft centreline in
way of the rope guard, through a simulated run-up
trial. There is good agreement on the trend between
predicted and measured results, but the results are
not accurate enough in terms of magnitude to enable
full confidence in the outcome and for them to be
used at the design stage. However, the trend is
encouraging and the challenge is now to extend this
work to manoeuvring operations.















measured






predicted







predicted shaft centre in way of rope
guard
In
support can be predicted as shown in Figures 9 and
10. The figures indicate calculations based on a shaft
to bearing mismatch of 0.0002 rads. Not only the
shaft support position, but also the parameters of
stiffness and damping, can be predicted and these
values can be fed back into the alignment and shaft
whirling analyses in the form of an iterative process
until the results converge.

T
water lubricated bearings with similar results, though
presently they are not as accurate. Water lubricated
bearings are as important as oil lubricated bearings,
and may be more so in the future, as the shipping
industry focuses on its green credentials.

70
1
8
15
22
29
36
43
50
S
1
S
3
S
5
S
7
S
9
S
1
1
S
1
3
S
1
5
S
1
7
S
1
9
0.00E+00
5.00E+05
1.00E+06
1.50E+06
2.00E+06
2.50E+06
3.00E+06
Oil film
Pressure (Pa)
Circumference
bottom half (90 to 270 deg)
Length
Sterntube Bearing


Figure 9: Pressure with 0.0002 rad mismatch


1
8
15
22
29
36
43
50
S
1
S
3
S
5
S
7
S
9
S
1
1
S
1
3
S
1
5
S
1
7
S
1
9
0.00E+00
5.00E+05
1.00E+06
1.50E+06
2.00E+06
2.50E+06
3.00E+06
Oil film
Pressure (Pa)
Circumference
bottom half (90 to 270 deg)
Length
Sterntube Bearing

This will help make the plan approval process more
efficient and there will be more time available to
discuss changes to design or material specification. In
this way, design issues will be able to be addressed
earlier, during the design phase, rather than while
the component is approaching the final stage of
manufacture.
Figure 9: Point of support at 0.002 radian mismatch
looking athwartships

Although this paper has discussed alignment issues,
shaft whirling characteristics of a shaft system are
very much influenced by the decisions taken in the
alignment analysis. Consequently, the two should be
assessed together when the values of bearing
stiffness and damping, especially, have a significant
effect on the whirling response. For that reason it is
recommended that the shaft transmission system is
treated as an integrated dynamic system in which all
forces are accounted for and assessed for alignment,
shaft whirling, axial and torsional vibration at the
same time.

4. CONCLUSIONS

It has been shown that alignment is a complex issue
which depends on a number of interacting
parameters. Some years ago, Lloyds Register
developed the analytical tools to consider a shaft line
as a system in order to provide concurrent results of
the individual analyses of: alignment; whirling; and
axial and torsional vibration. Currently, these analyses
are undertaken by different sub-contractors and the
results are submitted to Lloyds Register and brought
together as a system by the ship yard. The challenge
now is to alter this approach so that a systems
approach becomes the norm. This will help surveyors
undertaking approvals to have a better
understanding of the critical design issues and should
lead to a more efficient plan approval process by
replacing four analytical routines with just one. At the
very least, alignment should be undertaken together
with shaft whirling as design decisions resulting from
one will affect the other. There is no need to consider
these analyses in isolation from each other.

It must be emphasised that there are still unknowns
and the more detailed analyses of a shaft system
design described in this paper will not guarantee
faultless operation. However, the theoretical results
will be closer to reality. This analysis takes time and
can only be carried out with the co-operation of the
yard and component designers. Therefore, this means
it can only be undertaken pre-contract and preferably
at the birth of the design.

Looking ahead to the future for design approval, it
could involve a self certification process for the less
complex component and system designs in much the
same way as manufacturers use the Lloyds Register
Quality Assurance Machinery Scheme for serial
production of components. There is no reason why
the design activity cannot be part of the complete
Quality Assurance process.


It should be noted, however, that there are dangers
in the audit process and a successful outcome will
depend upon having full co-operation between the
designer and Lloyds Register. The audit regime will
require close monitoring, but this would appear to be
71


a price worth paying if it allows for a more efficient
design and manufacturing process.

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Author wishes to thank Kian Banisoleiman and
Peter Filcek of Lloyds Registers Department of
Technical Investigations for providing the slides and
technical background.





72
NOTES
73
NOTES
74
PAPER 7
THE POTENTIAL FOR ENERGY
Ed Fort B.Sc.
75
76
THE POTENTIAL FOR ENERGY

Ed P Fort

SUMMARY

However it is defined, sustainability with regard to the provision of shipboard energy, is arguably the marine
industrys greatest challenge. Lloyds Register is striving to ensure that its Rules and Regulations, intended to
protect life and the environment, facilitate the introduction of the technologies and developments needed to
help ensure that the industry can respond to this challenge. This paper outlines some of the potential options for
future marine power generation, focusing on particular options for which such Rules and Regulations are already
in place.

NOMENCLATURE
Nitrogen Oxides (NO
x
) Sulphur Oxides (SO
x)
) Carbon
dioxide (CO
2
), Particulate Matter (PM), Heavy Fuel Oil
(HFO), Marine Diesel Oil (MDO), International
Maritime Organization (IMO), International
Association of Classification Societies (IACS), Solid
Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC), Proton Exchange Membrane
Fuel Cell (PEMFC).

1. INTRODUCTION

Sustainability means different things to different
people. According to the Renewable Energy & Energy
Efficiency Partnership [1], sustainable energy has two
key components; renewable energy and energy
efficiency. In the longer term, such a definition may
well be appropriate. In the near term, however, with
respect to the provision of shipboard energy,
sustainability is really about achieving two objectives.

Harmful emissions, particularly airborne pollutants
and greenhouse gases, need to be reduced. However
unjustifiably [2], ships are increasingly portrayed as
among the worst offenders in the struggle to combat
climate change. Whether sustainable power
generation will ultimately mean zero emissions
remains to be seen, but in the near term, at least, the
perception is that the emission of nitrogen oxides,
sulphur oxides, carbon dioxide and particulate matter
from the ships power plant needs to be significantly
reduced compared to current levels.

Inextricably linked to reducing emissions is the need
to reduce oil fuel consumption. While the effect of
pollutants and greenhouse gases on climate change
remains the subject of intense debate, it is universally
recognised that societys dependence on fossil fuels is
unsustainable. It may be assumed that sustainable
power generation will ultimately mean an end to the
combustion of fossil fuels. In the near term, however,
ships need to become significantly more efficient than
they are at present.

This paper looks at a number of less controversial
power generation technologies which have the
potential to play a part in achieving the
aforementioned aims. It focuses particularly on fuel
cell technology, widely regarded as a panacea to the
challenges of sustainable marine power generation,
and, indeed, power generation generally.

The paper also looks at how Lloyds Register plans to
support the marine industry in meeting sustainability
goals through the publication of timely and
appropriate Rules, Regulations and guidance.

2. ENERGY DEMAND

2.1 EFFICIENT SHIPS

Although this paper focuses mainly on future power
generation technologies likely to contribute in
achieving sustainable shipping, it should not be
overlooked that very significant reductions in both
fuel consumption and emissions can be achieved
using a range of existing technologies.

A recent study estimates that fuel consumption could
be reduced by up to 30% in new ships by including a
range of technical features in the design of the ship
as a whole, features such as waste heat recovery,
improved steering configurations, improved hull form
and antifouling, for example.

Equally large reductions, of up to 30%, are estimated
from a range of operational improvements, such as
enhanced weather routing, optimised trim and
ballasting [3].

Clearly, the adoption of such measures alone would
be a massive step towards sustainable shipping.

3. ENERGY CONVERSION

3.1 GAS FUELLED ENGINES

Major engine manufacturers have been delivering
engines capable of running on natural gas for some
time. Switching to natural gas has several advantages
compared to burning HFO or even MDO. Significant
reductions in all emissions are claimed [4], including:
77
30% lower CO
2;

85% lower NO
x
(due to high air/fuel ratio)
no SO
x
(due to sulphur removal from fuel)
very low particulates
no visible smoke
no sludge deposits.

The large reductions in CO
2
compared with HFO and
MDO are due quite simply to the fact that the main
component of natural gas, methane (CH
4
), contains
significantly less carbon than HFO or MDO. Indeed,
methane is the most efficient hydrocarbon when
comparing energy content against carbon content.

Disadvantages include the relatively limited worldwide
availability of natural gas and the lower volumetric
energy density of the fuel compared to MDO, for
example. Even when liquefied, the storage space
required for liquefied natural gas (LNG) could be up
to four times greater than equivalent MDO tanks.
Even more limited is the worldwide availability of LNG.

With a clear understanding of the risks associated
with gas-fuelled engines, Lloyds Register has been
working closely with industry to develop Rules and
Regulations for using methane gas as a fuel in order
to facilitate its introduction [5].

3.2 PHOTOVOLTAIC CELLS

Under pressure to reduce CO
2
emissions from cars
over their entire lifecycle including shipment, Pure Car
and Truck Carrier (PCTC) ships are likely to emerge as
some of the first examples of energy efficient ships.

In demonstrating the potential contribution of solar
power, a 40 kW photovoltaic (PV) array comprising
328 modules of PV cells has recently been installed on
the upper deck of an operational PCTC. Connected to
the ships 440 V AC electrical distribution network,
the performance of the array will be evaluated in sea-
going conditions with particular regard to the effects
of salt water exposure and vibration.

Since they are capable of harnessing renewable solar
energy, the advantages of solid state photovoltaic
arrays are clear. The primary disadvantage, however,
is the very large exposed surface area required per
kW of power generated.

3.3 WIND ENGINES

With claims of a potential reduction in shipboard fuel
consumption of 30%, the contribution of wind
engines, better known as Flettner rotors, to
sustainable marine power generation could be very
significant.

They utilise a phenomenon known as the Magnus
effect, in which the force of the wind on a rotating
vertical cylinder creates a low pressure on one side,
generating thrust in much the same way that a sail
does, only with a magnitude which is 10 to 14 times
greater.

At least two full scale demonstration projects are
currently underway. Lloyds Register is currently
working closely with the Wind Assisted Ship
Propulsion (WASP) project, with designs for four 2.3-
metre diameter and 17-metre high rotors currently
undergoing review. Following review, testing will be
carried out ashore, followed by their installation on
board a bulk carrier [6].

3.4 ON-SHORE POWER SUPPLIES

The use of on-shore power supplies for cold-ironing
while in port may become a de facto facet of port
operations in the future. Regulators have begun to
encourage the use of such installations. 'Cold-ironing'
is the US Navys way of describing the practice of
connecting a ship to a shore-side power supply in
port, allowing the ships machinery to be shut down
and causing the installation to become cold.

The term is now commonly used to describe a new
generation of different high-voltage shore
connections with fast plug connections and seamless
load transfer without blackouts, which allow the full
range of in-port activities to continue while the ship is
discharging and loading cargo.

Already, a variety of equipment manufacturers and
on-shore power supply designers are offering a
variety of different solutions and configurations.
Major differences between these installations which
could have an impact on ship safety and operability
include:

Operating frequency many of the worlds on-
shore electrical systems operate at 50 Hz, while
most ship systems operate at 60 Hz, making
these incompatible without expensive frequency
conversion.
Voltage levels transformers are normally
required to change the shore voltage to the ship
voltage. Different ships have different operating
levels (11 kV, 6.6 kV and 440 kV being common),
necessitating transformers with multiple tapings
or similar.
Power rating different ships have differing
power-use profiles in port.
Cable and connector types there are currently
no construction or test standards for flexible
marine cables or high voltage plug and socket
outlets.
78
Cable management and lifting appliances for
the power levels required, cables and connectors
will be too heavy for simple manual handling.
Cable reels or cranes can be installed on board to
extend ship cables to shore sockets or shore cable
reels and cranes can be used to extend shore
cables to shipboard sockets.
Control and safety arrangements the available
solutions have been diverse, ranging from simple
to highly sophisticated. They can range from
manual operation with no automatic safety
measures, to automatic connection and
disconnection of submersible electrical equipment,
fully integrated into the ship and shore-side
emergency shutdown systems.

Where shore power is provided by renewable energy,
typically local wind turbines, the benefits are greater
and obvious. Where power is provided from the
national power distribution network, in addition to
the local benefits of reduced emissions and noise, it
may be expected that such power consumed has
been generated with higher efficiency than if it were
generated on board.

With a clear understanding of the risks associated
with shore power, Lloyds Register has been working
closely with industry to develop Rules and Regulations
for the connection of on-shore power in order to
facilitate its introduction [7].

3.5 FUEL CELLS

Fuel cells share many of the characteristics and utilise
many of the same components as the cells of a
battery. Both fuel cells and batteries convert stored
chemical energy into electricity in a silent, efficient
electrochemical reaction. Despite the similarities,
however, one fundamental difference between a fuel
cell and a battery suggests that a more appropriate
comparison may be with that of a conventional
generator set. Unlike a battery, in which the reactants
consumed in the energy conversion process are
stored internally and are eventually depleted, the
reactants consumed by the fuel cell are stored
externally and are supplied to the fuel cell in the same
way as a conventional generator set is supplied with
fuel and air. Such an arrangement means that a fuel
cell, unlike a battery, has the potential to supply
power as long as the supply of reactants, hydrogen
and oxygen is maintained.

The ability of the fuel cell to provide a continuous
supply of electrical power has important implications.
Sharing characteristics of batteries and generators,
the fuel cell has the potential to displace virtually all
sources of shipboard power, ranging from batteries
providing just a few watts of power intermittently,
through to main and auxiliary power generating plant
delivering megawatts of power continuously. The
relatively low power of individual fuel cells requires
the use of multiple cells to achieve usable power
levels. Such a replication of components lends itself to
high volume production and the design of modular
fuel cell power plant with the potential for high
reliability, good fault tolerance and potentially low
capital cost.

The benefits of fuel cell technology are greatest when
the fuel cell is operated on high purity hydrogen and
oxygen and when the by-products of the energy
conversion reaction (heat and water) can be utilised.
In such circumstances, the power plant is relatively
simple, extremely efficient and produces no
undesirable emissions. Such an ideal operating
environment is exemplified by manned space and
sub-sea applications.

Although the ultimate goal, a number of
considerations make the use of hydrogen as a fuel for
marine fuel cell power generation unlikely in the near
term, in particular its worldwide availability and its
very low volumetric energy density, which
necessitates unfeasibly large storage spaces. The
operation of fuel cells on conventional marine fuel
oils, however, is a problem. The fuel cell would need
to be capable of converting the marine fuel oil into
hydrogen. The development of fuel processing
equipment capable of converting such fuels into
hydrogen is unlikely to be realised in the near term.
Despite considerable investment by the automotive
industry, a reliable fuel reformer capable of
converting gasoline into hydrogen proved elusive. It is,
therefore, unlikely that reformation of heavier marine
fuel oils would be realised by the marine industry, the
only possible exception being US Naval research
programmes.

A much more realistic scenario for near term marine
fuel cell power generation is operation on natural gas.
A number of high temperature fuel cells are capable
of operating directly on natural gas, converting
methane into hydrogen within the fuel cell itself.
Unfortunately, while feasible, (many megawatts of
power are currently generated worldwide by natural
gas-fuelled fuel cells) the use of any fuel other than
hydrogen means that the fuel cell becomes
significantly larger and substantially more complex
than the highly efficient hydrogen-oxygen-fuelled fuel
cell and, in consuming hydrocarbon fuels such as
natural gas, will produce some undesirable emissions.
Arguably more significant, however, is that the overall
efficiency of the power plant will be significantly
lower than the efficiency delivered by the hydrogen-
oxygen-fuelled fuel cell power plant. Such a reduction
in efficiency means that early marine fuel cell power
plants are likely to operate at efficiencies not
dramatically greater than those achievable using
conventional power generation technologies and well
79
below the maximum theoretical efficiency of the fuel
cell.

The process and physical arrangements by which the
energy is converted within the fuel cell are similar to
those of a battery and are essentially the same
regardless of the type of fuel cell. Two reactants,
hydrogen and oxygen, combine within the fuel cell to
produce water, releasing both electrical energy and
thermal energy in the process. The reaction proceeds
as long as hydrogen and oxygen, both of which are
consumed within the reaction, are supplied to the
fuel cell.

The desire for particular operating characteristics and
improved fuel cell performance has led to the
development of several different types of fuel cell
which are individually identified by the electrolyte
material they use. All offer particular advantages
when compared. However, of the five basic types
currently under development, the high temperature
solid oxide (SOFC) type, operating at temperatures
between 700 and 1000 deg C, and, to a lesser extent,
the low temperature proton exchange membrane
type (PEMFC), are perhaps most suited to the marine
operating environment.

It is expected that performance will gradually improve,
and the introduction of combined cycle techniques,
combining fuel cells with gas turbines, will result in a
substantial additional increase in the overall efficiency
of the plant. In the longer term, however, it is the
operating environment that is expected to change in
favour of the fuel cell. Driven by concerns about the
stability and, ultimately, the availability of fossil fuel
supplies, it is hoped that green hydrogen, generated
using renewable energy ashore and consumed in
hydrogen fuelled fuel cells on board ships, will
provide the eventual solution. In such an ideal
operating environment, the benefits of fuel cell
technology will be fully exploited.

Lloyds Register is currently working closely with
industry as part of the EC METHAU project, the
ultimate aim of which is to install and evaluate the
performance of a methanol fuelled SOFC on board an
operational PCTC [8].

4. FACILITATING CHANGE

4.1 RULES, REGULATIONS AND GUIDANCE

In order to support the marine industry in meeting
the challenges of sustainable power generation and
sustainable shipping generally, Lloyds Register has
developed, and continues to develop, Rules and
Regulations to facilitate the introduction of new
technologies on board ships.

Where Lloyds Register has sufficient understanding,
expertise and knowledge of the risks associated with
the technologies proposed for installation on board
Lloyds Register classed ships, application-specific
Rules and Regulations are published accordingly. To
facilitate the introduction of technologies for which
Lloyds Register may not necessarily have sufficient
understanding and knowledge to justify the
publication of specific Rules and Regulations, a set of
generic, systems engineering-based Rules and
Regulations have been published. These allow Lloyds
Register to assess the safety and reliability of such
technologies, while allowing the industry the freedom
to evaluate radically new solutions under seagoing
conditions.

4.2 RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR ON-
SHORE POWER

To facilitate the uptake of on-shore power, Lloyds
Register has recently published application-specific
Rules for On-Shore Power Supplies and currently
supports the development of complementary
international standards by TC18 of the International
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) in cooperation with
the International Standards Organisation (ISO).

Although the environmental benefits are many, the
technical risks for the ships themselves and the safety
risks for those who work on board and ashore need
to be given equal consideration. Further, as such
shore-side power systems proliferate, adequate
standards are needed to ensure effective operation
and compatibility between systems.

The potential environmental benefits of on-shore
power supplies should not take precedence over ship
safety. The technical difficulties, hazards and potential
for serious injury and damage introduced are not to
be underestimated. The aforementioned Rules for
On-shore Power Supplies were created to assist in
addressing these hazards, along with a corresponding
class notation, OPS. The requirements in the Rules
and Regulations were developed in close consultation
with a wide variety of industry stakeholders.

4.3 RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR
METHANE GAS FUELLED SHIPS

To enable shipyards and owners to assess the class-
related implications of a gas-fuelled ship, Lloyds
Register has published its Provisional Rules for the
Classification of Methane Gas Fuelled Ships. The
development process has involved a wide cross-
section of industry experts, including ship designers
and engine builders.

The requirements provide a structured approach for
design and assessment. Ships complying with the
requirements will be eligible for the assignment of a
80
class notation, GF. The Rules have encompassed
applicable requirements from current standards,
including the draft IMO requirements, IACS Unified
Requirements (UR) and Lloyds Registers
requirements for offshore installations.

One of the key aspects of the Rules is the designation
and assessment of hazardous areas and the location
of machinery and equipment, consistent with current
practice and terminology. Particular care is required in
the design of ventilation and safety arrangements for
safe and reliable operation of gas-fuelled machinery,
and these issues are fully addressed in the Rules.

The requirements cover all types of gas-fuelled
machinery including both single and dual fuel engines,
as well as gas turbine machinery and boilers.

4.4 RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR
MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OF
UNCONVENTIONAL DESIGN

Reliance on in-service feedback, incidents and failures
as a process for identifying the risks associated with
new technologies is not realistic in todays society.
Equally unacceptable, however, is prohibiting or
delaying the installation on board ships of the
technologies desperately needed to meet the
challenges of sustainable power generation while the
regulators acquire the necessary knowledge and
experience to develop prescriptive requirements for
their design and construction. Accordingly, the
requirements described in this paper outline the
pragmatic, process-based, systems engineering
approach taken by Lloyds Register to the assessment
of the safety and dependability of systems, machinery
and equipment, making use of new technologies and
systems of unconventional design.

As a means by which Lloyds Register may satisfy
itself of the safety and dependability of engineering
systems of unconventional design proposed for
installation on board Lloyds Register classed ships,
and for which Lloyds Register may very likely have no
in-service experience, a set of process-based
requirements has been developed based on
established and internationally recognised systems
engineering principles.

In accordance with the aims of the IMO guidelines for
Formal Safety Assessment (FSA), the requirements
aim to ensure that risks to maritime safety and the
environment, stemming from the introduction of new
technologies, are addressed in so far as they affect
the scope of ship classification.

The requirements apply to machinery and
engineering systems intended to be installed on
board Lloyds Register classed ships and considered
by Lloyds Register to be of an unconventional
design, and which, as a result, are not directly
addressed by the extant Rules and Regulations. It
should be noted, however, that the general
requirements of the Rules and Regulations remain to
be satisfied as applicable.

The underlying principle behind the requirements is
that formal controls are required to be employed for
all development-related activities which include
certain key systems engineering processes, including:

project management
requirements definition
quality assurance
design definition
risk management
configuration management
verification
integration
validation (certification and survey).

Assessment by Lloyds Register involves examination
of the procedures for the application of the processes,
together with all records associated with their
application. For each of the processes, the procedures
and their associated records are to provide evidence
as described here.

4.4 (a) Project Management

A project management procedure is required to be
established, documented and followed, in order to
define and manage the key project processes. For the
entire project, and each of the processes within the
project, project management procedure
documentation is to define the activities to be carried
out, the required inputs and outputs, the roles and
responsibilities of key personnel, the competence of
key personnel and a schedule for the activities.

4.4 (b) Definition of Requirements

A requirements definition procedure is needed to be
established, documented and followed, in order to
define the required functional behaviour and
performance of the machinery or engineering system
in the environments to which the machinery or
engineering system are likely to be exposed, under
both normal and foreseeable emergency conditions.
Account is required to be taken of the requirements
of all key stakeholders, including the shipowner, the
ships crew, the shipyard, equipment suppliers and
regulators. The requirements definition procedure
documentation is required to specify the functional
behaviour and performance requirements and is to
identify the source of the requirements.

Lloyds Registers requirements include compliance
with statutory regulations and Lloyds Registers
81
existing Rules and Regulations as far as they are
applicable to the fuel cell system. Additionally, where
internationally recognised standards, codes of
practice or guidance, relevant to the design and
construction of marine fuel cell systems exist, due
account is to be taken of the provisions of such
documents. Typical of such standards are the
international standards IEC60092 Electrical
installations in ships Part 101 Definitions and
general requirements; and IEC60721 Classification
of environmental conditions Part 3: Classification of
groups of environmental parameters and their
severities ship environment which together provide
a relatively complete definition of the environment in
which a new power generation technologies would
be expected to operate.

4.4 (c) Quality Assurance

A quality assurance procedure is required to be
established, documented and followed, in order to
ensure that the quality of the machinery or
engineering system is in accordance with a defined
quality management system. The specific quality
controls to be applied during the project, in order to
satisfy the requirements of the quality management
system, are to be defined. The quality management
system itself is required to satisfy the requirements of
ISO9001:2000 Quality management systems
Requirements or an equivalent acceptable national
standard.

4.4 (d) Design Definition

A design definition process is required to be
established, documented and followed, in order to
define the requirements for the design of machinery
or an engineering system which satisfies the
stakeholder requirements, the quality assurance
requirements and complies with basic internationally
recognised design requirements for safety and
functionality. The design definition process is required
to ensure that the design of the machinery or
engineering system satisfies statutory legislation,
classification requirements and international
standards and codes of practice where relevant and is
to take account of stakeholder requirements and the
quality assurance requirements. Design definition
procedure documentation is required to specify the
design requirements, identify the source of the
requirements and ensure that the requirements for
the design of major components and subsystems of
the machinery or engineering system can be verified
before and after integration.

4.4 (e) Risk Management

A risk management process is required to be
established, documented and followed, in order to
ensure that any risks stemming from the introduction
of the machinery or engineering system are
addressed, in particular: risks affecting the structural
strength and integrity of the ship's hull; the safety of
shipboard machinery and engineering systems; the
safety of shipboard personnel; the reliability of
essential and emergency machinery and engineering
systems and the environment. Consideration is
required to be given to the hazards associated with
installation, operation, maintenance and disposal,
both with the machinery or engineering system
functioning correctly and, following any reasonably
foreseeable failure, taking account of stakeholder
requirements and design requirements.

Hazards are required to be identified using
acceptable and recognised hazard identification
techniques. The process is to ensure that risks are
eliminated wherever possible. Risks which cannot be
eliminated are to be mitigated as necessary. Details of
risks, and the means by which they are mitigated, are
required to be included in the operating manual.

Guidance on selecting and performing the various risk
assessment techniques is widely available, with
certain techniques being more suited for particular
applications than others, as indicated in the
international standard IEC60300 Dependability
management Part 3-1: Application guide Analysis
techniques for dependability Guide on methodology.
The IMOs Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) process
serves as one such technique, as do those described
in several international standards including: IEC61882
Hazard and operability studies (HAZOP studies)
application guide; and IEC60812 Analysis
techniques for system reliability Procedure for
failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA).

4.4 (f) Configuration Management

A configuration management process is required to
be established, documented and followed, in order to
ensure traceability of the configuration of the
machinery or engineering system, its subsystems and
its components. Items essential for the safety or
operation of the machinery or engineering system,
and which could foreseeably be changed during the
life time of the machinery or engineering system are
to be identified such as documentation, software,
sensors, actuators, instrumentation modules, boards
and cards. The process is required to take account of
the design requirements and any items used to
mitigate risks. Configuration management procedure
documentation is required to ensure that any
changes to configuration control items are identified,
recorded, evaluated, approved, incorporated and
verified.

The international standard ISO10007 Quality
management systems -- Guidelines for configuration
82
management is available as a guide in the
development of a configuration management process.

4.4 (g) Verification

A verification process is required to be established,
documented and followed, in order to ensure that
subsystems and major components of the machinery
or engineering system satisfy their design
requirements. The process is to be based on one of,
or a combination of, the following activities, as
appropriate: design review; product inspection;
process audit; and product testing. Verification
procedure documentation is required to identify the
requirements to be verified, the means by which they
are to be verified, and the points in the project at
which verification is to be carried out.

4.4 (h) Integration

An integration process is required to be established,
documented and followed, in order to ensure that
the machinery or engineering system is assembled in
a sequence which allows verification of individual
subsystems and major components following
integration in advance of validating the entire
machinery or engineering system. The process is
required to take account of the verification
requirements. Integration procedure documentation
is to identify the subsystems and major components,
the sequence in which they are to be integrated, the
points in the project at which integration is to be
carried out and the points in the project at which
verification is to be carried out.

4.4 (i) Validation (Certification and Survey)

A validation process is to be established, documented
and followed, in order to ensure the functional
behaviour and performance of the machinery or
engineering system meets its functional and
performance requirements. The process is to validate
stakeholder requirements, arrangements required to
mitigate risks and the traceability of the configuration
control items. Validation procedure documentation is
to identify the requirements to be validated, the
means by which they are be validated and the points
in the project at which validation is to be carried out,
including factory acceptance testing, integration
testing, commissioning, sea trials and though-life
survey.

It may be said that the key processes described above
are simply good engineering practice, much of which
is, or ought to be, established practice in a sector as
mature as the marine industry a sentiment which is
shared by the author. The requirements described
above have been published by Lloyds Register as an
additional chapter in the Rules and Regulations for
the Classification of Ships [9].
To support the application of these Rules and
Regulations, it is planned to develop application
specific guidance. An early example of this will be for
fuel cell systems providing electrical power for
essential services, using knowledge gained through
its participation in both commercial fuel cell
demonstration projects and research and
development projects, such as the EU projects
METHAPU, FCSHIP and FCTESTNET. The publication
of guidance rather than Rules and Regulations
requiring verification allows Lloyds Register to pass
on such knowledge for the benefit of the industry.
At a point when Lloyds Register has sufficient
knowledge and understanding of the risks associated
with fuel cell technology application, specific Rules
and Regulations will be published, as is done for
conventional machinery and equipment.

5. CONCLUSIONS

The energy demands on board a large modern ship
make the challenge of sustainable shipping appear
daunting. However, as can be seen, several near-term
solutions would appear to have the potential to make
a significant contribution to the sustainability of
shipping. Together, these suggest that a dramatic
reduction in both emissions and fuel consumption
can be expected in the not too distant future.

There are several other power generation scenarios
in existence, not included in this paper, which could
play an equal, or even greater, role in the provision of
shipboard energy. However, there remains
considerable debate as to their place in a sustainable
society, whatever their role at this point in time.

6. REFERENCES

1. Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency Partnership,
Jan 2009 (www.reeep.org)

2. Z Bazari & G Reynolds, Sustainable Energy in
Marine Transportation, IMAREST Conference,
Sustainable Shipping, 1-2 February 2005

3. G Reynolds, The Reduction of GHG Emissions
From Shipping A Key Challenge For The Industry,
WMTC, 2009

4. O Levander, Cruising on gas into a cleaner future,
Wartsila Technical Journal, 01.2007

5. Lloyds Register, Provisional Rules for Methane Gas
Fuelled Ships January 2007

6. Wind Assisted Ship Propulsion project (WASP), Jan
2009 (www.greenwave.org.uk)

7. Lloyds Register, Rules for On-shore Power
Supplies July 2008
83



8. Validation of renewable methanol based auxiliary
power systems for commercial vessels project
(METHAPU), EU 6
th
Research Framework Programme
(www.methapu.eu)

9. Lloyds Register, Rules for Machinery and
Equipment of Unconventional Design January 2008











84
NOTES
85
NOTES
86
PAPER 8
CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT
AS A RISK-BASED TOOL IN MANAGING
DEPENDABILITY OF COMPLEX
SOFTWARE-BASED SYSTEMS
Bernard Twomey B.Eng., C.Eng., F.I.E.T., M.I.Mech.E. and
Renny Smith B.Sc., C.Eng., M.I.E.T.
87
88
CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT AS A RISK-BASED TOOL IN MANAGING
DEPENDABILITY OF COMPLEX SOFTWARE-BASED SYSTEMS

Bernard J Twomey and Renny Smith

SUMMARY
The increasing reliance upon complex systems in marine operations brings a corresponding need to ensure that
these systems are demonstrably dependable in use. Furthermore, in order to be truly effective integrated systems,
they must be developed so that they function as a seamless whole, fulfilling operational needs. Ensuring that
integrated systems are traceable throughout the systems lifecycle has been addressed in numerous standards,
but the application in the marine sector has been limited, resulting in significant financial loss to the client. This
paper will emphasise the importance of shipowners configuration management (CM) during a systems lifecycle
and identifies the benefits of having a CM discipline in place to help manage the risks associated with software
maintenance.

Numerous standards have been produced to deal with configuration management and this paper will look at CM
with regard to the International Standards ISO 17894 General Principles for the Development and Use of
Programmable Electronic Systems in Marine Applications and BS ISO 10007:2003 Quality Management Systems
Guidelines for Configuration Management.
From the platform of these standards, the paper promotes good systems engineering practice in managing the
risks associated with through-life software maintenance and seeks to rationalise the ideals with the current
practices of the marine sector. In adopting the methodology, it is contended that the goal of effectively
managing the automation systems now found in the marine sector can be realistically achieved.

Key CM functions, such as CM planning, CM identification, change control, impact analysis and CM audit, and
their respective roles for newbuild and existing ship implementation are described. In addition, this paper
identifies some new opportunities in identifying future risks associated with obsolescence of programmable
electronic systems.
NOMENCLATURE

SCM Software Configuration Management
CI Configuration Item
CR Change Request
SA Status Accounting
IAF Implementation Approval Form
STCW International Convention on Standards of
Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers

1. INTRODUCTION
Configuration management was first developed by
the United States Department of Defence in the
1950s as a technical management discipline. The
concept has been widely adopted by numerous
technical management models, including systems
engineering, integrated logistics support, Capability
Maturity Model Integration (CMMI), ISO 9000,
Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL),
product lifecycle management, and application
lifecycle management. Many of these models have
redefined configuration management, from its
traditional holistic approach to technical
management. Some treat configuration management
as being similar to a librarian activity and split change
control and change management into separate
disciplines and some break out the traditional
elements of revision control and engineering release
into separate management disciplines. Others treat
CM as an overarching management discipline. In
many other sectors such as the rail industry, CM is a
mature discipline and applied rigorously in safety
related systems
Within the marine sector there is an expectation that
the integrated software-based systems for a ship will
be realised by using several manufacturers to provide
the design solution that will hopefully meet the
owners specification.
Each manufacturer will have its own quality
management procedures for the development of
software-based systems, and these will be part of the
classification approval process [1] [2]. Where
standards such as ISO 17894 [3] are specified, they
contain requirements for configuration management.
Naval and passenger ships have traditionally been at
the leading edge of many new developments, though
the availability of computer technology and
component-based development has led to software-
based systems appearing on virtually all ship types.
89
As a result, the safety operation of ships is becoming
dependent to varying degrees on these systems.

Increasing reliance on complex, highly integrated
computer-assisted systems presents a problem for
most maritime stakeholders. The combination of
complexity, use of computer hardware and software,
and practices in the purchase, operation and
maintenance of computer-based systems leads to a
range of potential defects that cannot be guarded
against by current marine procedures.

Few ships engineering staff have an understanding
of the implication of software being present in the
equipment, and the interaction between the sub
systems to ensure the system functions as an
integrated whole. Consequently, the modern seafarer
is becoming reliant on the correct operation of the
system to ensure the safe operation of the vessel.

To ensure systems continue to meet technical and
business needs it is usual for software systems to be
modified; this modification is referred to as software
maintenance. According to Martin and McClure [4]

software maintenance must be performed in order to:

correct errors
correct design flaws
interface with other systems
make enhancements
make necessary changes to the system
improve design.

In marine applications we also need to consider
obsolescence as a cause for maintenance, which
would require the introduction of new technology
that may be required to interface to older systems
and software platforms.

To ensure the systems continue to meet the
operational requirements of the owners,
consideration should be given to managing these
changes throughout the system lifecycle; failure to do
so has resulted in significant financial loss and the
potential for physical or environmental damage.

2. CM AS A PRACTICAL RISK REDUCTION
TOOL

Very few operators have processes in place to
properly control the changes to embedded software
in their equipment and systems and reliance is placed
on the manufacturers and Original Equipment
Manufacturers (OEMs) to provide this process.

It is not sufficient to simply track the modification
request; the software product and any changes made
to it must be controlled. This control is established by
implementing and enforcing an approved Software
Configuration Management (SCM) process. For this
process to work, management must support the
concept of software configuration management. The
SCM process is implemented by developing and
following a configuration management plan which
includes all system documentation, base line software
in the systems and procedures for managing software
changes, thereby providing tools for the ships staff to
manage changes to their systems.

A fundamental tool to support SCM is impact analysis,
through which the effect of change within the system
and on interrelated systems is analysed and the risks
associated with the change are assessed.

Software Configuration Management is therefore
seen as a risk mitigation tool that will enable owners
to successfully identify and manage their risks
throughout the systems life.

SCM is part of the software maintenance process. In
order to give the context of SCM, further discussion
of maintenance follows.

2.1 WHY IS THERE CONFUSION ABOUT
SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE?

Software maintenance is a much maligned and
misunderstood area of software engineering.
Although software has been maintained for years,
relatively little is written about the topic of
maintenance. Funding for research about software
maintenance is essentially non existent [4], thus, the
academic community publishes very little on the
subject. Practitioners publish even less because of the
corporate fears of giving away their competitive
edge. There are a few text books on software
maintenance but these are outdated. Periodicals
address the topic infrequently and this lack of
information contributes to the misunderstandings and
misconceptions that people have about the subject.

90
2.2 WHAT IS SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE?

What then is software maintenance? And where does
it fit into the lifecycle? Here are some generally
accepted traditional descriptions of software
maintenance:

changes that have been made to computer
programs after they have been delivered to the
customer or user. [4]
the performance of those activities required
to keep a software system operational and
responsive after it is accepted and placed into
service. [6]


Modification of a software product after delivery
to correct faults to improve performance or
attributes, or to adapt the product to a modified
environment. [6]


software product undergoes modifications to
code and associated documentation due to a
problem or the need for improvement. This
objective is to modify existing software product
while preserving its integrity. [7]

The common theme of the above descriptions is that
maintenance is an after the fact activity. Based on
these definitions, no maintenance activities occur
during the development process. Maintenance occurs
after the product is in operation.

2.3 WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF NOT
MANAGING THE RISK?

A recent incident that took place on an LNG vessel
resulted in significant financial loss to the owners.
The report from the OEM (below) highlighted the fact
that the owners were reliant on the manufacturers
SCM procedures being applied. The result of this
failure was the ship coming off hire at considerable
cost (millions of dollars) to the owner.

The upgrade of the reliquifaction software was
requested by the shipowner in conjunction with the
reliquifaction process system supplier. It is very
important to understand that the upgrade was not a
standard operational procedure and requires secure
high level access to the software based system and
detailed planning and documentationprior to
import of new software pre system configuration
status audit was not undertaken to establish a firm
base line. Pre works backups were not made, import
procedures were not fully documented and
associated technical risks not advised to the ship
owner.

Unfortunately, reports of this nature are becoming
more frequent due to the increase in software-based
systems being installed in marine applications.

Upon investigation, it was found that these incidents
could have been avoided if the shipowner had a SCM
process in place to identify and manage the risks
associated with the upgrade.

In land-based applications, there are numerous
reported failures due to software upgrades:
PayPal based in San Jose, Calif., and owned by
eBay Inc., is the major online payment system for
eBay auctions as well as smaller e-commerce
sites. In 2004, the company suffered intermittent
outages. AlertSite Inc. reported that PayPal was
available only 35 percent of the time. Keynote
Systems Inc. also was unable to connect to the
site from 10 locations nationwide. PayPal is
blaming the outages on the software update, and
officials did not know how many of its 50 million
user accounts were affected.
During the Thanksgiving holiday weekend in
2001, Amazon.com suffered a series of outages,
due to a software upgrade which cost the retailer
an estimated $25,000 per minute of downtime.

We have to accept that certain operators dont know
what software is in their system and the training
requirements of STCW [8] fall far short of providing
adequate training for the operators to address the
complexity now found on modern vessels. The Marine
Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) report [9] on
the MV Prospero, another vessel suffering an incident
caused by software modifications, identified that the
basic elements of STCW training for engineering
officers is unlikely to equip them to deal with modern
technology.

2.4 ESTABLISHING CONTROL

The approach described for managing software
change and introducing SCM into an organisation has
been trialled and implemented by a number of ship
owners. Each organisation has adapted the
procedures to take into consideration their own risk
identification processes and management structure,.
The benefit of this approach has been a SCM
procedure that is tailored for each organisation and
aligns with their existing processes.

2.4 (a) Ships' Configuration Management
Procedure

This process, based on BS ISO 10007:2003 [10],
applies to specified programmable electronic systems
on board a vessel and requires information to be
provided by systems suppliers, but the procedures do
not apply to the configuration management used by
suppliers.

91
The Configuration Management of software,
firmware and configuration data is achieved by
controlling the media upon which they are held.
Typical examples of the type of systems used on
board are: computer files for personal computer
based systems; electronic memory devices, such as
EPROM; embedded electronic cards; and removable
magnetic and optical media.

While the procedure can be applied across the whole
fleet, each ship has a ship-specific Configuration
Management Plan, which is used to document the
local arrangements for the implementation of the
procedure.

For newbuild projects, the configuration management
process for a particular ships system should ideally be
brought into use when one or more of the following
criteria has been met:

The ships system is first integrated with other
ships systems.
The ships system is brought into operational use.
The approval for the ships system has been given
using the New System Development.

During the implementation phase, suppliers may
make changes to their systems under their own
configuration management systems without invoking
the ships configuration management processes ,
provided the systems are not integrated with other
systems and have not been put into operation.

In practice, because shipowners do not have
responsibility for, or formal control over, systems on
board ship until formal hand over, it is not possible to
mandate the ideal configuration management
processes for newbuild projects.

The actual configuration management arrangements
that can be achieved for specific newbuild projects
will be recorded in a newbuild Configuration
Management Plan for the ship. Shipyards will not
accept a manufacturers SCM procedure being
imposed on the whole project, so it is important that
the shipowner specifies SCM requirements at the
contract stage with clearly defined deliverables at the
time of delivery of the vessel or system. As a
minimum, the shipowner should:

define the version control information that it
requires from system suppliers
define and implement the activities necessary for
it to have confidence in the configuration
information that will be provided when systems
are eventually handed over, activities which
should include: defining the configuration
management information required from the
supplier, oversight activities, and the
configuration audit process
seek the version control information previously
defined from system suppliers before accepting
the handover of the vessel.

When a ship is commissioned into service (handover
of the ship) the New Build Configuration
Management Plan for the ship will be replaced by the
ships In-Service Configuration Management Plan.

Configuration Management is only one of the
processes required for the proper management of
new and changed systems on a ship. The other
processes, such as systems engineering, contract,
commercial, and project management processes are
normally not addressed by this procedure. It is also
assumed that there will be co-operation between,
and co-ordination of, the different process activities,
and that the outputs from the configuration
management process will be used to support some of
the other processes. For instance, the output from the
impact analysis, which is a key part of the
configuration management process, could be used as
an input to the risk assessment process that should be
performed as part of the best practice processes for
the development of programmable electronic systems
in marine applications, as specified by ISO 17894 [3].

The procedures are normally written in a style which
assumes that equipment is installed on board ship
and that the necessary configuration management
information is available and within the ships
configuration management system.

For existing ships, which have not implemented this
procedure, a separate document that plans and
controls the introduction of the procedure will be
required.

The basic configuration management model used in
this procedure is represented diagrammatically by
Figure 1.

92

Figure 1: Configuration management model

Items that are required to be held under
configuration control are referred to as configuration
items (CIs). The model assumes that:

all CIs are defined and recorded in a database
all documents and records related to the
configuration items are in existence and available
staff with the competence and authority to assess
and approve requested changes are available.

2.4 (b) Documenting Proposed Changes

The decision to invoke SCM for a particular change
needs to be evaluated in accordance with clearly
defined and agreed criteria as not all changes need
the level of rigour required by these procedures (
changes such as set points and hysteresis, for
example, which are tuneable parameters that are
provided to be able to be changed by ships staff). For
these arrangements, alternative mechanisms to the
configuration management procedure need to be in
place to ensure the initial or default state of the
parameter is defined and recorded and that, when
changes are made, these are recorded and
communicated to other staff using the
system/equipment. The limits of allowable change
should be defined and staff should be aware of the
limits of changes.
Before a change is formally raised as a proposed
change and subsequently processed in accordance
with this procedure:
a change request shall be produced, and
an initial analysis of the impact of the change
shall be performed.
The scale of the risk associated with a change shall be
taken into account when specifying the proposed list
of deliverables on the Change Request (CR); less
complicated changes such as changes to application
data may be performed by local agreement with ships
staff with minimal planning documentation, whereas
replacement of equipment to prevent obsolescence,
would need stringent and detailed planning.
The model shown in Figure 2 outlines a process for
managing software maintenance. There are three key
areas for consideration: the data required to identify
and control the change; the stakeholders
responsibilities; and guidance to ensure the risks
associated with software maintenance are
successfully managed.


Figure 2: Documenting proposed change

2.4 (c) Approving Preparation of the Change
(Figure 3)

The next stage in the process is approval of the
Change Request. Approval responsibility for a CR
shall be assigned to a competent person based on the
results of the risk assessment performed at the time
of preparing the documentation for the change. In
this example, we have chosen the Chief Engineer, but
this can be modified to deal with companies specific
processes.

93
The approval process shall be conducted in a way that
ensures that the CR and supporting impact analysis
are reviewed by persons competent to assess the
information being presented.

If the review of a change request raises doubts about
the adequacy of the available information relating to
the change, consideration should be given to
performing a risk assessment of the proposed change
before approval.

When a decision has been reached, the approval
authority shall record it on a Preparation of Change
Approval Form, together with any additional
information, including: the reasons for rejection; the
reasons for returning the Change Request; and an
explanation of what needs to be done before
approval can be given, or any conditions that apply to
the approval.

Copies of the CR, impact analysis, supporting
information, and Preparation of Change Approval
Form, shall be provided to shore staff, based on the
results of the risk assessment performed at the time
of preparing the documentation for the change.




Figure 3: Approving preparation of the change




2.4 (d) Preparing Change/Develop New System
(Figure 4)

Once the approval has been given to develop a
change, or a system for a new ship, action shall be
taken to prepare all necessary systems, equipment,
products, processes, documentation and records in
accordance with the details specified in the Change
Request/New System Development Approval Form.
The level of management and oversight activities to
be performed by the provider of the system and the
shipowners staff, or their agents, shall be agreed, as
appropriate to the scale of the change/development
and the level of risk involved. The arrangements shall
be recorded as appropriate, typically in one of the
deliverables proposed in the Change Request/New
System Development Approval Form, such as a
project or quality plan.
This part of the process introduces requirements for
the supplier to develop the approved change/new
system and all agreed deliverables in accordance with
the approved CR.
During their production, the implementation stage
documents, such as Installation, Testing and
Commissioning Plans, shall be agreed with the ships
staff to ensure that:
adequate provision is made for the operation of
the ship during the implementation stage
fallback and transition strategies have been
prepared and are adequate
the testing provides sufficient coverage to
demonstrate the success of the
changes/development.
On completion of the development activities, but
before installation, the Chief Engineer shall inform
the approval authority of the status of the
development and arrange for the approval authority
to assess the readiness of the change/development
for implementation.
Problems that arise during this phase which may
require a change to be made to the functional,
performance, or contract requirements of the system
being changed or developed, shall be treated as a
change and shall be managed using this procedure.
For newbuilds, where the shipowner has no formal
responsibility or control over suppliers, attempts
should be made to influence them to adopt or co-
operate with the shipowners process on a voluntary
basis.

94

Figure 4: Prepare change/develop new system

2.4 (e) Approval for Implementation
(Figure 5)

On notification that the development activities are
finished, the approval authority shall make
arrangements to assess the completeness and
readiness of the change/development for
implementation on ship.
When a decision has been reached, the approval
authority shall record it on an Implementation
Approval Form (IAF) (to be developed by the
shipowner) together with any additional information,
including, the reasons for the return (non approval) of
the IAF and an explanation of what needs to be done
before approval can be given, or any conditions that
apply to the approval. Clarification should be sought
from the suppliers in areas of uncertainty to ensure
there is full understanding of the risks. After
clarification, re-approval may be necessary before
implementation takes place.
If it is considered necessary for a configuration audit
to be performed this shall be specified on the IAF.
For newbuilds, where the shipowner has no formal
responsibility or control over suppliers, the process
defined in this section should be applied, as far as
practicable, given the limitation of available data and
documentation.

Guidance DataRequired
Prepare
Change
Clarificationshouldbesought
fromsuppliersinareasof
uncertainty.
Approved
Returned
Approval Authority
Approval
Decision
Complete
"Implementation
Approval Form"
Implement
Change/New
System
Rework
Change
CR,
Impact
Analysis,
All agreed
deliverable
AssessReadinessfor
implementationof
change
MakeApproval
Decision
Figure 5: Approval for implementation

2.4 (f) Implementing Changes

The software implementation shall be installed,
tested and commissioned in accordance with the
plans produced during the development phase.
Installation, testing, and commissioning requires a
high degree of communication and co-ordination
between ship's staff, the shore-based ships team,
potential multiple suppliers and installation
organisations, and other agencies such as
classification societies. The activities should be closely
overseen and managed by the ships staff to ensure
that configuration management good practice is
maintained, particularly in respect of on-ship changes.
Temporary changes outside the formal configuration
management process should be exceptions and only
allowed with approval from the Chief Engineer
The supplier/installer shall co-ordinate its activities
with ships staff to ensure that the revision status of
all systems, equipment, and products is known to the
ships staff and suppliers of other interfacing systems
which are being implemented at the same time. This
should allow the ships staff to use the operational
and maintenance procedures appropriate to the
current status and minimise incompatibility of
integrated systems.
During the implementation phase, suppliers may
make changes to their systems under their own
configuration management systems without invoking
95
the ships configuration management processes ,
provided the systems are not integrated with other
systems and have not been put into operation.
All systems shall be put under the ships configuration
management procedure before being brought into
operational use or integrated with other systems.
Typically, as it is difficult to maintain good
configuration control during this phase, it is
recommended that a member of the ships staff is
assigned to monitor what changes are made and to
promote good configuration management practice
(this role need not be an exclusive one and could be
one of a number of roles held by the staff member).
Following each discrete stage of implementation (if
there is more than one) the CI Status Database shall
be updated to ensure that the integrity of the
database, with the installed equipment, is maintained
throughout the implementation activities.
If a configuration audit has been specified in the IAF,
the performance of the audit shall be co-coordinated
with the implementation activities to ensure that the
audit records show the final status of the systems
after changes have been finalised.
On successful completion of the implementation, and
any remedial action, copies of all changed or new
software, firmware and configuration data should be
made and held as archive versions on ship and by the
relevant manufacturer or supplier. The Chief Engineer
shall be responsible for the management and
documenting of archiving and backup.
When the implementation has been completed to the
satisfaction of the installer and the ships staff, the
Chief Engineer shall be informed.
Problems that arise during this phase, which may
require a change to be made to the functional,
performance or contract requirements of the system
being changed or developed, shall be treated as a
change and shall be managed using this procedure.
For newbuilds, where the shipowner has no formal
responsibility or control over suppliers, attempts
should be made to influence the suppliers to adopt,
or co-operate with, the process defined in this section
on a voluntary basis. As a minimum, version control
information for all systems should be sought before
accepting handover of the vessel.



Figure 6: Implementing change

2.4 IMPACT ANALYSIS

Impact analysis is the analysis of the effects of a
proposed change on existing ships systems. The term
ships systems is used in the widest sense to include
equipment, processes and people
1
.

1
systems, which may include such things as:

electrical systems
propulsion systems
monitoring, alarm and control systems
hotel equipment and services.

These physical systems will include electrical, electronic, mechanical,
hydraulic, programmable and data configurable subsystems, and
components.
In order to use the equipment effectively and correctly, processes are
developed and implemented. These are typically recorded in a suite of
operating procedures and maintenance procedures. At the highest levels of
the operating procedures, such as hotel services, the link with the physical
equipment might not be explicit. However, failure of the hotel services
infrastructure, such as the hotel computer systems, public address, or fire
detection systems, will all have an effect on the operational procedures used
to manage the guests.
The people element of a system concerns the competence of the staff to
operate and maintain equipment and implement processes effectively and
correctly. Competent staff are established by:

the selection of people with adequate education and the correct
underlying skills, knowledge and personal characteristics for the
functions they are required to perform
training staff in the processes and procedures to be used for the
functions they perform
monitoring performance of staff and providing additional training,
education and experience as required.
96
For any software change, it is usual, and expected,
that the supplier analyses the effect of the proposed
change on the complete software to ensure that
there will be no unintended effects of the change.
The analysis guides the way the changes are
implemented and tested.

Similarly, at a system level, the effects of proposed
changes on the other parts of the system, whether
equipment, process or people-related, should be
considered.
The responsibility, and skills necessary, to perform the
impact analysis on the internals of a software system
lie with the supplier and are not included in this
paper.
Analyses of the effects of software changes on ships
systems is the subject of this paper. Change sponsors
are given responsibility to ensure that analyses are
performed, but to do so they might need the support
of people with knowledge and experience from the
ships staff, the shipowners shore-based staff, and
suppliers of other systems.
Impact analysis involves considering the effect of the
change proposed on all elements of the ships
systems in detail. Ultimately, it is the approval
authority for the change who decides whether
sufficient analyses have been performed. His or her
decision should be based on the criticality to the safe,
effective and profitable operation of the ship, of the
system being changed and the other systems affected
by the change. The analyses should continue until it is
considered that the risks of not having identified
problems associated with the change are tolerable.

2.5 BENEFITS

The key theme of this paper has been the mitigation
of risk associated with software maintenance by
implementing SCM. The most obvious benefit of
mitigating software maintenance risk is the correct
and continued operation of the systems containing
software. While the operation of systems and
equipment might be the primary focus of the ships
engineering staff, management sees other benefits
from implementing SCM.
As discussed earlier in this paper, the failure of
software to operate correctly can have very expensive
consequences when the operation of a vessel is
affected. The mitigation of risk through SCM, with
the resulting improvement in the success of software
maintenance, is therefore an important contribution
to minimising cost of ownership.
Generally, implementing SCM returns the control of
software-based systems to shipowners, specifically
removing the consequences of unilateral and poorly
considered changes by suppliers. By taking up the
control provided by SCM, shipowners will be better
able to understand the implications of software
maintenance being carried out on their behalf by
suppliers and contractors.

SCM also helps demonstrate due diligence, with
regard to control over software maintenance, helping
to address questions that are starting to be raised by:
national authorities such as the Maritime and
Coastguard Agency (MCA) and the United States
Coast Guard (USCG); accident investigation boards
such as the Marine Accident Investigation Branch
(MAIB) and National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB); and legal companies who may question a
shipowners SCM processes in the event of an
incident.

A number of shipowners have linked SCM procedures
to their planned maintenance system and, through
this process, are tracking obsolescence in their
installed systems. This approach provides a significant
benefit by enabling them to form and implement an
appropriate obsolescence strategy.

3. CONCLUSIONS

Not managing the maintenance of software-based
systems properly can have serious consequences,
both in terms of operational control of ships and
consequential financial losses.

SCM is an important tool that can be used to mitigate
some of the risks associated with software
maintenance. The resulting benefits include:
optimising the availability of software systems;
minimising the cost of ownership; returning control
of change to the shipowner; and demonstrating due
diligence to national authorities.

The procedures described in this paper are expected
to be tailored to the specific needs of shipowners,
taking into consideration their current organisational
structure, existing risk mitigation practices and the
competence of the ships staff.

The implementation of SCM procedures will help
ensure that shipowners can fully understand the
implications of the software maintenance being
carried out and have control over their systems.

97


4. REFERENCES

1. Lloyds Register Rules and Regulations for the
Classification of Ships, Part 6, Chapter 1
2. Lloyds Register Rules and Regulations for the
Classification of Naval Ships, Vol 2, Part 9.
3. ISO 17894 General Principles for the
Development and Use of Programmable
Electronic Systems in Marine Applications, 2005
4. J Martin and C McClure. Software Maintenance:
The Problem and its Solution. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall
5. TM Pigoski, Practical Software Maintenance, ISBN
0471170011
6. IEEE 1219: Standard for Software Maintenance:
1998
7. ISO/IEC 12207 Systems and software engineering
-- Software life cycle processes, 2008
8. International Convention on Standards of
Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers STCW, 1995 Amendments
9. MAIB Report no 24/2007. Published 21
December 2007
10. BS ISO 10007:2003, Quality management
systems -- Guidelines for configuration
management
11. ISO/IEC 90003, Software engineering
Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001:2000
to computer software
12. RTCA/DO-178B, "Software Considerations in
Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification,"
December 1, 1992.
13. Boeing Co, The impact of configuration
management during the software product's
lifecycle, Digital Avionics Systems Conference,
1999. Proceedings.
14. DOD-STD-2167A, "Military Standard Defense
System Software Development," AMSC No.
N4327, February 29, 1988.
15. AC Messer, System Integration and Complexity:
managing dependability. Lloyds Register.
16. MIL-HDBK-61A(SE) Configuration management
Guidance, 7 February 2001
17. ANSI/IEEE Std 1042-1987 IEEE Guide to Software
Configuration Management, IEEE Standards
Board, September 10, 1987
18. IEEE Std 828-1998, IEEE Standard for Software
Configuration Management Plans, 25 June 1998
19. California power outages suspended--for now, by
Rachel Conrad, CNET news.com, January 18,
2001 http://news.com.com/2100-1017-
251167.html


98
NOTES
99
NOTES
100
PAPER 9
THE INFLUENCE OF SHIP
UNDERWATER NOISE EMISSIONS
ON MARINE MAMMALS
John Carlton D.Sc., B.A., C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E., M.R.I.N.A.,
M.I.Mar.EST. and Emma Dabbs
101
102
THE INFLUENCE OF SHIP UNDERWATER NOISE EMISSIONS ON MARINE
MAMMALS

John Carlton and Emma Dabbs

SUMMARY

Recognising the concerns that have been developing in various parts of the world, Lloyds
Register has, in recent years, undertaken research into the effects of radiated underwater noise
emissions from merchant ships on marine mammals. This debate is now planned to commence
within the IMO arena. Given this developing background, the paper discusses some of the initial
findings of Lloyds Register in relation to the physiology of marine mammals in the context of
ships far field noise emissions in order to assist in forming a basis for future discussion.

1. INTRODUCTION

In recent years, a number of conferences
and research initiatives have been
undertaken in various parts of the world
directed towards arriving at an enhanced
understanding of the behaviour of marine
mammals in relation to disturbances to the
environment caused by shipping activity. In
keeping with these initiatives, Lloyds
Register has, over the last five years, been
undertaking a continuing study into the
affects of the marine industry on the
behaviour of marine mammals with
particular reference to the influence of noise
emissions from ships on their hearing,
communication and navigational abilities.

In the 58th session of the Marine
Environmental Protection Committee of the
International Maritime Organisation, a
proposal (58/19) for a work programme was
tabled by the United States of America. The
programme is directed towards promoting
action to minimise the incidental
introduction of noise from commercial
shipping operations into the marine
environment, in order to reduce potential
adverse impacts on marine life. The
proposal claims that a significant proportion
of the anthropogenic noise input into the
oceans is attributable to the increasing
number and size of commercial ships
operating over wide-ranging geographical
areas of the world. Moreover, it is claimed
that the noise generated by these sources
has the potential to disturb the behaviour
and critical life functions of marine animals.

Within the deep ocean environment there is
evidence to suggest that noise levels have
increased in recent years. Hildebrand reports
[1] that from measurements made at the
San Nicolas SOSUS Array in the Pacific



Ocean this increase has been of the order of
3 dB over the decade to 2004.

This paper presents, in outline form, some
of the findings from the continuing Lloyds
Register study into this issue. In so doing it
concentrates on the frequency ranges used
by marine mammals and the noise
emissions from ships.

2. THE SHIP PROPULSION PROBLEM

Some years ago [2], comparative noise
emissions were qualitatively studied. It was
demonstrated that the sources of self-noise
at a single frequency, measured at the sonar
dome of a naval ship running at full speed,
were, in descending order of importance:

propeller cavitation
the ships boundary layer
machinery sources
electrical noise.

This ranking was preserved until about the
mid-speed range when the dominant noise
source became the machinery noise.

Merchant ship propellers tend to be
designed to maximise the propulsion
efficiency within certain constraints. These
constraints vary with ship type and
operational profile. In particular, the major
conflicting propulsion constraints are
propulsion efficiency and cavitation
development in the context of vibration,
noise and erosion of either the ships
propeller blades or the rudders which
operate in the propeller slipstream. The
radiated pressure field derived from marine
propellers comprises a combination of
harmonic and broadband emissions, the
103
latter occurring at the higher frequency
ranges and sometimes in the lower ranges
in the vicinity of the first few blade rate
harmonics. This pressure field, in whatever
combination of harmonic and broadband
components, is derived from the propeller
developing rapidly changing cavitation
structures when working in a spatially and
temporarily varying ship wake field. At the
propeller design stage, the designer
endeavours to produce a radial and
chordally varying loading distribution, which
itself is a variable as the propeller rotates, in
order to minimise the propellers influence
on the hull structure or passenger and crew
comfort. At present, in all but a few ship
types in the merchant sector, the external
radiated noise emissions are of lesser
interest than the noise and vibration
transmitted into the ship. The exceptions to
this are, typically, marine research ships and
some fishing vessels where the far field
radiated noise signature is critical to the
ships performance.

The noise signatures emitted by ships are
variable. They vary, among other factors,
with the type and age of the ship, the ships
speed and the type of propulsor deployed.
Figure 1 shows the upper and lower bounds
of typical emitted noise spectra derived
from a variety of source measurements for a
range of ship types, sizes and ages over the
last two decades.
Figure 1: Bounds of ship noise spectra
(15 ships)

The actual signature produced by a ship
varies considerably with the power
absorbed by the ship and the propeller type.
This in turn influences the flow and
cavitation development over the propeller
blades. In the case, for example, of a large
cruise ship the overall sound level of the
ship may increase by between 6% and 12%
when the ship increases its speed from 10
to 20 knots. This resulting emitted signature
is a combination of the emissions from the
diesel generators, electric propulsion and
the propulsors.

Within the literature, propeller singing is
often cited as a source of noise emission
from ships. In the occasional instances when
singing is encountered, the phenomenon is
caused by the shedding of vortices from the
tip and outer trailing edge region of the
propeller blades, which may then excite
high frequency blade resonances [3].
Singing, however, is normally so annoying
to the ships crew that at the next dry-
docking, or indeed at a special docking if
the noise is too intrusive, minor
modifications are made to the propeller
blades trailing edges in order to cure the
source of the noise emission.

3. MARINE MAMMALS

Marine mammals evolved from land animals,
making the transition from land to water
approximately 55 million years ago and
adapting to exploit deep oceans over a
period of 15 million years. The evolutionary
process brought about adaptations to their
respiratory and auditory systems, limb
structure and additional specialisms to other
body parts.

There are three orders of marine mammals:
Cetacea, Sirenia and Carnivora. The first
two are exclusively marine mammals and
the third includes some groups that live on
land and in water, such as polar bears, and
others that live only on land, such as dogs.
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
100 1000 10000
Frequency (Hz)
L
e
v
e
l

(
d
B

r
e
f

1

P
a
/
H
z
@
1
m
)
Upper Bound
Lower Bound

3.1 CETACEANS

The living cetaceans, which are all
carnivorous, are extremely diverse.
However, there are two main groups and
these are the Toothed whales (Odontocetes)
and Baleen whales (Mysticetes).

3.1 (a) Toothed Whales

Toothed whales are the most numerous
members of the cetacea. They comprise all
dolphins and porpoises, and the Sperm,
Killer, Pilot, Beluga, Narwhal and Beaked
whales. They are different from Baleen
whales in that they have teeth, have only a
single blowhole and are mostly smaller with
the sperm whale being the largest at
104
around 18m. Toothed whales actively hunt
prey, often using echolocation for this
purpose.

3.1 (b) Baleen Whales

Baleen whales are less diverse than the
Toothed whales, encompassing Bowhead,
Right, Blue, Fin, Sei, Brydes, Minke,
Humpback and Grey whales. Unlike the
Toothed whales they have two blow holes,
baleen plates and are generally much larger
in size. These baleen plates or whalebone
are made of keratin and arranged like
densely packed combs creating a filter to
sift zooplankton and small fish from the
seawater.

3.2 SIRENIANS

The order Sirenia includes the only
herbivores of the sea: the Manatee and
Dugong. As their colloquial name sea cow
would suggest, they are bulky, rotund and
rather slow-moving. They live in shallow,
warm or tropical, coastal or river waters.

3.3 PINNIPEDS

Pinnipeds are part of the order of carnivores.
They are from a less ancient lineage than
the cetacea and sirenians, and are hence
less specialised for deep water living. The
main three families are: True or Earless seals
(Phocids), Fur or Eared seals and Sea lions
(Otariids) and the Walrus (Odobenids).

3.3 (a) True Seals

True seals are more specialised for water
than Fur seals and Sea lions: they have no
external ear flaps, are more streamlined and
tend to be larger than otariids. However,
they are much clumsier on land, generally
lurching and bouncing ungracefully along
because their hind limbs are unable to
rotate forward under their bodies.

3.3 (b) Fur Seals and Sea Lions

A defining characteristic of the otariids is
the presence of small external ears.
Additionally they generally have thicker fur,
less blubber and longer necks than the
Phocids. They are much better suited to life
on land, being able to use their rear flippers
to walk and lift their bodies clear of the
ground. Consequently, they tend to spend a
greater proportion of their time on land
than the Phocids, especially when they are
with pups.

3.3 (c) Walrus

The Walrus family shares some
characteristics with both phocids and
otariids; nevertheless they are immediately
identifiable from their huge tusks, whiskers
and bulk. They have no external ears, but
walk on their hind flippers and spend
significant periods of time on ice.

3.4 OTHER MARINE MAMMALS

Sea otters and polar bears are also marine
mammals, but are not considered further at
the moment.

4. MARINE MAMMAL PHONATION

The term phonation is used to describe the
sounds produced by marine mammals, since
some marine mammal sounds are not
produced in the larynx, in the way that
humans produce speech.

When discussing the influence of radiated
sound from shipping activity on marine
mammals, it is essential to have an
understanding of how marine mammals
hear. This is in order to consider how noise
might be perceived by them or, conversely,
might damage their hearing systems.
Moreover, having insights into why it is
important for marine mammals to hear
enables us to understand how an inability to
hear might affect them. For most marine
mammals, hearing and sound is important
for a number of reasons:

avoidance of predators
communication and social behaviour
echolocation
foraging for food
navigation
overall awareness of their environment
parental care
reproduction.

Marine mammals have the basic same ear
structure as terrestrial mammals, although
this has been adapted to suit an aquatic
environment. Additionally, the brains of
these marine mammals are thought to
process the sound in the same way as
humans.

105
It should, however, be noted that the ears
are not the only potentially delicate
structures in marine mammals that could be
impacted by sound. Fundamentally, any
airspace in the body may be susceptible to
pressure and acoustic effects. While the ear
is an obvious candidate, other air-spaces
such as the lungs, airways and sinuses need
also be considered. For example,
acoustically induced resonance in the lungs
of human divers can be potentially harmful
and this has been demonstrated at
frequencies of around 70 Hz. Additionally,
in Cetaceans it is likely that there is more
than one pathway to the inner ear. There is
substantial evidence to suggest that high
frequency sounds are channelled through
sound conducting tissues located in the
lower jaw of Odontocetes, especially for
echolocation tasks. The lower jaw bones
typically contain mandibular fats, which are
good conductors of sound and well
impedance matched for the task
underwater. However, lower frequency
sounds probably follow the more
conventional route of transmission into the

Figure 2: Example of a balaenid phonation
from a Right whale call [6]

middle and inner ear. Figures 2 and 3
illustrate the principal types of phonation
from marine mammals: the first is for
communication, while the latter is for
echolocation purposes. In both spectra it is
seen that there is a considerable quantity of
data at differing frequencies.

4.1 ODONTOCETES

Toothed whales, dolphins and porpoises are
mostly sociable. They travel and feed in
groups, often co-operating to maximise
feeding potential. Dolphin phonations have
been the most comprehensively studied.
They produce complex whistles at around
10 kHz for communication purposes and
clicks at 100 kHz for echolocation, by
which they navigate and detect prey.



Figure 3: Idealised Sperm whale click and
frequency spectrum based on experimental
data [6]

Whistles are also used as signature calls so
that the mammals can identify each other, a
function that is especially important
between mothers and calves. This is the
general pattern of phonation for
Odontocetes, with a few exceptions:

Porpoises produce even higher
ultrasounds, around 130 kHz and some
species have not been proven to whistle.
Some porpoises produce low frequency
clicks (~2 kHz) for communication
instead.
Sperm whales only produce clicks, with
most sound energy around 3 kHz and
10.5 kHz.
Killer whale phonations are of a lower
frequency: their whistles are around
10.5 kHz and their pulsed calls are
mostly around 4 kHz, but can vary from
500 Hz to 25 kHz.
106
4.2 MYSTICETES

The larger Baleen whales typically produce
relatively low frequency (~20 Hz to 1000 Hz)
continuous tone or sweeping moan
phonations, with some species producing
infrasonics: frequencies that are too low for
humans to hear. Many sounds are quite
simple, apart from when Humpback and
Bowhead whales sing: in these cases
frequencies may extend above 1 kHz. The
songs are produced by solitary males as
reproductive displays and travel long
distances underwater [4]. While recognising
that these sounds are low frequency and
therefore travel long distances though the
ocean, this may suggest that the hearing
mechanism of these, and perhaps other,
mammals is particularly sensitive.

There has been no conclusive evidence that
Baleen whales echolocate, although there is
speculation that the reverberation of their
low frequency calls from the sea bed
provides them with a picture of their
environment, such as ice or islands, thus
helping them to navigate [4, 5].

4.3 SIRENIANS

It is unknown how important sound is to
the lives of Manatees and Dugong; they are
usually very quiet except for calls between
mother and calf and to signal danger.
Recorded calls have been in the general
range 1 kHz to 10 kHz.

4.4 PINNIPEDS

Pinnipeds produce phonations above and
below water. Pinnipeds that mate on land
tend to be more vocal on land and limited
to clicks and barks in the frequency range
100 Hz to 4 kHz underwater.

In contrast, the True seals that mate
underwater produce a greater range and
variety of phonations underwater from
grunts below 100 Hz to clicks, which may
be for echolocation, up to 150 kHz. It is
known that all Pinnipeds use sound to
establish and maintain the bond between
mother and pup and acoustic contact is
especially important when the two become
separated [4].



5. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHIPS
RADIATED NOISE EMISSIONS
AND MARINE MAMMALS

It is relatively easy, with the aid of
hydrophones, to measure the apparent
range of communication between marine
mammals of the same species. What is
uncertain is the actual breadth of the
hearing of each of the species and whether
within that broader range distress can be
caused by being subjected to certain
frequencies and noise amplitudes. It is
known that in certain circumstances marine
mammals are reluctant to approach certain
large ships too closely, but whether this is
because of distress caused by noise or a
natural reluctance to come too close to
another large moving maritime object is
again unclear.

While little is known about the auditory
thresholds and audiograms for the larger
mammals, a body of information is available
for the small marine mammals since these
can be handled and subjected to
experimentation more easily. Figure 4 is
typical of the data available in the form of
an audiogram for a dolphin [6].
Figure 4: Example of a dolphin audiogram
with a coloured sensitivity map

The audiograms for those species already
studied are typically non-linear with respect
to frequency, as seen in Figure 4. In marine
mammals the audiogram is typically U-
shaped, implying that at the upper and
lower frequency ends of the hearing range
hearing is less sensitive than in the middle
of the frequency range. Indeed, such a
hearing sensitivity is similar to that of
humans, characterised by the A-Weighted
hearing scale. Indeed, such a finding is not
surprising due to the similarity of the ear
107
structure for both humans and marine
mammals. In the case of the marine
mammals studied to date, this general
pattern seems to hold true, although
frequency and sensitivity ranges vary
between the various marine mammal
frequencies.

Figure 5: Overall communication and
echolocation frequency ranges associated
with each species

When compiling the known data on the
Toothed and Baleen whales, Pinnipeds and
Sirenians it is clear that there is an
abundance of communication and
navigational signals produced by these
mammals within the frequency range 100
Hz to 100kHz with, in the case of the
Baleen whales, frequencies down to 10Hz.
Figure 5 shows the overall frequency ranges
which encompass both the communication
and echolocation signals from each species.
When studying this figure it must also be
noted that the mechanisms for emitting and
receiving the various types of signal are
likely to be different and, moreover, there is
likely to be an interval within the spectrum
between the two types of signal. While
within each of these ranges associated with
the various species, some estimate can be
made for regions of particular sensitivity
from the available audiograms, such a
broad range clearly encompasses the
frequency ranges emitted by ships. As was
noted in Figure 1, where full scale noise
data bounds in the frequency range 100 Hz
to around 1250 Hz were shown, the true
extent of the noise spectrum from a
propeller is considerably greater and
extends up to 100 kHz and beyond,
although with reduced noise levels.
Additionally, propulsors emit low frequency
noise down to the first blade rate frequency
and lower. While these frequencies are
below the threshold of human hearing they
can border on the lower end of the
frequency ranges used by Baleen whales.

In terms of the contribution of cavitation to
these noise emission spectra, a significant
amount of work has been undertaken in
recent years, both in naval and merchant
ship communities. Each type of cavitation
has a characteristic noise signature
associated with it, depending upon the
cavity dynamics that are involved. For
example, in the case of sheet cavities the
decay of the primary structures into vortex
structures and then, subsequently, into
systems of micro-bubbles produces
characteristic signatures, probably through
synchronised collapse of all or part of the
system of bubbles the actual mechanism
being far from fully understood at the
present time. While there is much that can
be learnt from naval practice in the design
of quieter merchant ship propellers, it must
be recognised that there is a fundamental
difference in the design philosophy of both
types of ship. In the former case, the
concept of cavitation inception speed
features prominently when the propeller is
designed to operate in a sub-cavitating
mode up to a certain ship speed, typically,
10 or 15 knots depending on the naval
requirement. To achieve this, several
iterations of the design process, including
cavitation tunnel testing, are normally
required. In the case of the merchant
propeller, consideration of propulsion
efficiency is dominant and the presence of
cavitation is accepted provided that it does
not promote either significant ship internal
vibration or erosion of the propeller blades
or rudder. Nevertheless, the cavitation
structural dynamics on the propeller blades
and in the slip-stream, which will influence
the radiated hull surface pressures and the
erosive potential of the cavitation, will also
have a significant effect on the far field
noise emissions. As such, there is likely to be
some synergy in these merchant ship
cavitation influences.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Frequency Ranges (kHz)
Odontocetes (General)
Porpoises
Sperm Whales
Killer Whales
Mysticetes
Sirenians
Pinnipeds (General)
True seals

Considerable further work is required, at full
scale on the observation of the cavitating
structures on ships propellers since, due to
scale effects, these structures generally vary
from model scale predictions. Such studies
need then to be related to the noise
emissions measured using sonar buoys or
sea-bed arrays: one means of doing this
could be in association with boroscope
observations of the propeller behaviour [7].

108
6. CONCLUDING REMARKS

This short overview has drawn on some of
the ongoing research work that Lloyds
Register is undertaking on the interaction
between ship operations and marine
mammals. In giving an overview of the work
carried out it is clear that considerably more
study is needed by the marine engineering
and biological communities in order to
understand the true extent of the problem.
Such initiatives are required particularly in
the following areas:

characterising the noise emissions from
different types of cavitation generated
by merchant ships propellers at their
various ranges of operating conditions
methods of de-coupling machinery
noise from merchant ships in order to
attenuate noise transmission into the
sea
understanding the response to noise
spectra of the larger marine mammals,
particularly in relation to relative extents
of the phonation to hearing frequencies
understanding more clearly the noise
transmission paths in marine mammals
the physical and behavioural response
of marine mammals to ship noise
emission stimuli.

7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are most grateful for the initial
work done within this Lloyds Register
research programme by Dr John Goold who
stimulated many of the ideas contained
here and who laid the foundations of the
study. Thanks are also due to Caroline
Johnson who has made valuable
contributions to the work.

8. REFERENCES

1. Hildebrand, J. Large Vessels as Sound
Sources I: Radiated Sound and Ambient
Noise in Nearshore/Continental Shelf
Environments. NOAA Vessel-Quieting
Symposium, May 2007.
2. Sabath, P. and Guieysse, L. Aquoustique
Sous-Marine, Dunod, Paris, 1964.
3. Carlton, J.S. Marine Propellers and
Propulsion. 2nd Edition. Butterworth-
Heinemann. 2007.
4. Richardson, W.J., Greene, C.R., Malme,
C.I. and Thomson, D.H. Marine Mammals
and Noise, 1995.
5. Nachtigall, P.E. Marine Mammals,
Hearing and Sound. Advisory Committee on
Acoustic Impacts on Marine Mammals.
6. Goold, J. Underwater Acoustic Sensitivity
of Marine Mammals, Lloyds Register
Internal Research Paper, 2006.
7. Carlton, J.S. and Fitzsimmons, P.A.
Cavitation: Some Full Scale Experience of
Complex Structures and Methods of
Analysis and Observation. Proc. 27th ATTC,
St Johns Newfoundland, August 2004.
109
NOTES
110
PAPER 10
THE ASSURANCE OF SAFETY
IN THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT
Vince Jenkins B.Sc., C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E.
111
112
THE ASSURANCE OF SAFETY IN THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT

Vince Jenkins

SUMMARY

Lloyds Registers mission is to secure for the benefit of the community high technical standards of design,
manufacture, construction, maintenance, operation and performance, for the purpose of enhancing the safety of
life and property at sea, on land, and in the air', and to 'advance public education within engineering and
technological disciplines'. This paper explores how we are fulfilling our mission today in three specific areas:
embracing a robust approach to alternative design solutions; realising the benefits of our Naval Rules becoming
more objective-based; and ensuring that the simple safety basics of design and operation are not forgotten.

1. INTRODUCTION

News can now be delivered instantly in many
different ways no matter where you are in the
world, be it in the middle of the Pacific or at the top
of Everest. Those responsible for running private or
publicly owned companies drive performance with
the relentless pursuit of efficiency and profitability.
These two key fundamentals instant access to
information and the quest for performance have
had a considerable influence on the general publics
tolerance for mistakes. As an example, fifteen years
ago a company could have made three bad
decisions and probably still have stayed in business.
Today, one bad mistake means a company will most
likely fail. This simple fact affects most industries
globally and defines the commercial environment in
which the marine industry finds itself today.

The marine industry has undergone its own
significant changes in the five years to the second
quarter of 2008, and has grown by an
unprecedented amount. In responding to the
growth in the global economy, average ship
numbers have increased by approximately 30%,
while various ship type sectors have seen between
10 to 55% growth. The container ship sector saw a
growth of more than 200% in dwt. At the same
time, we have seen a considerable increase in the
complexity and size of vessels, a few examples of
which are:

container ships in excess of 12,000TEU
266,000 cubic metre LNG vessels
passenger vessels capable of carrying in excess
of 5,600 people
a significant increase in the use and complexity
of shipboard automation and IT infrastructures
podded propulsion
high voltage propulsion systems
cruise ships with ice rinks
designs which include kites to supplement
propulsion, in order to increase efficiency and
reduce environmental impact.

At the same time, the industry has struggled to find
the officers to cope with this huge growth. The
result has been that the average experience and
competence level of officers has not been
enhanced. A career at sea continues to be close to
the bottom of peoples long term career choices,
which further compounds the problem. Anecdotal
evidence suggests that officers, for example, no
longer look to the sea as a life long career, but
instead as a ten year period during which they can
make a lot of money to establish a future business
back in their homeland. The aforementioned is
happening at a time when the value of ships and
cargo has increased significantly: large container
ships, for example, have been rumored to be worth
US$1.5 billion fully loaded. It has not just been the
ship operators and owners who have found quality
manning difficult to maintain; most organizations
which operate within the industry have struggled to
fill the necessary places. For instance, classification
societies have had to work very hard to find the
numbers of experienced surveyors needed to
support the huge growth in newbuild yards.
Charterers, P&I, insurers and component
manufacturers, among others, have all struggled
with maintaining competence.

The first half of 2008 saw growing concerns with
regard to a change in incident statistics. The IUMI
(International Union of Marine Insurers) 2007
shipping statistics report released in March 2008
had some alarming headlines, as the following two
extracts show[1]:

Since last report (March 2007) the number
of total losses for the 2006 year have
significantly increased from 67 to 92 we
anticipated more reports during 2007 but this
37% increase is probably unprecedented
...The serious partial losses continue to
increase dramatically, there has been a strong
upward movement since 1998 where 247
serious incidents were reported with 727
reported in 2006 (a 6% increase since last
reported) and a staggering 914 so far for 2007.
A 270% increase in one decade
113
The industry is witnessing an increase in incidents
which are becoming increasingly expensive, as
reflected by IUMIs report. The IUMI report covering
2008 will make interesting reading.

Operators have clearly wanted to capitalise on the
business opportunity that the last five years has
presented, while the public and business tolerance
for mistakes has continued to reduce. Have our
systems to control the risks which the industry faces
been adequate? While the last six months have seen
a dramatic change of fortune for the global
economy and the marine industry, it could be
argued that the following two questions are even
more important for the industry now and in the
future:

Given the need to provide year on year
company growth, have the simple basics of
design and operational safety been maintained
or sacrificed for profit?
What framework, which will ensure continued
profitable trading, is required for safe design
and operation in the industry today?

2. THE PRESSURE TO PERFORM

The demands of the market for continuing higher
company performance year on year growth in
market size and increased profitability, for example
are relentless. If you are the CEO of a ship
operator you need to deliver.

The industry has significantly changed how it
operates over the last 30 years. The merchant
marine I joined as a young hopeful cadet in 1976 is
a very different industry to that which exists today.
Removing the fat from an industry is a necessary
part of business and process improvement. One
view, however, is that ship operation has been very
lean, with little or no fat, for many years now. This
is particularly so for the pure ship managers who do
not have another profitable business, such as
Shipowning, to support their ship management.

In the last 12 to 18 months, Lloyds Register has
seen an increasing number of examples of operators
either cutting the maintenance budget dramatically,
or not having sufficiently competent crew to
maintain their vessels correctly. While significantly
reducing effective maintenance has no immediate
effect, the implications and results do reveal
themselves over the course of a number of months.
The same fundamental issues of either loss of
capability or cutting costs and losing capability are
being witnessed within the component
manufacturers and suppliers sectors. While this
could have significant business implications in the
merchant marine, it could be catastrophic for the
military with regard to vessels such as submarines.
A number of notable incidents occurred in 2008
which must raise concerns over the complexity of
the vessels now being designed and whether
sufficient systems engineering is being applied to
their design and layout. The cost of such incidents is
alarming owners, insurers and P&I clubs.

There have been anecdotal reports of the pressure
to perform having even reached the point at which
a Masters judgment can be overruled by
commercial decisions. Not only is it a very short term
view, but it also risks bringing the industry into
disrepute.

There are still many very responsible shipowners and
operators in the industry. There are, however, those
companies that deliver a positive safety message at
a senior level, but the message is lost through
failure to implement policies and follow through. So
while the company policy might be safety first, it is
simply not believed or not re-enforced adequately in
the companys actions and management systems.

It is an unfortunate failing of humans that we are
very capable of seeing the tangible and
advantageous elements of a proposal (typically, the
financial benefits), but we are not so good, or
perhaps not so willing, to think about the
disadvantages or risks involved in the same
proposal.

Has the huge profit potential of the last few years,
and the knowledge that it will not last for ever,
simply accentuated the financial advantages of the
business, while the significant disadvantages of high
risk strategies have not been understood? Has this
tendency for high risk strategies now subsided in
the credit crunch times of 2009, or have we become
used to operating in this way? Have we even
realised that some strategies have been increasingly
high risk, such as reducing maintenance, or failing
to take a systems approach to the increasing
complexity of vessels?

3. THE ABILITY TO CONTROL YOUR OWN
DESTINY

At the heart of any classification society are its Rules
for classifying ships. Classification Rules are based
on centuries of experience, and embody a huge
amount of accumulated knowledge. The role of
classification societies has changed over the 250
years they have been in existence. Perhaps it is
useful to revisit where they came from and what
classification includes?

The insurers of the 18
th
Century were suffering
significant losses, due to the unseaworthy designs
of much of the tonnage they were covering.
Something had to be done. An independent body,
114
which had a set of rules which would ensure a
vessel was seaworthy, was required. Classification
was born, and while Lloyds Register was the first in
1760, each significant maritime nation had their
own classification society within a century. As a
result, classification was originally about ensuring
structural strength and stability, i.e. a seaworthy hull
(the term seaworthy is used in a more general way
here, rather than its legal definition). In the 18
th
and
19
th
centuries, the skill and competence of the
Master was recognized in ensuring the
seaworthiness of a vessel; the classification of the
vessel would change as the Master changed. It is
important to note that today classification rules
relate purely to hardware. While maintenance will
ensure a vessel is kept in good order and in class,
classification Rules rely only on physical hardware
and not on human intervention.

The role of classification societies today, however,
has moved beyond independently assuring
structural strength and stability. Representing flag
administrations and supporting ship operating
companies in meeting international legislation is all
part of the role of classification. Therefore, most
classification societies have two forms of support to
the industry: regulatory compliance; and services
beyond regulation. Lloyds Register is also heavily
involved with the military, providing military ship
classification and other support services.

20 years ago, almost all ship operators would have
made their own decisions which had any bearing on
their business, based on a rational understanding
and assessment of the facts as they stood, with their
own experienced and professional staff. It has been
noticeable, however, over the last 10 years that a
number of ship operators have turned to
classification societies with one question: What
would you do in our position? Such a position is
understandable when it is in reference to a
requirement of regulation, but all too frequently the
question is asked when it is not a matter of
regulation. Is it a loss of capability that is pushing
operators to hand over decision making to other
notable bodies?

An alternative view might be that the industry has
had so much legislation introduced recently,
combined with an increasing litigious environment,
that owners see the only safe way forward as
implementing what other notable bodies suggest. It
is hoped that, in the event of litigation, this gives
them a more robust defense. The simple principle
that is often forgotten is that it is the operator who
is the one responsible for his actions, and the
operator who is responsible for considering any
advice before he implements it. Often, putting my
lord or your honor on the end of a justification
brings a certain clarity to the decision being taken,
since one day an operator may find him or herself in
court explaining the decisions. Clearly, this does not
apply to all companies, but the reason for the
increasing tendency of companies to look to others
to make decisions may be a combination of both a
reduction in capability and fear of litigation.

4. CLASSIFICATION RULES

Classification rules are a set of design standards
which ensure a vessel has structural strength,
adequate propulsion capability and stability. They
tend to be reactive; by their very nature, they can
only respond to developments, such as the
manufacture and use of stronger materials, which
require revised rules. In this way, they support new
developments, but they cannot lead development.
Classification rules are also applied to all ships for
global trade. They are generic rules, and cannot
account for individual situations (although areas
with extreme weather conditions have been used as
the foundation for development a particular area
of the North Atlantic, for instance). There are a few
situations when the extremes of an operational
environment are considered, such as when
operating in ice, a situation for which ice rules have
been developed. These rules, however, apply to all
vessels operating in ice and are generic. As a result,
classification rules are limited to how they can
address a specific challenge and reliance is placed
on the designer or operator to move beyond
classification requirements to address their specific
issues. Is this limitation fully understood by the
industry?

To partly explain this concept a little further let us
look at the example of pressure vessels. Many
decades ago, industrial fatalities included deaths
due to pressure vessels exploding. This was either
due to over-pressure, or failure of the pressure
boundary at normal operating pressure. Over-
pressure incidents have principally been managed by
fitting relief valves on pressure vessels, i.e. two relief
valves set at somewhere between 105% to 120%
of operating pressure. This mitigates the likelihood
of an over pressure excursion. However, there are
some assumptions or facts about which we need to
remind ourselves. The relief valves could still fail, but
the probability of a pressure vessel failure has been
reduced considerably by the use of pressure relief
valves.

Now, imagine two factory sites involving an
identical chemical process, with very hazardous
pressurized liquids passing through three large
pressure vessels.

The first site has been in the same place for many
decades, and a town has grown up around it. The
three large pressure vessels are sited against the
115
factory boundary wall. The factory wall is adjacent
to a main street in the town, with a bus stop
outside the factory wall. There is a school not far
from the factory, and many 10s of children use this
bus stop each day to get to and from school.

The second site is a new site which has been built
out of town. It has the same process plant with the
same three pressure vessels placed adjacent to the
factory boundary wall. There is a field of wheat next
to the factory boundary wall.

Failure of the over protection system and the
resulting energy release, while having the same
incident initiators, will have a totally different final
consequence damage to a field of wheat in one
case, but potential multiple fatalities in the other.

It is not possible to be assured that prescribed
standards, on their own, control the risks associated
with a specific situation or application, as this case
demonstrates. This is because risk is comprised not
just of the hazard but also of the consequences of
the event. Hence, prescribed standards can only
ever be best general guidance, subject to the
consideration of the specifics of a particular case.

Classification rules have, in the past, been heavily
prescriptive. That is the nature of design rules. The
marine industry feels comfortable with prescription
and has increasingly pursued this route in all its
regulation. It is not unusual to find that shipbuilders
want to be told exactly what they need to do to
comply with the rules. Therefore most classification
society rules have developed over many centuries to
become prescriptive. In many cases, the objective of
a particular rule may have been lost.

There have been two recent developments which
are changing the nature of classification rules: these
are the development of rules for military ships and
the increasing use of novel designs and their
approval.

5. MILITARY CLASSIFICATION

First let us consider military classification. There are
some key differences between the merchant marine
and the military. Within the merchant marine, using
classification rules is a requirement of SOLAS. There
is no such requirement for the military since they
elect to meet the spirit and in many cases the letter
of SOLAS. The military has, however, found that
classification provides many cost effective benefits,
and has started to classify its vessels since the late
1990s. It is interesting to note that most nations
with a strong naval presence now use classification
rules to one degree or another. The military
however have to work within the constraints of:

making changes to an existing ship, not
originally built to a classification regime, or
the operational requirements of a new vessel
which conflict with the prescriptive requirement
of a classification rule.

When such examples occur, the discussion that
ensues with regard to not meeting the specific
classification requirement has encouraged Lloyds
Register to focus on the fundamental objectives of
the rules in terms of assuring structural strength and
stability.

A recent example is the sizing of ballast tank vent
pipes. The objective of the rule is to ensure that a
ballast tank cannot be over pressurized and
damaged. The vent piping size for one particular
ship was only 85% of the prescriptive requirement
set in the rule. An analysis was undertaken of the
specifics of this particular ship, including the high
standards of crew training and management
systems. The analysis concluded that the ballast tank
could not be overpressurised, and subsequently the
design met the classification objective.

The voluntary nature of the militarys use of
classification rules has resulted in the need for an
even greater dialogue to ensure that the
classification function is fulfilling its mission with the
navies of the world.

6. NOVEL OR ALTERNATIVE DESIGN

New technologies and designs are being introduced
at an increasing rate. Often the designs are novel,
one off, or pilot solutions. Developing specific rules
for such situations is often not appropriate. Clients,
however, require classification of such novel
solutions in order to trade legally. The IMO is also
keen to provide a framework to allow for novel
designs to be introduced, and has broadened the
provision within SOLAS to allow for alternative
design solutions to be allowed which meet the
objective of the law, but not necessarily the specifics
of the rule [2]. Specifically, this applies to:

Section II-1 Construction Structure,
subdivision and stability, machinery and
electrical installations, Parts C Fire Suppression;
D escape; and E Operational Requirements.

Section III Life-saving appliances and
arrangements

Clearly, without specific rules to design to, the
assessment of the proposals in meeting the design
objective has to be conducted in a different manner.
How this will be achieved will vary.


116
6.1 IMO AND SOLAS

The requirements of SOLAS are incorporated into
classification rules, hence Lloyds Register has to
address this issue from a classification perspective.
Additionally, we may be acting on behalf of a flag
state as a recognized organisation. The IMO requires
a risk-based justification to accompany the design,
to demonstrate design equivalence. There is
considerable detail to this and the subject would fill
a paper on its own. The fundamentals however are
that criteria have to be developed which will show
equivalence.

6.2 NEW OR NOVEL DESIGN SOLUTIONS

In the past when a novel design has been
presented, an expert judgment has been formed on
its acceptability and equivalence. One of the
challenges of expert judgment is that it is often
neither repeatable nor documented. The criteria
applied are not transparent and will vary from one
expert to another. Lloyds Register requires criteria
and standards to be applied consistently. Expert
judgment combined with transparent and
consistently applied criteria is very powerful. This
may seem to be very simple, and, in essence, it is. It
can, however, be quite difficult to establish the
fundamental objective, in such a way that a novel
design can be assessed for demonstrating
equivalence.

Systems engineering could be considered in the
same way, by asking: What are the objectives we
have for this system and what do we need as
outputs?

The future of most legislation, be it classification
rules or flag state requirements will consist of two
parts:

the objectives of the regulation or rule, and
a prescribed solution which could be used to
meet the objective

7. CONCLUSIONS

Todays business environment is very different to
that of 10 to 15 years ago. There is far less
tolerance of mistakes by society and business. News
of failure can be global in an instant. The pursuit of
year-on-year growth is relentless and, combined
with the huge growth in the industry, this has
meant that competence and experience throughout
the marine industry have reduced. Some of the
steps being taken to deliver growth and profit have
been at the expense of both safety and the bottom
line.

The industry appears to be entering a period when
companies are developing an appetite for much
higher levels of risk and the rewards that may result.
There is a danger that the safety/commercial
balance is shifting too far because pure compliance
is not a guarantee of safe performance.

There are other companies that seem reluctant to
take decisions, either through lack of capability or
fear of litigation. They rely on being told what to do
by notable industry bodies.

To cope with the rate of change in technology and
the overall faster pace of both the military and
merchant marine world, Lloyds Register is ensuring
its core service of classification is transparent and
flexible. This will help ensure that the support that
the industry needs in new, novel or the military
situations is provided. It will also help ensure that
our own approval process is robust and transparent.
Classification societies and industry have to embrace
risk-based and objective-based approaches,
supported by robust criteria and transparent use of
expert judgment.

8. REFERENCES

1. IUMI 2007 Shipping Statistics Analysis
(Total Losses Sharply Up and Major Partial
Losses Continue to Rise) March 2008

2. Guidelines on Alternative Design and
Arrangements for SOLAS CHAPTERS II-1
AND III MSC.1/Circ.1212 dated 15
December 2006.



117
NOTES
118
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES
Vaughan Pomeroy M.A., C.Eng., F.I.Mech.E., F.I.Mar.EST.,
F.R.I.N.A
Vaughan Pomeroy is Technical Director of Lloyds
Register, responsible for Concepts and Studies, External
Affairs, Strategic Research and Technical Policy. He
joined Lloyds Register in 1980, initially to work on
engineering research and specialist projects, after
working in the aircraft industry and with mechanical
and electrical engineering consultants. He has held
management positions within Lloyds Register since
1987. During this time, he has been responsible for
marine machinery, pressure equipment and, from 1992,
on appointment as Deputy Chief Engineer Surveyor, all
HQ engineering activities. After a short spell managing
Lloyds Registers Marine Consultancy Services, he took
over responsibility for the organisations marine
research and development programme and the
development of its global naval business. He is a
Chartered Engineer; a Vice President and Fellow of the
Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and
Technology; a Fellow of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers; a Fellow of the Royal Institution of Naval
Architects and a graduate of the University of
Cambridge.
Robert Smart B.Sc., C.Eng., M.R.I.N.A.
Robert Smart is Head of External Affairs for Lloyds
Register. In this position, he is responsible for liaising
with international, governmental and non-
governmental bodies such as IMO, IACS, and ILO.
Robert has been with Lloyds Register for 14 years,
during which time he has held a variety of positions
from Plan Approval Surveyor (fire and safety) to
Manager of Structures and Statutory Services. Before
this, he spent five years as a Naval Officer and four
years involved in marine consultancy work. This was
preceded by three previous years at Lloyds Register and
six years with the UKs Ministry of Defence, during
which time he obtained his degree from Newcastle-
upon-Tyne University in Naval Architecture and
Shipbuilding.
David Howarth B.Met., C.Eng., F.I.M.M.M., F. Weld.I.
Graduating in Metallurgy from Sheffield University,
David Howarth joined Lloyd's Register in 1985. He has
since been involved in all aspects of Lloyds Register's
materials work and also represents Lloyds Register on
several national and international committees. He was
Manager of the Materials department from 1992 until
2004, when he was appointed as Global Technology
Leader Materials and NDE. He now has a strategic
global technical responsibility for materials, metallurgy,
welding and NDE issues relating to Lloyds Registers
marine activities.
Alex Johnston C.Eng., F.R.I.N.A.
Alex Johnston currently holds the position of Global
Technology Leader Hull Structures within Lloyd's
Register. He is responsible for providing technical
leadership in the maintenance of consistent standards
on hull plan approval worldwide and ensuring a high
level technical approach is achieved. He has been with
Lloyds Register for 28 years and, following some years
in the shipbuilding industry, started his career in the
Plan Approval department in London in 1981. In 1989,
he was transferred to Busan, South Korea, where he
remained for 12 years, During this time, he was head of
the Korea Plan Approval department. He now works
within the international shipping community to further
Lloyd's Registers technical standards and is a member of
various international forums. He provides advice to the
Marine business on future strategy and maintains a
global view of the hull structure technical issues and
knowledge networks which affect the organisation. He
is a Chartered Engineer and a member of the Royal
Institute of Naval Architects.
John Carlton D.Sc., B.A., C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E., M.R.I.N.A.,
M.I.Mar.EST.
Following training as a mechanical engineer and
mathematician, John Carlton served in the Royal Naval
Scientific Service undertaking research into underwater
vehicle hydrodynamic design and propulsors. Five years
later, he joined Stone Manganese Marine Ltd at
Greenwich as a propeller designer and research engineer.
He joined Lloyds Register in 1975, working first in the
Technical Investigations department and transferring, after
nine years, to the Advanced Engineering department as its
Deputy Head. He later moved to the newly formed
Performance Technology department where he initiated
and led several research and development activities.
In 1992, he returned to the Technical Investigations
department as Senior Principal Surveyor and Head
of Department. In 2003, John was appointed Global
Head of Marine Technology and Investigation for
Lloyds Register and heads up the Concepts and Studies
Group. He has twice won both the Denny Gold Medal
and the Stanley Grey Prize of the Institute of Marine
Engineering, Science and Technology (IMarEST) and is
Visiting Professor at the School of Engineering and
Mathematical Sciences at City University, London.
Andrew Smith B.Sc., C.Eng., F.I.Mech.E.
Graduating in Engineering from Hatfield University,
Andrew Smith joined Lloyd's Register in 1975. He has
subsequently been involved in all aspects of Lloyds
Register's engineering plan approval activities and
represents the organisation on committees and IACS
working groups. He was Manager and Principal
Surveyor of the Engineering Systems department from
2004 until 2008, when he was appointed Global
Technology Leader Engineering Systems. He now has
a strategic global technical responsibility for engineering
issues within Lloyds Registers Marine business.
119
Ed Fort B.Sc.
Ed Fort trained as an electronic engineer and currently
manages the Engineering Systems Subject Matter Team
within Lloyd's Register's Marine Product Development
department. He completed his marine engineering
cadetship with Mobil Shipping Co. Ltd in 1982, after
which he served on board oil and petroleum products
tankers within the companys fleet. In 1984, he moved
to the European Space Agencys technology and
research centre (ESTEC) in the Netherlands, eventually
assuming responsibility for the testing of space craft
power systems. During this time, he was involved in the
evaluation of European and Russian alkaline fuel cell
technology in support of the European space agencys
HERMES space shuttle programme. In 2002, he joined
the Research and Development department at Lloyds
Register, following a period in industry with the fuel cell
manufacturer Zetek Power plc and marine consulting
engineers Wavespec Ltd. With more than 18 years
experience in fuel cell power generation technology,
he has represented Lloyds Register on various European
Union marine fuel cell projects, including FCSHIP,
FCTESTNET and METHAPU.
Bernard Twomey B.Eng., C.Eng., F.I.E.T., M.I.Mech.E.
Bernard Twomey completed his apprenticeship in 1976,
before spending twelve years in the merchant navy, two
years of which were as an engineering superintendent.
He then attended Loughborough University, graduating
in 1993 with a degree in Electro-Mechanical Power
Engineering. He joined Lloyd's Register in the same
year, and is now the Global Technology Leader for
Electrotechnical Systems. Bernard is a member of the
BSI GEL 65 System Considerations Panel and is Course
Director for the Lloyds Register/Cranfield University
training course in Marine Engineering Systems.
Renny Smith B.Sc., C.Eng., M.I.E.T.
Renny Smith is a Senior Consultant (Software
Assurance) within Lloyds Register Rail. He is an
experienced software safety audit and assurance
consultant who has extensive experience of software
for major transportation infrastructure projects,
including Channel Tunnel, Hong Kongs new Chep
Lap Kok airport, and light and heavy rail in Asia
and the UK. Recently, he has been involved in the
development of Lloyds Registers Dependable Systems
services and has delivered some of these services,
including development of configuration management
procedures, to several major shipping companies.
Vince Jenkins B.Sc., C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E.
Vince Jenkins is the Global Marine Risk Advisor within
Lloyds Registers Technical Directorate. His early years
were spent as a seagoing engineer with Cunard, before
graduating in Mechanical Engineering. He then spent
11 years in the nuclear industry, which introduced him
to nuclear submarine technology and its challenges.
Following this, he joined DNV where he worked for
over 10 years. At DNV, he was involved in delivering
Marine consultancy assignments and developing the
organisations capabilities in that area. Vince joined
Lloyds Register in January 2008.
120
121
122
LLOYD' S REGI STER
TECHNOLOGY DAY
PROCEEDI NGS
Working together for safer,
more sustainable ships

L
L
O
Y
D
'
S
R
E
G
I
S
T
E
R
T
E
C
H
N
O
L
O
G
Y
D
A
Y
P
R
O
C
E
E
D
I
N
G
S
Lloyds Register EMEA
T +44 (0)20 7709 9166
F +44 (0)20 7423 2057
E emea@lr.org
71 Fenchurch Street
London EC3M 4BS, UK
Lloyds Register Asia
T +852 2287 9333
F +852 2526 2921
E asia@lr.org
Suite 3501 China Merchants Tower
Shun Tak Centre
168200 Connaught Road Central
Hong Kong, SAR of PRC
Lloyds Register Americas, Inc.
T +1 (1)281 675 3100
F +1 (1)281 675 3139
E americas@lr.org
1401 Enclave Parkway, Suite 200
Houston, Texas, 77077, USA
www.lr.org
February 2009
Services are provided by members of the Lloyds Register Group.
Lloyds Register, Lloyds Register EMEA and Lloyds Register Asia are exempt charities under the UK Charities Act 1993.
cover1.qxd 10/2/09 17:07 Page 1