Relatório Final Sobre o Acesso Aquaviário À Poly Terminais

NAUTICAL STUDY POLY TERMINALS
HIDROTOPO
20 May 2014
077719927:A - Final
C02031.003136.0100
Nautical Study Poly Terminals
Contents
1
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1
Background ................................................................................................................................................ 4
1.2
Objective ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.3
Study approach .......................................................................................................................................... 5
1.4
Report layout .............................................................................................................................................. 6
Data and environmental conditions ................................................................................................................. 7

2.1
2.2
2.3
2.1.1
Channel layout ....................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.2
Manoeuvring strategy and present admittance policy ..................................................... 9
2.1.3
Bathymetry ............................................................................................................................. 9
Environmental conditions ...................................................................................................................... 10

2.2.1
Tidal levels and flow conditions. ....................................................................................... 10
2.2.2
Wind ...................................................................................................................................... 12
Nautical aspects ....................................................................................................................................... 14

2.3.1
Vessel specifications ............................................................................................................ 14
2.3.2
Tug specifications ................................................................................................................ 15
Manoeuvring simulations ................................................................................................................................ 16

3.1
General ...................................................................................................................................................... 16
3.2
Execution of simulations ......................................................................................................................... 17
3.3
Limiting condtitions ................................................................................................................................ 18
3.4
Tug use ...................................................................................................................................................... 19
3.5
Evaluation of executed simulations ...................................................................................................... 19
3.6
4
Physical properties .................................................................................................................................... 7
3.5.1
Simulations with the 150 x 28 x 8.5m vessel ..................................................................... 20
3.5.2
Simulations with 200 x 32 x 9.8m vessel ........................................................................... 22
3.5.3
General evaluation ............................................................................................................... 23
Manoeuvring strategy and tug use ....................................................................................................... 25
Conclusions and recommendations................................................................................................................ 27

4.1
Conclusions .............................................................................................................................................. 27
4.2
Recommendations ................................................................................................................................... 28
Appendix 1
Flow ....................................................................................................................................... 29
Appendix 2
Manoeuvring sheets of design vessels ............................................................................ 30
Appendix 3
SHIP-Navigator ................................................................................................................... 31
Appendix 4
Description and analysis of simulation runs ................................................................. 32
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
List of figures
Figure 1-1: Location of the POLY terminal along the Itaja-Au river ................................................................. 4
Figure 1-2: Overview of the POLY "termianis porturios" facility. ...................................................................... 5
Figure 2-1: Existing buoys along the existing navigation channel of 60m width (red lines). ............................ 8
Figure 2-2: Bathymetry with respect to MSL (based on survey data April 2013). ............................................ 10
Figure 2-3: Computational grid nested in the Delft3D model of the Brazilian coast ..................................... 11
Figure 2-4: Simulated and observed water levels at monitoring station Itaja. ................................................. 12
Figure 2-5: Location offshore wind data at 2641S 4556W ............................................................................... 12
Figure 2-6: Offshore wind rose at 2641S 4556W normal conditions ........................................................... 13
Figure 2-7: Ratio of wind velocity of any duration Ut of the 1-hr averaged wind speed U3600 (Reference:
CEM). .................................................................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 3-1: Simulated swept track of all simulations with the 150x28m vessel. ............................................... 20
Figure 3-2: Vessel crossing channel after turn. ...................................................................................................... 21
Figure 3-3: Simulated swept track of all simulations with the 200x32m vessel. ............................................... 22
Figure 3-4: Run P09, Arrival200m vessel in flood tide ........................................................................................ 25
Figure 3-5: Run P12, Arrival 200m vessel in ebb tide ........................................................................................... 26
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
List of Tables
Table 2-1: Limiting current conditions for the 200x32m vessel within 100m channel based on in-house
performed studies. .............................................................................................................................................. 7
Table 2-2: Coordinates of existing navigational buoys within the existing navigational channel of 60m
width. .................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Table 2-3: AutoCAD drawings containing the bathymetric survey data in the Itajai Poly terminal
waterway. ........................................................................................................................................................... 10
Table 2-4: Tidal levels at Itaja port according to ATT and tidal analysis. ......................................................... 11
Table 2-5: Joint probability of exceedance (%) of wind climate offshore Itaja (scatterometer data). ............ 13
Table 2-6: Wind conditions. ..................................................................................................................................... 14
Table 2-7: Main particulars of the general cargo vessels modelled. ................................................................... 14
Table 3-1: Simulation evaluation scale. .................................................................................................................. 16
Table 3-2: Simulations executed (red= simulations for the 150x28m vessel, blue= simulations for the
200x32m vessel and grey= confirmation simulations). ................................................................................. 18
Table 3-3: Limiting current conditions for the 200x32m vessel within wider channel. ................................... 18
Table 3-4: Evaluation of the performed simulations. ........................................................................................... 19
Table 3-5: Required time for berthing manoeuvre 150m vessel, measured from Boia 28 (fully blockage of
channel). ............................................................................................................................................................. 21
Table 3-6: Required time for berthing manoeuvre 200m vessel, measured from Boia 28 (fully blockage of
channel). ............................................................................................................................................................. 23
Table 3-7: Moored vessels alongside the Poly terminal and the remaining space in channel. ....................... 24
Table 4-1: Required time for berthing manoeuvre measured from Boia 28 (fully blockage of channel)
150x28m vessel. ................................................................................................................................................. 28
Table 4-2: Required time for berthing manoeuvre measured from Boia 28 (fully blockage of channel)
200x32m vessel. ................................................................................................................................................. 28
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
1
1.1
Introduction
BACKGROUND
The POLY Terminais Porturios (POLY) facility is located along the Itaja-Au river, see Figure 1-1 and
Figure 1-2 and is constructed approximately 9km upstream of the Braskarne terminal.
POLY envisages to receive the following design vessels in a phased development:
Phase 1: vessels with the following characteristics: LOA 135 m, Beam 19 m and LOA 150 m, Beam 28 m,
draught 8.5m in the actual situation;
Phase 2: vessels with the following dimensions will call this facility: LOA 200 m, Beam 32 m, draught
9.8m in the future (dredged) situation.
The vessels are only allowed to berth at the Poly terminal if its confirmed that a docking manoeuvre at the
POLY terminal does not cause hindrance to vessels navigation in the channel. Important criteria are the
time the berthing vessel occupies the channel and the space it requires for the manoeuvre. The existing wet
infrastructure is single way traffic. ARCADIS was awarded the contract to study these items.
Information about the control of traffic within the wet infrastructure is not available.
Figure 1-1: Location of the POLY terminal along the Itaja-Au river .
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
Figure 1-2: Overview of the POLY "termianis porturios" facility.
1.2
OBJECTIVE
The objectives of the work were as follows:
Determine the required space for berthing (during arrival) for 2 different design vessels, one for Phase
1 (actual situation) and one for Phase 2 (future situation) docking at the POLY terminal;
Evaluate if the space in the navigation channel during the berthing and docking part of the manoeuvre
is sufficient for safe navigation for vessels in the channel (i.e. vessels manoeuvring along the POLY
terminal);
Recommend potential improvements (e.g. navigational aids).
1.3
STUDY APPROACH
The study is divided in a couple of sub-tasks:
Task 1:
Perform a real-time manoeuvring study for both design vessels (150m and 200m vessel)
in order to determine the required space for berthing, as well as the time it takes to
conduct the docking and berthing manoeuvre.
Task 2:
Perform, based on the real-time manoeuvring study, a desk study in order to evaluate if
safe navigation in the channel for vessels manoeuvring along the Poly terminal is still
feasible and to determine the maximum size of the vessel (only in terms of width).
Task 3:
Give recommendations on improvements of navigation in the channel based on Task 1

and Task 2.
The project is executed in the period from December 2013 to January 2014 by the following project team of
ARCADIS:
J. de Groot
Project manager
J. Adema
Flow modelling
C. van de Vrie
Pilot / Master mariner
W. Misiag
Nautical expert
M. van der Wel
Nautical aspects
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
1.4
REPORT LAYOUT
In this report the approach to the study, results, conclusions and recommendations are presented. The
structure of the report is as follows:
In Chapter 1 the approach to the study is described;
Chapter 2 provides an overview and appraisal of the available data like environmental conditions and
channel layout;
In Chapter 3 the execution of the real time simulations and the analysis and interpretation of the results
are discussed;
Finally, in Chapter 4 the conclusions and recommendations are presented.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
Data and environmental conditions
2.1
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
2.1.1
CHANNEL LAYOUT
The existing navigation channel to the Poly Terminal extends from the North West limit of the Itaja Port
Basin (near the Braskarne terminal) to 10 km upstream of the Itaja-Au river, where the Poly terminal is
located. In the actual situation the channel has a constant width of 60m, see Figure 2-1. The average depth
along the channel is in the order of 9m relative to DHN. Within the described trajectory 4 tight bends with
small radii are present (radii varying between 450 and 900m). The existing turning basin is located in front
of the Teporti Terminal and has a diameter of 170 m.
The navigation along the channel is aided by 13 navigation buoys (not placed in pairs). The positions of
the installed buoys are presented in Table 2-2 and Figure 2-1.
Based on nautical studies conducted by ARCADIS for the Itaja-Au area, it is expected that besides the
water depth limitation, the existing channel is not sufficiently wide to receive the Phase 2 design vessel of
200x32m at the POLY terminal.
During in-house conducted studies a channel width of 100m in combination with a dredged depth of
DHN-11m seemed to be sufficient for the Phase 2 design vessel to manoeuvre through the river channel. It
is expected that this channel width of 100m is only sufficient for the 200x32m vessel under the limiting
current conditions presented in Table 2-1.
200x32
ebb current
flood current
flood current
channel transit
channel transit
turning
0.4 m/s
0.3m/s
0.3m/s
wind velocity
6m/s
Table 2-1: Limiting current conditions for the 200x32m vessel within 100m channel based on in-house performed
studies.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
Figure 2-1: Existing buoys along the existing navigation channel of 60m width (red lines).
Buoy number
Position (UTM WGS 84)

X (m)
Y (m)
16
731859
7023762
17
731498
7023238
18
731824
7024300
19
730222
7024063
20
731368
7024557
21
729805
7024036
22
729623
7025894
23
729405
7024454
24
729313
7026416
26
728758
7026606
28
728214
7026414
29
727736
7025936
31
727432
7025438
Table 2-2: Coordinates of existing navigational buoys within the existing navigational channel of 60m width.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
2.1.2
MANOEUVRING STRATEGY AND PRESENT ADMITTANCE POLICY
The information presented in this section was obtained during a telephone call between the local Itajai
pilots and the nautical team of ARCADIS.
Present admittance policy
The maximum allowable length of vessels presently received at facilities near the POLY terminal is 150 m
(length over all). The maximum allowable beam of the vessel presently received is 28 m. Vessels must have
a minimum under keel clearance of 1.14m. The maximum operational wind speed is 8 m/s (upper limit Bft.
4), measured at the port of Itaja .
Present manoeuvring strategy of the pilots
Within the existing wet infrastructure the vessels use the turning basin in front of the Teporti terminal to
turn the vessel. The turn is made preferably upon arrival during flood conditions. During arrivals under
high ebb conditions the vessel berths bow-in and turns upon departure. The turn is made by the pilots in
clockwise direction over starboard using the (flood and/or ebb) current. After the turn is made, the vessel
will sail towards the Poly terminal (upon arrival berthing bow-in) or set sail through the channel (upon
departure).
Tug requirements
The tugs from the port of Itajai are used to assist the vessel towards the Poly terminal. Upon arrival a tug
is connected at the mid stern position, whereas a 2 nd tug is connected at the forward alongside position.
The tugs assist during the transit to the Poly terminal, during the approach to the berth, turning in the
turning basin and final berthing.
2.1.3
BATHYMETRY
Bathymetric data relative to DHN was provided by Hidrotopo in several AutoCAD files, covering the
waterway from offshore Itajai to Teporti, see Table 2-3 for the files provided. The survey was executed in
the period 14-23 April 2013. ARCADIS interpolated the survey data on a fine grid in order to schematize
the bathymetry as required for the hydrodynamic modelling and navigation studies. The resulting
bathymetry is presented in Figure 2-2.
In order to enable the design vessel of the second phase (the 200x32x9.8m vessel), additional dredging
along the channel in order to widen and deepen the channel would be required. The existing nautical
guaranteed depth is insufficient to enter with a draught of 9.8m. Sufficient under keel clearance is required
in order to manoeuvre with these vessels through the bends (since the radii of the bends is rather small
with respect to the vessels length).
For the purpose of the simulations a channel width of 100m and a depth of DHN-11m was implemented,
see Section 2.1.1. It is expected that this channel width of 100m is only sufficient for the 200x32m vessel
under the limiting current conditions presented in Table 2-1.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
Itajai
Itajai Teporti
HDT-704-10-263-BAT-240kHz.dwg
HDT-804-13-010-BAT.dwg
Table 2-3: AutoCAD drawings containing the bathymetric survey data in the Itajai Poly terminal waterway.
Figure 2-2: Bathymetry with respect to MSL (based on survey data April 2013).
2.2
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
2.2.1
TIDAL LEVELS AND FLOW CONDITIONS.
The tide near Itaja is mainly semi-diurnal. The water levels are presented in Table 2-4. In this table both
the Admiralty Tide Tables figures as well as the tidal levels derived from a tidal analysis are presented.
These tidal levels were obtained by analysing available water level time series and subsequently making a
hindcast for an entire year.
The presented tidal levels are relative to Chart Datum = DHN/NR.
The table shows that at Itajai a minimum range of 0.1-0.4 m during neap tide and a maximum range of 0.9
m during spring tide.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
10
Water level (m)
Water level (m)
A.T.T
Tidal analysis
Mean High Water Spring
MHWS
CD + 1.0 m
CD + 1.09 m
Mean High Water Neap
MHWN
CD + 0.6 m
CD + 0.75 m
MSL
CD + 0.6 m
CD + 0.55 m
Mean Low Water Neap
MLWN
CD + 0.5 m
CD + 0.40 m
Mean Low Water Spring
MLWS
CD + 0.2 m
CD + 0.20 m
Low Low Water Spring
LLWS
CD + 0.0 m
CD + 0.00 m
Mean Level
Table 2-4: Tidal levels at Itaja port according to ATT and tidal analysis.
For the present study ARCADIS applied their detailed DELFT3D flow model covering the river and
coastal area (Figure 2-3 shows the computational grid). The model consists of 20 layers in the vertical, each
layer representing 5% of the total water depth. The model has been calibrated using water level
measurements at Itajai and Teporti, see Figure 2-4. From the figure it can be seen that there is a good
agreement between the model and the measurement station.
This model delivered the spatial and time varying currents required for the real-time manoeuvring
simulations. The flow model was run for 3 different river discharges: 250, 500 and 800 m3/s during an
extreme spring tide for the existing situation as well as for the future situation. The output consisted of
time series (10 min interval) of water levels, current velocities and directions at several locations along the
river and of spatial fields which were saved every 15 minutes.
The results of the simulations are presented in Appendix 1. These flow fields and the corresponding water
levels were coupled and applied in time varying mode to properly represent the propagation of the tidal
wave in the simulations.
Figure 2-3: Computational grid nested in the Delft3D model of the Brazilian coast
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
11
Figure 2-4: Simulated and observed water levels at monitoring station Itaja.
2.2.2
WIND
Offshore wind data were obtained from ARGOSS (waveclimate.com) at location 2641S 4556W (Figure
2-5). Table 2-5 and Figure 2-6 present the joint probability of exceedance of wind speed at given classes of
wind directions and the wind rose at this offshore location. It can be seen that the wind climate offshore is
characterized by winds mainly coming from North to East directions.
Figure 2-5: Location offshore wind data at 2641S 4556W
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
12
20 %
15 %
10 %
5%
0%
...
> 16.0 m/s

14.0 - 16.0 m/s
12.0 - 14.0 m/s
10.0 - 12.0 m/s
8.0 - 10.0 m/s
6.0 - 8.0 m/s
4.0 - 6.0 m/s
2.0 - 4.0 m/s
0.0 - 2.0 m/s
Figure 2-6: Offshore wind rose at 2641S 4556W normal conditions
Wind direction (Deg)
(m/s)
-15
to
15
to
45
to
75
to
105
to
135
to
165
to
195
to
225
to
255
to
285
to
315
to
15
45
75
105
135
165
195
225
255
285
315
345
Total
.0
8.98
16.71
15.35
15.03
10.64
5.85
7.79
6.94
4.29
3.38
2.57
2.47
100.00
2.0
8.56
16.15
14.64
14.09
10.04
5.55
7.48
6.70
4.05
3.10
2.34
2.28
94.98
4.0
7.40
14.59
12.70
11.40
8.35
4.77
6.64
6.05
3.42
2.30
1.73
1.77
81.10
6.0
5.20
11.42
9.75
6.97
5.34
3.54
5.25
4.87
2.53
1.30
.86
1.09
58.11
8.0
2.50
6.77
5.62
3.12
2.65
2.14
3.30
3.41
1.63
.63
.27
.50
32.55
10.0
.81
2.81
2.23
1.03
1.06
1.07
1.41
2.09
.93
.23
.08
.21
13.95
12.0
.19
.86
.65
.31
.39
.46
.54
1.05
.51
.12
.03
.05
5.15
14.0
.06
.18
.10
.04
.13
.09
.11
.34
.20
.09
.02
.01
1.37
16.0
.01
.01
.00
.01
.04
.02
.01
.08
.06
.05
.02
.00
.31
18.0
20.0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.01
.00
.01
.00
.00
.00
.01
.00
.02
.00
.01
.00
.01
.00
.00
.00
.08
.00
Table 2-5: Joint probability of exceedance (%) of wind climate offshore Itaja (scatterometer data).
Based on information received from local pilots it is understood that the wind speed under which
manoeuvres are conducted with the present day vessels received at the Poly terminals is limited to 8 m/s
(10 min average).
During this study only one wind speed was taken into account, which was the limiting wind speed for the
200x32m vessel (6 m/s 10 min average, see Table 2-1), found during conducted in-house studies for the
second phase design vessel in the widened wet infrastructure. It is expected that the increase of wind
speed from 6m/s to 8m/s does not have a significant impact on the swept path of the smaller design vessel,
since the vessel is sailing in loaded condition and fully under control of the tugs. The drift velocities of the
vessel will be small for these wind speeds.
The 30 second gust wind speed was derived using relations as described in the Coastal Engineering
Manual. The wind gustiness was modelled according to an API (American Petrol Industry) spectrum. The
variation in the wind direction is included by the relation established by Simiu & Scanlan (1986). The wind
speeds during the simulations are presented in Table 2-6.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
13
Wind speed in m/s
Wind speed in m/s
(10min average)
(30s gust)
6.0
Beaufort scale
7.8
Bft. 4
Table 2-6: Wind conditions.
Figure 2-7: Ratio of wind velocity of any duration Ut of the 1-hr averaged wind speed U3600 (Reference: CEM).
2.3
NAUTICAL ASPECTS
2.3.1
VESSEL SPECIFICATIONS
The design vessels specified by the Client are 2 general cargo vessels with principal dimensions as
specified in Table 2-7. For each of the vessel a full mathematical model was prepared and implemented in
the SHIP-Navigator system. Both vessels were modelled in one loading condition i.e. loaded to design
draught. The draughts of the vessels were selected in consultation with the Client. The manoeuvring
sheets of the vessels can be found in Appendix 2. For phase one of the study only the vessel of LOA 150m,
with a Beam of 28m was modelled, since the expected swept track of this vessel will be larger compared to
the vessel with a LOA of 135m and a Beam of 19m (as agreed with the Client).
Dimension
Vessel #1
Vessel #2
Length over all
LOA
Unit
m
150.0
200.0
Length between perpendiculars
Lpp
140.0
196.0
Beam
28.0
32.0
Depth
14.0
19.2
Draught loaded
Tmax
8.5
9.8
Table 2-7: Main particulars of the general cargo vessels modelled.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
14
2.3.2
TUG SPECIFICATIONS
ARCADIS has conducted several manoeuvring studies for the Port of Itaja. It is assumed that tugs from
the Port of Itaja will assist the general cargo vessels calling at the POLY terminal. Therefore, the same tugs
as used during these studies were implemented in the SHIP-Navigator system. During the simulations a
tug set ranging from 1x 45 TBP to 3 x 50 TBP ASD-type tugs was implemented.
The computer model (SHIP-Navigator) applies a reduction in the effectiveness of the tugs due to various
factors (e.g. waves, working mode and direction with respect to the vessel). For the present study this
concerns effectiveness reductions related to the speed, direction and mode of operation of the tug.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
15
3
3.1
Manoeuvring simulations
GENERAL
The simulations took place at ARCADIS premises in the Netherlands and were attended by
representatives of the ARCADIS project team. An experienced ship handler (a marine pilot) performed
the simulations. The pilot used a birds eye view display, where the outline of the turning circles,
navigation channel and the harbour basin were marked. Per simulation a specific simulation scenario and
relevant constraints were prepared (see Table 3-2). The outcome of the simulation (trajectory, velocities
and use of ship controls) was analysed and discussed to identify the safety issues, the required space
within the channel and the environmental conditions considered.
After each simulation a debriefing talk was held with the pilot. During the debriefing, the manoeuvre was
reviewed and the pilot commented the elements of the entire manoeuvre. After the debriefing talk the
final manoeuvre evaluation was assigned. The typical evaluation scale, as applied in manoeuvring studies,
is shown in the table below:
Evaluation:
Feasible and safe
Feasible
Limiting or doubtful
Over the limit
Unsafe
Table 3-1: Simulation evaluation scale.
The following factors were taken into account while evaluating the outcome of the simulations:
The use of the ship main engine, rudder and bow thrusters;
The use of tugs;
The distance of the ship and tugs to obstacles (e.g. channel border limits, quays and moored ships).
The following assumptions were made for the possibility of using ship controls (rudder, main engine and
bow thrusters):
The pilot may use the rudder in a full range of angles (the pilots are accustomed to use full rudder on
the approach to compensate for the wind or for the current, as long as they can increase the rudder
forces by increasing the main engine power).
During slowing down and stopping the ship close to the turning area, the use of the ships main engine
should be limited to HALF ASTERN. The pilot may use more main engine astern power, but this is
deemed as no reserve for control. In that case the pilot considers the situation as dangerous.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
16
The following assumptions were made for the evaluation of using tugs:
The pilot may order up to 90% tug power for continuous time. When full tug power (100%) is ordered
then the situation becomes dangerous (since there is no more reserve power for tugs).
The efficiency of the tugs is reduced due to the speed of the tug, the orientation of the tug with regard
to the ship motion and the tug working mode (push or tow). In general the pilot would not order the
bow tugs to pull the ship sideways when the ship speed is higher than 3.0kn. For pushing tugs the ship
speed should be lower than 1.0 kn.
The following criteria were adopted to evaluate the outcome of the simulations:
When the ship is uncontrollable, the simulation is evaluated as a failure.
When the ship approaches obstacles on distances smaller than 10m or collides with an obstacle, the
simulation is evaluated as a failure.
When the main engine of the ship is used on the approach, with power exceeding HALF AHEAD, the
simulation is evaluated as being on the safety limit.
When the main engine of the ship is used, within the turning area, with power exceeding HALF
ASTERN and tugs connected, the simulation is evaluated as being on the safety limit.
When the tugs are used, with their power exceeding 90%, the simulation is evaluated as being on the
safety limit.
When the pilot cannot keep the ship aligned with the berth line and dead in the water then it is
indication to evaluate the simulation as being on the safety limit,
When berthing a fully loaded ship the berthing lateral speed is evaluated as limiting when it exceeds
0.12 kn (0.063 m/s) or as unsafe when it exceeds 0.20 kn (0.10 m/s).
3.2
EXECUTION OF SIMULATIONS
A set of 12 arrival simulations was carried out, according to Table 3-2.

Within Appendix 4 the following is presented:
Track plots with ships position and rudder angle indicated every minute;
Time series of velocities (forward speed over the ground, lateral speed and rate of turn);
Time series of controls (rudder, propeller);
Time series of tug assistance (application point, requested force, actual force and direction) of each tug;
The sign convention in the plots is positive to port (i.e. port drift, counter-clockwise turn and port rudder
are positive).
Except for the verification simulations (C01 and C02) all arrival simulations started at the bend before the
Poly terminal (upon arrival). Most of the simulations were conducted as bow-in simulation (i.e. the vessel
berths upon arrival without turning). Simulation P09, P11, P13 and P18 were performed as bow-out
simulation (i.e. simulations in flood current conditions and the vessel berthing after the turn). During the
bow-out simulations the vessel first sails along the Poly terminal, turns and then set sail to the berth at the
Poly terminal.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
17
Run
Ship
Course
Current
Water level
Wind
P17.1
150 x 28 x 8.5m
Arrival
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 04:40,
WL: MSL +0.65m
Uhourly= 6m/s
Q = 500
P18.1
150 x 28 x 8.5m
Arrival
m3/s
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 04:40,
from: 1200 N
WL: MSL +0.65m
Q = 500 m3/s
P19.1
150 x 28 x 8.5m
Arrival
Flood, t0=21-Jan 03:00,
from: 300 N
WL: MSL +0.78m
Q = 250 m3/s
P07.1
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Flood, t0=21-Jan 03:00,
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Flood, t0=21-Jan 03:00,
WL: MSL +0.78m
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Flood, t0=21-Jan 03:00,

Q = 250
P10.1
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
WL: MSL +0.78m
Q = 250
P11.1
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Q = 250
P12.1
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
P13.1
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
WL: MSL +0.07m
WL: MSL +0.07m
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 10:00,
WL: MSL +0.65m
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Flood, t0=21-Jan 02:00,
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 1200 N
WL: MSL +0.65m
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 900 N
WL: MSL -0.05m
Q = 500 m3/s
C02
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 900 N
Q = 500 m3/s
C01
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 1200 N
m3/s
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 04:40,
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 300 N
m3/s
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 04:40,

Q = 500
WL: MSL +0.78m
m3/s
Flood, t0=20-Jan 11:00,
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 300 N
m3/s
Flood, t0=20-Jan 11:00,
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 300 N
Q = 250 m3/s
P09.1
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 300 N
Q = 250 m3/s
P08.1
Uhourly= 6m/s
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 300 N
WL: MSL +0.66m
Q = 250 m3/s
Uhourly= 6m/s
from: 1200 N
Table 3-2: Simulations executed (red= simulations for the 150x28m vessel, blue= simulations for the 200x32m vessel and
grey= confirmation simulations).
3.3
LIMITING CONDTITIONS
During two simulations the channel width and prescribed limiting conditions in terms of wind and
current conditions were confirmed for the Phase 2 design vessel (200x32m vessel), i.e. the simulations were
evaluated by the pilot as being limiting (see Table 3-2, run CO1 and C02). The limiting conditions as
described in Table 3-3 are applicable for the vessel within the channel layout with a width of 100m. The
evaluation of these confirmation simulations is not taken into account in Table 3-4.
Vessel
ebb current
flood current
flood current
LOA x B x T
channel transit
channel transit
turning
200 x 32 x 9.8 m
0.4 m/s
0.3m/s
0.3m/s
wind velocity
6m/s
Table 3-3: Limiting current conditions for the 200x32m vessel within wider channel.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
18
3.4
TUG USE
The tug used during the simulations (1x45 and 1x50 TBP ASD-type tugs) were of sufficient power and
effectiveness to assist the design vessels during the simulated manoeuvres. One tug is connected at the
centre lead aft (mainly pulling in order to break down the vessel speed). The second tug is connected at
starboard or port shoulder (depending on the berthing side of the vessel) and mainly pushing the vessels
towards the quay of the Poly terminal.
3.5
EVALUATION OF EXECUTED SIMULATIONS
All simulations were evaluated as feasible, see Table 3-4. The evaluation takes into account the berthing of
the vessel as well as the turning manoeuvre (in case of bow-out simulations). The whole transit from the
port of Itajai up to the Poly terminal was not conducted for all simulations and therefore not evaluated
(besides two runs to evaluate the assumed limiting conditions). The most important aspects used to
evaluate these simulations are:
the final berthing speed;
the distances with respect to the limits of the turning basin;
the distances with respect to the limits of the channel;
the time the vessel occupies the channel.

Run
Ship
Course
Current
Water level
Wind
Evaluation
P17.1
150 x 28 x 8.5m
Arrival
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 04:40,
WL: MSL +0.65m
Uhourly= 6m/s
Feasible
Q = 500 m3/s
P18.1
150 x 28 x 8.5m
Arrival
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 04:40,

Q = 500
P19.1
150 x 28 x 8.5m
Arrival
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Q = 250
P09.1
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
m3/s
Flood, t0=21-Jan 03:00,
WL: MSL +0.78m
P10.1
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Flood, t0=20-Jan 11:00,
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Flood, t0=20-Jan 11:00,
WL: MSL +0.07m
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 04:40,
WL: MSL +0.07m
200 x 32 x 9.8m
Arrival
Ebb, t0=21-Jan 04:40,

Q = 500
m3/s
Feasible
Uhourly= 6m/s
Feasible
Uhourly= 6m/s
Feasible
Uhourly= 6m/s
Feasible
from: 900 N
WL: MSL +0.65m
Q = 500 m3/s
P13.1
from: 1200 N
Q = 250 m3/s
P12.1
300
Feasible
from: 300 N
Q = 250 m3/s
P11.1
300
Feasible
Uhourly= 6m/s
from:
Q = 250 m3/s
300
Feasible
Uhourly= 6m/s
from:
WL: MSL +0.78m
300
Uhourly= 6m/s
from:
WL: MSL +0.78m
m3/s
Flood, t0=21-Jan 03:00,
Uhourly= 6m/s
from:
WL: MSL +0.78m
m3/s
Flood, t0=21-Jan 03:00,

Q = 250
P08.1
WL: MSL +0.65m
m3/s
Flood, t0=21-Jan 03:00,

Q = 250
P07.1
from: 1200 N
Uhourly= 6m/s
Feasible
from: 1200 N
WL: MSL +0.65m
Uhourly= 6m/s
from:
900
Feasible
Table 3-4: Evaluation of the performed simulations.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
19
3.5.1
SIMULATIONS WITH THE 150 X 28 X 8.5M VESSEL
In total 3 simulations were conducted:
Simulation P19 was conducted in 1.2 knots flood current in the bend.
Simulation P17 and P18 were conducted in 0.6 knots ebb current in the bend.
Figure 3-3 shows the swept track of all simulations with the 150x28m vessel within the existing wet
infrastructure of 60m width. The swept track width might slightly increase when more simulations are
conducted, however since almost limiting conditions are selected the swept track is thought to be
representative. In order to derive the swept track the bow-in arrival simulations are taken into account, as
well as a part of the bow-out manoeuvre (i.e. the part of the manoeuvre after turning in the basin).
Figure 3-1: Simulated swept track of all simulations with the 150x28m vessel.
The swept track in Figure 3-1 shows a much narrower swept track compared with the 200x32 m vessel
(Figure 3-3). This is due to the fact that the occupied width in the bend as well as the straight part after the
bend, is mainly dependent on the drift angle and the length of the vessel. For the same drift angle and a
longer vessel more additional width will be required when making a bend and sailing through the straight
part.
The swept track indicates that upon a bow-in arrival the existing channel (of 60m width) is fully occupied
by the vessel. This is due to the turn made in the bend. After turning in front of Teporti, the vessel ends at
the red buoy side and has to cross the channel towards the green buoy side, where the Poly terminal is
located, see Figure 3-2.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
20
Figure 3-2: Vessel crossing channel after turn.
During the bow-in manoeuvres it took about 13 minutes from passing the last green buoy (#28) up to the
final position for berthing at the poly terminal, see Table 3-5. This is slightly faster compared to the
200x32m vessel. It should be emphasized that the time required to connect the lines by the berth/mooring
crew on shore is not included. This time should be added when evaluating the occupancy time within the
channel, since the tugs will partly block the channel.
Passage green buoy (boia 28)
time frame
occupied space
13 minutes
50m
fully blockage of channel, no passing allowed
to final berthing (bow-in), parallel with the

berth
Passage turning basin Teporti
to final berthing (bow-out), parallel with
20 minutes
36m (trajectory turning basin to terminal)

the berth
Table 3-5: Required time for berthing manoeuvre 150m vessel, measured from Boia 28 (fully blockage of channel).
During the berthing manoeuvre of the vessel we strongly advise not to pass with another (large) vessel for
the following arguments:
As can be observed from the swept track the occupied space in the channel is 60m (measured from the
dredged channel limit at the green buoy side). After passing the green buoy the ahead velocity of the
vessel is still about 5knots. The existing channel width is only 60m. This yields that there is no space
available for another vessel to pass.
The swept path does not include the space occupied by the tugs. Once the vessel is being pushed
alongside towards the berth, the tug is within the safety distance between two passing ships (the
length of the tug is about 25m). This may hamper the operation of the tug and should therefore be
avoided. The propeller wash generated by the tugs, may hamper other traffic sailing in the channel as
well.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
21
A passing vessel has to sail upmost to the red bank side, hereby experiencing bank suction forces.
Given the rather narrow channel configuration (large blockage of the available wet cross-section), high
counter rudder is required to overcome the interaction forces between the vessels. Due to the fact that
the berthing vessel is hardly moving, the interaction forces are caused by reduction of the available wet
cross section, the presence of banks and the asymmetric flow pattern when manoeuvring along the
berthed vessel.
3.5.2
SIMULATIONS WITH 200 X 32 X 9.8M VESSEL
In total 7 simulations were conducted to evaluate the docking manoeuvre:
Simulation P07, P08 and P09 were conducted in 1.2 knots flood current in the bend.
Simulation P10, P11 and P12 were conducted during slack current (the most optimal moment for
turning the vessel).
Simulation P13 was conducted in 0.6 knots ebb current in the bend.
Figure 3-3 shows the swept track of all simulations with the 200x32m vessel. The swept path includes the
vessel track upon arrival to the berth (bow-in) and the vessel track after turning in the turning basin (bowout). It should be noted that the width of the channel in front of the poly terminal is set to 100m wide
(since this vessel cannot sail through the existing channel, which is only 60m wide, nor turn in the existing
turning basin).
The suggested buoy locations given in Figure 3-3 are recommended in order to mark the limits of the
berthing pocket.
Suggested Buoy location
Suggested Buoy location

Figure 3-3: Simulated swept track of all simulations with the 200x32m vessel.
The swept track in Figure 3-3 shows that the channel (with a width of 100m) is fully occupied by the vessel
during the berthing manoeuvre. During the bow-in manoeuvres the final approach took about 15 minutes
from passing the last green buoy (boia 28) up to bringing the vessel in final position for berthing at the
POLY terminal.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
22
During the bow-out manoeuvres it took about 36 minutes to conduct the transit from the passage of the
green buoy (boia 28) to the Teporti turning basin, turning and bringing the vessel in final position for
berthing. After turning it takes about 15min to make the final berthing manoeuvre, whereas the whole
manoeuvre takes about 36 minutes, see Table 3-6.
time frame
occupied space
15 minutes
60m
to final berthing (bow-in)

Passage green buoy (boia 28), to turning
36 minutes
basin and final berthing (bow-out)

Table 3-6: Required time for berthing manoeuvre 200m vessel, measured from Boia 28 (fully blockage of channel).
In all simulated manoeuvres the pilot turned the vessel and approached along the red buoy side, hereby
using the full width of the available space in the transition zone between turning basin and channel. Since
the terminal is located at the green buoy side, the pilot will use the complete available width of the channel
(crossing the channel), see Figure 3-2.
During the berthing manoeuvre of the vessel we strongly advise not to pass with another (large) vessel for
the following arguments:
As can be observed from the swept track the occupied space in the channel is 60m (measured from the
dredged channel limit at the green buoy side).
The swept path does not include the space occupied by the tugs. Once the vessel is being pushed
alongside towards the berth, the tug is within the safety distance between two passing ships (the
length of the tug is about 25m). This may hamper the operation of the tug and should therefore be
avoided. The propeller wash generated by the tugs, may hamper other traffic sailing in the channel as
well.
The remaining width available is 15m (100-60-25=15m). This remaining width is the total lane width
available for a vessel. This total lane width should include the basic manoeuvring lane width as well as
the environmental factors and passing distance as described by PIANC.
The 15m width is not sufficient for a vessel to sail along the Poly terminal when a 32m wide vessel is
making the berthing manoeuvre.
A passing vessel has to sail upmost to the red bank side, hereby experiencing rather high bank suction
forces. Given the rather narrow channel configuration (large blockage of the available wet crosssection), high counter rudder is required to overcome the interaction forces between the vessels.
3.5.3
GENERAL EVALUATION
As shown in Table 3-7, a vessel moored alongside the Poly terminal, does not exceed the channel limits.
Once the design vessel is moored other ships can pass alongside. According to PIANC (report 121, 2014
Harbour approach channels design guidelines) a minimum separation distance between hulls of 2B
should be taken into (hull to hull side) when the passing ship speed is less than 4 knots (which is about the
ahead velocity of the vessel while passing the Poly terminal). When the ahead velocity of the passing
vessel increases, the passing ship interaction forces between the two ships increase. Depending on the
vessel size and speed the interaction forces may endanger the operations at the berth (mooring forces in
the lines and too high ship motions).
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
23
The recommended safe passing distance between a moored vessel and a passing ship of 2B (by PIANC) for
a similar sized vessel cannot be maintained in the existing channel. However, based on our experience we
expect that this minimum passing distance recommended by PIANC is quite conservative. It should be
investigated by conducting a dynamic mooring analysis what a safe passing distance and speed is when
there is a moored vessel at the Poly terminal (in case it is envisaged that large vessels will pass along the
moored vessel at the Poly terminal). This mooring analysis should take into account the passing ship
interaction forces in shallow water in a restricted channel. PIANC recommends this dynamic mooring
analysis in detailed design stage, since it is a site specific assessment.
Vessel of 135x19m moored along the Poly terminal

and located outside dredged channel limits (60m
wide). If the same vessel size is passing the
moored vessel and we apply a passing distance of
2*B as recommended by PIANC, a channel width of
about 37m is available in the main channel for the
vessel to pass the POLY terminal. This means that
passing should take place during relatively mild
wind and current conditions (small drift angle
required). Additional mooring analysis is
recommended to verify passing distance and
speed.
wide). If we account for a passing distance of 2*B
(PIANC recommendation) and assume the same
vessel size is passing the terminal, about 10m
width is available in the channel. This remaining
width is insufficient for a vessel of the same size
(remaining width < B). Additional mooring analysis
recommended to verify passing distance and
speed.

wide). If the same vessel size has to sail alongside
and accounting for a safety distance of 2B, then
about 35m width is available in the channel,. This
remaining width is insufficient for a vessel of the
same size (remaining width of about 1 B).
Additional mooring analysis recommended to verify
passing distance and speed.
There is sufficient space available for the 135x19m
vessel to pass. In order to verify if the 150x28m
vessel can pass additional mooring analysis is
recommended as well.
Table 3-7: Moored vessels alongside the Poly terminal and the remaining space in channel.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
24
3.6
MANOEUVRING STRATEGY AND TUG USE
For both design vessels the strategy is the same. Two ASD tugs are used during the berthing manoeuvre.
The use of tugs may differ when the ship is equipped with a bow thruster. In case the smaller vessel
(LOA=135m/150m) is equipped with a bow thruster, only one tug at the aft will be used. On the large
vessel (LOA=200m) the forward tug remains connected to the centre lead forward when berthing.
Arrival strategy in flood or slack tide (bow-out)
Stemming the tide (current coming from ahead) when berthing makes the manoeuver more controllable
and easier for handling the ships mooring lines, therefore the manoeuvre is considered safer compared to
arrivals over the ebb (when the current is coming from astern).
The vessel is stopped and turned over starboard using the two tugs in the turning area opposite of the
Teporti terminal. After being turned the forward tug is repositioned from the centre lead on the bow to
port shoulder in push/pull mode. From the turning area the vessel sails towards the berth, see Figure 3-4.
The vessel approaches the berth under a small angle using the current, if any, to create lateral motion
towards the berth (the pilot is using the main engine in combination with the rudder to achieve the lateral
motions). Once in position she is kept by the tugs and ships lines are send out.
Figure 3-4: Run P09, Arrival200m vessel in flood tide
Arrival strategy in ebb or slack tide (bow in)

During the approach the forward tug takes position on starboard shoulder in push/pull mode. The stern
tug controls the headway and stern of the vessel. The forward tug controls the bow of the vessel. During
the ebb tide the vessel approaches the berth under a small angle using the current to create lateral motion
towards the berth. The mooring procedure is similar to the manoeuver in flood tide. An example of such a
manoeuvre is given in Figure 3-5.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
25
Figure 3-5: Run P12, Arrival 200m vessel in ebb tide
Although not simulated for this study we recommend the following strategy during departures:
Departure strategy in flood and ebb tide (bow-out)
Two tugs are connected, one at the forward centre lead and one at the aft centre lead. After the last ships
mooring lines are clear the tugs can pull the vessel sideways from the quay and the vessel can set sail.
Departure strategy in flood and ebb tide (bow-in)
De-berthing takes place using the same procedure as for bow-out manoeuvres. The vessel sails towards
the turning area opposite of the Teporti terminal. As a result of the shape of the turning area, the velocity
of the current in the southern part under the quay is higher than in the northern part. This means that in
flood tide the turn through starboard and in ebb tide through port is assisted by the current. After the turn
the vessel lines up for the river channel and sets sail.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
26
4
4.1
Conclusions and
recommendations
CONCLUSIONS
The objectives of the work were as follows:
Determine the required space for berthing (during arrival) for 2 different design vessels, one for Phase
1 (actual situation) and one for Phase 2 (future situation) docking at the Poly terminal;
Evaluate if the space in the navigation channel during the berthing and docking part of the manoeuvre
is sufficient for safe navigation for vessels in the channel (i.e. vessels manoeuvring along the Poly
terminal).
Recommend potential improvements (e.g. navigational aids).
Based on the simulations carried out the following is concluded:
The occupied width in the channel during arrival is about 50m for the smallest vessel (150x28m) and
about 60m (200x32m) for the largest design vessel considered in this study.
For the 150m vessel the berthing manoeuvre, starting at buoy 28, takes about 13 minutes in case of a
bow-in manoeuvre. In case of a bow-out manoeuvre it takes 20 minutes to navigate from the turning
basin in front of Teporti to the Poly terminal berth, see Table 4-1.
For the 200m vessel the berthing manoeuvre takes about 15 minutes in case of a bow-in manoeuvre
and 36 minutes in case of a bow-out manoeuvre. The time is measured from passing the last green
buoy downstream of the Poly terminal (boya 28) up to final berthing at the quay, see Table 4-2.
The remaining space in the channel is not sufficient for other sea-going vessels or equivalent inland
crafts to pass during the berthing manoeuvre of the vessels.
In case a vessel of 135x19m is moored along the Poly terminal in the existing situation (60m wide
channel), she will be located outside the dredged channel limits. If we assume a passing vessel with
similar beam and a passing distance of 2*B, as recommended by PIANC, then a channel width of about
37m is available in the main channel for the vessel to pass the Poly terminal. This means that passing
should take place during relatively mild wind and current conditions (small drift angle required).
Additional mooring analysis is recommended to verify passing distance and speed.
In case a vessel of 150x28m is moored along the Poly terminal, she will be located outside the existing
channel limits (60m wide channel). If we account for a passing distance of 2*B (PIANC
recommendation) and assume the same vessel size is passing the terminal, about 10m width is
available in the channel. This remaining width is insufficient for a vessel of the same size (remaining
width < B).
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
27
In case a vessel of 200x32m is moored along the Poly terminal, she will be located outside the dredged
channel limits (100m wide channel). If the same vessel size has to sail alongside and accounting for a
safety distance of 2B, then about 35m width is available in the channel. This remaining width of about
1B is insufficient for a vessel of the same size to pass Poly terminal. There is sufficient space available
for the 135x19m vessel to pass. Additional mooring analysis are recommended to determine and verify
which vessels can safely pass the terminal and what should be the passing distance and speed
As mentioned in the three previous bullets, the PIANC design guidelines recommend for the
conceptual design phase a passing distance between a moored and sailing vessel of 2 times the beam of
the sailing vessel. It is noted that based on our experience in similar projects worldwide, a distance of
2B for a sailing speed of 4 knots is quite conservative. The minimum passing distances should be
determined for various vessel sizes and sailing speeds by carrying out a dynamic mooring analysis. It
is noted that this approach is also recommended by PIANC for the detailed design stage.
Additional buoys are suggested to indicate the berthing pocket and identify the sailing route towards
the quay, see Figure 3-3.
time frame
occupied space
13 minutes
50m

Passage turning basin Teporti
20 minutes

to final berthing (bow-out)
Table 4-1: Required time for berthing manoeuvre measured from Boia 28 (fully blockage of channel) 150x28m vessel.
time frame
occupied space
15 minutes
60m

Passage green buoy (boia 28), to turning
basin and final berthing (bow-out)
36 minutes

Table 4-2: Required time for berthing manoeuvre measured from Boia 28 (fully blockage of channel) 200x32m vessel.
4.2
RECOMMENDATIONS
We recommend to carry out a dynamic mooring analysis, including passing ship interaction forces in
restricted shallow water, in order to determine for various vessels safe passing distances and passing ship
speeds. It is noted that this study is only relevant in case it is envisaged to pass the moored vessel at Poly
terminal with large vessels (sea-going or equivalent inland crafts). Therefore, in order to judge if a
dynamic mooring analysis is required, it should first be investigated what are the expected sizes of vessels
that will pass the Poly terminal in the future.
Furthermore, we recommend to set-up a VTS system (Vessel Traffic System) to monitor the vessel traffic
along the trajectory of Itaja up to Teporti. This will assist the pilots in order to plan the transits of the
vessel through the channel.
077719927:A - Final
ARCADIS
28
Appendix 1
077719927:A - Final
Flow
ARCADIS
29
Appendix 2
077719927:A - Final
Manoeuvring sheets of
design vessels
ARCADIS
30
Gear Bulk Vessel
Ship #355
820_GC355_hjn02.1p1_5p0.dsf
LOADING CONDITION
Partial load
TELEGRAPH
depth
p
MAIN DIMENSIONS
Capacity
DWT
Loa
m
Lpp
m
B
m
D
m
T (test)
m
Awt
m
Awl
m
61800
200.0
196.0
32.3
19.2
9.8
650
2500
PROPULSION
P
kW
N
rpm
Dprop
m
9,960
127.0
6.0
BOW & STERN THRUSTERS
P bow
P stern
kW
kW
1480
-
sea full
harbour full
half
slow
dead slow
100.0
58.5
32.5
16.0
6.5
TURNING CIRCLES
depth
initial speed
rudder
advance
m
transfer
m
tactical diam.
m
final diameter
m
STOPPING TEST
depth
initial speed
telegraph astern
distance to stop
time to stop
final heading
kn
m
m:s
ZIG-ZAG TESTS
depth
initial speed
rudder/execute
1st overshoot
execute time
overshoot time
period
kn
s
s
s
deep water
rpm
knots
127
15.2
100
12.1
85
10.3
48
6.0
32
4.2
deep water
15.2
ST 35
745
373
779
427
shallow water
rpm
knots
127
12.4
100
10.1
85
8.6
48
5.0
32
3.5
15.2
ST 20
1081
672
1411
1181
shallow water
10.1
10.1
ST 35
ST 20
1013
1857
789
1670
1478
3301
1197
3209
deep water
15.2
12.1
harbour full harbour full
2205
1565
00:09:09
00:07:52
29
23
shallow water
10.1
5.0
half
half
1417
494
00:09:08 00:05:39
6
4
deep water
15.2
15.2
20/20
10/10
7
3
64
62
25
23
294
285
shallow water
10.1
10.1
20/20
10/10
2
1
144
145
21
17
583
595
MANOEUVRING TESTS
water depth
49.0
shallow water
10.8
GC355
Gear Bulk Vessel
Ship #360
820_GC360_hjn03.1p1_5p0.dsf
LOADING CONDITION
Partial load
TELEGRAPH
depth
p
MAIN DIMENSIONS
Capacity
DWT
Loa
m
Lpp
m
B
m
D
m
T (test)
m
Awt
m
Awl
m
20000
150.0
140.0
28.0
14.0
8.5
431
1705
PROPULSION
P
kW
N
rpm
Dprop
m
6,480
105.0
5.5
BOW & STERN THRUSTERS
P bow
P stern
kW
kW
600
-
sea full
harbour full
half
slow
dead slow
100.0
58.5
32.5
16.0
6.5
TURNING CIRCLES
depth
initial speed
rudder
advance
m
transfer
m
tactical diam.
m
final diameter
m
STOPPING TEST
depth
initial speed
telegraph astern
distance to stop
time to stop
final heading
kn
m
m:s
ZIG-ZAG TESTS
depth
initial speed
rudder/execute
1st overshoot
execute time
overshoot time
period
kn
s
s
s
deep water
rpm
knots
105
16.5
83
13.1
70
11.1
40
6.4
26
4.3
shallow water
rpm
knots
105
12.9
83
10.7
70
9.0
40
5.2
26
3.5
deep water
16.5
16.5
ST 35
ST 20
544
738
235
396
469
804
213
624
shallow water
10.7
10.7
ST 35
ST 20
738
1170
561
1025
1054
2024
842
1952
deep water
16.5
13.1
harbour full harbour full
2333
1383
00:08:03
00:06:00
32
32
shallow water
10.7
5.2
half
half
1065
374
00:06:25 00:04:00
8
6
deep water
16.5
16.5
20/20
10/10
13
5
44
43
26
24
229
220
shallow water
10.7
10.7
20/20
10/10
3
1
88
88
19
15
366
365
MANOEUVRING TESTS
water depth
42.5
shallow water
9.4
GC360
Appendix 3
077719927:A - Final
SHIP-Navigator
ARCADIS
31
Imagine the result
SHIP-NAVIGATOR
General
The construction of new or extended harbours and terminals involves large and
expensive infrastructural works such as dredged channels, breakwaters, trestles and
fixed or floating mooring systems. The size and location of these infrastructures and
sometimes the layout of the entire terminal are related to the nautical requirements
(manoeuvring width, navigational aids, tug support) of the ships calling at the port
or terminal.
Optimisation of the design from a nautical point of view requires a thorough
knowledge of and experience in ship handling and harbour design and efficient
design tools for ship manoeuvring.
Ship-related infrastructure is developed with increasingly smaller margins and under
increasingly difficult site conditions. Therefore it is important to be able to simulate
the entire ship operation including arrival, behaviour at berth and departure.
In order to anticipate to these demands, we have developed the three-dimensional
simulation model ship. This is an integrated ship-simulation suite, which simulates
the manoeuvring ship, including arrival, berthing, de-berthing and departure (SHIPNAVIGATOR) as well as the behaviour at the berth (ship-moorings).
SHIP-NAVIGATOR is a computer program for the nautical assessment and optimisation of designs. With SHIP-NAVIGATOR one is capable to simulate ship manoeuvres
in real-time as well as faster than real-time.
It is possible to exercise the controls manually as well as through a track-following
automatic pilot. With these possibilities the model allows a fast analysis of a large
number of design alternatives as well as a detailed analysis of berthing and deberthing procedures.
Figure 1: Manoeuvring action
Figure 2: Control Panel
Imagine the result
ARCADISs mathematical model SHIP

SHIP-NAVIGATOR is part of the nautical SHIP suite of programs developed by ARCADIS. The programs may be used either integrated or in a stand-alone fashion.
SHIP models:
the simulation of the manoeuvring of a sailing vessel;

the horizontal and vertical motions of a vessel sailing in waves;
motions and mooring forces of a vessel moored to a jetty, quay, SPM or spread
mooring system.
In these simulations the effects of in time and space varying wind, waves, currents
and water depths can be considered. The influence of rudder(s), propeller(s), bow
and stern thrusters, tugs, mooring lines and fenders are also included.
Figure 3: Winches control panel
Special features
Nowadays the construction of terminals is realised at locations with increasingly
difficult environmental conditions. Therefore, SHIP-NAVIGATOR has been designed
such that it allows for accurate close-quarter manoeuvring characteristics and possibilities. Better than most other fast-time simulators it allows for the following features:
It models the actual characteristics of rudder and propeller with detailed model-
Figure 4: Tugs control panel
ling of the interaction between rudder, propeller and hull. Thus realistic ship
manoeuvring is possible in all modes of operation (manoeuvring ahead, astern,
sideways, accelerating, stopping, being towed or pushed).
With double rudder/propeller-ships it is possible to individually control propellers and rudders.
It has a detailed tug modelling with towing and pushing possibility; control of
their towing-line length, towing position and towing angle; tug effectiveness is
restricted depending on the speed and relative direction of the tow, of the tugs
own speed and of the waves at the tug location. Wave shielding at the lee-side
of the ship is taken into account.
Ship may be handled both manually (interactive) by the user as well as by a track
-following automatic pilot.
Close quarter manoeuvring is facilitated for the user with a user-friendly control
panel for ship (Figure 2), winch (Figure 3) and tug control (Figure 4) and with real
-time birds-eye-view colour-visualisation of the ship, the tugs and the surroundings (coast, channel, manoeuvring aids, harbour, berths).
For debriefing purposes it is possible to replay an earlier executed run.
Imagine the result
Model Properties
Modular set-up with special emphasis for hullpropeller-rudder interaction and manoeuvring properties for slow speeds and astern manoeuvres.
Propeller forces (full four-quadrant modelling).
Rudder forces (incl. effects of screw race / flow attack
for all manoeuvring conditions).
Bow and stern-thruster forces (with speed-correction).
Full model of engine-propeller with correct revolutions
build-up and reduction.
Shallow water-effects.
Wind forces.
Current; effect of variable current over the length of
the ship.
Multiple wave fields (e.g. sea and swell); effect of diminishing wave forces over the length of the ship
when entering a protected area.
Wave reduction caused by the ship herself (used for
operation of tugs on the lee-side of the ship).
Realistic tugboat usage depending on sailing direction, speed, wave height at tug location and time required to change tow-direction; tug (schematically)
and towline presented on screen
Clear presentation with birds-eye-view in colour of
manoeuvring area, infrastructure, ship and navigational aids.
Manual or automatic steering.
Checking of manoeuvring characteristics with standard
manoeuvring tests.
Possibility of modelling of fenders and mooring lines
(at jetties etc.).
Options
On-line choice of simulation-speed and controlmethod (track-following automatic pilot or manual
control).
Possibility to replay earlier executed runs with all instruments active during the replay; replay-speed adjustable.
Variable orientation of birds-eye-view with respect to
North.
Variable number of tugs (maximum four).
Option to show swept path during simulation or during replay.
Choice for normal simulation or automatic execution
of standard manoeuvring tests (turning circles, zigzag
tests).
Controls and instruments

Manual control with mouse of buttons and
handles:
telegraph;
rudder control;
(de)coupling of propellers and rudders in case of
twin propulsion;
bow-thruster;
stern-thruster;
tugs (pull; push; push/pull; direction; connection
point; line length);
winches (pulling, paying out, slipping).
Instruments and position-indication:
time;
doppler-log (u,v);
sallog;
rate-of-turn;
water depth;
heading;
wave heights (sea en swell);
wind speed and direction (relative);
distance indication rings and heading-line
repeaters for RPM, rudder (both double if required), bow and stern thruster
Results
Interactive output control screen with various possibilities to compile output with 1 to 3 plots per page.
Track-plots of runs.
Plot possibilities for e.g. speeds, rudder, propeller, tug
usage and site conditions.
Possibility to plot against time or distance along the
track.
Output files (ASCII) with all parameters and also with
all force-contributions exerted on the ship.
The results are presented in the form of track-plots (see
figure 5) and plots of parameters such as speed, rate-ofturn, engine settings, tug usage and any other parameters
relevant to the particular study.
The results are used to evaluate accurately, costeffectively and in a short period of time the downtime
and safe manoeuvring conditions for many design alternatives and thus facilitate an optimal design choice.
Imagine the result
Development
Given the high level of demands on a specialised consultant, we view the development of our software-tools in general and of ship in particular as a continuous process. Where possible, we directly implement experience and specific know-how
gained during our many projects.
SHIP-NAVIGATOR has been developed by a team of engineers in the field of ship
hydrodynamics, flow and wave hydrodynamics, applied mathematics and system
developers. This team has in-depth expertise and experience both in the nautical
field as well as in the design of complex software systems. The team has previous
working experience at Delft Hydraulics (including the three former section heads of
Harbours, Ship Hydrodynamics and Waves and Currents), the Maritime Research
Institute Netherlands (MARIN), The Netherlands Organisation of Applied Scientific
Research (TNO) and The National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR). As a team and as
individuals they have developed several simulation models, including new or further
developments of ship-simulation software for TNO, the Netherlands Royal Navy,
Delft Hydraulics and IHC.
SHIP-NAVIGATOR has been programmed by a group of programmers under the
supervision of an experienced software system developer. The latter has previously
also been responsible for the software design and implementation of complex refraction-diffraction models, of a 3-D finite-element model for the computation of
hydrodynamic forces on floating bodies and of a Navier-Stokes model for simulating breaking waves on coastal defences. He also participated in the EU projects ESPRIT and REDO, designed a Kalman graphical model for the Dutch Government and
carried out software design projects for the EU-projects pace and safe.
For ARCADIS Hydraulic Consultancy & Research bv, developing and maintaining at
a state-of-the-art level for the software-package SHIP-NAVIGATOR, is an essential
task in order to be able to supply high-level specialist advice in the area of waterrelated infrastructure and management.
The program ship has been obtained by the Netherlands Ministry of Transport and
Public Works for national projects as well as by the Civil Engineering Faculty of the
Delft University of Technology for educational goals.
More information
About ARCADIS
Please contact our office:
ARCADIS is an international company providing consultancy, design, engineering

and management services in infrastructure, water, environment and buildings. We
enhance mobility, sustainability and quality of life by creating balance in the built
and natural environment. ARCADIS develops, designs, implements, maintains and
operates projects for companies and governments. With 21,000 people and 2.4
billion in revenues, the company has an extensive international network supported
by strong local market positions. ARCADIS supports UNHABITAT with knowledge
and expertise to improve the quality of life in rapidly growing cities around the
world. Please visit: www.arcadis.com
Zwolle
Hanzelaan 286
8017 JJ Zwolle, the Netherlands
P.O. Box 137, 8000 AC Zwolle
T 038 777 7701
E info@arcadis.nl
I www.arcadis.com
Appendix 4
077719927:A - Final
Description and analysis of

simulation runs
ARCADIS
32
Run log Poly Simulations.

P07.1 355
Flood, Q250
W 030 6m/sec
Bend 4 and
up
P08.1 355
Flood, Q 250
W 030 6m/sec
Bend 4 and
up
P09.1 355
Flood, Q 250
W 030 6m/sec
Bend 4 and
up + turn
P10.1 355
Slack water
W 120 6m/sec
Bend 4 and
up
P11.1 355
Slack water
W 090 6m/sec
Bend 4 and
up + turn
P12.1 355
Ebb, Q 500
W 120 6m/sec
Bend 4 & up
P13.1 355
Ebb, Q 500
W 090 6m/sec
Bend 4 & up
+ turn
Ebb, Q 500
W 120 6m/sec
Up bend 4
P17
360
Arrival. Start time 21 January 03.00. 2

Tugs connected stern cl and fwd stb
shoulder push/pull. Stern close to outer
bend due to correction after start.
Berthing using flood stern current. No
bow thruster used.
Arrival. Start time 21 January 03.00. In
bend 4 ME set SAhd STW 3.1 SOG 4.0 ROT
~ 10/min. pivot point at 1/3L from bow.
Distance to limits 0.5B. Tugs cl aft fwd
stb shoulder push/pull max 50%.
Arrival. Start time January 21st 03.00.
Safe river transit. Difficult to turn into TC
with 10% UKC. Vessel drifted with stern
close to Teporti quay. (No vessel
alongside). Turn through stb within TC
limits, 2 tugs connected on line at cl. ROT
up to 35/min, pp at 1/2L, fwd tug 90%
capacity. Repositioned fwd tug to port
shoulder before berthing. On the limit for
close distance to TC limits
Arrival. Start time January 20th 11.00.
Stern close to outer bend due to
correction after start. (See run P07 can
be avoided). Controlled approach and
berthing using 2 tugs.
Arrival. Start time January 20st 11.00. ME
set HAhd for better steer ability in bend 4.
2 Tugs connected fwd & aft. Turn
through starboard close to TC Limit. ROT
up to 30/min using fwd tug.
Repositioned fwd tug to port shoulder
before berthing. Controlled berthing with
2 tugs.
Arrival. Start time January 21st 04.40. ME
set HAhd in first section short kick harbor
full. STW 7.1 SOG 5.5 ROT up to 20/min.
Berthing using current and 2 tugs.
Arrival. Start time 21 January 04.40. ME
set SAhd. Bend 4 STW 6.9 SOG 5.3 ROT
16/min. Pivot point L from bow. Stern
B from outer limit. Turn in limits TC
stern tug used in port turn ROT max
33/min. Pivot point L from stern.
Controlled berth using 2 tugs.
Bend 4 ME set HA to maintain headway
STW above 6 kts. STW 6.9 SOG 5.3 ROT ~
17/min. Pivot point at L from bow.
++
+/-
+/-
P18
360
Ebb, Q 500
W 120 6m/sec
Up bend 4
P19
360
Flood, Q 250
W 030 6m/sec
Up bend 4
Distance to channel limits 1B. Stopped

vessel over the ground in front of berth
and stepped sideways towards berth. 2
Tugs connected.
Bend 4 see previous run. Stopped run at
berth 2nd part : From to TC to berth. 2
Tugs connected. Berthing with current
from astern. Duration 22 minutes.
Bend 4 ME set SAhd. STW 3.7, SOG 4.6
kts. ROT up to 15/min. Pivot point at L
from bow. Distance to channel limits
1B. Berthing with current from astern
using 2 tugs. Duration of terminal
approach and berthing about 15 min.
Rating:
++ = very safe
+ = safe
+/- = limit
- = over the limit
-- = dangerous / failure
Abbreviations:
SOG
STW
ROT
ME
DSAhd
SAhd
HAhd
HFAhd
DSAst
PP
Fwd
CL
Kts
B
TC
Speed over the ground in knots (Nautical Miles / hour)

Speed through the water in knots
Rate of turn (/min)
Main Engine
Dead slow ahead
Slow ahead
Half ahead
Harbour full ahead
Dead slow astern
Pivot point
Forward
Centre lead
Knots
Beam (ships)
Turning circle
20/02/2014 15:11:52 Rev:1 File:P07-1.ps
Arrival of 200x32x9.8m general cargo vessel

Current: Flood, t0=21-01 03:00, Q=250m3/s
Run P07
Water level: MSL+0.78m
Wind: u(hourly)= 6 m/s from 30 N

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P07-1
20/02/2014 15:13:58 Rev:1 File:P07-2.ps

Run P07

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P07-2
20/02/2014 15:18:50 Rev:1 File:l:\A3076_Teporti\SHIP\runs\P07\velocityseries.ps

Run P07
ARCADIS
P07
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P07-3
20/02/2014 15:18:55 Rev:1 File:l:\A3076_Teporti\SHIP\runs\P07\engineseries.ps

Run P07
ARCADIS
P07
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P07-4
20/02/2014 15:18:59 Rev:1 File:l:\A3076_Teporti\SHIP\runs\P07\tugsseries.ps

Run P07
ARCADIS
P07
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P07-5
20/02/2014 15:12:05 Rev:1 File:P08-1.ps

Run P08

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P08-1
20/02/2014 15:14:08 Rev:1 File:P08-2.ps

Run P08

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P08-2

Run P08
ARCADIS
P08
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P08-3

Run P08
ARCADIS
P08
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P08-4

Run P08
ARCADIS
P08
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P08-5
20/02/2014 15:12:18 Rev:1 File:P09-1.ps

Run P09

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P09-1
20/02/2014 15:14:21 Rev:1 File:P09-2.ps

Run P09

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P09-2
21/02/2014 10:45:51 Rev:1
Run P09-1
P09

plot interval: 60s

ARCADIS
A3136 Poly
Fig. P09. 1-3

Run P09
ARCADIS
P09
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P09-3

Run P09
ARCADIS
P09
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P09-4

Run P09
ARCADIS
P09
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P09-5
20/02/2014 15:12:27 Rev:1 File:P10-1.ps

Run P10

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P10-1
20/02/2014 15:14:32 Rev:1 File:P10-2.ps

Run P10

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P10-2

Run P10
ARCADIS
P10
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P10-3

Run P10
ARCADIS
P10
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P10-4

Run P10
ARCADIS
P10
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P10-5
20/02/2014 15:12:42 Rev:1 File:P11-1.ps

Run P11

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P11-1
20/02/2014 15:14:46 Rev:1 File:P11-2.ps

Run P11

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P11-2
21/02/2014 10:47:49 Rev:1
Run P11-1

plot interval: 60s

ARCADIS
A3136 Poly
Fig. P11.1-3

Run P11
ARCADIS
P11
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P11-3

Run P11
ARCADIS
P11
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P11-4

Run P11
ARCADIS
P11
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P11-5
20/02/2014 15:12:52 Rev:1 File:P12-1.ps

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P12

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P12-1
20/02/2014 15:14:56 Rev:1 File:P12-2.ps

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P12

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P12-2

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P12
ARCADIS
P12
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P12-3

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P12
ARCADIS
P12
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P12-4

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P12
ARCADIS
P12
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P12-5
20/02/2014 15:13:04 Rev:1 File:P13-1.ps

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P13

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P13-1
20/02/2014 15:15:11 Rev:1 File:P13-2.ps

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P13

ARCADIS
Track
A3136 Poly
P13-2
21/02/2014 10:47:10 Rev:1
Run P13-1
Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s

plot interval: 60s

ARCADIS
A3136 Poly
Fig. P13.1-3

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P13
ARCADIS
P13
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P13-3

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P13
ARCADIS
P13
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P13-4

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P13
ARCADIS
P13
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P13-5
25/02/2014 17:25:52 Rev:1
P17
Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s

Wind: u(hourly) 6m/s from 120 N
ARCADIS
A3136 Poly
Fig. P17-1
25/02/2014 17:26:08 Rev:1
P17
Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s

Wind: u(hourly) 6m/s from 120 N
ARCADIS
A3136 Poly
Fig. P17-1

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P17
ARCADIS
P17
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P17-3

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P17
ARCADIS
P17
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P17-4

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P17
ARCADIS
P17
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P17-5
25/02/2014 17:22:38 Rev:1
Run P18
Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s

ARCADIS
A3136 Poly
P18

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P18
ARCADIS
P18
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P18-3

Current: Ebb, t0=21-01 04:40, Q=500m3/s
Run P18
ARCADIS
P18
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P18-4
25/02/2014 17:27:17 Rev:1
Run P19

ARCADIS
A3136 Poly
P19
25/02/2014 17:27:34 Rev:1
Run P19

ARCADIS
A3136 Poly
P19

Run P19
ARCADIS
P19
A3136 Poly
Velocities
Fig.P19-3

Run P19
ARCADIS
P19
A3136 Poly
Engine
Fig.P19-4

Run P19
ARCADIS
P19
A3136 Poly
Tugs
Fig.P19-5

Relatório Final Sobre o Acesso Aquaviário À Poly Terminais

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Relatório Final Sobre o Acesso Aquaviário À Poly Terminais

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NAUTICAL STUDY POLY TERMINALS

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Study approach .......................................................................................................................................... 5

Report layout .............................................................................................................................................. 6

Data and environmental conditions ................................................................................................................. 7

Channel layout ....................................................................................................................... 7

Manoeuvring strategy and present admittance policy ..................................................... 9

Environmental conditions ...................................................................................................................... 10

Tidal levels and flow conditions. ....................................................................................... 10

Nautical aspects ....................................................................................................................................... 14

Vessel specifications ............................................................................................................ 14

Tug specifications ................................................................................................................ 15

Manoeuvring simulations ................................................................................................................................ 16

Execution of simulations ......................................................................................................................... 17

Limiting condtitions ................................................................................................................................ 18

Tug use ...................................................................................................................................................... 19

Evaluation of executed simulations ...................................................................................................... 19

Physical properties .................................................................................................................................... 7

Simulations with the 150 x 28 x 8.5m vessel ..................................................................... 20

Simulations with 200 x 32 x 9.8m vessel ........................................................................... 22

General evaluation ............................................................................................................... 23

Manoeuvring strategy and tug use ....................................................................................................... 25

Conclusions and recommendations................................................................................................................ 27

Manoeuvring sheets of design vessels ............................................................................ 30

Description and analysis of simulation runs ................................................................. 32

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Figure 1-2: Overview of the POLY "termianis porturios" facility.

The objectives of the work were as follows:

Recommend potential improvements (e.g. navigational aids).

The study is divided in a couple of sub-tasks:

Give recommendations on improvements of navigation in the channel based on Task 1

Pilot / Master mariner

M. van der Wel

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

In Chapter 1 the approach to the study is described;

Finally, in Chapter 4 the conclusions and recommendations are presented.

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Data and environmental conditions

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Position (UTM WGS 84)

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

MANOEUVRING STRATEGY AND PRESENT ADMITTANCE POLICY

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

TIDAL LEVELS AND FLOW CONDITIONS.

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Water level (m)

Water level (m)

Mean High Water Spring

Mean High Water Neap

Mean Low Water Neap

Mean Low Water Spring

Low Low Water Spring

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Figure 2-5: Location offshore wind data at 2641S 4556W

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

> 16.0 m/s

Figure 2-6: Offshore wind rose at 2641S 4556W normal conditions

Wind direction (Deg)

Nautical Study Poly Terminals

Wind speed in m/s