Ship Project - Final PDF

AALTO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
Department of Applied Mechanics
Marine Technology
Ship Project A
M/S Arianna
Cruise ship without lifeboats
Jrgen Rosen
338099
Sander Nelis
337498
Justin Champion
397205
AALTO UNIVERSITY
Marine Technology
Introduction and Feasibility Studies

M/S Arianna
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... 1
1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 2
1.1
FOREWORD .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.2
PROJECT SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................. 2
1.3
VESSEL OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................. 3
FEASIBILITY STUDIES ................................................................................................ 4

2.1
MISSION ................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2
MARKET .................................................................................................................................. 5
2.2.1
The cruise industry........................................................................................................................ 5
2.2.2
The luxury cruise market .............................................................................................................. 5
2.2.3
Cruising in England ...................................................................................................................... 6
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................... 7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 - Outboard profile ..................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2-1 - Cruise route ............................................................................................................ 5
Figure 2-2 Past cruiser statistics .............................................................................................. 6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 - Main particulars ....................................................................................................... 3
Table 2-1 - Port limitations ........................................................................................................ 4
1 Introduction
1.1 Foreword
This project was assigned in conjunction with the course Kul-24.4110, Ship Project A. The
task was to develop further the design completed in the Ship Conceptual Design course by
completing an additional iteration through the ship design spiral.
One major objective is to achieve as holistic a design as possible, with an equal amount of
effort placed on each of the deliverables. This report summarizes the main challenges and
outcomes of each task, along with the methods used for their completion.
1.2 Project schedule

In addition to time reserved for the final report and all corrective measures, the project was
divided into five major phases. For each, background information including a summarization
of completed work, areas for improvement, and additional tasks to be completed were first
presented. The main project tasks were as follows:
Task 1 resistance, propulsion, and machinery
Task 2 general arrangement
Task 3 hull structure
Task 4 lightweight and intact stability
Task 5 cost and ship price
Not included in this structure were additional NAPA considerations, such as the damage
stability and lines drawing.
1.3 Vessel overview

The final design is for the cruise ship Arianna, a small-scale, luxury cruise ship to be based in
the United Kingdom. The main difference between this ship and existing ones is the fact that
she has no lifeboats onboard, but rather alternative forms of lifesaving equipment.
The vessels final main particulars are provided in Table 1-1 and the outboard profile in
Figure 1-1.
Table 1-1 - Main particulars
Length overall
Length between perpindiculars
Beam
Draft
Air draft
Service speed
Froude number
Displacement
Gross registered tons
Block coefficient
Max. passenger capacity
Max. crew capacity
Total electric power
Propeller diameter
Fuel
Classification societies
120
107,5
18
5,4
18
17
0,25
7023
6577
0,65
184
62
17,82
3,8
HFO
DNV and ABS
m
m
m
m
m
kn
[-]
t
GRT
[-]
[-]
[-]
MW
m
[-]
[-]
Figure 1-1 - Outboard profile
2 Feasibility studies
Though the focus of this project is on the technical characteristics and overall design process,
it is no less important to research the current demand and industry in order to ensure the
projects feasibility. As such, the definition of the vessels mission, research of the market,
and compilation of current ship data served as the starting point of the design process.
2.1 Mission
The vessels mission, as a cruise ship, is straightforward: to transport passengers in a
comfortable setting with overnight accommodations to the decided ports of call. As a luxury
cruise ship, however, a much higher standard will be expected in terms of comfort and
service. Finally, a core mission is to ensure an extremely high level of safety in both normal
operation conditions and emergencies. As the ship has no lifeboats, this is among the most
important considerations throughout the project.
According to SOLAS regulations, vessels without lifeboats must operate no more than 200
miles from the coast, so selecting a suitable area of operation was important. With these
limitations, a route along the coast of the United Kingdom was selected. Many UK ports are
popular among current cruise lines and there is no need to sail long distances in open water. A
typical itinerary starts from the port of Dover and visits, in order, Portsmouth, Plymouth,
Swansea, Holyhead, Douglas, and Liverpool. This results in an open-ended cruise, though it
could be customized to end at the same port of embarkation as well. Known port limitations
are listed in Table 2-1. It should be noted that exact information for the port of Douglas was
not found, though commercial vessels are offered deep-water berths in the outer harbour
while large vessels, including cruise ships, may be restricted to anchoring in the bay and using
tenders to bring passengers ashore. With such a small ship, however, this should not be an
issue. The route, along with estimated distances, is shown in Figure 2-1.
Table 2-1 - Port limitations
Port
Dover
Portsmouth
Plymouth
Swansea
Holyhead
Douglas*
Liverpool
Max. Length [m]

342.5
285
140
200
300
350
Breadth [m]
26,2
-
Max. Draught[m]
10.5
9,5
18
9,9
10,5
10.5
Figure 2-1 - Cruise route
2.2 Market
Even in todays questionable economic climate, the cruise industry is expected to continue
growing in the future. All industry aspects affecting this design show strong trends over recent
years.
2.2.1 The cruise industry
The cruise industry is the fastest growing category in the leisure travel market, with an annual
growth of 7.6% since 1990 (1). Today, the industry demand outstrips supply (based on
berthing), where demand is at 103.2% of such supply (2). As for the future, the industry is
forecast to grow over the next 15 years, expanding from a worldwide base of 16 million
passengers to between 21 and 28 million in 2027 (1). These trends can be seen in current and
future new-build projects, as there are 26 planned cruise ships, carrying from 100 to over
4,000 passengers, to be built in the next two years (2).
2.2.2 The luxury cruise market
The cruise industry as a whole continues to expand and so does the luxury cruise market
specifically, though at a slightly smaller rate. The market is largely successful because of the
high interest and return rate of past cruisers, as highlighted in Figure 2-2. It has been indicated
that 87% of luxury cruisers are repeat cruisers and 43% have taken six or more cruise
vacations (1). In addition, it was found that 80% of the core market group belonged in the
5
affluent range in terms of finances, as defined by the CLIA, showing that the future luxury
market is promising. This, along with the new cruiser market, makes the luxury market a
successful yet under capacity market in regards to demand vs. berths. In fact, there are
currently only twenty ocean-going, non-expedition luxury ships in service, with only two
new-build projects planned at this time (3).
Figure 2-2 Past cruiser statistics
2.2.3 Cruising in England

As with the entire industry, the UK-based cruise market is thriving at present, both in terms of
UK cruisers and cruises within the country. Currently, UK ranks second, behind only the US,
in terms of passenger market penetration. As of 2012, nearly 3% of all UK citizens have taken
a cruise, and the annual number of cruisers has increased greatly over the past decade (4). The
UK and northern Europe make up the third largest cruise market, with almost 11% of current
deployments, behind only the Caribbean and Mediterranean (4). The cruise industry in the UK
specifically is experiencing a rapid increase and a record number of cruise ships will call at
UK ports in 2014 (5). Further, 860 cruises are scheduled to depart from British ports while
there has been a 12% rise in the number of cruises starting and ending in the UK. This all
leads to a promising market forecast and validates the choice to base the ship in the UK.
Bibliography
1. Cruise Lines International Association, Inc. CLIA Overview. 2012.
2. . Cruise Market Profile Study. 2011.
3. Ward, Douglas. Complete Guide to Cruising and Cruise Ships 2012. London : Berlitz,
2011.
4. Cruise Lines International Association. 2013 Cruise Industry Update. s.l. : CLIA, 2013.
5. Travel Magazine. Cruise industry booming as UK sailing forecast to hit all-time high.
2013.
AALTO UNIVERSITY
Marine Technology
Primary Dimensions and Hull Form

M/S Arianna
Table of Contents
1
PARAMETRIC STUDY .................................................................................................. 2

1.1
PRELIMINARY DIMENSIONS ..................................................................................................... 2
HULL FORM DEFINITION .......................................................................................... 5

2.1
BOW SHAPE .............................................................................................................................. 5
2.2
MIDSHIP SHAPE ........................................................................................................................ 7
2.3
STERN SHAPE ........................................................................................................................... 7
2.4
PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT ......................................................................................................... 8
2.5
LENGTH OF PARALLEL MID-BODY ........................................................................................... 8
2.6
LOCATION OF MID-SECTION..................................................................................................... 9
2.7
LONGITUDINAL CENTRE OF BUOYANCY .................................................................................. 9
LINES DRAWING ......................................................................................................... 10
HYDROSTATIC CURVES ........................................................................................... 11
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 12
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1. Length as a function of number of passengers ........................................................ 3
Figure 1-2. Breadth as a function of number of passengers ....................................................... 3
Figure 1-3. Draft as a function of number of passengers ........................................................... 4
Figure 1-4. Breadth as a function of length ................................................................................ 4
Figure 1-5. Draft as a function of length .................................................................................... 5
Figure 2-1. Shapes of the bow .................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2-2. Modern bulb form.................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2-3. Midship deadrise ..................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2-4. Prismatic coefficient dependent of Froude number ................................................. 8
Figure 2-5. Graph for the parallel mid-body length ................................................................... 8
Figure 2-6. Location of mid - section as a function of Froude number. .................................... 9
Figure 2-7. Longitudinal centre of buoyancy as function of prismatic coefficient .................... 9
1 Parametric study
In order to identify the initial, major characteristics of the ship, data was collected for cruise
ships and luxury cruise ships specifically. With this database, a parametric study was
completed for both the preliminary dimensions and general cruise ship characteristics.
1.1 Preliminary dimensions

The ships main dimensions are limited by the harbours in which she visits, along with the
fact that the vessel has no lifeboats. From the previous chapter, it can be seen that the main
dimensions are mainly limited by Portsmouth, Plymouth, and Swansea. The Portsmouth
harbour limits the draft of the ship to 9.5 m and Plymouth limits the length to 140 m. Finally,
Swansea limits the vessels breadth to 26.2 m. With no lifeboats, it is important to limit the
total number of passengers in order to comply with regulations, therefore, a maximum
passenger capacity of 184 persons will be considered.
For initial estimations, dimensions were plotted as a function of number of passengers.. The
trend for length, breadth and draft are shown in Figure 1-1, Figure 1-2 and in Figure 1-3. The
regression for length yields 120 m, for breadth 18 m, and for draft 5,4 m corresponding to the
estimation of approximately 184 passengers. In the Figure 1-4 and in Figure 1-5 are shown
breadth and draft as a function of length
140
130
Length (m)
120
110
Project ship
100
90
80
50
100
150
200
250
300
Number of Passengers
Figure 1-1. Length as a function of number of passengers
22
Breadth (m)
20
18
16
Project ship
14
12
10
50
100
150
200
250
300
Figure 1-2. Breadth as a function of number of passengers
6
5.5
Draft (m)
5
4.5
4
Project ship
3.5
3
2.5
2
50
100
150
200
250
300
Figure 1-3. Draft as a function of number of passengers
20
19
Breadth(m)
18
17
16
Project ship
15
14
13
12
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Length (m)
Figure 1-4. Breadth as a function of length
6
5.5
Draft (m)
5
4.5
4
Project ship
3.5
3
2.5
2
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Length (m)
Figure 1-5. Draft as a function of length
2 Hull form definition

Hull shape is always designed by considering hydrodynamics, stability, and also the operation
area and ship type should be taken into account. The following subsections summarize the
major criteria taken into account at the very early design stage.
2.1 Bow shape

The shape of the bow of ship project is V-shaped because it has many advantages when
compared with a U-shaped bow.
Greater volume of topsides and more space for wider decks
Greater local width in the CWL and thus greater moment of inertia of the water plane and
a higher centre of buoyancy - both effects increase KM. The heeling accelerations are
smaller and, for a cruise ship, it is one of the most important considerations.
Smaller wetted surface, lower frictional resistance, and lower steel weight
Less curved surface and cheaper outer shell construction
Better seakeeping ability due to a) greater reserve of buoyancy and b) no slamming effects
Figure 2-1. Shapes of the bow
The ships hull includes a bulbous bow because the Froude number is over 0,23. Therefore, a
bulbous bow is recommended. Today, bulbous forms tapering sharply underneath are
preferred since these reduce slamming. Additional advantages are as follows.
Bulbous bows can reduce the powering requirements of the propulsion by 20 %
Course-keeping ability and manoeuvrability are improved
The wetted surface area increasews, which affects the frictional resistance - modern bulbs
decrease resistance often by more than 20%. (1)
Figure 2-2. Modern bulb form
2.2 Midship shape

In the midship section, deadrise is used, resulting in the following affects.
Improved flow around the bilge

Raised centre of buoyancy KB, which improves stability
Decreased rolled damping, which results in larger rolling angles
Improved course-keeping ability. (1)
Figure 2-3. Midship deadrise
2.3 Stern shape

The shape of the stern is a transom stern for the current ship project because of the fact that Fn
0,3. The transom should be above the waterline. The flat stern begins at approximately the
height of the CWL. There will be a conventional twin-screw arrangement. Therefore, this
form was introduced merely to simplify construction. The transom stern for fast ships should
aim at reducing resistance through the effect of virtual lengthening of the ship. (1)
2.4 Prismatic coefficient
Figure 2-4. Prismatic coefficient dependent of Froude number
As Froude number is equal to 0,25, the prismatic coefficient using Troosts criteria is
.
2.5 Length of parallel mid-body
Figure 2-5. Graph for the parallel mid-body length
As
which is smaller than 0,65, there is an assumed zero parallel mid-body.
2.6 Location of mid-section
Figure 2-6. Location of mid - section as a function of Froude number.
As Froude number is 0,25, the location
is 0,4 and the mid section location from the
forward perpendicular is
2.7 Longitudinal centre of buoyancy
Figure 2-7. Longitudinal centre of buoyancy as function of prismatic coefficient
LCB is aft of the mid-ship for small values and ahead of
for large values. The location of
the longitudinal centre of buoyancy is from -1,2% to 0,8% of the overall length.
9
m
m
m
m
m
m
Disp
Disv
S
Cb
Cm
Cp
Cwp
LCB
VCB
KMT
10.8
10.5
20
19
7.5
18
0
1
5.4
17
4.5
16
15
120.00
110.61
107.49
18.00
18.00
5.40
6.15
20.48
3.33
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
14
4
5
17
8960
13 2
111
6999
6828
2564
0.6536
0.9209
0.7097
0.8733
-0.93
3.10
9.12
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
t
m3
m2
Lines drawing
Loa
Lwl
Lpp
Bmax
Bwl
Tdwl
Lwl/Bwl
Lwl/Tdwl
Bwl/Tdwl
%
m
m
1.5
Scale 1:357.51
Scale 1:715.03
10.8
10.5
7.5
5.4
4.5
3
1.5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Scale 1:715.03
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
m
of b
uoy.
mo
t
wa
l
ta
to
di
t
ent
em ransv.
c
met
la
ac.
sp
eff
heik co
g
c
h
o
t
bl
en
ici
er
li
ne
ar
h
o c
t t
n
e
m
rim
e t
g
n
a
cm
n/
io
s
r
me
im
ea
4
total displacement
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
long. centre of buoy.

56
56.5
57
57.5
58
58.5
m
59
transv. metac. height

8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
block coefficient
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
waterline area
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
moment to change trim

40
60
80
100
120
140
12
13
14
15
16
17
tm/cm
160
immersion/cm
11
m2
1900
18
t/cm
19
HYDROSTATIC CURVES
PROJECT
DATE
HULL
ARIANNA/A
2013-11-05
HULL
SIGN
CREATED
TEEK
2013-10-31
draught, moulded
draught, moulded
long
. ce
ntre
Bibliography
1. Schneekluth, H and Bertram, V. Ship Design Efficiency and Economy. 2nd. 1998.
12
AALTO UNIVERSITY
Marine Technology
Resistance, propulsion and machinery

M/S Arianna
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. 1
1
RESISTANCE ....................................................................................................................... 3
1.1
ITTC-57 METHOD ....................................................................................................................... 3
1.2
ANDERSEN-GULDHAMMER METHOD .......................................................................................... 5
1.3
NAVCAD SOFTWARE ESTIMATIONS ........................................................................................... 9
1.4
FINAL RESISTANCE COMPARISONS ........................................................................................... 12
1.5
EFFECTIVE POWER PREDICTION ................................................................................................ 14
PROPULSION .................................................................................................................... 15
2.1
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 15
2.2
OPTIMIZATION OF PROPULSION ................................................................................................. 15
2.3
PROPULSION SYSTEM EFFICIENCY ............................................................................................. 17
2.4
CAVITATION .............................................................................................................................. 21
MACHINERY ..................................................................................................................... 22
3.1
SELECTING MACHINERY ............................................................................................................ 22
3.2
ELECTRIC BALANCE ................................................................................................................... 25
BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................... 26
APPENDIX 1 ITTC-57 CALCULATIONS .......................................................................... 27
APPENDIX 2 ANDERSEN-GULDHAMMER CALCULATIONS.................................... 29
APPENDIX 3 NAVCAD INPUT PARAMETERS ............................................................... 34
APPENDIX 4 NAVCAD RESISTANCE OUTPUTS ........................................................... 35
APPENDIX 5 ELECTRIC BALANCE ................................................................................. 36
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1. Incremental Resistance Values .................................................................................... 5
Figure 1-2. Bulb Correction Interpolation Plot ............................................................................... 9
Figure 1-3. Resistance Results ...................................................................................................... 12
Figure 1-4. Updated Resistance Results ....................................................................................... 13
Figure 1-5. Effective Power Results ............................................................................................. 14
1
Figure 2-1. Wageningen B-series graph ....................................................................................... 17

Figure 2-2. Areas of cavitation (7)................................................................................................ 21
Figure 3-1. Electric propulsion illustration. (9) ............................................................................ 22
Figure 3-2. Motor output range (12) ............................................................................................. 24
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1. Bulb Correction Table ................................................................................................... 8
Table 1-2. Final Effective Power .................................................................................................. 15
Table 3-1. Generation sets (10) (11) ............................................................................................. 23
Table 3-2. Diesel generator set data (11) ...................................................................................... 24
Table 3-3. Electric motor data (13) ............................................................................................... 25
1 Resistance
Before choosing the main engine and additional machinery for project ship, a preliminary total
resistance prediction and subsequent power estimation must be performed. Various methods are
used to predict these values, as described in the subsequent sections.
1.1
ITTC-57 Method
The method for predicting the resistance of a ship defined by the International Towing Tank
Conference (ITTC-57 and ITTC-78) is one of the most straightforward procedures with defined
equations (1). By simplifying the process and removing various coefficients, the result is a basic
estimation that is generally sufficient for the preliminary design of a conventional vessel. One
advantage of this method is its simplicity. Total resistance is calculated with the following
formula:
( )
1-1
where,
total resistance coefficient
density of salt water
v ship speed [m/s]
S wetted surface area of the hull [m2].
For an initial calculation, wetted surface area is estimated using the Holtrop-Mennen method,
which is an empirical formula utilizing many vessel parameters.
(
( )
1-2
The total resistance coefficient is calculated as following (1):

1-3
where,
frictional resistance coefficient
residual resistance coefficient
3
volume-length resistance coefficient

appendage resistance coefficient
air resistance coefficient
steering resistance coefficient
Of these, the frictional and residual are calculated while the others approximated. Frictional
resistance is calculated by using the ITTC-57 equation, which utilized the Reynolds number,
where v, L, and
are the ship speed, ship length, and kinematic viscosity of water, respectively.
1-4
where,
Reynolds number
Reynolds number is calculated as following:
1-5
where,
v ship speed [m/s]
L ship length [m]
kinematic viscosity of water [m2/s]
Following this, we calculate the residual resistance coefficient with the following estimation.
This is not prescribed by the ITTC method itself, but is an appropriate approximation (1).
[
)]
1-6
where,
Froude number
prismatic coefficient
volume-length coefficient
B ship breadth
T ship draft
4
The volume-length coefficient equation is a simple ratio between the volumetric displacement
and length multiple.
1-7
Remaining resistance coefficients are identified with simple approximations. The incremental
resistance coefficient
is dependent on speed (see Figure 1-1). The remaining three
coefficients: appendage, air, and steering, are taken as suggested values given in the procedure.
Figure 1-1. Incremental Resistance Values
All calculated and estimated values are provided in Appendix 1.
1.2
Andersen-Guldhammer Method
A second method of predicting the total resistance of a ship is Andersen and Guldhammer (2),
which refines an earlier method by Guldhammer and Harvald (3). The newer procedure shares
many similarities with the ITTC method, but puts a larger focus on the smaller resistance
coefficients. It also includes several factors that make up for any deviations with the model hull,
including B/T, LCB, hull form, bulb, and appendage factors. Another advantages of this method
is that it was specifically created as a computer-oriented tool for the prediction of propulsive
power, with an emphasis on the preliminary calculation of an optimum propeller. Therefore, it
may be a more accurate prediction method for later use in propeller and machinery calculations.
5
Though the input variables are mostly the same, there are some unique definitions for this
method, specifically for the length and longitudinal center of buoyancy (LCB).
1-8
1-9
where,
the length of the bulb forward of the forward perpendicular
length of the waterline aft of the aft perpendicular
longitudinal center of buoyancy
The total resistance equation is the same as before, shown in Equation (1-1), and the total
resistance coefficient differs only in syntax, where
resistance coefficient and
represents a combined air and steering
the frictional resistance coefficient, which is the same as equation
3-4, assuming that there is minimal appendage effect.

1-10
Incremental resistance coefficient
is solved with a single equation, as shown below. It is
dependent only on the volumetric displacement of our hull form.

1-11
The residuary resistance, however, is more complex, as it depends on four arithmetic variables:
E, G, H, and K.
1-12
In turn, the first of these variables, E, depends on four more defined variables:
as well as the Froude number, meaning it changes according to the tested ship speed.
1-13
1-14
1-15
1-16
1-17
Similarly, the second residuary resistance coefficient, G, is determined by four more defined
variables:
, of which
and therefore G vary with speed.
In turn, the first of these variables, E, depends on four more defined variables:
as well as the Froude number, meaning it changes according to the tested ship speed.
(
1-18
1-19
1-20
1-21
1-22
The final two residuary resistance coefficients are each represented by only one equation each.
(
))
1-23
1-24
Following the residuary resistance coefficient calculations, we begin checking for and applying
necessary corrections. The first of these is the
correction, which adjusts the results in case the
hull deviates from the required standard characteristics. There are two initial correction checks:
one for the beam to draft ratio and one for the LCB. If the beam to draft ratio is greater than the
standard value of [
], then an additive correction must be implemented, as follows.

1-25
7
The requirement for an LCB correction is based on a more lengthy equation, which is in turn
dependent on a predefined standard LCB value.
1-26
If the actual LCB varies from this, a correction according to the following equation must be
implemented.
[
][
1-27
Both factors in the formula must be positive for the correction to work, which for particular ship
calculations was not the case. Therefore, the correction is set to zero.
A hull form correction is not necessary for project vessel, since it has neither a pronounced U
nor V shaped fore or after body. Bulb correction is needed, however, since the standard hull is
defined as one without a bulbous bow. This correction depends on the bulb shape, as defined by
the bulb area ratio
. In order to calculate the correction, a double interpolation of a given
table is needed.
Table 1-1. Bulb Correction Table
For this particular vessels is obtained a
value of 0.615 (Equation 1-19) so
was chosen
from the table. Then was plotted the correction values and fit a power regression to the data,
yielding an interpolation equation and very high coefficient of determination (R2) value.
0.3
y = -85734x5 + 104751x4 - 49867x3 + 11531x2 - 1295.9x + 56.908

R = 0.9992
0.2
Correction
0.1
0
0.14
0.19
0.24
0.29
0.34
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
Froude Number
Figure 1-2. Bulb Correction Interpolation Plot
These values, however, are only valid for bulb area ratios greater than 1.0, which was not true for
this hull form. Therefore, a proportional reduction was needed. With this correction, the
residuary resistance coefficient can be found, as can the total resistance coefficient. The latter
utilizes suggested values for the air and steering resistance coefficients, with
and
respectively. Both values are suggested by the Guldhammer and Harvald
1974 resistance method. The final step in resistance estimation is plugging all variables into
Equation (1-1). Again, the complete results are provided in Appendix 2.
1.3
NavCAD Software Estimations
In order to check hand calculations, additional resistance predictions are completed using the
software tool NavCAD. This tool is specifically for the prediction and analysis of ship speed and
power performance, focusing on hull resistance, propulsion selection, and propeller interaction
and optimization. It features an extremely user-friendly interface and is a good tool for applying
many additional estimation methods that would otherwise be difficult or prone to error. (4)
Another advantage with NavCAD is that it considers the available input parameters and hull
form and suggests which prediction methods are most suitable. Considering this, five additional
calculations were performed, according to the following methods:
Holtrop 1984
HSTS
Simple Displacement
Denmark Cargo
Degroot RB
These five methods were chosen because of their high prediction match with the input data; they
were predicted to be the most applicable in accordance to the input parameters that are currently
available for the ship. When information that is more detailed is known, the program may
recommend other resistance prediction methods, but the included information is sufficient for
preliminary resistance estimations.
As with the hand calculations, there are advantages and disadvantages for each method. The
Holtrop 1984 method is intended for commercial vessels, is formulated from a data set of 334
randomly collected models, and is regarded as a reliable method for preliminary resistance
estimations (5). This method was chosen because of its widespread use in early resistance
calculations. It is applicable for vessel speeds in the range of a Froude number between 0.100.80.
The HSTS model is derived from a total of 739 models and 10,672 data points and is a speeddependent approach (5). It has many more required input values than other methods. One
potential issue is that its database includes a very diverse set of vessels, though most errors are
encountered only at very low speeds (5). This method was the highest rated for available input
variables, though it uses a 2D method for the residual resistance calculation, which is likely not
as accurate as one utilizing the 3D form factor. It is valid for a 0.15-0.90 speed range.
The simple displacement/semi-displacement method is dependent primarily on the waterline
length and volumetric displacement, and therefore the vessels volume coefficient (5). It is useful
only for very early stage analysis and is derived from a basic power demand relationship. It was
chosen because of its high rating, though it is similar to the ITTC method in that it features many
simplifications. It can be used for Froude numbers between 0.0-0.40.
The Denmark Cargo method is a numerical implementation method using the Guldhammer
procedure (5). Though its focus is on cargo vessels, it is again a very early stage prediction
10
method that can be used for generic hulls such as this. It is meant for general purpose early
design estimations only, which is suitable for the current purposes. It does include analysis for
ships with a bulbous bow. It was chosen as a prediction method specifically because of its tie to
the Andersen-Guldhammer procedures, which were followed in the hand calculations. Its speed
range correlates to a Froude number of 0.05-0.33, which is at the limit of the selected speed.
Therefore, it will rely on extrapolation at the extremes.
The final method, DeGroot RB, is based on various model test series, based on a numerical
representation of the published graphical form resistance curves (5). It can be used at preliminary
design stages for general hull types, though it also puts emphasis on hard-chine vessels and
vessels with pronounced round bilges. It is applicable for Froude values between 0.30 and 1.05,
again meaning extrapolation will again be used for the lower speeds.
The input parameters used for all methods, showing also NavCADs interface, are given in
Appendix 3, along with the output data in Appendix 4, for each method.
11
1.4
Final Resistance Comparisons
The results from the two hand-calculation methods and five computer-generated ones are shown
in Figure 1-3.
1600
AndersenGuldham
mer
Holtrop
1400
1200
Total Resistance [kN]
Ittc
1000
HSTS
800
Simple
Displacem
ent
Denmark
Cargo
600
400
200
DeGroot
0
9
11
13
15
Speed [knt]
17
19
21
Figure 1-3. Resistance Results
This graph shows that the methods are, as a whole in line, though there are clearly outliers,
specifically the ITTC, Denmark Cargo, and DeGroot methods.
The ITTC method is predictably high, as it does not include correction reductions for important
properties such as the bulbous bow. As one of the most basic numerical prediction methods, it is
unlikely to compare as favourably as those with more considerations are. Therefore, it was
removed from the final prediction analysis.
The Denmark Cargo method was chosen based on its dependence on the Andersen resistance
procedures, though its speed range is limiting and it must rely on extrapolation at some of the
speeds for this vessel. It is clear that its focus on cargo ships results in comparison differences
and it is thus neglected from this point on as well.
The DeGroot method seems to focus too heavily on more unique hull shapes, in contrast to the
generic shape chosen for the cruise ship. Even though it was highly rated by the NavCAD
software, it is also intended for higher Froude numbers, meaning the output is not accurate at our
12
speeds, as the other methods have direct computations as opposed to extrapolations. With this
method eliminated, four remaining methods give very comparable results, one from hand
calculations and three from the software. The final resistance graph is given in Figure 1-4.
900
800
700
AndersenGuldham
mer
Holtrop
Total Resistance [kN]
600
500
400
HSTS
300
Simple
Displacem
ent
200
100
0
9
11
13
15
Speed [kn]
17
19
21
Figure 1-4. Updated Resistance Results
In summary, a large number of prediction methods were chosen in order to give as holistic an
initial resistance estimation as possible. Though no method is perfectly accurate at such an early
design stage, comparing many methods will give more credibility to consistent results, which is
warranted for important characteristics like the ships resistance, as this will greatly influence the
vessels design, equipment selection, and general characteristics. The final four predictions show
very strong correlations with one another, meaning the resistance prediction should be
reasonable. Though the deliverable only requested basic numerical calculations such as the ITTC
or Holtrop methods, taking the time to compare such approaches with an industry-approved
software such as NavCAD can only improve the quality of the prediction.
13
1.5
Effective Power Prediction
With the total resistance estimates, the power needed to power the ship in calm seas, or the
effective power, was calculated.
1-24
The effected power curves for the four selected methods are shown in Figure 1-5.
10000.0
Andersen
Guldham
mer
Holtrop
9000.0
8000.0
Effective Power [kW]
7000.0
HSTS
6000.0
5000.0
Simple
Displace
ment
4000.0
Design
Speed
3000.0
2000.0
Max.
Speed
1000.0
0.0
9
11
13
15
Speed [kn]
17
19
21
Figure 1-5. Effective Power Results
An initial design speed of 17 [kn] was chosen in accordance with the selected itinerary around
the English coast. In order to allow for flexibility in future deployment, resistance values are
taken at a more conservative level, corresponding to a maximum speed of 20 [kn]. This will
allow the vessel to complete an array of itineraries without needing to adjust port times in order
to compensate for an underpowered arrangement.
Since the methods agree overall, the average value at the maximum speed was taken as final
power prediction to be used in the machinery selection process. Each method includes a large
preliminary design margin, so this result should be sufficiently conservative. Table 1-2 shows the
calculated power in [kW] for the various prediction methods and speeds. As a summary, the
required effective power can be taken as 7839 [kW].
14
Table 1-2. Final Effective Power
Speed [kn]
17
18
19
20
Effective Power Prediction [kW]

AndersenSimple
Guldhammer Holtrop HSTS Displacement Average
3139
3758 4198
3217
3652
4032
4988 5268
4067
4681
5435
6892 6806
5157
6194
7357
8795 8343
6247
7839
2 Propulsion
2.1
Introduction
The ship has two controllable pitch propellers (CP-propeller). The propeller is a traditional four
bladed propeller with revolutions of 180 revolutions per minute, which is based on the chosen
electrical motors. A CP-propeller was chosen because it gives the highest propulsive efficiency
over a broad range of speeds and load conditions and it improves maneuverability when
compared to fixed pitch propellers (FP-propeller), which is mainly used on bulkers and tankers
due to the little need for maneuverability. The main advantage of a CP-propeller is fine thrust
control when maneuvering, which can be achieved without necessarily the need to accelerate and
decelerate the propulsion machinery. Fine control of thrust is particular in certain cases, for
example, in dynamic positioning situations or where frequent berthing maneuvers are required
(6). There, it is also possible to use azimuth thrusters, but due to the fact that vessel has quite
small draft, it is not reasonable to use those, as the propeller diameter would be small and it
would not be as efficient.
2.2
Optimization of propulsion
The propeller diameter is roughly estimated based on (7), where it is said that the clearance
between blade tips and hull plating should be 25-30 per cent of diameter. Therefore, it is
estimated that the propeller diameter D is 70% of the draft. Thus, the propeller diameter is
calculated as the following:
[m]
2-1
15
For finding the operational point for the propeller, the Wageningen B-series graphs are used. For
that, several parameters should be first calculated. Using simplified equations, the wake fraction
can be calculated as following:
2-2
And the thrust reduction coefficient can be obtained from:
2-3
The speed of advanced is calculated as follows:
2-4
[m/s]
Therefore, the thrust of the propellers is:

[kN]
2-5
The blade area ration is (7):

2-6
Where Z=4 for a propeller with four blades, k=0,1 for two propeller ship and
hydrostatic
pressure,
is the vapor pressure at
is the
[Pa]
and
[Pa].
The thrust coefficient is calculated as the following:

2-7
The advanced number for the propellers is:
2-8
From the Wageningen B4-75 series, with the graph seen in Figure 2-1, the P/D ratio is obtained.
Therefore, the P/D ratio is approximately 1 and open water efficiency 0,68. Thus, it is well seen
that, if advance speed increases, the propeller open water efficiency also increases.
16
Figure 2-1. Wageningen B-series graph
2.3
Propulsion system efficiency
The propulsion system efficiency is a product of different efficiencies as can be seen in the
following:
2-9
where,
hull efficiency
open water efficiency
relative rotative efficiency
17
2.3.1 Hull efficiency

Hull efficiency tells how good the selected propeller to operate behind the hull is. For a
beneficial propeller-hull interaction, hull efficiency has a value exceeding unity. This is often the
case for a single screw vessel with a properly selected propeller. From the definition of hull
efficiency, it is seen that it is beneficial to locate propeller in the region of decelerated flow
(wake). On the other hand, the propeller location should not lead to a high acceleration of hull
flow velocities because this causes an increase of thrust deduction. (8)
Hull efficiency equation:
2-10
As it can be seen, the main variables of the previous formula are wake fraction w and thrust
reduction coefficient t. These can be calculated based on some developed rules or simplified
rules. In this project, it is calculated with two ways.
Wake fraction for twin-screw ships is calculated based on Holtrop and Mennen 1982:
2-11
where,
Block coefficient,
propeller diameter,
draft,
breadth,
[m]
[m]
[m]
viscous resistance coefficient

2-12
where,
factor that describes the viscous resistance of the hull form
frictional resistance of ship according to the ITTC-57 (Equation 1-4)
correlation allowance coefficient:
2-13
18
where,
ship length [m]
2-14
Substituting values from Equations 2-4 and 2-5 and other constants to Equation 2-3, the wake
fraction is:
2-15
The thrust deduction factor is calculated as the following:
2-16
Using now Equation 2-2, the hull efficiency can be calculated:

2-17
2.3.2 Simplified equations

Using simplified equations, the wake fraction can be calculated as:
2-18
And the thrust reduction coefficient can obtained from:
2-19
As such, the hull efficiency would then be:
2-20
For ships with two propellers and a conventional aftbody for, the hull efficiency is approximately
between 0.95 - 1.05, so in this particular case both methods gives good results.
19
2.3.3 Open water efficiency

Open water efficiency
is related to working in open water, i.e. the propeller works in a
homogenous wake field with no hull in front of it. The propeller efficiency depends mostly on
the speed of advance, thrust force, rate of revolution, diameter, and design of the propeller. There
are methods to approximately get open water efficiency but for traditional shaft propulsion
systems, the number can be close to 0,7. It is estimated that it is for this ship 0,69. (8). This
estimation is also in a good agreement with the previously found efficiency based on
Wageningen B-series.
2.3.4 Relative rotative efficiency

The actual velocity of the water flowing to the propeller behind the hull is neither constant nor at
right angles to the propellers disk area, but rather has a kind of rotational flow. Therefore,
compared with when the propeller is working in open water, the propellers efficiency is affected
by the factor
, which is called propellers relative rotative efficiency. For ships with a
conventional hull shape and two propellers, this will normally be less than 1, approximately 0,98.
(8)
2.3.5 Propeller efficiency

The ratio between the thrust power
, which the propeller delivers to the water and the power
, which is delivered to the propeller, i.e. the propeller efficiency
for a propeller working
behind the ship, is defined as (8):

2-21
2.3.6 Total propulsion efficiency

The propulsion efficiency
, must not be confused with the open water propeller efficiency, as
it is equal to the ratio between the effective (towing) power
delivered to the propeller
:
2-22
The total propulsion efficiency is taken into account in the engine selection process.
20
2.4
Cavitation
Cavitation occurs when the local absolute pressure is less than the local vapor pressure for the
fluid medium. The critical measurement for cavitation performance is the cavitation inception
point, which is the conditions, i.e. cavitation number, for which cavitation is first observed
anywhere on the propeller. Cavitation will harm propeller blades, so corrosion occurs and also,
cavitation stars causing vibration and noise. Therefore, it is necessary to check the cavitation
limit to be sure that chosen propeller will not start to cavitate.
The cavitation number can be calculated by equation:
(
2-23
where,
hydrostatic pressure,
[Pa]
vapor pressure at
advance speed,
[Pa]
[m/s]
According to Equation 2-23, the cavitation number equals 3,42 and, comparing it to the
cavitation graph (see Figure 2-2), it can be seen that cavitation will not occur. (7)
Cavitation of suction side
Cavitation free area
Cavitation of pressure
Figure 2-2. Areas of cavitation (7)
21
3 Machinery
3.1
Selecting machinery
3.1.1 Introduction
The space for engines and auxiliary systems is limited and the diesel generators are chosen not to
spend space for extra generators to produce electricity. The advantage of diesel generators is also
the freedom to locate heavy main machines, because there is a pool in the aft area, the engines
should be more in the fore, meaning that, if the shaft is sprightly attached to engine, the shaft line
is long and may cause extra vibrations and noise, which may in turn cause inconveniences for
passengers. Therefore, the propellers are powered by electric engines and electricity is produced
by diesel generators.
Figure 3-1. Electric propulsion illustration. (9)
3.1.2 Diesel generator

Power prediction is done in Chapter 1 and, according to Table 1-2, the effective power is
kW. Also, the propulsion efficiency is taken into account (see Chapter 2.7) and, using
Equation 2-9, the delivered power need is:
[kW]
22
Electricity is also needed for the vessels other systems, therefore, an additional 2500 [kW] is
added to power in the first approximation. Additionally, the diesel engine minimum fuel
consumption per kilowatt is in the range of 85 90% of the maximum output and this is taken
into account in selection process.
Finally, the losses in electric circuit are considered and the engine output and needed power
should have about 5% additional cap.
Two or three generators are chosen because it makes maintenance more flexible and adds safety
in case of an accident and helps to fulfil Safe Return to Port regulations. Four or more engines
are not suitable because the total area for machinery is limited. Combinations of different
generating sets are not used in order to be able to have engine maintenance onboard without
docking the ship.
Table 3-1. Generation sets (10) (11)

Producer
Type
Generator output
[kW]
Weight
[t]
Main
[mm]
dimensions
Fuel consumption
[g/kWh]
Wrtsil
Wrtsil
12V38
16V38
8400
11600
160
200
11900 x 3600 x 4945

13300 x 3800 x 4945
176-185
192-204
Wrtsil
Wrtsil
Rolls Royce
Caterpillar
16V32
18V32
B32:40V12
C280-12
8910
8640
7449
5200
121
133
102
100
11174 x 3060 x 4280

11825 x 3360 x 4280
10400 x 2310 x 3855
8040 x 2000 x 4085
192-204
176-185
183
880,8 [l/h]
From Table 3-1, three Wrtsil 16V32 generator sets are chosen because it fulfils the power
requirements and also is light and small enough for the ship, as the engine room height is 7 [m]
and width 6 [m]. In that case, two engines are used to produce electric energy and the third is in
back-up. The same set of Wrtsil 12V38 engines are not sufficient because they are bigger and
weight more, with an increased weight of about 32%. Using the two Wrtisl 16V38 set does not
fulfil the power requirement and using three is not valid regarding weight. Weight is one of the
main points to be concerned in because of the aim to keep the ships design draft and from Ship
Conceptual design it is known that ship weight is a big concern. Three Rolls Royce B32:40V12
sets are 15% lighter and smaller than Wrtsil 16V32 but fulfils the power need precisely. Using
four Catepillar C280-28 generation sets will take too much deck space and is 10% heavier.
23
Table 3-2. Diesel generator set data (11)
Engine
Wrtsil 16V32
Output [kW]
9280
Output[kWe]
8910
Cylinders
V16
Engine speed [rpm]
750
Output per cylinder [kW]
580
Cylinder bore [mm]
320
Piston stroke [mm]
400
Mean effective pressure [bar]
28,9
Piston speed [m/s]
10,0
Voltage [kV]
0,4 13,8
Length [mm]
11175
Height [mm]
4280
Width [mm]
3060
Weight [ton]
121
Fuel [cSt/50 C]
700
SFOC [g/kWh]
183-191
3.1.3 Electric motors

Electric motors are chosen by taking the power handling into account and selecting reasonable
revolutions of propeller, which is 180 [rpm]. Motor selection is done by using Figure 3-2. The
most reasonable choice at 6 [MW] output and 180 [rpm] is the ABB AMS 1250 electric motor.
Figure 3-2. Motor output range (12)
24
Table 3-3. Electric motor data (13)
Output power
Number of poles
Voltages
Frequency
Protection
Cooling
Enclosure material
Motor type
Mounting type
Standards
Marine classification
3.2
1 60 [MW]
4 40
1 15 [kV]
50 or 60 [Hz]
IP23, IPW24, IP44, IP54, IP55
IC01, IC611, IC81W, IC8A6W7
Welded steel
AMS
Horizontal and vertical
IEC and NEMA
All international societies (ABS, BV, DNV,
GL)
Electric balance
To be able to choose suitable engines and engine setup, the total electrical power consumption
must be estimated. Electricity is consumed by propulsion electrical motors, ventilation, heating,
and other auxiliary systems. The electricity consumption needs to be calculated for different
operating situations, as the profile of electricity consumption varies in different situations. The
operating situations are open water, manoeuvring, in harbour, at rest, and emergency. A
summary of the electrical balance for the selected engine is provided in Appendix 5.
25
Bibliography
1. Birk, Lothar. NAME 3150 Course Notes - Ship resistance and propulsion. New Orleans :
s.n., 2011.
2. Guldhammer, H.E. and Harvald, Sv. Aa. Ship Resistance - Effect of Form and Principle
Dimensions. Copenhagen : Akademisk Forlag, 1974.
3. Andersen, P. and Guldhammer, H.E. A Computer-Oriented Power Prediction Procedure.
Lyngby : Department of Ocean Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, 1986.
4. Hydro Comp PLNC. NavCad. Durham, NH : s.n., 2013.
5. . Appendix H - Resistance Prediction Methods. 2011.
6. Carlton, John. Marine Propellers and Propulsion. 2nd. Burlington : Elsevier Ltd, 2007.
7. Matiusak, Jerzy. Laivan Propulsio. Espoo : s.n., 2005.
8.
Basic
Principles
of
Ship
Propulsion.
http://www.mandieselturbo.com/files/news/filesof5405/5510_004_02%20low.pdf. [Online] 10 1,
2013.
9. Electric propulsion. Wrtsil. [Online] 10 29, 2012. http://www.wartsila.com/en/powerelectric-systems/electric-propulsion-packages/electric-propulsion.
10. Generating sets. Catepillar. [Online] 10 29, 2012. http://marine.cat.com/cat-C280-12-genset.
11.
Generating
sets.
Wrtsil.
[Online]
10
29,
2012.
http://www.wartsila.com/en/engines/gensets/generating-sets.
12.
Synchronos
Motors
Brochure.
ABB.
[Online]
16,
2013.
http://www05.abb.com/global/scot/scot234.nsf/veritydisplay/822ae96e598fd891c125796f0032e7
5d/$file/Brochure_Synchronous_motors_9AKK105576_EN_122011_FINAL_LR.pdf.
13.
Electric
motor
data.
ABB.
[Online]
16,
2013.
http://www.abb.com/product/seitp322/19e6c63b9837b35dc1256dc1004430be.aspx?productLang
uage=us&country=FI&tabKey=2.
26
Appendix 1 ITTC-57 Calculations

KNOWN PARAMETERS
length between perpindiculars
beam
draft
displacement
midship coefficient
wetted surface area (HoltropMennen)
block coefficient
prismatic coefficient
slenderness coefficient
initial design speed
ship speeds to consider
CONSTANTS
salt water density
gravitational acceleration
kinematic viscosity of water
Lpp
B
T
V
Cm
110
18
5.4
6380
0.94
m
m
m
m^3
[-]
S
Cb
Cp
C
v
v
2562.5362
0.67
0.712766
0.0047934
17
10 TO 20
m^2
[-]
[-]
[-]
knots
knots
1025.86
9.81
1.188E-06
kg/m^3
m/s^2
m^2/s
1. FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT C'F

V [kn]
V [m/s]
Rn
C'F
10
5.144
476217191.7
0.0016819
11
5.659
523838910.9
0.0016612
12
6.173
571460630
0.0016427
13
6.688
619082349.2
0.0016259
14
7.202
666704068.4
0.0016106
15
7.717
714325787.5
0.0015966
16
8.231
761947506.7
0.0015836
17
8.746
809569225.9
0.0015715
18
9.260
857190945
0.0015603
19
9.774
904812664.2
0.0015498
20
10.289
952434383.4
0.0015399
2. RESIDUARY RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT
V [kn]
V [m/s]
Fn
Cr
10
5.144
0.156605725
0.0027916
11
5.659
0.172266298
0.0028504
12
6.173
0.18792687
0.0029481
13
6.688
0.203587443
0.003099
14
7.202
0.219248015
0.0033196
15
7.717
0.234908588
0.0036286
16
8.231
0.250569161
0.004047
17
8.746
0.266229733
0.0045979
18
9.260
0.281890306
0.0053068
19
9.774
0.297550878
0.0062013
20
10.289
0.313211451
0.0073114
27
3. ADDITIONAL COEFFICIENTS
additional resistance coefficient
CA
appendenge resistance coefficient CAAP
air resistance coefficient
CAA
steering coefficient
CAS
0.0004
0.00006
0.00007
0.00004
from graph
[-]
[-]
[-]
4. TOTAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT

V [kn]
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
V [m/s]
5.144
5.659
6.173
6.688
7.202
7.717
8.231
8.746
9.260
9.774
10.289
5. TOTAL RESISTANCE
V [kn]
V [m/s]
10
5.144
11
5.659
12
6.173
13
6.688
14
7.202
15
7.717
16
8.231
17
8.746
18
9.260
19
9.774
20
10.289
6. POWER ESTIMATION
V [kn] V [m/s] R [N]
10
5.144
175442.643
11
5.659
213891.0137
12
6.173
258514.7714
13
6.688
311281.1323
14
7.202
375008.7271
15
7.717
453579.2686
16
8.231
552172.5412
17
8.746
677524.7021
18
9.260
838209.8914
19
9.774
1044945.144
20
10.289
1310918.602
Fn
0.156605725
0.172266298
0.18792687
0.203587443
0.219248015
0.234908588
0.250569161
0.266229733
0.281890306
0.297550878
0.313211451
Ct
0.0050435
0.0050816
0.0051608
0.0052949
0.0055002
0.0057952
0.0062005
0.0067394
0.0074371
0.0083211
0.0094213
Fn
0.156605725
0.172266298
0.18792687
0.203587443
0.219248015
0.234908588
0.250569161
0.266229733
0.281890306
0.297550878
0.313211451
Rt
175442.64
213891.01
258514.77
311281.13
375008.73
453579.27
552172.54
677524.7
838209.89
1044945.1
1310918.6
R [KN]
175
214
259
311
375
454
552
678
838
1045
1311
PE [Watts]
902554.93
1210385.5
1595897.9
2081779
2700896.2
3500120
4544993.5
5925329.9
7761823.6
10213758
13487896
PE [KW]
902.6
1210.4
1595.9
2081.8
2700.9
3500.1
4545.0
5925.3
7761.8
10213.8
13487.9
28
Appendix 2 Andersen-Guldhammer Calculations

Known Parameters
length between
perpindiculars
length of bulf forward
of FP
length of WL aft of
AP
beam
draft
displacement
midship coefficient
waterplane area
coefficient
wetted surface area
midship CSA
bulbous bow CSA at
FP
block coefficient
longitudinal center of
buoyancy
propeller diameter
no. propeller blades
initial design speed
ship speeds to consider
Constants
salt water density
gravitational
acceleration
kinematic viscosity of
water
Lpp
110
Lfore
3.5
Laft
B
T
V
Cm
18
5.4
6380
0.94
m
m
m^3
[-]
Cw
0.73
[-]
S
Am
2562.536197 m^2
91.368
m^2
Abt
10
m^2
CB
0.67
[-]
LCB
51.33
D
Z
v
v
3.0
4
17
10 TO 20
m
[-]
knots
knots
1025.86
kg/m^3
9.81
m/s^2
1.1883E-06
m^2/s
1. LENGTH DEFINITION
length
L
113.5
m
2. LCB DEFINITION
LCB0
-3.67
meters aft of Lpp/2
LCB
-0.2175 meters aft of Lpp/2
3. FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT C'F
V [kn] V [m/s]
Rn
C'F
10
5.144
491369556.9
0.001675044
11
5.659
540506512.6
0.001654511
12
6.173
589643468.3
0.001636094
13
6.688
638780423.9
0.001619422
14
7.202
687917379.6
0.001604213
15
7.717
737054335.3
0.001590245
16
8.231
786191291
0.001577343
17
8.746
835328246.7
0.001565366
18
9.260
884465202.4
0.001554199
19
9.774
933602158.1
0.001543745
20
10.289
982739113.8
0.001533925
29
4. INCREMENTAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT

factored
10^3CA
0.4547443
actual
CA
0.000454744
[-]
[-]
5. RESIDUARY RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT

M
6.119589657
A0
0.39188691
N1
8.539179315
A1
15869.58731
V [kn]
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
V [m/s]
5.144
5.659
6.173
6.688
7.202
7.717
8.231
8.746
9.260
9.774
10.289
Fn
0.154172192
0.169589411
0.18500663
0.20042385
0.215841069
0.231258288
0.246675507
0.262092726
0.277509946
0.292927165
0.308344384
B1
B2
3.629556018
0.615220359
0.331893277
[-]
[-]
[-]
V [kn]
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
V [m/s]
5.144
5.659
6.173
6.688
7.202
7.717
8.231
8.746
9.260
9.774
10.289
Fn
0.154172192
0.169589411
0.18500663
0.20042385
0.215841069
0.231258288
0.246675507
0.262092726
0.277509946
0.292927165
0.308344384
B3
67.14125334
50.63381822
37.17639717
26.44668177
18.12283216
11.88384567
7.410317711
4.3861404
2.50262006
1.469122938
1.040131244
E
0.44052
0.45241
0.46729
0.48686
0.51382
0.55229
0.60842
0.69107
0.81281
0.99102
1.24943
G
0.017941656
0.023790922
0.032402958
0.045549202
0.066470032
0.101366618
0.162560539
0.274643566
0.481345635
0.819962176
1.158147348
H
5.91634E-10
2.03096E-09
6.9719E-09
2.39332E-08
8.21579E-08
2.82032E-07
9.68161E-07
3.32351E-06
1.14089E-05
3.91647E-05
0.000134445
K
0.004425061
0.006296109
0.008687402
0.011681799
0.01536714
0.019836131
0.025186235
0.031519572
0.038942836
0.047567205
0.057508269
10^3CR
0.46289
0.48250
0.50838
0.54409
0.59565
0.67349
0.79617
0.99724
1.33311
1.85859
2.46522
CR
0.000462885
0.000482501
0.000508385
0.000544092
0.000595653
0.000673493
0.000796167
0.000997241
0.001333107
0.001858588
0.002465221
6. RESIDUARY RESISTANCE CORRECTION

LCB Correction
B/T
3.333333333
Correction Needed? YES
10^3CR
0.133333333
30
V [kn]
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Fn
0.154172192
0.169589411
0.18500663
0.20042385
0.215841069
0.231258288
0.246675507
0.262092726
0.277509946
0.292927165
0.308344384
LCBst/L
-0.026164236
-0.019380659
-0.012597083
-0.005813506
0.00097007
0.007753647
0.014537223
0.0213208
0.028104376
0.034887952
0.041671529
Factor 2
-0.024247936
-0.01746436
-0.010680783
-0.003897207
0.00288637
0.009669946
0.016453523
0.023237099
0.030020676
0.036804252
0.043587828
[+] Factors?
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Bulb Correction
ABT/AM
0.109447509
Correction
Needed?
YES
Table 12
Fn
0.6
0.15
0.6
0.18
0.6
0.21
0.6
0.24
0.6
0.27
0.6
0.3
0.6
0.33
10^3Crbulb
0.2
0.2
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.3
-0.3
Bulb Correction Factor

0.3
Correction
0.2
y = -85734x5 + 104751x4 - 49867x3 + 11531x2 - 1295.9x + 56.908

R = 0.9992
0.1
0
0.14
-0.1
0.19
0.24
0.29
0.34
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
Froude Number
31
Fn
0.154172192
0.169589411
0.18500663
0.20042385
0.215841069
0.231258288
0.246675507
0.262092726
0.277509946
0.292927165
0.308344384
uncorrected
10^3Crbulb
0.171653791
0.169717063
0.197442975
0.198115716
0.149519896
0.054979374
-0.065603907
-0.184711083
-0.276167542
-0.324104088
-0.331918106
corrected
10^3Crbulb
0.062206282
0.060269554
0.087995466
0.088668207
0.040072387
-0.054468135
-0.175051416
-0.294158592
-0.385615051
-0.433551597
-0.441365615
10^3CR
0.46289
0.48250
0.50838
0.54409
0.59565
0.67349
0.79617
0.99724
1.33311
1.85859
2.46522
10^3CRB/T
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
0.133333333
10^3CRbulb
0.062206282
0.060269554
0.087995466
0.088668207
0.040072387
-0.054468135
-0.175051416
-0.294158592
-0.385615051
-0.433551597
-0.441365615
10^3CRcorr.
0.65842
0.67610
0.72971
0.76609
0.76906
0.75236
0.75445
0.83642
1.08083
1.55837
2.15719
CR
0.000658425
0.000676104
0.000729714
0.000766094
0.000769059
0.000752359
0.000754448
0.000836416
0.001080825
0.00155837
0.002157189
7. AIR AND STEERING RESISTANCE COEFFICIENTS

CAA
0.00007
[-]
CAS
0.00004
[-]
8. TOTAL RESISTANCE COEFFICIENT
CR
C'F
CA
0.000658425
0.001675044
0.000454744
0.000676104
0.001654511
0.000454744
0.000729714
0.001636094
0.000454744
0.000766094
0.001619422
0.000454744
0.000769059
0.001604213
0.000454744
0.000752359
0.001590245
0.000454744
0.000754448
0.001577343
0.000454744
0.000836416
0.001565366
0.000454744
0.001080825
0.001554199
0.000454744
0.00155837
0.001543745
0.000454744
0.002157189
0.001533925
0.000454744
CAA
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
0.00007
CAS
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
0.00004
CT
0.003043124
0.003040128
0.00307708
0.003097774
0.003084917
0.003052715
0.003041363
0.003114853
0.003359757
0.003850202
0.00446865
32
9. TOTAL RESISTANCE
V [kn]
V [m/s]
CT
10
5.144
0.003043124
11
5.659
0.003040128
12
6.173
0.00307708
13
6.688
0.003097774
14
7.202
0.003084917
15
7.717
0.003052715
16
8.231
0.003041363
17
8.746
0.003114853
18
9.260
0.003359757
19
9.774
0.003850202
20
10.289
0.00446865
R [N]
105858.2361
127962.3657
154136.7847
182113.217
210331.6479
238931.7586
270840.2805
313141.347
378667.3889
483499.2246
621786.7008
10. EFFECTIVE POWER

V [kn]
V [m/s]
R [N]
10
5.144
105858.2361
11
5.659
127962.3657
12
6.173
154136.7847
13
6.688
182113.217
14
7.202
210331.6479
15
7.717
238931.7586
16
8.231
270840.2805
17
8.746
313141.347
18
9.260
378667.3889
19
9.774
483499.2246
20
10.289
621786.7008
R [KN]
106
128
154
182
210
239
271
313
379
483
622
11. DESIGN MARGIN

V [kn]
V [m/s]
10
5.144
11
5.659
12
6.173
13
6.688
14
7.202
15
7.717
16
8.231
17
8.746
18
9.260
19
9.774
20
10.289
PE [KW]
688.9
832.7
1094.3
1400.6
1742.1
2120.3
2563.7
3149.4
4032.4
5434.8
7357.1
PE [KW]
599.0
724.1
951.5
1217.9
1514.9
1843.8
2229.3
2738.6
3506.5
4725.9
6397.5
PE [Watts]
599039.9958
724124.8092
951537.7512
1217932.725
1514855.269
1843756.737
2229316.442
2738595.047
3506460.021
4725936.31
6397494.277
PE [KW]
599.0
724.1
951.5
1217.9
1514.9
1843.8
2229.3
2738.6
3506.5
4725.9
6397.5
33
Appendix 3 NavCAD input parameters
34
DeGroot RB
Denmark Cargo
Simple displ/semi
HSTS
Hoptrop 1984
Appendix 4 NavCAD resistance outputs

Vel
Fn
Fv
Rn
Cf
Cr
Ct
Rbare
Rtotal
Rtotal
Rbare/W
Pebare
Petotal
[kts]
[-]
[-]
[-]
[-]
[-]
[-]
[N]
[N]
[kN]
[-]
[kW]
[kW]
0,125
0,301
3,81E+08
0,001732
0,00055
0,002806
62465
62465
62,465
0,0009
257
257
10
0,157
0,377
4,76E+08
0,001682
0,000599
0,002806
97595
97595
97,595
0,00141
502
502
12
0,188
0,452
5,71E+08
0,001643
0,0008
0,002967
148624
148624
148,624
0,00215
918
918
14
0,219
0,527
6,67E+08
0,001611
0,001216
0,003351
228452
228452
228,452
0,0033
1645
1645
16
0,251
0,603
7,62E+08
0,001584
0,001855
0,003962
352863
352863
352,863
0,0051
2904
2904
17
0,266
0,64
8,10E+08
0,001572
0,002179
0,004275
429740
429740
429,74
0,00621
3758
3758
18
0,282
0,678
8,57E+08
0,00156
0,002695
0,004779
538653
538653
538,653
0,00778
4988
4988
20
0,313
0,753
9,52E+08
0,00154
0,004079
0,006143
854775
854775
854,775
0,01235
8795
8795
22
0,345
0,829
1,05E+09
0,001522
0,004313
0,00636
1070720
1070720
1070,72
0,01547
12118
12118
613
0,125
0,301
3,81E+08
0,001732
0,004433
0,00669
148928
148928
148,928
0,00215
613
10
0,157
0,377
4,76E+08
0,001682
0,00263
0,004836
168227
168227
168,227
0,00243
865
865
12
0,188
0,452
5,71E+08
0,001643
0,002316
0,004483
224543
224543
224,543
0,00325
1386
1386
14
0,219
0,527
6,67E+08
0,001611
0,002421
0,004556
310618
310618
310,618
0,00449
2237
2237
16
0,251
0,603
7,62E+08
0,001584
0,002599
0,004707
419119
419119
419,119
0,00606
3450
3450
17
0,266
0,64
8,10E+08
0,001572
0,002679
0,004775
479990
479990
479,99
0,00694
4198
4198
18
0,282
0,678
8,57E+08
0,00156
0,002963
0,005048
568950
568950
568,95
0,00822
5268
5268
20
0,313
0,753
9,52E+08
0,00154
0,003763
0,005827
810842
810842
810,842
0,01172
8343
8343
22
0,345
0,829
1,05E+09
0,001522
0,004234
0,00628
1057285
1057285
1057,285
0,01528
11966
11966
0,125
0,301
3,81E+08
0,001732
0,000478
0,002734
60875
60875
60,875
0,00088
251
251
10
0,157
0,377
4,76E+08
0,001682
0,000472
0,002678
93150
93150
93,15
0,00135
479
479
12
0,188
0,452
5,71E+08
0,001643
0,000462
0,002629
131682
131682
131,682
0,0019
813
813
14
0,219
0,527
6,67E+08
0,001611
0,000787
0,002922
199251
199251
199,251
0,00288
1435
1435
16
0,251
0,603
7,62E+08
0,001584
0,001311
0,003419
304449
304449
304,449
0,0044
2506
2506
17
0,266
0,64
8,10E+08
0,001572
0,001564
0,00366
367901
367901
367,901
0,00532
3217
3217
18
0,282
0,678
8,57E+08
0,00156
0,001812
0,003897
439160
439160
439,16
0,00635
4067
4067
20
0,313
0,753
9,52E+08
0,00154
0,002299
0,004363
607128
607128
607,128
0,00877
6247
6247
22
0,345
0,829
1,05E+09
0,001522
0,002775
0,004822
811782
811782
811,782
0,01173
9188
9188
0,125
0,301
3,81E+08
0,001732
0,000478
0,002734
60875
60875
60,875
0,00088
251
251
10
0,157
0,377
4,76E+08
0,001682
0,000472
0,002678
93150
93150
93,15
0,00135
479
479
12
0,188
0,452
5,71E+08
0,001643
0,000564
0,002731
136816
136816
136,816
0,00198
845
845
14
0,219
0,527
6,67E+08
0,001611
0,0009
0,003034
206890
206890
206,89
0,00299
1490
1490
16
0,251
0,603
7,62E+08
0,001584
0,001679
0,003787
337208
337208
337,208
0,00487
2776
2776
17
0,266
0,64
8,10E+08
0,001572
0,002482
0,004578
460215
460215
460,215
0,00665
4025
4025
18
0,282
0,678
8,57E+08
0,00156
0,003849
0,005934
668751
668751
668,751
0,00966
6193
6193
20
0,313
0,753
9,52E+08
0,00154
0,007519
0,009583
1333447
1333447
1333,447
0,01927
13720
13720
22
0,345
0,829
1,05E+09
0,001522
0,007968
0,010014
1685973
1685973
1685,973
0,02437
19081
19081
0,125
0,301
3,81E+08
0,001732
0,000478
0,002734
60875
60875
60,875
0,00088
251
251
10
0,157
0,377
4,76E+08
0,001682
0,000472
0,002678
93150
93150
93,15
0,00135
479
479
12
0,188
0,452
5,71E+08
0,001643
0,000462
0,002629
131682
131682
131,682
0,0019
813
813
14
0,219
0,527
6,67E+08
0,001611
0,00044
0,002575
175540
175540
175,54
0,00254
1264
1264
16
0,251
0,603
7,62E+08
0,001584
0,000407
0,002515
223919
223919
223,919
0,00324
1843
1843
17
0,266
0,64
8,10E+08
0,001572
0,000388
0,002484
249715
249715
249,715
0,00361
2184
2184
18
0,282
0,678
8,57E+08
0,00156
0,000407
0,002492
280863
280863
280,863
0,00406
2601
2601
20
0,313
0,753
9,52E+08
0,00154
0,000999
0,003064
426292
426292
426,292
0,00616
4386
4386
22
0,345
0,829
1,05E+09
0,001522
0,002092
0,004138
696740
696740
696,74
0,01007
7886
7886
35
Appendix 5 Electric balance

Open water
Quantity
Time spend
Speed
Annual running
Propulsion
Electric propulsion motors
HFO circulation pump
HFO feeding pump
HFO separator
HFO separator pump
Lubrication pump
Lubrication oil separator
HT - waterpump
LT - waterpump
Seawater pump
Starting air compressor
Bearing lubrication pump
Preheating pump
Total
Factor
Group loading
HVAC
Boiler burner
Air cooler
Air blowers
Boiler water treatment
Fresh water treatment
Boiler feed water pump
Warm water supply pump
Warm water feed pump
Fresh water supply pump
Seawater pump
Exhaust gas boiler feed
pump
Electric motor air cooler
Electric engine drive cooler
Total
Factor
Group loading
Auxillary systems
Gray water treatment
Gray water pump
Black water treatment
Black water pump
Bilge pumps
Bilge water feed pumps
Fire figthing water pumps
Total
Factor
Group loading
Deck machinery
Achur winch
Mooring lines winch
Passanger elevator
Service elevator
Total
Factor
Group loading
Lights
Cabins
Public rooms
Machinery rooms
Outside ligths
Total
Factor
Group loading
Service systems
Kitchen machines
Refridgerators
Total
Factor
Group loading
Navigation, automation
Navigation
Communication systems
Loading
Loading
factor
[%]
[kn]
[hrs]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
Quantity Loading
55
17
4818
Manouvering
Quantity
Loading
3
3
263
In harbor
Quantity Loading
39
0
3416
In harbor at rest
Quantity
Loading
Emergency
Quantity
3
0
263
Loading
0
0
0
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
2
3
6124.0
3.4
0.8
5.0
0.6
25.0
2.0
6.3
6.3
7.5
5.2
6.0
6.3
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.8
1.0
0.8
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
2
0
12248.0
6.8
1.6
10.0
1.2
50.0
4.0
12.6
12.6
15.0
0.0
12.0
0.0
12373.8
1.0
12373.8
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
2
0
12248.0
6.8
1.6
10.0
1.2
50.0
4.0
12.6
12.6
15.0
0.0
12.0
0.0
12373.8
1.0
12373.8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6124.0
3.4
0.8
5.0
0.6
25.0
2.0
6.3
6.3
7.5
5.2
6.0
6.3
6198.4
1.0
6198.4
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
0.0
3.4
0.8
5.0
0.6
25.0
2.0
6.3
6.3
7.5
0.0
6.0
0.0
62.9
1.0
62.9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.3
6.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.6
1.0
12.6
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
1.0
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
5.5
2.3
7.5
3.6
3.6
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
3.5
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0
1
3
0
1
0
1
1
1
2
0.0
2.3
22.5
0.0
3.6
0.0
1.3
1.3
1.3
6.9
0
1
3
0
1
0
1
1
1
2
0.0
2.3
22.5
0.0
3.6
0.0
1.3
1.3
1.3
6.9
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
5.5
2.3
22.5
3.6
3.6
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
6.9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
3.5
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
1
2
1
1.3
5.0
3.7
0.8
1.0
1.0
1
2
1
1.3
10.0
3.7
54.2
1.0
54.2
1
2
1
1.3
10.0
3.7
54.2
1.0
54.2
1
0
0
1.3
0.0
0.0
50.8
1.0
50.8
1
1
1
1.3
5.0
3.7
10.0
1.0
10.0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.4
1.0
8.4
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3.6
0.8
3.6
0.8
4.0
2.0
7.0
1.0
0.8
1.0
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
3.6
0.8
3.6
0.8
4.0
2.0
0.0
14.8
0.5
7.4
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
3.6
0.8
3.6
0.8
4.0
2.0
0.0
14.8
0.5
7.4
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
3.6
0.8
3.6
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.8
0.5
4.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3.6
0.8
3.6
0.8
4.0
2.0
14.0
28.8
0.5
14.4
2
4
1
1
10.0
12.0
5.0
5.0
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0
0
1
1
0.0
0.0
5.0
5.0
10.0
0.4
4.0
0
0
1
1
0.0
0.0
5.0
5.0
10.0
0.4
4.0
1
1
1
1
10.0
12.0
5.0
5.0
32.0
0.4
12.8
1
1
0
1
10.0
12.0
0.0
5.0
27.0
0.4
10.8
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
150.0
150.0
30.0
50.0
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.9
1
1
1
1
150.0
150.0
30.0
50.0
380.0
0.8
304.0
1
1
1
1
150.0
150.0
30.0
50.0
380.0
0.8
304.0
1
1
1
1
150.0
150.0
30.0
50.0
380.0
0.8
304.0
0
1
1
0
0.0
150.0
30.0
0.0
180.0
0.8
144.0
0
1
0
1
0.0
150.0
0.0
50.0
200.0
0.8
160.0
100.0
100.0
0.7
0.7
1
1
100.0
100.0
200.0
0.8
160.0
1
1
100.0
100.0
200.0
0.8
160.0
1
1
100.0
100.0
200.0
0.8
160.0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
1
1
10.0
5.0
1.0
1.0
1
1
10.0
5.0
1
1
10.0
5.0
0
1
0.0
5.0
0
0
0.0
0.0
1
1
10.0
5.0
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
36
Navigation lights
Total
Factor
Group loading
Special equipment
Thrusters
Rudder hydrolic pump
Total
Factor
Group loading
Total load
Power factor
Required power
Number of engines in use
Diesel generator loading
[kW]
[kW]
5.0
1.0
5.0
20.0
0.8
16.0
5.0
20.0
0.8
16.0
0.0
5.0
0.8
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
5.0
20.0
0.8
16.0
2
2
1500.0
7.0
1.0
1.0
0
2
0.0
14.0
14.0
0.9
12.6
1
2
1500.0
14.0
1514.0
0.9
1362.6
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.0
0
2
0.0
14.0
14.0
0.9
12.6
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kW]
[kVA]
[%]
12931.9
0.8
14368.8
2.0
84.9
14281.9
0.8
15868.8
2.0
93.7
6734.4
0.8
7482.7
1.0
88.4
227.7
0.8
253.0
1.0
3.0
223.9
0.8
248.8
1.0
2.9
37
AALTO UNIVERSITY
Marine Technology
General Arrangement
M/S Arianna
Table of Contents
1
OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 2
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................. 2
SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS....................................................................................... 3
3.1
SUBDIVISION AND FIRE SAFETY ............................................................................................... 3
3.2
EVACUATION AND LIFESAVING EQUIPMENT............................................................................ 3
PASSENGER COMFORT .............................................................................................. 5

4.1
STATEROOMS ........................................................................................................................... 5
4.2
PUBLIC SPACES ........................................................................................................................ 6
CREW AND SERVICE FACILITIES ........................................................................... 6

5.1
CREW ACCOMMODATION ........................................................................................................ 6
5.2
SERVICE SPACES ...................................................................................................................... 7
5.3
ADDITIONAL SPACES ............................................................................................................... 8
MATERIAL ACCESS ..................................................................................................... 8
TANK ARRANGEMENT ............................................................................................... 9
7.1
FUEL TANKS ............................................................................................................................. 9
7.2
BALLAST TANKS ...................................................................................................................... 9
7.3
FRESH WATER TANKS .............................................................................................................. 9
7.4
BLACK AND GREY WATER TANKS ............................................................................................ 9
7.5
TANKS FOR OTHER SYSTEM ................................................................................................... 10
MACHINERY ARRANGEMENT ............................................................................... 10

8.1
MAIN MACHINERY ROOMS ..................................................................................................... 10
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 12
APPENDIX 1 ARRANGEMENT DRAWINGS............................................................... 13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4-1- Sample stateroom floor plans .................................................................................. 5
Figure 5-1- Sample crew cabin floor plans ................................................................................ 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 7-1. Fuel tank capacities ................................................................................................... 9
1
1 Overview
The general arrangement is a time consuming portion of the design due to the inherent
difficulties of arranging a passenger vessel. As a cruise ship, the major considerations are
safety and passenger comfort and the layout of the ship reflects a combined approach to each
topic. Generally, the ship is segmented into different areas, with accommodation spaces
forward and public and lifesaving spaces aft. This is in line with many of the luxury, smallscale cruise ships in service today. With this layout, the staterooms are subject to much less
noise and vibration, the balconies are maximized, and the passenger and service flow are
simple. The main reason, however, is due to the vessels unconventional lifesaving layout.
The starting point for the general arrangement is the initial NAPA model that reflects the
vessels initial design constraints and parametric study. With the basic lines, the
superstructure can be designed to house the expected 150 passengers and 50 crewmembers in
comfort. The challenge, however, is including the required and expected spaces into the
necessary structural arrangement, which is already designed at a preliminary level. This is
particularly true for the pillars that are set throughout the ship.
One important reference in the arrangement is past and present luxury ship designs. With
these in mind, strong aspects of some vessels can be included while avoiding the negative
aspects of others. This is especially helpful for the public arrangement layouts at this stage of
design. Studied ships include those of Azamara Club Cruises, Ponant Cruise Line, Silver Seas
Cruises, and Seabourn Cruises, all of which belong in the luxury market.
Finally, the aesthetics of the ship were taken into account throughout the general arrangement
process. Key aesthetic points of todays cruise ships include the profile, bow, stern, funnel,
color scheme, and portlight and window shape and arrangement, among others. The
preliminary outboard profile of this vessel is shown in the appendix.
2 Regulatory requirements
The ship is designed using DNV classification rules (1). This, along with the regulations set
by the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (2), serves as the primary limiter of
arrangement design. The SOLAS regulations are important for fire protection, evacuation, and
general safety considerations, while the DNV rules give a broader idea of general
requirements to be considered. Though not the governing body for this ship, the ABS rules for
Crew Habitability on Ships (3) and Passenger Comfort on Ships (4) also serve as a checking
2
point for dimensional aspects, as they include a checklist of minimum dimensions. At this
level of design, a conservative approach to such dimensioning aspects will ensure a feasible
design that will not need to be altered at a later design stage.
3 Safety considerations
At the preliminary design stage, the major safety considerations taken into account are
subdivision requirements, fire protection, and evacuation procedures, all of which are crucial
to ensure the safety of those onboard.
3.1 Subdivision and fire safety

In regards to fire and safety protection, recent amendments to the SOLAS regulations have
raised fire safety regulations for passenger vessels (5). They are crucial in listing required
equipment and subdivision rules for all vessels. The main consideration at this stage is the
requirement that cruise ships be separated by main vertical zone bulkheads (MVZBs), or main
fire bulkheads (MFBs) with a maximum spacing of 48 meters. Fire doors must be located in
the bulkheads where necessary. These bulkheads, along with the aforementioned pillars, serve
as a major guideline in the placement of public spaces. This vessel is divided into three MVZ
spaces by two MVZBs.
Misting fire protection systems for all accommodation and machinery spaces, CO2 systems
for the engine rooms, and proper training are also included in the revised SOLAS
requirements for cruise ships. While not reflected in the general arrangement for this design
stage, such considerations must be taken into account to ensure complete fire safety and
regulatory compliancy.
3.2 Evacuation and lifesaving equipment

The uniqueness of this vessel, and therefore the innovation, revolves around the fact that there
are no lifeboats onboard. Therefore, it is crucial that the chosen alternative not only suffice in
offering appropriate lifesaving capabilities, but improve on the traditional systems. It must be
proven that the procedure is not only as safe as comparable ships, but safer. This is needed not
only to satisfy the regulations, but also to provide a sense of comfort for passengers.
With this in mind, the ship features Marin Ark 2 marine evacuation systems (MES) (6). For
vastly improved safety, there are two separate systems situated on each side of the vessel,
giving four evacuation stations, each with the capability of serving 158 persons. The MES
stations are located on decks three and five. This is more than enough to evacuate all
3
passengers from one side of the vessel in case of severe listing. Not only does this provide a
redundancy of over three times the total passengers and crew, but the fact that the systems are
located on different decks makes it safer than the traditional setup.
In addition, two traditional, davit-launch life raft stations are included on deck 4. Each station
has storage space for two compact Viking davit-launched, self-righting life rafts, along with a
davit. With this arrangement, the life raft is connected to the davit and then inflated at the
deck level, enabling passengers to board directly from the deck (7). Each raft has a 39 person
capacity, meaning, with two at each station, a total of 156 passengers can be evacuated by
more traditional means. This is important for passengers with disabilities, elderly, or others
who are incapable of safely evacuating the ship via MES. The fact that the traditional life rafts
are located on the middle of the three evacuation decks is also conducive to the evacuation
procedure, as it is central and therefore more accessible to passengers with disabilities.
In case of emergency, todays rules require all persons to report first to an assembly station
before proceeding, if necessary, to an evacuation station (5). By placing all six stations
directly adjacent to the three assembly stations (the main dining room, theatre, and casual
restaurant), this process is greatly streamlined, allowing for a more orderly and faster
evacuation process. The assembly stations may either be on deck or in public spaces and must
have an area of at least 0.35 [m2] per person to be evacuated (5), which is fulfilled by each of
the three chosen locations.
In comparison to modern lifeboats, the evacuation systems are fully inflatable and operational
within 90 seconds of deployment and are fully reversible, meaning they will inflate upright
every time. The chutes are also fully enclosed, ensuring no passenger is exposed to the
elements at any time. As the vessel has no permanent openings within the hull or
superstructure to prevent stress concentration in openings and ease the production process, the
systems are accessible through large, interior evacuation rooms and deployed after opening
weather tight doors. The evacuation arrangement is shown in the appendix of this report.
In summary, the selected evacuation methods have multiple advantages over traditional
lifeboats. By arranging all accommodations forward, unlike most current cruise ships, three
separate stations, per side, can offer a faster and more accessible evacuation when compared
to lifeboats located on one deck.
4 Passenger comfort
When completing the general arrangement, focus on passenger comfort is second only to
safety considerations. As a luxury cruise ship, it is extremely important that passenger
staterooms and public spaces reflect a high level of passenger comfort to compete with
todays luxury ships.
4.1 Staterooms
All passenger staterooms feature not only outside views, but private balconies as well. All
cabins are sized with the high standard of luxury design taken into account, and the layouts,
sizing, and spacing are all in line with comparable vessels. There are also wheelchair
accessible cabins onboard, sized with extra space for the navigation of wheelchairs and
featuring appropriate head arrangements. The six accessible cabins make up nearly 8% of the
total staterooms, which is well above the Passenger Vessel Accessibility Guidelines (PVAG),
which states that 2% of all cabins must be accessible. A breakdown of available passenger
staterooms is listed below, as well as subsequent sample plans in Figure 4-1.
(76) 23-26 [m2] balcony staterooms

(6) 31 [m2] wheelchair accessible balcony staterooms
(10) 39-50 [m2] balcony suites
These staterooms compare very favourably to the current norm. Todays standard balcony
stateroom averages 20 [m2] while suites are generally around 33 [m2] (8).
Figure 4-1- Sample stateroom floor plans
4.2 Public spaces

As with the design of the passenger staterooms, the various public passenger facilities were
arranged to both meet the regulatory requirements and provide a high level of comfort. One
focus is locating as many spaces as possible with sea views, especially the dining facilities,
which are required to have both natural and artificial lighting. The vertical layout of major
public spaces makes this an easy task. Another challenge is fitting as many passenger
amenities as possible on such a small vessel, which is aided by the high passenger space ratio,
meaning public spaces can be located in areas that would otherwise be reserved for cabins.
The result is a ship that features the spaces that passengers both need and expect, including a
main two-level foyer, medical center, large formal dining room, casual buffet, show lounge,
observation lounge, spa, gym, pool area, and multiple bars. The only typical cruise feature
missing from the vessel is a casino, which was excluded due to the restricting itinerary plan,
as the vessel operates in inland waters.
5 Crew and service facilities

Though not as major a focus as passenger comfort, it is nonetheless important to ensure that
the crew have adequate cabins and facilities in order to ensure their wellbeing and motivation,
which will directly affect the guests. There are many requirements to take into account,
including the sizing of accommodation spaces, inclusion of the required recreation areas and
practical spaces, and the complete separation of crew and passenger facilities.
5.1 Crew accommodation

The final arrangement features crew cabins on deck two, sufficiently far from the main engine
and equipment rooms. The senior officers cabins are situated on deck five, directly adjacent
to the navigation bridge. To ensure a high level of comfort, all cabins feature outside views
and no cabin sleeps more than two persons, which is a rarity aboard cruise ships. Still, there
are accommodation spaces for 56 crewmembers, which leave a margin for guests or a future
increased crew capacity. Sample crew schematics are shown in
Figure 5-1- Sample crew cabin floor plans
As with cabins, additional crew spaces are included to comply with the regulations. These
include the obligatory messes for general crewmembers and officers, gym, laundry room, and
recreation facility. In addition, practical spaces that are necessary for a successful working
order of the ship are taken into account. Examples of these include multiple office spaces as
well as a conference room for the navigating officers.
5.2 Service spaces

Separate crew and service stairwells and elevators are provided to service all decks, ensuring
a convenient and efficient service flow. There is one large, main galley on board to prepare
the bulk of the food for both passengers and crew. In addition, for easier serviceability, there
are smaller galleys and pantries adjacent to every dining facility, all of which are connected
both by a stairwell and service elevator. This is especially important with the vertical
arrangement, as it would not be convenient to transport food from lower decks.
Included both in the main galley and a separate room directly below is an ample amount of
provisions storage. At this design stage, the ABS guidelines for provision storage allotment
(4) were considered. These guidelines estimate the needed area or volume based on both the
number of intended passengers and continuous operating time, as listed below.
Dry provisions: 0.06 [m2 per person/per day]

Chilled provisions: 0.017 [m3 per person/per day]
Frozen provisions: 0.023 [m3 per person/per day]
The space allotted for these provisions is more than adequate for these estimations. It is
important to include a large margin to allow for the possibility of expanding itinerary options
in the future, as some may last more than seven days.
The bridge is located on the second highest deck and includes the central safety control center
that is required by SOLAS. This permanently manned station contains control panels for the
various systems onboard. These include the fire detection and alarm systems, sprinkler
systems, fire and watertight doors, ventilation fans, general alarm systems, communication
systems, and the public address system (9).
5.3 Additional spaces

Besides the aforementioned spaces, machinery spaces, and tanks, the remaining space
onboard are reserved for operational requirements, including exhaust spacing, hotel service
spaces, and heating and cooling facilities. Approximately 5% of the total interior space aboard
cruise ships should be allocated to heating and cooling spaces on each deck (10). This is
crucial for the decks that feature large amounts of passenger staterooms. In addition, at least
3% should be reserved for hospitality rooms, including storage and cleaning lockers and
laundry stations.
6 Material access
Another functional consideration is the access and flow of various materials. In this regard,
space has been allocated in both the arrangement and profile views for the needed stations and
doors. Passenger embarkation can be accomplished with both the general gangway access and
passenger tender stations near the waterline. Even though this ship has a low draft, it is
important to include tendering capabilities for future deployment flexibility. Another
watertight door leads to a bunker station, with one station port and one starboard to allow
flexibility when docking.
Additional doors are identified for material handling. The forward is dedicated to luggage
access and egress and is situated near the luggage handling room. This is an important feature
for cruise ships, which must handle a large amount of luggage on the embarkation and
debarkation days. Finally, the provision access doors are located aft of the bunker stations and
lead directly to two of the provision storage rooms. All doors from the deck to superstructure
are weather tight while the closures below the bulkhead deck are watertight.
7 Tank arrangement
7.1 Fuel tanks
The sizes of fuel tanks are calculated based on the fuel consumption of all engines and taking
into account mission of the ship. Therefore, the fuel tanks must have enough capacity to
ensure a sufficient period of independency on sea. The vessel visits during the cruise every
day one port; therefore, each of storage tanks for HFO must be able to hold fuel for at least
one day. In addition to the storage tanks, there are also two settling tanks, each capable of
providing fuel for 24 hours operation at maximum fuel consumption. This time will be
sufficient for settling (water and sediment separation). There are also day tanks, each which
holds fuel for 8 hours of sailing at full power. As the fuel consumption for all engines is
[m3/h] which was calculated during Ship Machinery course, then tank capacities are
calculated according to this and the results can be seen in Table 7-1.
Table 7-1. Fuel tank capacities

Storage tank
Settling tank
Day tank
Number of tanks
2
2
2
Total:
Capacity [m3/h]
259,2
259,2
86,4
604,8
7.2 Ballast tanks

Capacity for the ballast water tanks, at this stage is first estimation due to the preliminary
weight calculations and it is not known how much ballast water is needed. Therefore, most of
the tanks in double bottom which do not have other purpose are ballast water tanks.
7.3 Fresh water tanks

The fresh water consumption per person is chosen to be 300 [l/day]. Additionally steam
boilers use fresh water and the total steam need is 2054 [kg/h]. Therefore in total, assuming
that the ship is in full use with 152 persons, the daily water consumption used by passengers
and crew will be 45 600 [l]. The total amount of fresh water needed for steam boilers is taken
as 50 000 [l/day]. Thus, fresh water tanks are designed to have capacity for approximately 2
days, equaling in volume 200 [m3].
7.4
Black and grey water tanks
Black and gray water holding tank capacities are calculated based on average generated
sewage and grey water per person in day. The average black water generated per person in
9
one day is approximately 32 liters per person (11). The grey wastewater generated per person
in one day is approximately 255 liters per person (12). Therefore, black water holding tank
capacity should be 4864 liters per vessel and the designed tank capacity is 10 [m3].
Grey wastewater holding tank capacity should be 38 760 liters per vessel and the designed
tank capacity is 78 [m3]. These tank sizes are made twice a bigger, because if something
happens with treatment plant, then there is not an issue to hold all the black and grey
wastewater during trip between two ports.
For a waste treatment plant is chosen EVAC advanced membrane bio-reactor (MBR)
treatment plant, which will treat grey and black water as well dry waste and food waste. A
membrane bioreactor is used to filter grey and black water so, that clean water is separated
from the biomass by membrane filtration. In choosing the treatment plant it is considered that
it will be capable to treat as much water as the person generates per one day.
7.5 Tanks for other system

In addition to these bigger systems, there are also some smaller systems which tanks needs to
be mentioned and these are: lubricating oil tank, sludge tank for lubricating oil system and
some minor fuel tank for boiler.
8 Machinery arrangement
In all type of the ships, the machinery area is tried to keep as small as possible, to have more
space for passenger or cargo, the payload. This fact makes machinery area arrangement
significantly more complicated than others, as it has to fit a lot of equipment. The project ship
is designed according to DNV rules and the requirements pointed out in ( (13), Section 3) are
followed. For safety reasons are followed the SOLAS rules (14).
8.1 Main machinery rooms

In the following list are described the main machinery rooms and the aspects, which are taken
into consideration of their arrangement:
Main engine rooms are all separated by longitudinal bulkheads, to ensure the ship
performance in case of emergency. The main engines rooms are located in the middle of
the ship, because the weight of the engines will cause bigger trim angle when located in
aft or fore of ship.
10
Propulsion motors are located as stern as possible to decrease the shaft length; considered
as one of the main sources of vibration in ship, which are tried to keep as low as possible
in passenger ships.
Main drive and switchboard rooms should be located as close as possible to generators, as
the cables between those three are the biggest and with highest voltages and therefore
tried to keep short.
Water treatment and heating are placed close to each other to limit the piping length,
which lowers the accident and failure possibilities and gives extra space.
Fuel separating and feeding unit are placed as close to engines as possible to decrease
piping length
Thruster room should be separated from other areas as it contains big drive unit with high
voltage and to lower the chance of getting in case of accident.
11
Bibliography
1. DNV. Passanger and Dry Cargo Ships. Rules for Classification of Ships. 2011.
2. International Maritime Organization. International Convention for the Safety of Life at
Sea. 1994.
3. Shipping, American Bureau of. Crew Habitability on Ships. Houston : s.n., 2012.
4. Passenger Comfor on Ships. Houson : s.n., 2001.
5. Aarnio, Markus. Rules and Regulations - How the Rules and Regulations affect Passenger
Ship Design. 2012.
6. Marine, RFD Beafort. Marin Ark Technical Manual. 2013.
7. Viking. Viking Liferafts. 2013.
8. Jatunen, Olli. Passenger Ship Design Criteria, Functions, and Features. 2013.
9. American Bureau of Shipping. Guide for Bridge Design and Navigational Equipment and
Systems. Houston : s.n., 2000.
10. Levander, Kai. Passenger Ships. [book auth.] Thomas Lamb. Ship Design and
Construction Vol II. Jersey City : Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 2004.
11.
Cruise
Ship
Discharge
Assessment
Report.
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/vwd/upload/2009_01_28_oceans_cruise_ships_section2_sewag
e.pdf. [Online]
12.
Cruise
Ship
Discharge
Assessment
Report.
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/vwd/upload/2009_01_28_oceans_cruise_ships_section3_grayw
ater.pdf. [Online]
13. DNV. Newbuildings Machinery and Systems - Main Class. Rules For Classification of
Ships. 2011.
14. SOLAS. Means of escape from machinery spaces. Regulation 13. Means of Escape. 2002.
12
BOILER FEED
WATER TANK
MAIN
DRIVE
FIRE
FIGHTING
MAIN
SWITCHBOARD
SETTLING
TANK
DAY
TANK
STORAGE
MAIN ENGINE ROOM
GRAY AND BLACK WATER
TREATMENT
FRESH WATER TANK
GRAYWATER TANK
WORKSHOP
10
20
PROPULSION
MOTOR
ROOM
30
FRESHWATER TREATMENT
40
AND HEATING
50
60
70
80
90
MAIN ENGINE ROOM
100
GRAY AND BLACK WATER

TREATMENT
110
GRAYWATER TANK
THRUSTER CONTROL ROOM
HVAC
SETTLING
TANK
FUEL FEEDING AND SEPERATION
DAY
TANK
PUMP
ROOM
MAIN ENGINE ROOM
MFB
MFB
SEA CHEST
WB
HFO
LUBRICATION
OIL
WB
20
30
40
50
SLUDGE
WB
BILGE WATER
SLUDGE
10
WB
60
WB
70
80
WB
90
100
110
WB
HFO
SEA CHEST
WB
LUBRICATION
OIL
SEA CHEST
WB
WB
5-1
A3
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Tank plan and machinery deck
Champion
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Aalto University
School of Engineering
Marine Technology
CREW ACCOMODATION
PASSENGER EMBARKATION STATION
LUGGAGE ACCESS
CREW ACCOMODATION
OFFICE
SECURITY
AND
CONTROL
OFFICE
OFFICER MESS
AND LOUNGE
EXCURSION
DESK
RECEPTION
MAIN GALLEY
AND
PROVISIONS STORAGE
MOORING
AND
CREW
SPACE
GRAND
FOYER
10
20
30
40
OFFICE
OFFICE
EXHAUST
CASING
50
OFFICE
SECURITY
AND
CONTROL
LUGGAGE
HANDLING
60
70
80
CREW LOUNGE
AND BAR
90
100
110
MEDICAL CENTER
OFFICE
LUGGAGE ACCESS
PASSENGER EMBARKATION STATION
MFB
PROVISION ACCESS
PROVISION ACCESS
PROPULSION
MOTOR
ROOM
PROVISIONS STORAGE
AND
GARBAGE HANDLING
STEERING GEAR
10
MACHINERY
ACCESS
MFB
PASSENGER TENDER STATION
BUNKER STATION
HOTEL
STORES
HVAC
MAIN ENGINE ROOM
PROVISIONS
STORAGE
20
30
EXHAUST
CASING
40
50
MAIN ENGINE ROOM
60
70
COMMERCIAL LAUNDRY AND LINEN

STORES
80
90
100
110
ENGINE CONTROL
ROOM
PROPULSION
MOTOR
ROOM
PROVISION ACCESS
MACHINERY
ACCESS
PROVISION ACCESS
PAINT
STORES
BUNKER STATION
MAIN ENGINE ROOM
PASSENGER TENDER STATION
MFB
MFB
5-2
A3
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Deck 1 and Deck 2
Champion
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Aalto University
Marine Technology
EVACUATION STATION #4
78 PERSONS
MAIN SHOW LOUNGE

AND BAR
WC
10
20
SOUND
AND
LIGHTING
CONTROL
HOSPITALITY
STORE
RETAIL
SHOP
30
40
50
LAUNDRETTE
EXHAUST
CASING
60
HOSPITALITY
STORE
HVAC ROOM
70
80
CLEANING
LOCKER
90
100
110
WC
ASSEMBLY STATION #2
78 PERSONS
BALCONY STATEROOM
ACCESSIBLE STATEROOM
MFB
BALCONY SUITE
MFB
158 PERSONS
MAIN DINING ROOM
WC
GALLEY
EXHAUST
CASING
OPEN
10
20
30
40
50
60
HOSPITALITY
STORE
HVAC ROOM
70
80
90
100
110
WC
ASSEMBLY STATION #1
EMERGENCY
GENSET ROOM
158 PERSONS
BALCONY STATEROOM
MFB
BALCONY SUITE
MFB
5-3
A3
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Deck 3 and Deck 4
Champion
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Aalto University
Marine Technology
MAST
FUNNEL
CREW RECREATION DECK
10
20
30
40
50
SUN DECK
60
70
80
90
100
110
JOGGING TRACK
SPA
SUN DECK
JACC.
POOL BAR
AND
PANTRY
SUN DECK
POOL
10
20
30
40
50
WC
EXHAUST
CASING/
AIR INTAKE
DECK AND POOL

STORAGE
60
GYM
OBSERVATION LOUNGE
AND BAR
SPA
70
80
90
100
110
WC
JACC.
SPA
SUN DECK
MFB
GYM
MFB
SR.
OFF.
158 PERSONS
HOTEL
DIRECTOR
CHIEF
ENGINEER
DECK
RADIO
ROOM
CASUAL BUFFET
RESTAURANT
PANTRY
WC
10
20
HOSPITALITY
STORE
LIBRARY/
CARD ROOM
POOL TRUNK
30
40
50
CLEANING
LOCKER
LAUNDRETTE
60
OFFICE OFFICE
EXHAUST
CASING
HVAC ROOM
70
NAVIGATION BRIDGE
80
CONFERENCE
ROOM
90
100
110
WC
ASSEMBLY STATION #3
CENTRAL
SAFETY
CONTROL
CENTER
SR.
OFF.
158 PERSONS
BALCONY SUITE
BALCONY STATEROOM
MFB
SR.
OFF.
CAPTAIN
DECK
MFB
5-4
A3
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Deck 5, Deck 6 and Deck 7
Champion
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Aalto University
Marine Technology
10
20
10
30
20
40
30
50
40
60
50
70
60
80
70
90
80
100
90
110
100
5-5
110
A3
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Profile views
Champion
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Aalto University
Marine Technology
FUNNEL
SUN DECK
MAST
MOORING
MAIN GALLEY AND PROVISIONS
PROVISIONS AND MACHINERY
PUBLIC SPACE AND EVACUATION
PASSENGER STAIRS
GALLEY
PASSENGER LIFTS 3,4
MAIN DINING ROOM
SERVICE LIFT 2 AND SERVICE STAIRS
SHOW LOUNGE AND BAR
SPA AND GYM
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PUBLIC AND OFFICE SPACES
10
20
OFFICER ACC.
NAVIGATION BRIDGE
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PROVISIONS
MFB
OBSERVATION LOUNGE
PASSENGER STAIRS
CASUAL RESTAURANT
STORAGE
PASSENGER LIFTS 1,2
POOL BAR
POOL AREA
30
40
MFB
50
60
70
80
5-6
90
A3
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Inboard view
100
110
Champion
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Aalto University
Marine Technology
DWL
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
5-7
100
A3
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Evacuation profile
110
Champion
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Aalto University
Marine Technology
AALTO UNIVERSITY
Marine Technology
Hull Structure
M/S Arianna
Table of Contents
NOTATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 3
1
MAIN FRAME CHARACTERISTICS ..................................................................... 4

1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11
1.12
FRAMING SYSTEM .................................................................................................................... 4

WEB FRAME ............................................................................................................................. 4
DOUBLE BOTTOM HEIGHT........................................................................................................ 4
SIDE GIRDER ............................................................................................................................ 4
FLOORS .................................................................................................................................... 5
LONGITUDINALS ...................................................................................................................... 5
PILLARS ................................................................................................................................... 5
BRACKETS ............................................................................................................................... 5
OPENINGS ................................................................................................................................ 6
SPACE RESERVATIONS ......................................................................................................... 8
LOCATION OF BULKHEADS .................................................................................................. 8
DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS IN ENGINE ROOM ......................................................... 9
RELEVANT LOADS ................................................................................................. 10

2.1
2.2
2.3
HULL AND DECKS PRESSURES................................................................................................ 10

HULL GIRDER BENDING MOMENTS ........................................................................................ 12
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 14
MATERIAL SELECTION........................................................................................ 14
STRUCTURAL ELEMENT CALCULATIONS .................................................... 16

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
BOTTOM STRUCTURES ........................................................................................................... 16

SIDE STRUCTURES .................................................................................................................. 17
DECK STRUCTURES ................................................................................................................ 18
SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 19
STRUCTURAL ELEMENT CALCULATIONS USING BEAM THEORY ....... 20
HULL GIRDER NORMAL STRESS RESPONSE ................................................ 22

6.1
6.2
6.3
BENDING STRESS ................................................................................................................... 22

SHEAR STRESS ....................................................................................................................... 27
STRESS COMPARISON WITH RULE LIMITS .............................................................................. 29
WEB FRAMES ........................................................................................................... 31
CRITICAL BUCKLING STRESS ........................................................................... 32

8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
JOHNSON CORRECTION .......................................................................................................... 32

STIFFENER BUCKLING ............................................................................................................ 32
PLATE BUCKLING IN COMPRESSION ....................................................................................... 33
PLATE BUCKLING IN SHEAR STRESS....................................................................................... 33
USAGE FACTOR ...................................................................................................................... 33
RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 34
ULTIMATE STRENGTH ......................................................................................... 34

9.1
FIRST FIBRE YIELD ................................................................................................................. 34
9.2
9.3
FIRST FIBRE BUCKLING .......................................................................................................... 35

CONSTRUCT RESULTS ............................................................................................................ 35
10
NATURAL FREQUENCIES OF PLATES, STIFFENERS AND GIRDERS...... 36
11
TORSION PROBLEMS ............................................................................................ 37
12
VIBRATORY LEVELS ............................................................................................. 37
13
FATIGUE ANALYSIS .............................................................................................. 38
14
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................... 41
APPENDIX 1 MAIN FRAME CHARACTERISTICS.................................................... 42

APPENDIX 2 BULKHEAD LOCATIONS ...................................................................... 43
APPENDIX 3 MAIN FRAME AT MACHINERY ROOM............................................. 44
APPENDIX 4 MAIN FRAME ........................................................................................... 45
APPENDIX 5 - MATERIAL GRADES AND CLASSES ................................................... 46
APPENDIX 6 - BEAM THEORY CALCULATION TABLES ......................................... 47
APPENDIX 7 - TABLES FOR BLEICH APPROACH ..................................................... 54
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 5-1. Stiffener section modulus with plate. .................................................................... 22
Figure 6-1. Bending stress distribution in hogging. ................................................................. 24
Figure 6-2. Hogging bending stress distribution according to Construct. ............................... 25
Figure 6-3.Bending stress distribution in sagging. ................................................................... 25
Figure 6-4. Sagging bending stress distribution according to Construct. ................................ 26
Figure 6-5. Shear stress distribution. ........................................................................................ 28
Figure 6-6. Shear stress distribution according to Construct. .................................................. 28
Figure 9-1. Ultimate strength according to Construct. ............................................................. 35
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1. Load types, magnitudes and frequencies. ............................................................... 14
Table 3-1. Structural element materials. .................................................................................. 15
Table 4-1. Structural element minimum dimensions according to DNV (3) ........................... 19
Table 5-1. Section modulus calculation ................................................................................... 20
Table 6-1. Shear force distribution factor ................................................................................ 27
Table 6-2. Stress comparison. .................................................................................................. 30
Table 8-1. Critical buckling stresses ........................................................................................ 34
Table 10-1. Frequency ranges .................................................................................................. 36
2
Table 13-1. S-N parameters ..................................................................................................... 40
Notations
ship length [m]

ship breadth [m]
ship draft [m]
Block coefficient
pressure [kN/mm2]
stiffener spacing [m]
stiffener span [m]
section modulus corrosion factor
corrosion addition [mm]
material factor
bending stress [MPa]
shear stress [MPa]
yield stress [MPa]
correction factor for aspect of plate field
girder or web-frame spacing [m]
vertical distance from the waterline at draught T to the load point [m]
vertical distance in m from the load point to the top of tank [m]
distance from the centre line to the load point [m]
vertical distance from the baseline to the load point, maximum T [m]
acceleration of gravity [m/s2]
vertical acceleration [m/s2]
density of liquid [kg/m3]
plate thickness [mm]
1 Main frame characteristics

The ship is designed according to Det Norske Veritas (DNV) rules. Most of the design is done
by following to the DNV Rules for Classification of Ships, part 3 - Hull and Equipment, Main
Class chapter 1. This corresponds to the hull structural design for ships with a length of 100
metres and above. Even so, there are some differences between different ship types and
therefore part 5, Special Service and Additional Type Classes and chapter 2, Passenger and
Dry Cargo Ships, are also used when necessary. The final main frame is presented in
Appendix 1-Main frame characteristics.
1.1
Framing system
A longitudinal framing system is chosen for the ship because of its lower weight compared to
transverse and mixed framing systems. Additionally, with more longitudinal stiffeners, the
shell and deck plating are reinforced more effectively in comparison to transverse framing,
allowing resistance of longitudinal compressive stresses. This is important since cruise ships
are usually with relatively high L/B ratios, meaning longitudinal stresses are the main issues
(1).
1.2
Web frame
The web frame spacing is chosen by considering the fact that cabins should be fitted between
web frames. As such, a web frame spacing of 3m is chosen for the final design. (2)
1.3
Double bottom height
For passenger vessels and cargo ships other than tankers, a double bottom shall be fitted,
extending from the collision bulkhead to the afterpeak bulkhead, as far as is practicable and
compatible with the design and proper working of the ship ( (3), Section 6). The minimum
height of the double bottom is calculated as follows:
[mm]
1.4
1-1
Side girder
Side girders shall normally be fitted so that the distance between the side girders and the
center girder or margin plate or between the side girders themselves does not exceed 5 m. In
the engine room, one side girder is to be fitted outside the engine seating girders in all cases
( (3), Section 6).
1.5
Floors
The floor spacing is normally not to be greater than 3,6 m. In way of deep tanks with heights
exceeding 0,7 times the distance between the inner bottom and the main deck, the floor
spacing is normally not to exceed 2,5 m. In the engine room, floors shall be fitted at every
second side frame. Bracket floors shall be fitted at intermediate frames, extending to the first
ordinary side girder outside the engine seating. For thrust bearings and below pillars,
additional strengthening shall be provided ( (3), Section 6). Floors are fitted equally with web
frames and the floor spacing is 3 m.
1.6
Longitudinals
All longitudinals (bottom, inner bottom, and deck) are fitted with spacing of 600 mm or as
near it as possible. The stiffener span must be chosen in accordance to the following
considerations:
Longitudinals shall be continuous through transverse members within 0,5 L amidships in

ships with length L > 150 m
Longitudinals may be cut at transverse members within 0,5 L amidships in ships with
length 50 m < L< 150 m. In that case, continuous brackets connecting the ends of the
longitudinals shall be fitted.
Longitudinals may be welded against the floors in ships with length L < 50 m, and in larger
ships, outside 0.5 L amidships.
1.7
Pillars
The main issue with pillar location is cabin arrangement, as they must fit between pillars or
between a pillar and side. Pillars should be connected with transverse deck girders and deck
girders at the strongest point, therefore, pillars should be located at the crossing points of deck
girders. Pillars should be in one line as much as possible to avoid shear force. The same
reason is taken into account by locating pillars on bulkheads.
1.8
Brackets
1.8.1 End connections of stiffeners

Normally, all types of stiffeners (longitudinals, beams, frames, and bulkhead stiffeners) shall
be connected at their ends. In special cases, however, sniped ends may be allowed.
Connections between stiffener and bracket shall be designed so that the section modulus in
way of the connection is not reduced to a value less than required for the stiffener. If the
flange transition between the stiffener and an integral bracket is knuckled, the flange shall be
effectively supported in way of the knuckle. (3)
1.8.2 End connections of girders
Normally, ends of single girders or connections between girders forming ring systems shall be
provided with brackets. Brackets are generally to be made with a radius or be well-rounded at
their toes. The free edge of the brackets shall be arranged with a flange or edge stiffener. The
thickness of brackets on girders shall not be less than that of the girder web plate. Where
flanges are continuous, there shall be a smooth taper between bracket flange and girder face
plate. If the flange is discontinuous, the face plate of the girder shall extend well beyond the
toe of the bracket. (3)
Between supporting plates on the centre girder, docking brackets shall be fitted. Alternative
arrangements of supporting plates and docking brackets require special consideration of the
local buckling strength of the centre girder/duct keel and local strength of the docking
longitudinal that is subject to the forces from docking blocks. (3)
1.9
Openings
Openings may be accepted in watertight bulkheads, except in the part of the collision
bulkhead which is situated below the freeboard deck. Openings situated below the freeboard
deck which are intended for use when the ship is at sea, shall have watertight doors which
shall be closable from the freeboard deck or an alternative place above the deck. The
operating device shall be well protected and accessible. Openings in the collision bulkhead
above the freeboard deck shall have weather tight doors or an equivalent arrangement. The
number of openings in the bulkhead shall be reduced to the minimum compatible with the
design and normal operation of the ship.
No door, manhole, or ventilation duct or any other opening will be accepted in the collision
bulkhead below the freeboard deck. The collision bulkhead may, however, be pierced by
necessary pipes to deal with fluids in the forepeak tank, provided the pipes are fitted with
valves capable of being operated from above the freeboard deck.
Openings in the side shell, longitudinal bulkheads, and longitudinal girders shall be located
not less than twice the opening breadth below the strength deck or the termination of a
rounded deck corner. Small openings are generally to be kept well clear of other openings in
longitudinal strength members. Edges of small unreinforced openings shall be located at a
6
transverse distance not less than four times the opening breadth from the edge of any other
opening.
Smaller openings (manholes, lightening holes, and single scallops in way of seams, etc.) do
not need to be deducted provided the sum of their breadths or shadow area breadths in one
transverse section does not reduce the section modulus at the deck or bottom by more than
3%. In addition, the height of lightening holes, draining holes, and single scallops in
longitudinals or longitudinal girders must not exceed 25% of the web depth and a maximum
75mm is imposed for scallops.
In the strength deck and outer bottom within 0,6 L amidships, circular openings with a
diameter equal to or greater than 0,325 m shall have edge reinforcement. The cross-sectional
area of edge reinforcements shall not be less than the following:
[cm2]
1-2
Where,
- diameter of opening in [m],
The reinforcement is normally to be a vertical ring welded to the plate edge. Alternative
arrangements may be accepted but the distance from plating edge to reinforcement is in no
case to exceed 0,05 b.
In areas specified in previously elliptical openings with a breadth greater than 0,5 m, edge
reinforcement must be included if their length/breadth ratio is less than 2. The reinforcement
shall also be required in the strength deck and outer bottom for circular openings, taking b as
the breadth of the opening. For corners of circular shape the radius shall not be less than:
[cm]
1-3
Where,
- breadth of opening
For streamlining, shape edge reinforcement will generally not be required; edges of openings
shall be smooth. Machine flame cut openings with smooth edges may be accepted.
Holes in girders will generally be accepted provided the shear stress level is acceptable and
the buckling strength is sufficient. Holes shall be kept well clear of end of brackets and
locations where shear stresses are high.
1.10 Space reservations

As the present project is a cruise ship with a capacity of 184 people, there should be enough
space to accommodate all the passengers and crew members. Therefore, an important issue is
cabin measurements. Cabin measures depend on the distances between web frames, as cabins
should fit in between web frames. Thus, there must be compromises between cabins size and
web frame spacing in order to find the best solution. In the current project, web frame spacing
is chosen to be 3 m, which is sufficient to accommodate two or four persons. The number of
people depends on the cabin layout. In a cabin, there must be enough space to move freely
and feel comfortable. Deck heights are about 2,6 m, so there is enough space in the ceiling
for, for example, piping and cable lines. The engine room height is through two decks, with
an initial approximation of 7 m. What is more, there must be reserved space for hallways
between public spaces and accommodation spaces and also space for stairways between
decks.
In conclusion, the space is divided between cabins, crew accommodation, machinery room,
public restaurant, and lounges, etc.
1.11 Location of bulkheads

The following transverse, watertight bulkheads shall be fitted in all ships:
a collision bulkhead
an after peak bulkhead
a bulkhead at each end of the machinery space(s).
According to (3) Section 3, Table A1, there must be 6 bulkheads. The minimum distance xc
from the fore perpendicular PF to the collision bulkhead is calculated with the following
equation (3):
[m]
1-4
The after peak bulkhead is placed approximately 18 m from the aft perpendicular to the
location where the double bottom and rising stern part meets. There is also a longitudinal
bulkhead between two engines and a bulkhead to allocate the switchboard. The location of
other bulkheads is shown in Appendix 2-Bulkhead locations.
1.12 Design of structural members in engine room

The side shell in the engine room always supports the water pressure from the outside,
especially in the fully loaded condition, as it will be quite high. The water pressure is
supported by the longitudinal frames and the load is transmitted to the web frames which are
finally supported by the engine flats. From this viewpoint, the engine flat is not only the
foundation of the machinery but also an important strength member. In order to reduce the
hull steel weight as consequence of the water pressure, the thickness of the engine flat is
reduced and is finally constructed by a frame work without a plate. Even in such a situation, it
is good to remember that the engine flat is an important strength member to support the web
frames in the engine room.
Ship machinery is not installed directly on the supporting surfaces of foundations, but rather
on appropriate intermediate elements such as foundation chocks. This is due to the fact that
large supporting surfaces of foundations and machine bodies are dicult to match in contact
exactly. Also, there is the often arising need to have the connected machines aligned with high
precision. Metal chocks made of steel or cast iron, with their characteristic high rigidity, have
traditionally been used in shipbuilding and the seating arrangements utilizing them are rigid.
The load should be evenly distributed among all chocks, which is obtained by their
appropriate placement and tting. Resulting from the high rigidity of metal chocks, small
inaccuracies in their tting may lead to a highly uneven foundation loading, holding down the
bolts and bodies of machines. As this phenomenon is highly detrimental, demanding
requirements have been introduced with regard to the precise tting of the chocks during the
installation of ship machinery. (4)
1.12.1 Transverse framing
Side girders shall be fitted so that the distance between the side girders and centre girder or
margin plate or between the side girders themselves does not exceed 4 metres. In the engine
room, side girders are in all cases to be fitted outside the engine seating girders.
In the engine room, floors shall be fitted at every second side frame. Bracket floors shall be
fitted at intermediate frames, extending to the first ordinary side girder outside the engine
seating. With respect to the thrust bearing and below pillars, additional strengthening shall be
provided (3). The vessels machinery room is presented in Appendix 3-Main frame at
machinery room.
2 Relevant loads
According to the project ship, there are several loads acting on its design lifetime of 20 years,
which is an assumed value at this stage. Loads on ship structures can be divided into the
following categories:
static loads (e.g., still water bending moments)
low-frequency (dynamic) loads (e.g., wave-induced hull pressure variations)
high-frequency (dynamic) loads (e.g., wave-induced loads from primary short waves)
impact loads(e.g., collision, slamming)
The load calculation results are presented in
Table 2-1.
2.1
Hull and decks pressures
2.1.1 Side pressures

Firstly, there is an estimated sea pressure to ships sides as well as pressure to the decks.
Water pressure increases with depth and tends to set in the ships plating below the water line.
A transverse section of a ship is subjected to a static pressure from the surrounding water in
addition to loading resulting from the weight of the structure, cargo, etc. Although transverse
stresses are of lesser magnitude than longitudinal stresses, considerable distortion of the
structure could occur in absence of adequate stiffening. The sea pressure is calculated with
two different equations. According to the DNV rules, the pressure acting on the ship side shall
be taken as the sum of the static and dynamic pressure. Pressure which is below the summer
waterline can be calculated as the following:
[kPa]
The pressure
2-1
is taken as:
(
) [kPa]
2-2
) [kPa]
2-3
Where,
(
)(
10
Where,
[
2-4
] [kPa]
Side pressure decreases when
decreases, therefore, the pressure near the waterline is
calculated similarly as above and the result can be seen in

Table 2-1.
The pressure above the summer waterline is constant along the entire side and can be
calculated as follows:
[kPa]
2-5
2.1.2 Deck pressure

The deck pressures in accommodation decks are calculated as the following:
(
) [kPa]
2-6
However, the minimum pressure must be larger than a specified value:

(
) [kPa]
2-7
The deck pressures in machinery spaces are calculated as the following:

(
) [kPa]
2-8
2.1.3 Inner bottom pressure

The pressure for the inner bottom is calculated with the following relationship:
[kPa]
2-9
2.1.4 Outer bottom pressure

The outer bottom pressure is calculated in the same way as the side pressure below the
summer waterline and the result can be seen in
Table 2-1. Although the ship has deadrise in the bottom, the pressure acting on the bottom is
taken as a constant and is calculated using Equation 2-1 at the design draft.
11
2.1.5 Pressure in tanks

The pressure in full tanks is calculated as follows:
(
2.2
[kPa]
2-10
Hull girder bending moments
2.2.1 Stillwater loads

2.2.1.1 Stillwater bending moments
The loads from cargo and lightweight are balanced by the displacement in port and that will
cause still water bending of the hull girder. The design still water bending moments amidships
(sagging and hogging) are calculated as follows:
Sagging:
(
) [kNm]
2-11
Hogging:
(
) [kNm]
In case of unrestricted service, the relationship
2-12
must be satisfied.
2.2.1.2 Stillwater shear force

The design values of still water shear forces along the length of the ship are normally not to
be taken less than the following:
[kN]
2-13
[kN]
2-14
Where,
, between 0,4L and 0,6L from aft perpendicular
A specified sign convention is to be applied:
when sagging, condition positive in forebody, negative in afterbody
when hogging, condition negative in forebody, positive in afterbody

12
2.2.2 Wave loads

2.2.2.1 Bending moment
In a heavy seaway, a ship may be supported at the ends by the crests of waves while the
middle remains unsupported. If the wave trough is now considered at amidships then the
buoyancy in this region will be reduced. With the wave crest positioned at the ends of the
ship, the buoyancy here will be increased. This loading condition will result in a bending
moment which will cause the ship to sag.
In contrast, if the wave crest is considered at amidships then the buoyancy in this region will
be increased. With the wave trough positioned at the ends of the ship, the buoyancy here will
be reduced. This loading condition will result in a significantly increased bending moment,
which will cause the ship to hog. As such, the vertical wave bending moments are:
Sagging:
(
) [kNm]
2-15
Hogging:
[kNm]
2-16
For seagoing conditions, the parameter
is equal to one.
2.2.2.2 Shear force

The wave vertical shear forces along the length of the ship of are calculated as a positive shear
force:
(
) [kN]
2-17
A positive shear force should be used when a positive still water shear force appears.
The negative shear force can also be found:
(
) [kN]
2-18
Where,
for seagoing conditions,
between 0,4 L and 0,6 L from A.P,
13
between 0,4 L and 0,6 L from A.P,

Negative shear force should be used when negative still water shear force appears.
2.2.3 Total bending moment
The total moment acting on the hull is calculated utilizing Equations 2-11 to 2-16 as follows:
[kNm]
2.3
2-19
Summary
Table 2-1. Load types, magnitudes and frequencies.

Load type
Side pressure below waterline [kPa]
Side pressure above waterline [kPa]
Bottom pressure [kPa]
Inner bottom pressure [kPa]
Accommodation deck pressure [kPa]
Machinery deck pressure [kPa]
Pressure in tanks [kPa]
Stillwater bending moment [kNm]:
Wave bending moment [kNm]:
Total wave moment [kNm]:
Stillwater shear force
Wave shear force [kN] :
Sign
Sagging
Hogging
Sagging
Hogging
Sagging
Hogging
Sagging
Hogging
Positive
Negative
Magnitude
4,3 - 71,3
9
71,3
19,3
13,3
20,2
19,8
Frequency
Constant
Constant
Constant
Constant
Constant
Constant
Constant
Constant
Constant
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
Stillwater bending moments are also calculated using NAPA and is seen that in stillwater
conditions the ship is hogging and the biggest moment affects the ship when it is arriving to
port and it is
rules,
kNm. Compared to bending moment calculated according to DNV

, the difference is significant. In calculations, the DNV bending moment is
used to assure the strength is guaranteed.

The shear force is also taken from NAPA, where it is found to be 820 kN, but according to
DNV in hogging, the shear force is 730 kN, which results in a difference of 11%. The DNV
shear force is used in calculations to prevent mixing different result sources and, as the
bending moment difference is much bigger, it is reasonable to use DNV in still water loads.
14
3 Material selection
Material selection is done according to DNV classification rules ( (3) , Section 2). The most
cost efficient for the shipyard is to use as few different materials as possible. In this project,
the main materials are normal strength steel (yield strength 235 [N/mm2]) and high strength
steel (yield strength 355 [N/mm2]). The normal strength steel is used in the hull structure and
high strength steel is used in the superstructure. There is no point to use high strength steel in
the hull structure because, due to the huge amount of welding, HSS loses its properties, which
change basically to the same as normal strength steel. Also, HSS is more sensitive to welding
fractures than normal strength steel. High strength steel is used in the superstructure in order
to decrease the structure weight. The critical factors for the superstructure are buckling and
vibrations. When using HSS, as the plate thicknesses are much smaller, the most bucklingcritical locations, higher decks, should have extra attention. The materials are divided into the
grades as following:
Normal strength steel grades: A, B, D and E.
High strength steel grades: AH, DH and EH.
In various parts of the structure, different material grades are used. These grades and classes
are given in DNV tables (Appendix 5), which describes which grade/class should be used in
various parts. The materials ascribed to the project ships main frame structural elements are
given in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1. Structural element materials.
Structural element
Bottom
Keel plate
Bilge plate
Bottom plate
Tank top plate
Floors
Longitudinal girder
Centre girder
Bottom longitudinals
Inner bottom longitudinals
Longitudinal girder and floor stiffeners
Side structures
Below waterline
Side plate
Side longitudinals
Above waterline
Side plate
Side longitudinals
Superstructure
Side plate
Side longitudinals
Strength group
Grade
Class
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
III
III
III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NV-NS
NV-NS
A/AH
A/AH
III
I
NV-NS
NV-NS
A/AH
A/AH
III
I
NV-36
NV-36
A/AH
A/AH
III
III
15
Sheer strake at strength deck

Deck structures
Strength deck
Stringer plate
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
Decks above strength deck
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
Decks below strength deck
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
A/AH
III
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
B, D or E
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
III
III
I
I
NV-36
NV-36
NV-36
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
III
III
III
NV-NS
NV-NS
NV-NS
A/AH
A/AH
A/AH
I
I
I
4 Structural element calculations

The preliminary prediction of structural elements is done by calculating the dimensions
according to (3), minimum requirements. Formulas used in calculations are shown below and
the results are given in Table 4-1. Pressures used in calculations are taken from Chapter 2.1.
The equation members descriptions are shown in notations. The material factor for normal
strength steel is 1,0 and for high strength steel 1,28 and the corrosion addition is 1,5 mm.
4.1
Bottom structures
4.1.1 Keel plate

The keel plate extends over complete length of the ship. The breath of is:
[mm]
4-1
The thickness of keel plate can also be found:

[mm]
4-2
4.1.2 Bottom and bilge plating

The thickness of bottom plating shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-3
If the bilge plate is not stiffened or has only one stiffener inside the curved part, the thickness
shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-4
Where,
16
) [mm]
4-5
[mm]
The thickness of the bilge plate shall not be less than that of the adjacent bottom and side
plates, whichever is greater.
4.1.3 Inner bottom plating
The thickness shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-6
Where,
4.1.4 Double bottom floors and girders

The thickness of longitudinal girders and floors shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-7
Where,
- for centre girder
- for other girders
4.1.5 Bottom and inner bottom longitudinals
The thickness of web and flange shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-8
Where,
, maximum 5
4.2
Side structures
4.2.1 Plating
The thickness is not for any region of the ship to be less than:
[mm]
4-9
Where,
up to 4.6 m above the summer load waterline. For each 2.3 m above this level, the kvalue may be reduced by 0.01 (minimum value 0.01)
17
4.2.2 Sheer strake at strength deck

The breadth shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-10
with a maximum 1800 [mm]

The thickness shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-11
4.2.3 Side longitudinals

[mm]
4-12
Where,
4.3
Deck structures
4.3.1 Strength deck plating

The thickness is not for any region of the ship to be less than:
[mm]
4-13
Where,
4.3.2 Deck plating below and above strength deck

The thickness of steel decks shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-14
Where,
- for unsheathed weather and cargo decks
- for accommodation decks and for weather and cargo decks sheathed with wood or an
approved composition
18
4.3.3 Deck longitudinals

[mm]
4-15
Where,
- in general
- for accommodations decks above strength deck
4.3.4 Girders
The thickness of web plates, flanges and stiffeners of girders shall not be less than:
[mm]
4-16
Where,
- in general
The thickness of girder web plates is in addition not to be less than:
[mm]
4.4
4-17
Summary
Table 4-1. Structural element minimum dimensions according to DNV (3)

Dimensions
Bottom
Keel plate
Bilge plate
Bottom plate
Tank top plate
Floors
Longitudinal girder
Centre girder
Inner bottom longitudinals
Longitudinal girder and floor stiffeners
Superstructure
Side plate
Side longitudinals
Sheer strake at strength deck
Deck structures
Strength deck
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
Decks above strength deck
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Minimum thicknesss [mm]

13
10
10
9
9
9
11
7
7
7-10
7
8
6
7
7
6
11
19
Girders
Decks below strength deck
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
7
6
7
7
5 Structural element calculations using beam theory

The aim of this part is to calculate the section modulus of different structural parts using beam
theory. For section modulus calculations, there excel tables are used to get sufficient stiffener,
girder, and plate sizes. The calculations are made for most of the structure parts: bottom
structures, tank top, strength deck, decks, and sides. Furthermore, the calculations are made
for each structure part separately where stiffener or girder spacing is different, using values
which are calculated in Chapter 4. There is no need to do calculations for all the
accommodation decks because they all are similar, so it was enough to complete one deck
only. All the calculation tables can be seen in Appendix 6. In following table, there is an
example section modulus calculation for an entire cross-section of one stiffener coupled with
a plate. This example can be seen in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1. Section modulus calculation
Part
Pcs
Effective breadth Calculated, b
n
[-]
Plate
Stiffener HP 200x12
[-]
[Gpa]
1
1
210
210
Height
N.A
Area
1. Moment
2. Moment
Steiner
be
b=E/Eref*be
el
A=n*b*h
S=A*e l
I0=n*b*h3/12
Is=A*e 2
[m]
[m]
[m]
0,44
0,44
[m]
0,01
0,005
0,2
0,127
Total
[m2]
4,40E-03
2,97E-03
7,37E-03
[m3]
2,20E-05
3,77E-04
3,99E-04
[m4]
3,67E-08
1,16E-05
1,16E-05
[m4]
1,10E-07
4,78E-05
4,79E-05
Entire cross-section
Neutral axis, bending, e=S/A
Elements, Io.tot
5,41E-02 m
1,16E-05 m4
Elements, Is.tot
4,79E-05 m4
In
5,96E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
3,80E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Ztop
2,44E-04 m3
243,83 cm3
Zbot
7,02E-04 m3
702,21 cm3
From rules:
171 cm3
In this case, there is a calculated bottom plate coupled with stiffener section modulus. Plate
breadth is taken as the same as the spacing between stiffeners. In deck girder calculations,
there an effective breadth was used, which was calculated according to the lecture notes.
The height of the plate is the plate thickness and for the stiffeners the height is their length.
The neutral axis is the distance from the center of gravity to the main coordinate axis and, if
considering the plate, the neutral axis is in the middle of plate thickness. The plate area is
calculated as the following:
[m2]
5-1
- number of parts
- breadth, [m]
20
- height (thickness), [m]
Plate first moment of area:

5-2
[m2]
Where,
- location of neutral axis, [m]
Second moment of area (plate moment of inertia):

5-3
[m4]
Steiner moment:
5-4
[m4]
For stiffeners, these calculations are not necessary because this data can be obtained from
Ruukki HP profile sheets. Thus, the neutral axis of plate-stiffener system can be calculated as:
[m]
5-5
The total moment of inertia according to the new main coordinate axis is:
5-6
[m4]
Where,
- total second moment of area of parts, [m4]
- total steiner moment of parts, [m4]
The moment of inertia, which will be used in section modulus calculation, is found as:
(
)]
[m4]
5-7
Finally, the new section modulus can be calculated as:

(
[m3]
[m3]
The difference between
and
[cm3]
[cm3]
5-8
5-9
can be seen in Figure 5-1.

21
Figure 5-1. Stiffener section modulus with plate.
6 Hull girder normal stress response

6.1
Bending stress
External moments acting on the hull are caused by waves and also by still water. These
moments are obtained by using classification society rules in Chapter 2.2, as presented in
Table 2-1. The total moments values are:
Sagging:
[kNm]
Hogging:
[kNm]
Whilst the hogging and sagging moments absolute values are equal, the calculations can be
done by using only one, of which the hogging moment is chosen because, according to
NAPA, the ship operates in hogging conditions.
As the project ship is a passenger ship, the superstructure takes some of the bending moment
and therefore the stress distribution cannot be calculated using basic beam theory. In this
work, stress distribution in the main frame is obtained using Bleich approach (5).
In the Bleich approach, the hull and superstructure are taken as two independent beams. In
calculations, needed parameters are both areas, respective neutral axes, and and second
moments of area around these axes. Calculations are done using Tables 1 and 2 (presented in
Appendix 7).
Hull characteristics:
[m2]
[m]
22
[m4]
Superstructure characteristics:
[m2]
[m]
[m4]
The neutral axis of the whole ship is calculated using the table which is presented in
Appendix 6:
[m]
The following parameter describes the distance between hull and superstructure:
6-1
[m]
Non dimensional parameters are then:

6-2
6-3
As this particular ship has no openings for lifeboats in the superstructure and it is fully
supported by the hull, there is no vertical interaction between the hull and superstructure and
the spring constant in Bleich approach is discarded.
The influence of membrane forces is calculated as following:
[m2]
6-4
and the term :

6-5
Because of the superstructure, the normal forces applied into superstructure and hull are:
(
(
)(
)(
[MPa]
6-6
and additional moment:

(
)(
)(
)(
)(
[MPa]
[MPa]
6-7
6-8
The change of normal stress in the superstructure and hull is calculated as the following:
(
) [MPa]
6-9
23
) [MPa]
6-10
The normal stress is calculated as following:

(
) [MPa]
6-11
Utilizing Equations 6-1 - 6-11, the total stress can be calculated:

{
6-12
[MPa]
The Bleich method results are compared to the Construct results. Although the ship is always
in hogging condition, the results are presented also for sagging. The bending moment
distribution in hogging is presented in Figure 6-1 and the Construct results for hogging can be
seen in Figure 6-2. The bending moment distribution in hogging is presented in Figure 6-3
and the Construct results for hogging can be seen in Figure 6-4.
24
Height z [m]
20
16
Total
12
Normal
Change of stress
Construct
4
0
-40 -30 -20 -10
10
20
30
40
50
Bending stress [MPa]
Figure 6-1. Bending stress distribution in hogging.
24
Figure 6-2. Hogging bending stress distribution according to Construct.
24
Height z [m]
20
16
Total
12
Normal
Change of stress
Construct
4
0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10
10
20
30
40
Bending stress [MPa]
Figure 6-3.Bending stress distribution in sagging.
25
Figure 6-4. Sagging bending stress distribution according to Construct.
From Figure 6-1 and Figure 6-3, it can be seen that the ships superstructure is not fully
effective, which means that most of the loads are carried by the hull. The difference in the
Bleich method and Construct is well seen and the Construct results are declared more reliable,
as it uses coupled beam theory, which is a development of the Blecih method. The Bleich
method also shows the change of stress due to different hull and superstructure stiffness, as
the ship is not behaving as a beam. Construct results are more reliable also because of the
lower chance of error, as the modelling error probability is lower compared to analytical
calculation.
As mentioned previously, the ship is operating in hogging condition and, in that case, the
highest bending stresses occur in the bottom and in the strength deck. The maximum
compression stress is at the bottom with a value of 33,2 MPa. The stress reaches 0 around 3,2
m. The tensile stress reaches its maximum around 10,8 m, the location of strength deck, where
stress is 31,1 MPa. After that, stress starts to decrease and increases near the highest deck and
at top deck, the stress is 26,4 MPa.
The distribution in sagging is different, but the stresses in the bottom and top deck are the
same while the difference is near the strength deck where the stress is 10,1 MPa, the higher
stress is at deck 2, 14,4 MPa, but is smaller compared to hogging.
26
6.2
Shear stress
Shear stress distribution is done by using the DNV classification society rules (3).
Firstly, the still water and wave induced shear forces are calculated, which is presented in
Chapter 2.2.
Still water:
Sagging:
Hogging:
[kN]
[kN]
|
Wave induced:
[kN]
The plate thickness requirement is given in DNV rules (3):

| (
[MPa]
6-13
From Equation 6-13 shear stress is disclosed:

| (
[MPa]
6-14
Where,
- shear force distribution factor, given in Table 6-1.
- shear force correction due to shear carrying by longitudinal bottom members ans
uneven transverse load distribution. As
the value of
is 0.
- first moment of area in [cm3] of the longitudinal material above or below the horizontal
neutral axis, taken about this axis.
- moment of inertia in [cm4] about the transverse neutral axis
Table 6-1. Shear force distribution factor
27
Shear stresses are calculated for each plate according to Equation 6-14. The calculations are
also done with Construct for comparison and results can been seen in Figure 6-6 and the shear
stress distribution in
is presented in Figure 6-5.
24
21
Height [m]
18
15
12
Hogging
Sagging
Construct
6
3
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
Shear stress [MPa]
Figure 6-5. Shear stress distribution.
Figure 6-6. Shear stress distribution according to Construct.
28
To the Figure 6-5 is plotted the vertical shear stress distribution. Only vertical shear stresses
are calculated, as they are much bigger when compared to the deck plating shear stresses. As
seen from Figure 6-5, shear stresses occurs as known from basic beam theory, which means,
in the bottom and top deck, the stresses are 0 and the highest stress occurs at neutral axis. Big
differences between Construct and DNV results are caused by the simplification of DNV rules
and also the aspect that acceptance of classification society should provide a quality of
structure that increases the values, as it assures a little over-dimensioned structure. The shear
stress distribution according to basic beam theory is a smooth curve, but as seen in Figure 6-5,
the distribution according to Construct is not. The non-smooth distribution is related to large
window openings in superstructure, which increases the shear stresses significantly and is
considered as one of the most challenging problems in modern cruise ships.
From DNV rules, it is known that the maximum allowed shear stress is
range where the maximum shear stress occurs,
[MPa]. In the
and the maximum allowed shear
stress is 110 [MPa]. The maximum shear stress is 46,3 [MPa], which means that the safety
factor taking only shear force into account is:
6-15
The safety factor shows that the shear stresses which occur in the side shells are in the
allowable range.
6.3
Stress comparison with rule limits
In the Chapter 4, the minimum structural element dimensions were calculated and these were
used in Construct calculations, as the stresses in structure was too high, the dimensions were
changed to reach optimal stress range. The structural elements must be calculated to local
strengths using given pressures (see Chapter 2). The response to local loading is calculated as
following:
From DNV (3), the section modulus of the longitudinals is calculated as the following:
[cm3]
6-16
from Equation 6-16 stress is derived:

[MPa]
6-17
29
The stress is calculated also for plates:

(
)
(
[MPa]
6-18
[MPa]
6-19
and girders:
The calculated stresses are compared with maximum allowable stresses according to DNV,
which is calculated as following:
Bottom
6-20
[MPa]
Inner bottom and decks

6-21
[MPa]
Side structures
6-22
[MPa]
The material factor in Equations 6-20 - 6-22 is taken according to material of the structure,
which are described in Chapter 3. The results are shown in Table 6-2.
Table 6-2. Stress comparison.
Dimensions
Bottom
Minimum DNV required
thickness [mm]
Bottom plate
Keel plate
Bilge plate
Tank top plate
Floors
Longitudinal girder
Centre girder
Inner bottom
longitudinals
Longitudinal girder and
floor stiffeners
Side structures
Up to 7,8 [m]
Side plate
Side longitudinals
7,8 to 10,8 [m]
Side plate
Side longitudinals
10,8 to 13,8 [m]
Side plate
Side longitudinals
13,8 to 16,8 [m]
Side plate
Section modulus
(DNV) [cm3]
Section modulus
(beam theory) [cm3]
Stress
[MPa]
Maximum allowable stress

according to DNV [MPa]
120
120
120
140
130
130
130
160
160
10
10
13
9
9
9
11
7
7
171
53
194
80
79
79
79
21
30
30
20
113
90
76
80
96
160
10
7
246
274
63
157
140
160
10
7
12
32
10
63
140
160
9
7
32
13
63
194.6
222.4
16
194.6
30
Side longitudinals
16,8 to 22,8 [m]
Side plate
Side longitudinals
Deck structures
Deck 1 and 2
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
Deck 3
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
Deck 4
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
Deck 5
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
Deck 6 and 7
Deck plate
Deck longitudinals
Girders
33
61
222.4
7
7
33
22
61
194.6
222.4
6
7
7
21
113
33
116
48
137
155
120
160
160
6
7
7
27
226
197
297
25
36
91
120
160
160
6
7
7
15
82
34
106
19
91
170
154
205
205
6
7
7
15
82
33
105
24
88
171
154
205
205
6
7
7
15
82
83
297
24
35
61
154
205
205
Web frames
The ships main frame web-frames are divided into to two parts the first is from the tank top
to Deck 2 and second part is from Deck 2 to the top deck.
Firstly, the web frames are calculated using DNV classification society rules ( (3), Section 7
C400).
The section modulus requirement is given by:
7-1
[cm3]
- as external pressure is used

- full length of frame including brackets
For first part
For second part
[m]
[m]
Calculated section modules are:

[cm3]
[cm3]
The section modulus values are calculated also using analytical beam theory, which is
described in Chapter 5, and the calculation table is shown in Appendix 5. Two different
effective breadths are used to calculate the section modulus, where differences come from the
31
length of the frame. This is first used as the length from the tank top to Deck 2 and the second
distance is from Deck 2 to the top deck. As classification society rules give the minimum
value of the section modulus, the section modulus calculated by analytical beam theory must
be higher than section modulus calculated according to DNV rules:
For first part T - beam 230 x 110 x 8 x 8 is chosen as:
[cm3]
For second part T - beam 130 x 100 x 7 x 7 is chosen as:
[cm3]
8 Critical buckling stress

Buckling stresses are calculated for four different cases for every plating: stiffener buckling
stress for compression, x axis directional buckling for plate for compression, y axis
directional buckling for plate for compression, and buckling stress for plate for shear stress.
All the buckling stresses are calculated according to Euler buckling equation taking Johnsons
correction into account when
. For shear stresses, the yield stress is defined as
. Critical buckling stresses are calculated for every deck and, in this estimation,
the side shell buckling and double bottom longitudinal girder buckling are not calculated.
Results are presented in Table 8-1. In locations where buckling stress varies, the smallest
value is taken because it defines the critical stress. All calculation tables are presented in
Appendix 6.
8.1
Johnson correction
(
) [MPa]
8-1
Where,
- critical buckling stress according to Euler
8.2
Stiffener buckling
Stiffener critical buckling stress is calculated taking also the plate into account and is
calculated as follows:
[MPa]
8-2
Where,
- stiffener lenght [m]
32
Deck girders are considered as I beams and the same formula is used to calculate the
buckling stress for those structural members.
8.3
Plate buckling in compression
In plate buckling, a corrosion factor added in Chapter 4 is disunited because it has no

resistance in buckling. Plate buckling is calculated as following:
8-3
( ) [MPa]
Where,
- load buckling coefficient which depends on the boundary conditions. In both cases
as the plate is clamped

- plate breath perpendicular to stress in [m]
8.4
Plate buckling in shear stress
The ideal elastic buckling stress may be taken as:

(
) [MPa]
8-4
Where,
()
8-5
Where,
- shortest side of plate
- longest side of plate
8.5
Usage factor
The usage factor is defined as the ratio between the actual value of the reference stress due to
design loading and the critical value of the reference stress.
The usage factor is presented in Table 8-1 and is calculated as:
8-6
Where,
- actual compression maximum stress, calculated in previous assignment by Bleich method
- critical buckling stress, minimum of buckling stress calculated using equations presented
in previous chapters.
- actual maximum shear stress, calculated in previous assignment.
- critical buckling stress, due to shear moment
33
8.6
Results
In Table 8-1, the critical buckling stresses are presented, which are calculated according to
Equations 8-1 to 8-4 and usage factors using Equation 8-6.
Table 8-1. Critical buckling stresses
Bottom
Tank
top
Deck 1
Deck 2
Deck 3
Deck 4
Deck 5
Deck 6
Deck 7
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
txy.plate
247.1
217.8
212.7
200.5
212.7
200.5
138.8
135.5
138.9
138.9
247.6
139.3
156.5
281.3
281.3
114.3
114.3
147.4
114.3
84.0
84.0
84.0
114.3
114.3
147.4
114.3
84.0
84.0
84.0
111.6
111.6
121.3
130.7
103.9
103.9
103.9
el.girder
txy.girder
Bending
stress [MPa]
33.2
17.0
Shear stress
[MPa]
0.0
10.0
Usage factor
(compression)
0.2
0.1
Usage factor
(shear)
0.0
0.1
228.2
228.2
253.8
223.1
226.8
255.3
255.3
151.7
151.7
151.0
151.7
151.7
151.0
151.0
3.5
11.2
9.9
11.8
12.4
19.8
26.4
21.0
26.0
38.0
43.0
35.0
26.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.0
As seen from the usage factors, the buckling risk in the structure is very low; the acting
bending and shear stress is around 3 times smaller in critical areas than critical buckling
stress.
9 Ultimate strength
Ultimate strength is calculated using Construct and first fibre criterion. Results are shown in
Figure 9-1.
9.1
First fibre yield
The first fibre yield criterion means that elastic moment of structure is calculated according to
material yield stress and the criterion is fulfilled when the moment does not exceed the design
moment. The most critical locations for yielding are top deck in case of hogging and bottom
in case of sagging. First fibre criterion is calculated with the following:
[Nm]
9-1
Where,
- elastic section modulus
First fibre yield moment in top:
First fibre yield moment in bottom:
[MNm]
[MNm]
The moments calculated using Equation 9-1 are significantly higher compared to the design
moment, which is calculated according to DNV (see Chapter 2.2), therefore, it can be said that
the yielding criterion is fulfilled.
34
9.2
First fibre buckling
First fibre buckling criterion means that elastic moment of structure is calculated according to
structure critical buckling stress and the criterion is fulfilled when the moment does not
exceed the design moment. The most critical locations for yielding are the top deck in case of
sagging and bottom in case of hogging. The critical buckling stresses are presented in Table
8-1. First fibre buckling criterion is calculated with the equation:
9-2
[Nm]
Where,
- elastic section modulus
First fibre yield moment in top:
[MNm]
First fibre yield moment in bottom:
[MNm]
The moments calculated using Equation 9-2 are significantly higher compared to design
moment, which is calculated according to DNV (see Chapter 2.2) and it can therefore be said
that the buckling criterion is fulfilled.
9.3
-100
Construct results
-80
-60
-40
ME [MNm]
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
-100 0
-20
20
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
Construct ultimate strength

results
40
60
80
Design moment
100 [mm]
Figure 9-1. Ultimate strength according to Construct.
As seen in Figure 9-1, the Construct ultimate strength calculation results exceed the design
moment. The margin between the maximum moment and design moment is sufficient to
provide structural reliability.
The maximum moment that the structure can respond to is calculated with Construct and is
around two times lower compared to first fibre criterions. The reason for this difference may
be errors in modelling or errors in calculation tables. Construct results are more reliable
35
because they take into consideration the fact that the minimum thickness and section modulus
requirements has to be fulfilled, which lowers the section modulus for first fibre criterions.
10 Natural frequencies of plates, stiffeners and girders

Natural frequencies of plates, stiffeners, and girders are calculated using formulas which are
presented in the lecture notes and in the calculations, a plate is coupled with a stiffener or
girder according to the certain structure part. It is also assumed that the boundary conditions
are clamped, which means all six degrees of freedom are fixed from both sides. So, as the
plate is coupled with the stiffener, for example, it is acting as a beam and therefore the
eigenfrequency equation for beams is used:
[rad/s]
10-1
Where
- value corresponding to the first mode of oscillation
[kg/m3] - density of steel
- length
As the
is circular natural frequency, its unit is rad/s, so in the calculation it is divided by
and the unit becomes Hz. All of the calculations and results can be seen tables which are in
Appendix 6.
The frequency range is the biggest on the strength deck and the lowest on deck as can be seen
in Table 10-1. There will be no threat of resonance due to the fact that possible locations for
that are not near each other and, for example, this particular ship frequency caused by
machinery and shaft are relatively smaller than the structure frequency. They fall within a
range of 2 -17 Hz.
Table 10-1. Frequency ranges
Location
Bottom
Tank Top
Strength Deck
Deck
Side
Web Frame
Frequency range [Hz]

36 - 75
43
25 - 87
27 - 52
23 - 84
16 - 75
36
11 Torsion problems
Torsion is not overly severe in passenger ships, as these do not have large opening in the
deck, unlike container ships. Still, torsion is an issue which has to be considered in the design
stage. In this particular ship, the following things can be done to prevent torsion:
add material to the places where torsion effect can be most effectively prevented, in the
corners of superstructure and hull
double side torsion boxes
applying transverse bulkheads to increase cross sectional area in dangerous areas
12 Vibratory levels
The most common sources of vibration excitation are propellers and main machinery. All
vibration is undesirable. It can be unpleasant for people on board and can be harmful to
equipment. It must be reduced as much as possible but it cannot be entirely eliminated.
Vibrations may occur due to various excitations:
Machinery and systems
Wave-induced
Global hull girder vibrations:
Vertical bending
Horizontal bending
Torsion
Longitudinal
Local vibrations:
Decks and bulkheads
Superstructure
Measures to control vibratory levels:
Supporting machinery with special foundations. This is especially important for main
engines and other large equipment. The foundation will dampen the vibrations created by
machinery.
Wave induced vibrations can be controlled by adding stiffness to structure, as it increases

the section modulus and therefore creates better response to bending and other loads.
37
One of the main vibration producers is also the cavitation effect caused by the propeller,
therefore, the propeller has to be designed properly and good flow has to be ensured to
prevent vibrations.
Although this particular ship does not have long shaft line, it should still be supported
correctly with bearing to decrease vibrations.
To avoid vibrations in the superstructure, resonance should be avoided by changing the

stiffness of components or varying the exciting frequencies.
13
Fatigue analysis
At this stage, it is assumed that the operating time of this particular ship is 20 years and the
most critical structure for fatigue would be a welded joint of the bottom plate under maximum
compression stress if considering the hogging condition. At this design stage, the fatigue
analysis is made for one part of the structure only, where normal stress is largest. The
maximum normal stress caused by bending for the bottom is 33,2 MPa.
Fatigue is calculated according to DNV rules and defined by applying Weibull distribution for
the different load conditions and a one slope S-N curve is used. The fatigue damage is given
by:
13-1
where
- total number load condition considered,
- fraction of design life in load condition,
- design life of a ship in seconds,
- Weibull stress range shape distribution parameter for load condition n,
- Weibull stress range scale distribution parameter for load condition n,
- long term average response zero-crossing frequency,
- S-N fatigue parameter,
(
) - gamma function,
- usage factor which is defined as =1.
38
The design life of ship is second during 20 years:

13-2
[s]
The Weibull scale parameter is defined from the stress range level
(
, as
13-3
where
is stress range for bottom plating which is most critical and calculated as following:
(
[MPa]
- number of cycles over time period for which the stress range level
13-4
, is
defined ,
- Weibull stress range shape distribution parameter for load condition n can be calculated
as following:
( )
13-5
In simplified fatigue calculations, the zero value-crossing frequency may be taken as:
13-6
( )
The value for the gamma function
) can be calculated or found from the DNV
rulebook. [ (6), Table G-1]. In this case the gamma value is:
(
13-7
where
- S-N fatigue parameter,
Another fatigue parameter from the S-N curve is air condition and for the welded joint is
taken from Table 13-1.
39
Table 13-1. S-N parameters
Thus, fatigue damage according to Equation 13-1 is as the following:
According to the results, the fatigue criterion is fulfilled if considering DNV rules, withs D<1.
This means that the fatigue resistance of the bottom plating is sufficient.
40
14 Bibliography
1. Bannerman, David B. and Jan, Hsein Y. Analysis and Design of Principal Hull Structure.
[book auth.] Robert Taggart. Ship Design and Constuction. New York : The Society of Naval
Architects and Marine Engineers, 1980.
2. Kujala, Pentti. General Arrangement and Cargo Handling. Ship Conseptual Design lecture
notes. 2012.
3. DNV. Hull Structural Design, Ships with Length 100 metres and above. Rules for
Classification of Ships. 2012.
4. Okumoto, Yasushia, et al., et al. Design of Ship Hull Structures. Berlin : Springer, 2009.
5. Bleich, H. H. Nonlinear distribution of bending stresses due to distortion of the cross
section. Journal of Applied Mechanics 29. 1952, pp. 94-104.
6. Fatigue Assessment of Ship Structures. DNV Rules for Classification of Ships.
41
9000
3000
600
600
3000
3000
DECK 7
22800
3000
DECK 6
19800
3000
DECK 5
16800
DECK 4
13800
6000
3000
34 x 600 = 20400
B
6000
890
DECK 3
10800
3000
1200
3000
DECK 2
7800
795
DECK 1
4800
6-1
500
3300
500
1000
750
1500
Ship Project A
1500
TANK TOP
ARIANNA
600
1500
500 500
18000
A3
Main frame characteristics (frame #45)
200
1:100
Rosen
Nelis
Detail A
1:20
Detail B
1:20
Detail C
1:20
Materials:
Hull structures NV-NS
Superstructure NV-36
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
FUNNEL
SUN DECK
MAST
MOORING
MAIN GALLEY AND PROVISIONS
PROVISIONS AND MACHINERY
PASSENGER STAIRS
GALLEY
PASSENGER LIFTS 3,4
MAIN DINING ROOM
SHOW LOUNGE AND BAR
SPA AND GYM
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PUBLIC AND OFFICE SPACES
10
20
OFFICER ACC.
NAVIGATION BRIDGE
PASSENGER ACC.
PASSENGER ACC.
PROVISIONS
MFB
OBSERVATION LOUNGE
PASSENGER STAIRS
CASUAL RESTAURANT
STORAGE
PASSENGER LIFTS 1,2
POOL BAR
POOL AREA
30
40
MFB
50
60
70
80
6-2
90
A3
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Location of bulkheads
100
110
Rosen
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Aalto University
Marine Technology
DECK 7
22800
DECK 6
19800
DECK 5
16800
DECK 4
13800
DECK 3
10800
600
600
6-3
DECK 2
7800
Plate 7 mm
Longitudinal HP 140x10
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
WL
597
A3
Machinery room (frame #66)
570
Thickness 45 mm
TANK TOP
1:100
Thickness 14 mm
600
500
690
3570
Thickness 20 mm
Rosen
Nelis
Unmarked dimensions
are taken same as in
mainframe
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Deck plate 6 mm
T-Beam 340x150x8x8
Deck longitudinals HP 140x10
Deck plate 6 mm
T-Beam 340x150x8x8
CH 180x10
Side plate 7 mm
Side longitudinals HP 100x7
CH 180x10
Side plate 8 mm
CH 150x10
Side plate 9 mm
CH 180x10
Deck plate 6 mm
T-Beam 200x120x8x8
Deck plate 7 mm
T-Beam 200x120x8x8
Deck plate 8 mm
T-Beam 340x150x8x8
DECK 6
19800
DECK 5
16800
DECK 4
13800
DECK 3
10800
D220
Transverse
T-Beam 340x150x8x8
CH 180x10
Side plate 10 mm
DECK 7
22800
Deck plate 6 mm
T-Beam 210x120x8x8
Web frame 130x100x7x7
Side plate 10 mm
DECK 2
7800
Web frame 230x110x8x8
Deck plate 6 mm
T-Beam 210x120x8x8
CH 150x10
WL
DECK 1
4800
6-4
D110
Transverse
T-Beam 200x120x8x8
Tank top plate 9 mm
Ship Project A
ARIANNA
Bottom plate 10 mm
Bilge plate 10 mm
Bottom longitudinals HP 200x10
A3
Structural elements dimensions
CH 150x10
Centre girder 1500x11

Keel plating 13 mm
Tank top longitudinals HP 140x8
TANK TOP
Longitudinal girders 7 mm
Floors 7 mm
Stiffeners HP 140x10
1:100
Rosen
Nelis
07.12.2013
07.12.2013
Appendix 5 - Material grades and classes
Table 1. Material classes (3)
Table 2. Material classes and grades for ships in general (3)
46
Appendix 5 - Analytical beam calculation tables

Plate thickness [m]
Bottom
0.01
Keel
0.013
Tank top
0.009
Strength deck
0.008
Deck
0.006
Materials
Side 1
0.01
Eref
Side 2
0.009
Side 3
1.5
265 MPa
152.9978213 Deck1
4.8
355 MPa
204.9593456 Deck 2
7.8
0.008
Side 4
0.007
Centre girder
0.011
Long. girder
0.007
Deck 6
19.8
0.01
Deck 7
22.8
Bilge
Part
Pcs
3m
[-]
[-]
Deck 3
2.10E+11
n
Bottom
Tank top
210
4.73 for beam
[Gpa]
1
210
HP 200x10
210
13.8
16.8
Effective breadth
Calculated, b
Height
N.A
Area
1. Moment
2. Moment
Steiner
be
b=E/Eref*be
el
A=n*b*h
S=A*el
I0=n*b*h3/12
Is=A*e2
[m]
Plate
10.8
Deck 4
Deck 5
[m]
0.5
[m]
[m ]
[m]
0.5
0.01
0.2
0.005
0.119
Total
5.00E-03
[m ]
[m ]
2.50E-05
4.17E-08
[m4]
1.25E-07
2.57E-03
3.05E-04
1.02E-05
3.63E-05
7.57E-03
3.30E-04
1.02E-05
3.65E-05
4.37E-02 m
Elements, Io.tot
1.02E-05 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.65E-05 m4
In
4.67E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
3.23E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfrequency
75.33 Hz
247.11 MPa
el.stiff
x.plate
212.75 MPa
y.plate
212.75 MPa
xy.plate
138.80 MPa
5.451
Ztop
1.94E-04 m3
Zbot
Longitudinal girders
194.06 cm3
7.39E-04 m3
From rules:
739.29 cm3
171 cm3
739289.1565
Plate
210
0.44
0.44
0.009
0.22
3.96E-03
8.71E-04
2.67E-08
1.92E-04
Girder 1
210
0.007
0.007
1.415
0.4435
9.91E-03
4.39E-03
1.65E-03
1.95E-03
Plate
210
0.44
0.44
0.01
0.667
Total
4.40E-03
2.93E-03
1.83E-02
8.20E-03
0.4489 m
r>
Elements, Io.tot
0.0017 m4
Elements, Is.tot
0.0041 m4
a/b
In
0.0058 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
0.0021 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
be
Eigenfreuqency
1.96E-03
4.10E-03
0.44
6
3
6.82
1
0.44
615.87 Hz
Ztop
0.0021 m3
Zbot
0.0046 m3
Plate
3.67E-08
1.65E-03
b
210
0.55
2101.08 cm3
4611.00 cm3
0.539
0.009
0.0045
Girder 2
210
0.007
0.007
1.313
0.6655
9.19E-03
6.12E-03
1.32E-03
4.07E-03
Plate
210
0.55
0.539
0.01
1.327
5.39E-03
7.15E-03
4.49E-08
9.49E-03
1.94E-02
1.33E-02
1.32E-03
1.36E-02
Total
4.85E-03
2.18E-05
3.27E-08
0.55
r>
0.6840 m
Elements, Io.tot
0.0013 m4
a/b
Elements, Is.tot
0.0136 m4
In
0.0149 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
0.0058 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfreuqency
533.71 Hz
Ztop
0.0089 m3
Zbot
Plate
210
0.56
6
3
5.45
0.98
be
0.539
8937.80 cm3
0.0085 m3
1
8468.07 cm3
0.5488
0.009
0.0045
4.94E-03
2.22E-05
3.33E-08
1.00E-07
Girder 3
210
0.007
0.007
1.208
0.613
8.46E-03
5.18E-03
1.03E-03
3.18E-03
Plate
210
0.56
0.5488
0.01
1.222
5.49E-03
6.71E-03
4.57E-08
8.20E-03
1.89E-02
1.19E-02
1.03E-03
1.14E-02
Total
0.56
r>
0.6308 m
Elements, Io.tot
0.0010 m4
a/b
Elements, Is.tot
0.0114 m4
In
0.0124 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
0.0049 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfreuqency
6
3
5.36
0.98
be
0.549
477.79 Hz
Ztop
0.0082 m3
Zbot
0.0077 m3
Plate
210
0.66
8196.68 cm3
7746.32 cm3
0.6336
0.009
0.0045
Girder 4
210
0.007
0.007
1.075
0.5465
7.53E-03
4.11E-03
7.25E-04
2.25E-03
Plate
210
0.66
0.6336
0.01
1.089
6.34E-03
6.90E-03
5.28E-08
7.51E-03
1.96E-02
1.10E-02
7.25E-04
9.76E-03
Total
5.70E-03
2.57E-05
3.85E-08
0.5642 m
Elements, Io.tot
0.0007 m4
a/b
Elements, Is.tot
0.0098 m4
In
0.0105 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
0.0043 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
I
Eigenfreuqency
394.07 Hz
Ztop
0.0080 m3
Zbot
1
210
HP 200x10
210
0.5
0.96
be
0.634
7547.66 cm3
0.5
0.013
0.2
0.0065
0.119
Total
6.50E-03
4.23E-05
3.83E-02 m
Elements, Io.tot
1.03E-05 m4
Elements, Is.tot
4.69E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
3.36E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfrequency
1.02E-05
3.63E-05
1.03E-05
3.66E-05
el.stiff
68.98 Hz
244.39 MPa
x.plate
234.08 MPa
y.plate
234.08 MPa
144.60 MPa
xy.plate
5.451
Ztop
1.92E-04 m3
192.24 cm3
Zbot
8.76E-04 m3
875.70 cm3
2.75E-07
3.05E-04
3.48E-04
3.66E-05 m4
In
9.15E-08
2.57E-03
9.07E-03
6
3
4.55
8038.19 cm3
0.0075 m3
Plate
1.15E-07
0.66
r>
Keel
9.82E-08
From rules:
171 cm3
Centre girder
210
0.44
0.44
Girder
210
0.011
0.011
1.5
0.759
1.65E-02
1.25E-02
3.09E-03
9.51E-03
Plate
Plate
210
0.44
0.44
0.013
0.009
1.5155
0.0045
5.72E-03
8.67E-03
8.06E-08
1.31E-02
2.62E-02
2.12E-02
3.09E-03
2.26E-02
Total
3.96E-03
1.78E-05
2.67E-08
0.44
r>
0.8102 m
Elements, Io.tot
0.0031 m4
a/b
Elements, Is.tot
0.0226 m4
In
0.0257 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
0.0086 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfreuqency
Keel girder with

stiffener
8.02E-08
6
3
6.82
be
0.44
703.82 Hz
Ztop
0.0120 m3
Zbot
0.0106 m3
Plate
210
HP 140x10
210
0.75
12015.56 cm3
10557.37 cm3
0.75
0.012
0.006
9.00E-03
5.40E-05
1.08E-07
0.14
0.0792
1.66E-03
1.32E-04
3.16E-06
1.04E-05
1.07E-02
1.86E-04
3.27E-06
1.08E-05
3.06E-07
Total
3.24E-07
1.74E-02 m
Elements, Io.tot
3.27E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
1.08E-05 m4
In
1.40E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
1.08E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfrequency
35.84 Hz
189.58 MPa
el.stiff
x.plate
183.36 MPa
y.plate
183.36 MPa
xy.plate
131.36 MPa
5.590
Ztop
8.02E-05 m3
Zbot
Girder 1 with
stiffener
80.17 cm3
6.19E-04 m3
Plate
210
HP 140x10
210
0.7075
From rules:
76 cm3
619.48 cm3
0.7075
0.012
0.006
8.49E-03
5.09E-05
1.02E-07
0.14
0.0792
1.66E-03
1.32E-04
3.16E-06
1.04E-05
1.02E-02
1.83E-04
3.26E-06
1.07E-05
2.84E-07
Total
1.80E-02 m
Elements, Io.tot
3.26E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
1.07E-05 m4
In
1.40E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
1.07E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfrequency
36.70 Hz
el.stiff
192.68 MPa
x.plate
192.35 MPa
y.plate
192.35 MPa
xy.plate
133.65 MPa
5.562
Ztop
7.99E-05 m3
Zbot
Girder 2 with
stiffener
79.94 cm3
5.96E-04 m3
Plate
210
HP 140x10
210
0.6565
From rules:
76 cm3
595.51 cm3
0.6565
0.012
0.006
7.88E-03
4.73E-05
9.45E-08
0.14
0.0792
1.66E-03
1.32E-04
3.16E-06
1.04E-05
9.54E-03
1.79E-04
3.25E-06
1.07E-05
2.61E-07
Total
1.88E-02 m
Elements, Io.tot
3.25E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
1.07E-05 m4
In
1.40E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
1.06E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfrequency
37.81 Hz
196.39 MPa
el.stiff
x.plate
202.45 MPa
y.plate
202.45 MPa
xy.plate
136.24 MPa
5.532
Ztop
7.96E-05 m3
Zbot
Girder 3 with
stiffener
79.65 cm3
5.66E-04 m3
Plate
210
HP 140x10
210
0.604
From rules:
76 cm3
565.72 cm3
0.604
0.012
0.006
7.25E-03
4.35E-05
8.70E-08
0.14
0.0792
1.66E-03
1.32E-04
3.16E-06
1.04E-05
8.91E-03
1.75E-04
3.25E-06
1.07E-05
2.32E-07
Total
1.97E-02 m
Elements, Io.tot
3.25E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
1.07E-05 m4
In
1.39E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
1.05E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfrequency
39.08 Hz
200.20 MPa
el.stiff
x.plate
212.05 MPa
y.plate
212.05 MPa
xy.plate
138.74 MPa
5.502
Ztop
7.93E-05 m3
Zbot
Girder 4 with
stiffener
79.30 cm3
5.34E-04 m3
Plate
210
HP 140x10
210
0.5375
From rules:
76 cm3
533.79 cm3
0.5375
0.012
0.006
6.45E-03
3.87E-05
7.74E-08
0.14
0.0792
1.66E-03
1.32E-04
3.16E-06
1.04E-05
8.11E-03
1.70E-04
3.24E-06
1.07E-05
Total
2.10E-02 m
Elements, Io.tot
3.24E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
1.07E-05 m4
In
1.39E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
1.03E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfrequency
40.90 Hz
205.02 MPa
el.stiff
x.plate
223.07 MPa
y.plate
223.07 MPa
141.64 MPa
xy.plate
Bilge
5.468
Ztop
7.88E-05 m3
78.79 cm3
Zbot
4.91E-04 m3
491.40 cm3
Plate
210
HP 200x10
210
0.5
0.5
0.01
0.2
From rules:
0.005
0.119
Total
4.37E-02 m
Elements, Io.tot
1.02E-05 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.65E-05 m4
In
4.67E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
3.23E-05 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
Eigenfrequency
el.stiff
75.33 Hz
247.11 MPa
x.plate
212.75 MPa
y.plate
212.75 MPa
xy.plate
138.80 MPa
5.451
Ztop
1.94E-04 m3
194.06 cm3
Zbot
7.39E-04 m3
739.29 cm3
5.00E-03
76 cm3
2.50E-05
4.17E-08
1.25E-07
2.57E-03
3.05E-04
1.02E-05
3.63E-05
7.57E-03
3.30E-04
1.02E-05
3.65E-05
Tank top
Part
Pcs
n
[-]
Plate
HP 140x10
[-]
1
1
[Gpa]
210
210
Elements, Io.tot
Effective breadth
be
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
[m]
[m]
0.5
Height
h
[m]
0.009
0.14
0.5
0
N.A
el
[m]
0.0045
0.0792
Total
1.05E-05 m4
In
1.37E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
In-n.a^2*Atot
Ztop
9.97E-06
46.58
217.81
200.49
200.49
135.47
8.01E-05
Zbot
4.04E-04 m3
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
Pcs
n
[-]
Strength deck Plate
HP 200x10
[m ]
4.50E-03
1.66E-03
6.16E-03
1. Moment
S=A*el
2. Moment
I0=n*b*h3/12
[m ]
2.03E-05
1.32E-04
1.52E-04
[m ]
3.04E-08
3.16E-06
3.19E-06
Steiner
2
Is=A*e
4
[m ]
9.11E-08
1.04E-05
1.05E-05
2.47E-02 m
3.19E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
Part
Area
A=n*b*h
[-]
1
1
[Gpa]
210
210
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
0.000218 MPa
k
k
k
80.15 cm3
From rules:
53 cm3
404.19 cm3
Effective breadth
be
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
[m]
[m]
0.6
4
4
5.451
Height
h
[m]
0.008
0.2
0.6
0
N.A
el
Area
A=n*b*h
[m]
0.004
0.119
Total
[m ]
4.80E-03
2.57E-03
7.37E-03
1. Moment
S=A*el
2. Moment
I0=n*b*h3/12
[m ]
1.92E-05
3.05E-04
3.25E-04
Steiner
2
Is=A*e
4
[m ]
2.56E-08
1.02E-05
1.02E-05
[m ]
7.68E-08
3.63E-05
3.64E-05
Elements, Io.tot
4.41E-02 m
1.02E-05 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.64E-05 m4
In
4.66E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
In-n.a^2*Atot
Ztop
3.23E-05
76.28
247.62
147.44
147.44
121.33
1.97E-04
Zbot
7.34E-04 m3
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
T-profile 340x8
Plate
Flange
Web
150 x 8
332 x8
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
k
k
k
4
4
5.5
197.26 cm3
From rules:
210
1.2
0.008
0.004
9.60E-03
3.84E-05
5.12E-08
1.54E-07
1
1
210
210
0.15
0.008
0.15
0.008
0.008
0.332
0.012
0.182
Total
1.20E-03
2.66E-03
1.35E-02
1.44E-05
4.83E-04
5.36E-04
6.40E-09
2.44E-05
2.45E-05
1.73E-07
8.80E-05
8.83E-05
3
6
3
1
Elements, Io.tot
b
r>
a
a/b
3.98E-02 m
2.45E-05 m4
Elements, Is.tot
8.83E-05 m4
In
1.13E-04 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
In-n.a^2*Atot
Ztop
9.14E-05
87.28
253.76
257.65
257.65
150.96
2.97E-04
Zbot
2.29E-03 m3
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
27 cm3
733.97 cm3
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
k
k
k
0.4
be
1.2
4
4
5.35
296.58 cm3
2293.51 cm3
From rules:
226 cm3
Part
Pcs
[-]
Plate
HP 100x7
[-]
n
Deck 1 and 2
1
1
[Gpa]
210
210
Effective breadth
be
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
[m]
[m]
0.6
Height
N.A
el
h
[m]
0.007
0.1
0.6
0
Area
A=n*b*h
[m]
0.0035
0.0587
Total
[m2]
4.20E-03
8.74E-04
5.07E-03
1. Moment
S=A*el
2. Moment
3
I0=n*b*h /12
[m3]
1.47E-05
5.13E-05
6.60E-05
Steiner
2
Is=A*e
[m4]
1.72E-08
8.50E-07
8.67E-07
[m4]
5.15E-08
3.01E-06
3.06E-06
3.43E-08
5.12E-09
5.49E-06
5.53E-06
1.03E-07
1.16E-07
2.17E-05
2.20E-05
3
6
3
1
Elements, Io.tot
1.30E-02 m
8.67E-07 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.06E-06 m4
In
3.93E-06 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
In-n.a^2*Atot
Ztop
3.07E-06
26.76
138.94
114.33
114.33
111.64
3.27E-05
Zbot
2.36E-04 m3
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
T-profile 200x8x120x8 Plate

Flange
Web
1
1
1
120 x 8
202 x 8
210
210
210
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
3
0.12
0.008
k
k
k
4
4
5.5
32.68 cm3
From rules:
20 cm3
236.12 cm3
1.2
0.12
0.008
0.007
0.008
0.202
0.0035
0.011
0.116
Total
8.40E-03
9.60E-04
1.62E-03
1.10E-02
2.94E-05
1.06E-05
1.87E-04
2.27E-04
Elements, Io.tot
Elements, Is.tot
2.20E-05 m4
In
2.75E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
2.28E-05
45.97
228.24
260.30
260.30
151.69
1.16E-04
In-n.a^2*Atot
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
Ztop
Zbot
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
k
k
k
Pcs
[-]
Plate
HP 100x7
[-]
1
1
[Gpa]
210
210
0.4
be
1.2
4
4
5.346
116.09 cm3
1.10E-03 m3
Part
n
Deck 4
b
r>
a
a/b
2.07E-02 m
5.53E-06 m4
From rules:
113 cm3
1099.76 cm3
Effective breadth
be
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
[m]
[m]
0.6
Height
N.A
el
h
[m]
0.007
0.1
0.6
0
Area
A=n*b*h
[m]
0.0035
0.0587
Total
[m2]
4.20E-03
8.74E-04
5.07E-03
1. Moment
S=A*el
2. Moment
I0=n*b*h3/12
[m3]
1.47E-05
5.13E-05
6.60E-05
Steiner
Is=A*e2
[m4]
1.72E-08
8.50E-07
8.67E-07
[m4]
5.15E-08
3.01E-06
3.06E-06
3.43E-08
5.12E-09
4.72E-06
4.76E-06
1.03E-07
1.16E-07
1.89E-05
1.91E-05
3
6
3
1
Elements, Io.tot
1.30E-02 m
8.67E-07 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.06E-06 m4
In
3.93E-06 m4
I
Eigenfrequency
3.07E-06
26.76
139.26
114.33
114.33
130.73
3.27E-05
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
Ztop
Zbot
T-profile 240x8
Plate
Flange
Web
1
1
1
120 x 8
192 x 8
210
210
210
I0.tot+Is.tot
In-n.a^2*Atot
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
2.36E-04 m3
3
0.12
0.008
k
k
k
4
4
5.5
32.68 cm3
From rules:
236.12 cm3
0.007
0.0035
0.008
0.011
0.192
0.111
Total
1.2
0.12
0.008
8.40E-03
9.60E-04
1.54E-03
1.09E-02
15 cm3
2.94E-05
1.06E-05
1.70E-04
2.10E-04
Elements, Io.tot
Elements, Is.tot
1.91E-05 m4
In
2.39E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
1.98E-05
42.78
223.08
260.30
260.30
151.69
1.06E-04
In-n.a^2*Atot
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
Ztop
Zbot
Deck 5
b
r>
a
a/b
1.93E-02 m
4.76E-06 m4
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
k
k
k
1
1
210
210
0.4
1.2
4
4
5.346
105.69 cm3
1.03E-03 m3
Plate
HP 100x7
C
be
From rules:
82 cm3
1027.04 cm3
0.6
0.6
0
0.006
0.1
0.003
0.0587
Total
3.60E-03
8.74E-04
4.47E-03
1.08E-05
5.13E-05
6.21E-05
1.08E-08
8.50E-07
8.61E-07
3.24E-08
3.01E-06
3.04E-06
2.16E-08
5.12E-09
4.72E-06
4.75E-06
6.48E-08
9.60E-08
1.86E-05
1.87E-05
3
6
3
1
Elements, Io.tot
1.39E-02 m
8.61E-07 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.04E-06 m4
In
3.90E-06 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
3.04E-06
28.40
156.46
84.00
84.00
103.93
3.30E-05
In-n.a^2*Atot
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
Ztop
Zbot
T-profile 240x8
Plate
Flange
Web
1
1
1
120 x 8
192 x 8
210
210
210
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
2.19E-04 m3
3
0.12
0.008
k
k
k
4
4
5.5
33.03 cm3
From rules:
219.20 cm3
0.006
0.003
0.008
0.01
0.192
0.11
Total
1.2
0.12
0.008
7.20E-03
9.60E-04
1.54E-03
9.70E-03
14 cm3
2.16E-05
9.60E-06
1.69E-04
2.00E-04
Elements, Io.tot
Elements, Is.tot
1.87E-05 m4
In
2.35E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
In-n.a^2*Atot
Ztop
1.94E-05
45.29
226.78
260.30
260.30
151.69
1.04E-04
Zbot
9.38E-04 m3
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
Part
Pcs
[-]
Plate
HP 140x10
[-]
n
Decks 6 and 7
b
r>
a
a/b
2.06E-02 m
4.75E-06 m4
1
1
[Gpa]
210
210
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
k
k
k
0.4
1.2
4
4
5.346
104.45 cm3
From rules:
82 cm3
937.81 cm3
Effective breadth
be
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
[m]
[m]
0.6
C
be
Height
N.A
el
h
[m]
0.006
0.14
0.6
0
Area
A=n*b*h
[m]
0.003
0.0792
Total
[m2]
3.60E-03
1.66E-03
5.26E-03
1. Moment
S=A*el
2. Moment
I0=n*b*h3/12
[m3]
1.08E-05
1.32E-04
1.43E-04
Steiner
Is=A*e2
[m4]
1.08E-08
3.16E-06
3.17E-06
[m4]
3.24E-08
1.04E-05
1.05E-05
2.16E-08
6.40E-09
2.44E-05
2.44E-05
6.48E-08
1.20E-07
8.61E-05
8.62E-05
3
6
3
1
Elements, Io.tot
2.71E-02 m
3.17E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
1.05E-05 m4
In
1.36E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
9.78E-06
50.25
281.27
84.00
84.00
103.93
8.22E-05
In-n.a^2*Atot
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
Ztop
Zbot
T-profile 240x8
Plate
Flange
Web
150 x 8
332 x8
1
1
1
210
210
210
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
3.61E-04 m3
3
0.15
0.008
k
k
k
4
4
5.5
82.20 cm3
From rules:
361.03 cm3
0.006
0.003
0.008
0.01
0.332
0.18
Total
1.2
0.15
0.008
7.20E-03
1.20E-03
2.66E-03
1.11E-02
Elements, Io.tot
Elements, Is.tot
b
r>
a
a/b
4.63E-02 m
2.44E-05 m4
8.62E-05 m4
In
1.11E-04 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
In-n.a^2*Atot
Ztop
8.70E-05
96.23
255.30
257.65
257.65
150.96
2.90E-04
Zbot
1.88E-03 m3
el.stiff
x.plate
y.plate
xy.plate
m4
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
m3
14 cm3
2.16E-05
1.20E-05
4.78E-04
5.12E-04
k
k
k
0.4
be
1.2
4
4
5.350
290.21 cm3
1879.45 cm3
From rules:
82 cm3
Side up to 7,8 [m]
Part
Pcs
n
[-]
Plate
HP 220x12
[-]
1
1
[Gpa]
210
210
Effective breadth
be
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
[m]
[m]
0.6
0.6
0
Height
h
[m]
0.01
0.22
N.A
el
[m]
0.005
0.13
Total
Area
A=n*b*h
2
1. Moment 2. Moment
S=A*el
I0=n*b*h3/12
3
Steiner
2
Is=A*e
4
[m ]
[m ]
[m ]
[m ]
6.00E-03
3.34E-03
9.34E-03
3.00E-05
4.34E-04
4.64E-04
5.00E-08
1.59E-05
1.60E-05
1.50E-07
5.64E-05
5.66E-05
5.00E-08
8.50E-07
9.00E-07
1.50E-07
3.01E-06
3.16E-06
3.65E-08
8.50E-07
8.86E-07
1.09E-07
3.01E-06
3.12E-06
2.56E-08
8.50E-07
8.76E-07
7.68E-08
3.01E-06
3.09E-06
1.72E-08
8.50E-07
8.67E-07
5.15E-08
3.01E-06
3.06E-06
Elements, Io.tot
Side 7,8 to 10,8 [m]
4.97E-02 m
1.60E-05 m4
Elements, Is.tot
5.66E-05 m4
In
7.25E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
Ztop
Zbot
4.95E-05 m4
84.61 Hz
2.74E-04 m3
In-n.a^2*Atot
Plate
HP 100x7
274.40 cm3
9.95E-04 m3
1
1
210
210
0.6
From rules:
246 cm3
995.47 cm3
0.6
0
0.01
0.1
0.005
0.0587
Total
6.00E-03
8.74E-04
6.87E-03
3.00E-05
5.13E-05
8.13E-05
Elements, Io.tot
Side 10,8 to 13,8 [m]
1.18E-02 m
9.00E-07 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.16E-06 m4
In
4.06E-06 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
Ztop
Zbot
3.10E-06 m4
23.43 Hz
3.16E-05 m3
In-n.a^2*Atot
Plate
HP 100x7
31.58 cm3
2.62E-04 m3
1
1
210
210
0.6
From rules:
12 cm3
262.09 cm3
0.6
0
0.009
0.1
0.0045
0.0587
Total
5.40E-03
8.74E-04
6.27E-03
2.43E-05
5.13E-05
7.56E-05
Elements, Io.tot
Side 13,8 to 16,8 [m]
1.21E-02 m
8.86E-07 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.12E-06 m4
In
4.01E-06 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
Ztop
Zbot
3.10E-06 m4
24.34 Hz
3.19E-05 m3
In-n.a^2*Atot
Plate
HP 100x7
31.94 cm3
2.57E-04 m3
1
1
210
210
0.6
From rules:
12 cm3
256.95 cm3
0.6
0
0.008
0.1
0.004
0.0587
Total
4.80E-03
8.74E-04
5.67E-03
1.92E-05
5.13E-05
7.05E-05
Elements, Io.tot
Side 16,8 to 22,8 [m]
1.24E-02 m
8.76E-07 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.09E-06 m4
In
3.96E-06 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
Ztop
Zbot
3.09E-06 m4
25.43 Hz
3.23E-05 m3
In-n.a^2*Atot
Plate
HP 100x7
32.31 cm3
2.49E-04 m3
1
1
210
210
0.6
From rules:
9 cm3
248.51 cm3
0.6
0
0.007
0.1
0.0035
0.0587
Total
4.20E-03
8.74E-04
5.07E-03
1.47E-05
5.13E-05
6.60E-05
Elements, Io.tot
1.30E-02 m
8.67E-07 m4
Elements, Is.tot
3.06E-06 m4
In
3.93E-06 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
Ztop
3.07E-06 m4
26.76 Hz
3.27E-05 m3
In-n.a^2*Atot
Zbot
2.36E-04 m3
32.68 cm3
236.12 cm3
From rules:
9 cm3
Web frame calculation

Part
Part 1
[-]
Plate
Flange
Web
Pcs
n
[-]
110 x 8
230 x 8
1
1
1
Effective breadth
be
[Gpa]
210
210
210
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
[m]
[m]
0.6
0.11
0.008
2.1
0.11
0.008
Height
h
N.A
el
[m]
0.006
0.007
0.222
[m]
0.003
0.0095
0.124
Total
Area
A=n*b*h
2
[m ]
1.26E-02
7.70E-04
1.78E-03
1.51E-02
1. Moment
S=A*el
Part 2
1.75E-02 m
7.33E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
2.75E-05 m4
3.48E-05 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
Ztop
Zbot
3.02E-05 m4
45.06 Hz
1.39E-04 m3
In-n.a^2*Atot
100 x 7
130 x 7
210
210
210
0.6
0.01
0.007
[m ]
1.13E-07
6.95E-08
2.73E-05
2.75E-05
3
6
6.3
2.1
0.7
be
2.1
1722.57 cm3
2.79
0.01
0.007
0.006
0.007
0.123
0.003
0.0095
0.0745
Total
Elements, Io.tot
3.78E-08
3.14E-09
7.29E-06
7.33E-06
Steiner
2
Is=A*e
138.76 cm3
1.72E-03 m3
1
1
1
[m ]
3.78E-05
7.32E-06
2.20E-04
2.65E-04
b
r>
a
a/b
In
Plate
Flange
Web
[m ]
Elements, Io.tot
2. Moment
3
I0=n*b*h /12
1.67E-02
7.00E-05
8.61E-04
1.77E-02
5.02E-05
6.65E-07
6.41E-05
1.15E-04
5.02E-08
2.86E-10
1.09E-06
1.14E-06
b
r>
a
a/b
6.51E-03 m
1.14E-06 m4
Elements, Is.tot
4.94E-06 m4
In
6.07E-06 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Eigenfrequency
Ztop
5.32E-06 m4
16.42 Hz
4.11E-05 m3
In-n.a^2*Atot
Zbot
8.18E-04 m3
41.11 cm3
817.72 cm3
1.51E-07
6.32E-09
4.78E-06
4.94E-06
3
6
15
5
0.93
be
2.79
Main frame
Part
Pcs
n
[-]
Bottom
Keel
Bilge
Tank top
Centre girder
Girder 1
Girder 2
Girder 3
Girder 4
Deck 1
Deck 2
Deck 3
Deck 4
Deck 5
Deck 6
Deck 7
Side up to 7,8 [m]
Plate
HP 200x10
Plate
HP 200x10
Plate
HP 200x10
HP 200x10
HP 200x10
Plate
HP 140x8
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 100x7
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 100x7
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 200x10
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 100x7
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 100x7
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 140x10
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 140x10
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 220x12
Side 7,8 to 10,8 [m]
Plate
HP 100x7
Side 10,8 to 13,8 [m]
Plate
HP 100x7
Side 13,8 to 16,8 [m]
Plate
HP 100x7
Side 16,8 to 22,8 [m]
Plate
HP 100x7
[-]
192 x 8
120 x 8
192 x 8
120 x 8
332 x 8
150 x 8
192 x 8
120 x 8
192 x 8
120 x 8
332 x 8
150 x 8
332 x 8
150 x 8
2
20
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
22
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
22
3
3
2
22
3
3
2
22
5
5
2
22
5
5
2
22
5
5
2
22
5
5
2
22
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
[Gpa]
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
Effective breadth Calculated, b

be
b=E/Eref*be
[m]
[m]
[m]
8.3
8.3
0.7
0.7
0
1.5
1.5
Height
h
8.75
8.75
0.011
0.011
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
8.75
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.15
8.75
0.008
0.15
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.15
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0
0.008
0.15
8.75
0.008
0.15
0.01
0.008
0.15
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.009
0.009
0.008
0.008
0.007
0.007
[m]
0.01
0.01
0.2
0.129
0.013
0.01
0.2
0.132
0.01
0.01
0.2
0.129
0.2 0.5396667
0.2 1.0793333
0.009
1.50
0.14
1.4092
1.5
0.75
0.14
0.5
0.14
1
1.4
0.79
0.14
1.023
0.14
0.555
1.3
0.71
0.14
0.927
0.14
0.494
1.2
0.76
0.14
0.96
0.14
0.56
1.1
0.81
0.14
0.994
0.14
0.628
0.006
4.80
0.1
4.7353
0.202
4.69
0.008
4.59
0.006
7.80
0.1
7.7353
0.202
7.69
0.008
7.59
0.008
10.80
0.2
10.673
0.332
10.63
0.008
10.46
0.007
13.80
0.1
13.7343
0.192
13.70
0.008
13.60
0.006
16.80
0.1
16.7353
0.192
16.70
0.008
16.60
0.006
19.80
0.14
19.7148
0.332
19.63
0.008
19.46
0.006
22.80
0.14
22.7148
0.332
22.63
0.008
19.46
6.3
4.65
0.012
2.1
0.012
2.70
0.012
3.30
0.012
3.90
0.012
4.50
0.012
5.10
0.012
5.70
0.012
6.30
0.012
6.90
0.012
7.50
3
9.30
0.007
8.10
0.007
8.70
0.007
9.30
0.007
9.90
0.007
10.50
3
12.30
0.007
11.1
0.007
13.50
3
15.30
0.007
14.1
0.007
16.50
6
19.80
0.007
17.1
0.007
19.50
0.007
20.10
0.007
22.50
Total
Elements, Io.tot
9.22E+00 m
7.62E-01 m4
Elements, Is.tot
2.90E+02 m4
N.A
el
In
2.91E+02 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Ztop
1.17E+02 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
8.58E+00 m3
8.58E+06 cm3
Zbot
1.26E+01 m3
1.26E+07 cm3
Area
A=n*b*h
2
[m ]
1.66E-01
5.13E-02
1.82E-02
5.13E-03
3.00E-02
5.13E-03
5.13E-03
5.13E-03
1.58E-01
3.04E-02
1.65E-02
1.66E-03
1.66E-03
1.96E-02
3.33E-03
3.33E-03
1.82E-02
3.33E-03
3.33E-03
1.68E-02
3.33E-03
3.33E-03
1.54E-02
3.33E-03
3.33E-03
1.05E-01
1.92E-02
4.85E-03
2.88E-03
1.05E-01
1.92E-02
4.85E-03
2.88E-03
1.40E-01
5.65E-02
1.33E-02
6.00E-03
1.23E-01
1.92E-02
7.68E-03
4.80E-03
1.05E-01
1.92E-02
7.68E-03
4.80E-03
1.05E-01
3.66E-02
1.33E-02
6.00E-03
1.05E-01
3.66E-02
1.33E-02
6.00E-03
1.26E-01
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.68E-03
6.00E-02
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
2.70E-02
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
2.40E-02
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
4.20E-02
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
1.75E-03
2.05E+00
1. Moment
S=A*el
3
[m ]
8.30E-04
6.62E-03
1.18E-04
6.77E-04
1.50E-04
6.62E-04
2.77E-03
5.54E-03
2.36E-01
4.29E-02
1.24E-02
8.32E-04
1.66E-03
1.55E-02
3.40E-03
1.85E-03
1.29E-02
3.08E-03
1.64E-03
1.28E-02
3.19E-03
1.86E-03
1.25E-02
3.31E-03
2.09E-03
5.04E-01
9.11E-02
2.28E-02
1.32E-02
8.19E-01
1.49E-01
3.73E-02
2.19E-02
1.51E+00
6.03E-01
1.41E-01
6.27E-02
1.69E+00
2.64E-01
1.05E-01
6.53E-02
1.76E+00
3.22E-01
1.28E-01
7.97E-02
2.08E+00
7.21E-01
2.61E-01
1.17E-01
2.39E+00
8.31E-01
3.00E-01
1.17E-01
5.86E-01
1.40E-02
1.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.61E-02
3.01E-02
3.41E-02
3.81E-02
4.21E-02
4.61E-02
5.01E-02
5.58E-01
1.42E-02
1.52E-02
1.63E-02
1.73E-02
1.84E-02
3.32E-01
1.94E-02
2.36E-02
3.67E-01
2.46E-02
2.88E-02
8.32E-01
2.99E-02
3.41E-02
3.51E-02
3.93E-02
1.89E+01
2. Moment
I0=n*b*h3/12
4
[m ]
1.38E-06
1.02E-05
2.56E-07
1.02E-05
2.50E-07
1.02E-05
1.02E-05
1.02E-05
1.06E-06
2.66E-06
3.09E-03
3.16E-06
3.16E-06
3.20E-03
3.16E-06
3.16E-06
2.56E-03
3.16E-06
3.16E-06
2.02E-03
3.16E-06
3.16E-06
1.55E-03
3.16E-06
3.16E-06
3.15E-07
8.50E-07
1.65E-05
1.54E-08
3.15E-07
8.50E-07
1.65E-05
1.54E-08
7.47E-07
1.02E-05
1.22E-04
3.20E-08
5.00E-07
8.50E-07
2.36E-05
2.56E-08
3.15E-07
8.50E-07
2.36E-05
2.56E-08
3.15E-07
3.16E-06
1.22E-04
3.20E-08
3.15E-07
3.16E-06
1.22E-04
3.20E-08
4.17E-01
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
2.80E-07
4.50E-02
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
3.54E-02
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
3.15E-02
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
2.21E-01
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
7.62E-01
Steiner
2
Is=A*e
4
[m ]
4.15E-06
8.54E-04
7.69E-07
8.94E-05
7.50E-07
8.54E-05
1.49E-03
5.98E-03
3.52E-01
6.04E-02
9.28E-03
4.16E-04
1.66E-03
1.23E-02
3.48E-03
1.02E-03
9.17E-03
2.86E-03
8.12E-04
9.70E-03
3.07E-03
1.04E-03
1.01E-02
3.29E-03
1.31E-03
2.42E+00
4.31E-01
1.07E-01
6.06E-02
6.38E+00
1.15E+00
2.87E-01
1.66E-01
1.63E+01
6.43E+00
1.50E+00
6.56E-01
2.33E+01
3.63E+00
1.44E+00
8.87E-01
2.96E+01
5.39E+00
2.14E+00
1.32E+00
4.12E+01
1.42E+01
5.12E+00
2.27E+00
5.46E+01
1.89E+01
6.80E+00
2.27E+00
2.72E+00
2.95E-02
4.87E-02
7.27E-02
1.02E-01
1.35E-01
1.74E-01
2.17E-01
2.65E-01
3.18E-01
3.76E-01
5.19E+00
1.15E-01
1.32E-01
1.51E-01
1.71E-01
1.93E-01
4.08E+00
2.15E-01
3.19E-01
5.62E+00
3.48E-01
4.76E-01
1.65E+01
5.11E-01
6.65E-01
7.06E-01
8.85E-01
2.90E+02
Appendix 6 - Tables for Bleich approach

Table 1-Hull
Part
Pcs
n
[-]
Bottom
Keel
Bilge
Tank top
Centre girder
Girder 1
Girder 2
Girder 3
Girder 4
Deck 1
Deck 2
0
0
0
Deck 3
0
0
0
Side up to 7,8 [m]
Side 7,8 to 10,8 [m]
Plate
HP 200x10
Plate
HP 200x10
Plate
HP 200x10
HP 200x10
HP 200x10
Plate
HP 140x8
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 140x10
HP 140x10
Plate
HP 100x7
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 100x7
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 200x10
Web
Flange
Plate
HP 220x12
[-]
2
20
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
22
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
22
3
3
2
22
3
3
2
22
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
192 x 8
120 x 8
192 x 8
120 x 8
332 x 8
150 x 8
Plate
HP 100x7
[Gpa]
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
Effective breadth
be
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
Height
h
N.A
el
[m]
[m]
[m]
[m]
0.005
0.129
0.0065
0.132
0.005
0.129
0.539667
1.079333
1.4955
1.4092
0.75
0.5
1
0.791
1.023
0.555
0.71
0.927
0.494
0.76
0.96
0.56
0.81
0.994
0.628
4.797
4.7353
4.693
4.588
7.797
7.7353
7.693
7.588
10.796
10.673
10.626
10.456
4.65
2.1
2.7
3.3
3.9
4.5
5.1
5.7
6.3
6.9
7.5
9.3
8.1
8.7
9.3
9.9
10.5
Total
8.3
8.3
0.7
0.7
1.5
1.5
8.75
8.75
0.011
0.011
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
8.75
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.15
0.01
0.008
0.15
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.2
0.013
0.2
0.01
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.009
0.14
1.5
0.14
0.14
1.4
0.14
0.14
1.3
0.14
0.14
1.2
0.14
0.14
1.1
0.14
0.14
0.006
0.1
0.202
0.008
0.006
0.1
0.202
0.008
0.008
0.2
0.332
0.008
6.3
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
0.012
3
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
Area
A=n*b*h
[m2]
0.166
0.05132
0.0182
0.005132
0.03
0.005132
0.005132
0.005132
0.1575
0.030426
0.0165
0.001663
0.001663
0.0196
0.003326
0.003326
0.0182
0.003326
0.003326
0.0168
0.003326
0.003326
0.0154
0.003326
0.003326
0.105
0.019228
0.004848
0.00288
0.105
0.019228
0.004848
0.00288
0.14
0.056452
0.01328
0.006
0.126
0.00668
0.00668
0.00668
0.00668
0.00668
0.00668
0.00668
0.00668
0.00668
0.00668
0.06
0.001748
0.001748
0.001748
0.001748
0.001748
1.33E+00
1. Moment
S=A*el
[m3]
0.00083
0.00662028
0.0001183
0.00067742
0.00015
0.00066203
0.00276957
0.00553914
0.23554125
0.04287632
0.012375
0.0008315
0.001663
0.0155036
0.0034025
0.00184593
0.012922
0.0030832
0.00164304
0.012768
0.00319296
0.00186256
0.012474
0.00330604
0.00208873
0.503685
0.09105035
0.02275166
0.01321344
0.818685
0.14873435
0.03729566
0.02185344
1.51144
0.6025122
0.14111328
0.062736
0.5859
0.014028
0.018036
0.022044
0.026052
0.03006
0.034068
0.038076
0.042084
0.046092
0.0501
0.558
0.0141588
0.0152076
0.0162564
0.0173052
0.018354
5.91E+00
2. Moment
I0=n*b*h3/12
[m4]
1.38333E-06
0.0000102
2.56317E-07
0.0000102
0.00000025
0.0000102
0.0000102
0.0000102
1.06313E-06
0.00000266
0.00309375
0.00000316
0.00000316
0.003201333
0.00000316
0.00000316
0.002563167
0.00000316
0.00000316
0.002016
0.00000316
0.00000316
0.001552833
0.00000316
0.00000316
0.000000315
0.00000085
1.64848E-05
1.536E-08
0.000000315
0.00000085
1.64848E-05
1.536E-08
7.46667E-07
0.0000102
0.000121981
0.000000032
0.416745
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
2.798E-07
0.045
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
4.74E-01
Steiner
Is=A*e2
[m4]
4.15E-06
0.000854
7.69E-07
8.94E-05
7.5E-07
8.54E-05
0.001495
0.005979
0.352252
0.060421
0.009281
0.000416
0.001663
0.012263
0.003481
0.001024
0.009175
0.002858
0.000812
0.009704
0.003065
0.001043
0.010104
0.003286
0.001312
2.416177
0.431151
0.106774
0.060623
6.383287
1.150505
0.286916
0.165824
16.31751
6.430613
1.49947
0.655968
2.724435
0.029459
0.048697
0.072745
0.101603
0.13527
0.173747
0.217033
0.265129
0.318035
0.37575
5.1894
0.114686
0.132306
0.151185
0.171321
0.192717
4.68E+01
Elements, Io.tot
4.44E+00 m
4.74E-01 m4
Elements, Is.tot
4.68E+01 m4
In
4.73E+01 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Ztop
2.11E+01 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
1.37E+00 m3
1.37E+06 cm3
Zbot
4.76E+00 m3
4.76E+06 cm3
Table 2-Superstructure
Part
[-]
Plate
HP 100x7
Web
Flange
Deck 5
Plate
HP 100x7
Web
Flange
Deck 6
Plate
HP 140x10
Web
Flange
Deck 7
Plate
HP 140x10
Web
Flange
Side 10,8 to 13,8 [m] Plate
HP 100x7
[-]
Deck 4
192 x 8
120 x 8
192 x 8
120 x 8
332 x 8
150 x 8
332 x 8
150 x 8

HP 100x7
HP 100x7
Elements, Io.tot
Elements, Is.tot
Pcs
n
2
22
5
5
2
22
5
5
2
22
5
5
2
22
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
[Gpa]
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
210
Effective breadth
be
Calculated, b
b=E/Eref*be
Height
h
N.A
el
[m]
[m]
[m]
[m]
2.9965
2.9343
2.897
2.797
5.997
5.9353
5.898
5.798
8.997
8.9148
8.828
8.658
11.997
11.9148
11.828
8.658
1.5
0.3
2.7
4.5
3.3
5.7
9
6.3
8.7
9.3
11.7
Total
8.75
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.12
8.75
0.008
0.15
8.75
0.008
0.15
8.75
0.008
0.15
0.009
0.008
0.15
0.009
0.008
0.008
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.1
0.192
0.008
0.006
0.1
0.192
0.008
0.006
0.14
0.332
0.008
0.006
0.14
0.332
0.008
3
0.007
0.007
3
0.007
0.007
6
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.007
7.27E+00 m
2.88E-01 m4
4.64E+01 m4
In
4.67E+01 m4
I0.tot+Is.tot
I
Ztop
8.65E+00 m4
In-n.a^2*Atot
6.90E-01 m3
6.90E+05 cm3
Zbot
1.19E+00 m3
1.19E+06 cm3
Area
A=n*b*h
[m2]
0.1225
0.019228
0.00768
0.0048
0.105
0.019228
0.00768
0.0048
0.105
0.036586
0.01328
0.006
0.105
0.036586
0.01328
0.006
0.027
0.001748
0.001748
0.024
0.001748
0.001748
0.042
0.001748
0.001748
0.001748
0.001748
7.20E-01
1. Moment
S=A*el
[m3]
0.36707125
0.05642072
0.02224896
0.0134256
0.629685
0.11412395
0.04529664
0.0278304
0.944685
0.32615687
0.11723584
0.051948
1.259685
0.43591487
0.15707584
0.051948
0.0405
0.0005244
0.0047196
0.108
0.0057684
0.0099636
0.378
0.0110124
0.0152076
0.0162564
0.0204516
5.23E+00
2. Moment
I0=n*b*h3/12
[m4]
5.00208E-07
0.00000085
2.3593E-05
2.56E-08
0.000000315
0.00000085
2.3593E-05
2.56E-08
0.000000315
0.00000316
0.000121981
0.000000032
0.000000315
0.00000316
0.000121981
0.000000032
0.0354375
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
0.0315
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
0.2205
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
1.99E-08
2.88E-01
Steiner
Is=A*e2
[m4]
1.099929
0.165555
0.064455
0.037551
3.776221
0.67736
0.26716
0.161361
8.499331
2.907623
1.034958
0.449766
15.11244
5.193839
1.857893
0.449766
0.06075
0.000157
0.012743
0.486
0.019036
0.056793
3.402
0.069378
0.132306
0.151185
0.239284
4.64E+01
AALTO UNIVERSITY
Marine Technology
Weight and Intact Stability

M/S Arianna
Table of Contents
1.
INITIAL LIGHTWEIGHT ESTIMATE ....................................................................... 3
2.
DETAILED LIGHTWEIGHT ESTIMATE.................................................................. 4

2.1
OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................... 4
2.2
METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 5
2.3
CALCULATIONS AND RESULTS ................................................................................................. 6
3.
PARAMETRIC WEIGHT COMPARISON ................................................................. 8
4.
BASELINE GM ESTIMATE .......................................................................................... 9
5.
INTACT STABILITY RESULTS ................................................................................ 10

5.1
LOAD CASE 1 DEPARTURE FROM PORT ............................................................................... 10
5.2
LOAD CASE 2 MID-VOYAGE ................................................................................................ 10
5.3
LOAD CASE 3 ARRIVAL TO PORT ........................................................................................ 11
5.4
LOAD CASE 4 LIGHTSHIP..................................................................................................... 11
5.5
STABILITY SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 11
5.6
DEADWEIGHT CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................... 13
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 14
APPENDIX 1 - DETAILED ESWBS WEIGHT ESTIMATE ........................................... 15
APPENDIX 2 PARAMETRIC WEIGHT DATA ............................................................ 20
APPENDIX 3 NAPA STABILITY CURVES ................................................................... 21
APPENDIX 4 NAPA STRENGTH CURVES .................................................................. 25
APPENDIX 5 NAPA LOADING CONDITIONS RESULTS ......................................... 29
APPENDIX 5 NAPA CURVES OF MAX KG AND MIN GM....................................... 33
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 - Weight breakdown by ESWBS group .................................................................. 6
Figure 3-1 - Cruise ship lightship weight correlation ............................................................... 8
Figure 5-1 Reference deadweight vs. lightship weight ......................................................... 13
Figure 6-1 - Parametric weight data ......................................................................................... 20
Figure 6-2. Stability curve, load case 1 .................................................................................... 21
1

Figure 6-6. Strength curves, load case 1 .................................................................................. 25
Figure 6-10. Stability criteria results, load case 1 .................................................................... 29
Figure 6-14. KG limit curve ..................................................................................................... 33
Figure 6-15. GM limit curve .................................................................................................... 33
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 - ESWBS group definitions ....................................................................................... 4
Table 2-2 - Weight estimate summary by ESWBS group.......................................................... 6
Table 3-1 Lightweight distribution comparison to references ................................................ 8
Table 3-2 - Total lightweight comparison .................................................................................. 9
Table 4-1 - Calculation parameters .......................................................................................... 10
Table 5-1 - Stability summary table ......................................................................................... 12
Table 6-1 -ESWBS 100 weight summary ................................................................................ 15
Table 6-2 -ESWBS 200 estimate ............................................................................................. 15
Table 6-7 Paint data................................................................................................................ 19
Table 6-8 Paint application .................................................................................................... 19
1. Initial lightweight estimate

Before conducting a detailed lightweight estimation, an initial calculation will first be
completed in order to set a reference value. In this way, the result can be compared to a value
other than existing reference ships. The chosen estimation is from the reference book
provided in the Ship Conceptual Design course and it was selected based on its simplicity and
usability at a very early stage of design. Its intended purpose is nothing more than an initial,
rough estimation of the lightship weight.
The general equation for lightship weight is shown in the equation below.
1-1
The steel weight is taken directly from the NAPA steel model, as this will give a more
accurate value than the suggested empirical formula for initial steel weight estimation.
Therefore, the steel weight is taken as 2062 [t]. The preliminary machinery weight, without
considering the actual equipment specifications, can be estimated with the following equation,
where the needed power is taken as 12,248 kW, as specified in the machinery section of this
project.
1-2
With the stated power, the machinery weight totals at 1060 [t]. Next, the outfitting weight is
estimated as a function of a specified factor and the converted volume, as defined below.
1-3
With the basic dimensions of the vessel and a K value of 0.036, as prescribed by the
reference, the total outfitting weight is estimated at 1586 [t]. Finally, the interior weight is
again based on a defined coefficient, along with the interior area of the vessel. In this case, the
coefficient is taken at
, or the given value for small and medium sized ships. The
interior weight calculation can therefore be completed according to the equation below.
1-4
This yields an initial interior weight of 562 [t]. With these four weight components, the total
lightship weight is found to be 5268 [t].
2. Detailed lightweight estimate

2.1 Overview
For a detailed initial weight estimation, the Expanded Ship Work Breakdown Structure
(ESWBS) set by the US Navy was used as an organizational hierarchy. This structure applies
five digit numbers to shipboard systems, based on their function and description. The
advantage of using a work breakdown structure is its simplicity and organization, especially at
the project management level. It is a product-oriented hierarchical division, which organizes,
defines, and graphically displays the product to be produced (1). The SWBS system, along
with MARAD, is one of the two major weight accounting systems used in the industry today
and is well regarded because it is hierarchical, third-party maintained, and well documented
(2). MARAD is divided only into three groupings, so the SWBS system was chosen to yield a
higher level of transparency.
Though the ESWBS system uses five digits, only three are needed at this level of design for
the initial weight estimate. The fourth and fifth single digit classification levels are used to
incorporate the functions that support maintenance and repair needs. The major ESWBS
groups are defined in Table 2-1 below.
Table 2-1 - ESWBS group definitions
SWBS Group
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
M
Description
Hull Structure
Propulsion Plant
Electric Plant
Command and Surveillance
Auxilliary Systems
Outfit and Furnishings
Armament
Margins and Allowances
These eight groups represent the projected ship design in the predefined Condition A
(lightship with margins) while an additional group, group F, is added for estimating weights
in Condition D (departure full load) (3). Initially, only the lightship condition will be
estimated. Since the vessel in question is a passenger vessel without armament, group 700
will be neglected from this point on.
2.2 Methodology
The lightship weight estimate can be difficult to attain at such an early design stage, as the
specifications of many features, and thus their respective weights, are not yet known. As such,
a basic bottom-up factoring method was used, where identified unit weights are multiplied by
the perceived number of units plus an uncertainty. In turn, these individual values are summed
to develop a total ship weight. The top-up or baseline method is the most common for ship
estimations, but in this case, a closely related parent ship cannot be used.
Without a parent ship, the ratiocination, or scaling, method was used to estimate various
weights for each ESWBS grouping. This is the second most common method for ship weight
estimation and multiplies weight components of reference vessels by a scaled ratio to achieve
a new weight estimate. This is especially useful as a starting point in the design process, but
there are limitations, the most serious of which is the fact that new technologies or special
features not common to all ships cannot be accurately scaled (3). To counter this, additional
margins are used to ensure a conservative estimate is achieved.
For this ship, two references were used when assigning ratios and weights. The first is a
military ship outlined in the ratiocination manual from the Society of Allied Weight Engineers
(4). Clearly, a cruise ship is completely different in design and this ship was only used to
identify small components that do not greatly affect the overall weight, including various
surveillance and command equipment. More helpful was a sample weight estimation of a
Panamax-max cruise ship, as provided by the faculty of the University of New Orleans School
of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering (5). This database provided reasonable
estimations common with the new ships design, though they were factored to account for the
great size differences between the two ships.
Though many parameters are estimated, the actual weights are used for components that have
specifically be identified, taken from online specifications. These include major machinery
components such as the electrical engines, emergency generator, switchboards, and main
generators, in addition to lifesaving equipment and paint. Where applicable, the source for
such components is provided in the calculation tables.
2.3 Calculations and results

Once the perceived weight was assigned to each component, the approximate longitudinal,
transverse, and vertical centres of gravity (LCG, TCG, and VCG) were measured from the
general arrangement and inboard profile drawings. These values represent the levers for each
component and contribute to the ships overall gravity measures, including the very important
lightship vertical centre of gravity (KG). The selected measuring convention takes the LCG
from the forward perpendicular, the VCG from the keel level, and the TCG from the vessels
centreline. For smaller components with unknown exact locations, a balanced centre of
gravity is assumed.
The results, in tabular form, are shown in Table 2-2 and Figure 2-1 below. The full calculation
data, divided by ESWBS group, is provided in Appendix 1. The total lightship weight is taken
as approximately 4,934 tonnes.
Table 2-2 - Weight estimate summary by ESWBS group
SWBS
Group
100
200
300
400
500
600
Description
Steel Structure
Propulsion Plant
Electric Plant
Command/Surveillance
Auxilliary Systems
Serv. Life Allowance
Addl 10% Margin
Total
[m]
7.14
4.15
3.31
11.39
11.73
12.96
Long'l
Mmnt
[m-t]
100024.5
18378.0
17200.7
72.2
3945.6
94143.3
Trans
Mmnt
[m-t]
0.00
0.00
14.50
-0.58
0.00
0.00
Vert
Mmnt
[m-t]
14724.5
863.9
1311.8
14.5
1134.7
19185.0
7.46
233764
13.92
37234
Weight
Weight
LCG
TCG
VCG
[t]
2062.4
161.6
396.7
1.3
96.8
1480.3
318.5
424.7
4933
[LT]
2029.8
159.0
390.4
1.3
95.2
1456.9
313.5
418.0
4855
[m]
48.50
82.87
43.36
56.50
40.78
63.60
[m]
0.000
0.000
0.037
-0.454
0.000
0.000
46.37
0.003
Weight Breakdown
Steel Structure
35%
49%
Propulsion Plant
Electric Plant
9%
2%
5%
0%
Auxilliary Systems
Figure 2-1 - Weight breakdown by ESWBS group

6
The structural weights were taken directly from NAPA and show nearly 60% of the 2062
tonnes as the steel hull structure weight and the remaining 40% from the superstructure.
Group 200 includes the propulsion system, with the main weight contribution coming from
the ABB electric engines, steering gears, and propellers. In total, this group accounts for 5%
of the lightship weight. The electric systems are listed in group 300 and make up for 9% of
the weight, the vast majority of which is from the two main generator sets and third, standby
set. Group 400, command and surveilance equipment, is nearly insignificant for the cruise
ship, but was included in order to achieve a holistic estimation. The auxiliary systems, group
500, make up 2% of the lightship weight, with the largest single contribution from the
anchoring equipment and six marine evacuation systems.
Finally, the outfitting and furnishing weights, located in group 600, are the second highest
contributors, with a total weight equaling 35% of the total. An estimated outfitting weight for
each deck was accomplished using the course notes from the Ship Conceptual Design class.
For each, the total area was taken from the general arrangement and subsequently multiplied
by a predefined factor based on the spaces and functions of each deck. The decks comprised
of public spaces, for instance, have a much higher multiplication factor than those with
outdoor decks. The estimated paint and primer weights were also included in this group,
achieved with actual coverage and density values from shipping paint suppliers and calculated
surface area values for both the hull and superstructure from NAPA. It is assumed that the
hull needs both primer and paint and the superstructure paint alone. The final weight
contribution in this group is the four passenger and two crew elevators.
The final weight contributions are in the form of additional margins and allowances, which
are crucial during early design phases. This is to ensure that the estimated displacement and
KG values as originally projected during the initial conceptual design phase are met at
delivery (3). As suggested by the Society of Allied Weight Engineers, a 7.5% service life
allowance accounts for weight gains over time to compensate for additional paint and
outfitting. In addition, a 10% acquisition margin is added to account for any underestimation
or omission of individual components.
With the total weight, the vertical center of gravity of the entire ship is calculated with the
following equation (2). The total longitudinal and transverse centers are found accordingly.
2-1
3. Parametric weight comparison

The results of the estimate seem reasonable, with nearly half of the weight contribution
coming from the hull and superstructure structural components and another large percentage
from outfitting and furnishings. The latter is known to be especially high for cruise ships. As a
comparison, the reference cruise ship featured a similar weight distribution, with 47%, 39%,
and 14% distributions to the structure, outfitting, and machinery, respectively. There is also a
favorable comparison with Levanders suggested cruise ship lightweight distribution (6). A
comparison of the three distributions is shown below in Table 3-1, along with the initial
estimate breakdown. In comparison, it seems as if the initial estimation puts too much
emphasis on the machinery weight at the expense of the structural.
Table 3-1 Lightweight distribution comparison to references
Group
Structure
Outfitting
Machinery
Initial
39%
41%
20%
Reference Ship
47%
39%
14%
Levander
50%
38%
12%
Our Ship
49%
35%
16%
In order to check the rationality of the total lightship weight, a parametric study of existing
vessels was completed. The results show a steady correlation between a cruise ships total
lightweight and length overall, as shown in Figure 3-1.
LS Weight vs. Length
Lightship Weight [t]
100000
90000
Current ships
80000
Calculated
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
LOA [m]
Figure 3-1 - Cruise ship lightship weight correlation
This data yields a very close estimate to the calculated one, especially after the same margins
are applied. This provides more validation to the chosen methods and result. A comparison
8
between the parametric and calculated results is provided in Table 3-2 and the parametric data
is attached in Appendix 2.
Table 3-2 - Total lightweight comparison
Group
Raw weight [t]
Service life allowance [t]
Additional margin [t]
TOTAL
Initial
4483
336
448
5268
Parametric
4035
303
404
4742
Calculated
4199
315
420
4934
This data shows that the detailed estimation is, on whole, in agreeance with both the
simplified initial estimate and existing ships. This is especially promising given the
uncertainties in all estimations and is satisfactory at such an early design stage.
4. Baseline GM estimate
Before using the NAPA software to estimate the metacentric height (GM) at different
specified loading conditions with more accuracy, a baseline GM will first be found by
approximate formulas. This will signify whether the NAPA results are reasonable. The
fundamental formula for the GM of an ocean-going vessel is as follows.
4-1
Here, the vertical center of buoyancy (KB), metacentric radius (BM) can be calculated with
formulas 4-2 and 4-3, respectively. The vertical center of gravity (KG or VCG) of the ship is
taken in the same manner as from equation 4-1.
4-2
4-3
These two equations are based on various coefficients and parameters, as defined below.
4-4
4-5
4-6
With these equations, a baseline GM estimate can be found using the additional known
parameters shown in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1 - Calculation parameters

Parameter
Length overall
Length along waterline
Beam
Draft
Waterplane area coefficient
Waterplane area
Vertical center of gravity
Symbol
LOA
LBP
B
T
KG
Value
120
110
18
5.4
0.73
1445
7.46
Units
[m]
[m]
[m]
[m]
[-]
[m2]
[m]
With these values, the baseline GM for the ship is found to be 1.04 m. Again, this is only a
basis for comparison and is not expected to represent the final stability of the vessel.
5. Intact stability results

The ships intact stability was assessed with the aid of the NAPA software. Four different
load cases were defined. Namely, two of them are based on (7) , these are the departure from
port and arrival to port conditions. In addition, there is also defined mid-voyage and lightship
condition for gaining additional knowledge about ship stability in some certain circumstances.
These four load cases are described in following chapters. The ships lightweight used in the
calculations was taken as that defined in Chapter 1. A lightweight element table feature was
used to define the lightweight distribution. Load case parameters such as draft, trim, GM,
loads, and stability curves are given in the load case reports generated by NAPA.
5.1 Load case 1 Departure from port

In load case ,1 the ship is loaded with passenegers, with an estimated weight of 16 [t]. The
hotel and deck storages are assumed to be at full capacity. The lubricating oil, heavy fuel oil,
and fresh water tanks are also full and the gray water tanks empty. Under these conditions, the
total ship displacement was found to be 6,991 [t], with a draft of 5.38 [m] and a GM of 1.75
[m], resulting in a trimming angle of -0.
. The stability criteria is fulfilled according to IMO
criteria that NAPA considers as can be seen in Figure 5-11 The stability and strength curves
corresponding to this load case can be found in Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-7.
5.2 Load case 2 Mid-voyage

At the middle of the projected voyage, storage rooms are taken as 66% full, lubricating oil
and heavy fuel oil as 50%, and gray water tanks and garbage holds as 50%. As the ship has
freshwater producing capability, the freshwater tank is filled 80% at all times during the
10
voyage to take into account free surface effect. The resulting displacement is now 6,830 [t],
the draft 5.37 [m], and the GM of the entire ship 1.69 [m]. The ship trims -0.22 under such
conditions. Similar to the first case, stability criteria is fulfilled as can be seen Figure 5-12 and
the appropriate stability and strength curves are provided in Figure 5-4 and Figure 5-8.
5.3 Load case 3 Arrival to port

The third case describes the ship arriving to port at the end of the voyage. Now, storage rooms
are taken as only 10% full, lubricating and heavy fuel oil as 10%, and grey water tanks and
garbage holds also as 90%. For this case, the ship is trimming -0.42 , with a displacement of
6,942 [t], a 5.37 [m] draft, and a 1.37 [m] GM. Similar to the previous cases, stability criteria
is fulfilled as can be seen Figure 5-13, and stability and strength curves are shown in Figure
5-5 and Figure 5-9.
5.4 Load case 4 Lightship

The final case describes the ship lightship condition where all the storage rooms and tanks are
empty, so no deadweight considered. For this final case, the ship is trimming -0.
, with a
displacement of 5,002 [t], a 4.16 [m] draft, and a 1.09 [m] GM. Similar to the previous cases,
stability criteria is fulfilled as can be seen Figure 5-14,and stability and strength curves are
shown in Figure 5-6 and Figure 5-10.
5.5 Stability summary

The intact stability of the vessel is checked in four different loading conditions, all of which
are realistic and probable for the selected route and characteristics. The displacement ranges
from 5002 [t] to 6991 [t] and the GM value from 1.09 [m] to 1.75 [m]. NAPA automatically
calculates the accordance of the vessels stability to the IMO criteria for a ships intact
stability and the ship is in compliance with the IMO regulations in all four loading conditions.
Therefore, it would be allowed to sail under all conditions accounted for. As seen from the
results, the ship stability does not vary greatly, meaning it will always demonstrate similar a
behavior. The design draft of 5.4 [m] was almost achieved and it was under 1% less in three
first cases and of course for lightship case it is much less due to missing deadweight. One
potential source for such a discrepancy is the lightweight estimation method, which is by no
means exact. The same is true for the vessels deadweight. Therefore, the small differences in
draft should be acceptable at this stage. The low GM values ensure that the vessel will have
good stability levels as well as produces higher accelerations in passenger areas. For this case,
11
such accelerations are not a severe issue since the ship is relatively low, a feature that
enhances a decrease in acceleration. It should be also mentioned that permanent ballast water
is used for correcting slightly the trim and also to maintain the necessary draft according to
different load cases. As for the max KG and min GM curves, these were not obtained due to
the lack of skills of NAPA, there are curves just for limit case as can be seen in Figure 5-15
and Figure 5-16. When trying to get these for different load cases it just gave empty graphs.
As for strength curves, then maximum bending moment in hogging is during the arrival to the
port condition, where the bending moment is approximately
kNm, which is twice a
smaller of the maximum bending moment in the roughest situation that was calculated
according to the rules. Therefore, this result is quite reasonable.
A summary table for all loading conditions is shown in Table 5-1. It is clear that the
metacentric heights differ from the original, baseline calculation. This is unsurprising due to
the latters very generic characteristics.
Table 5-1 - Stability summary table
Loading Condition
1
2
3
4
Displacement [t]
6991
6990
6831
5002
Draft [m]
5.38
5.37
5.37
4.16
GM [m]
1.75
1.69
1.37
1.09
Trim [ ]
-0.02
-0.22
-0.04
-0.67
12
5.6 Deadweight considerations

With the achieved values, the estimated design deadweight of the vessel can be found,
according to the principle formula below.
5-1
With displacements varying slightly, but consistently near 7000 [t], it can be seen that the
deadweight will approximately reach 2000 [t]. When compared to reference cruise ships, this
seems rather high in comparison to the ships lightship weight. As it stands, the deadweight is
right at a 40% value of the lightship weight. As can be seen in Figure 5-1, the deadweight, on
whole, is proportional to a ships lightship weight. This data is taken from Appendix 2.
DWT vs. Lightship Weight
20000
Current ships
18000
Calculated
Deadweight [t]
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0
10000
20000
30000
40000 50000
Lightship [t]
60000
70000
80000
90000
Figure 5-1 Reference deadweight vs. lightship weight
With this relationship, the deadweight for modern cruise ships is, on average, around 25-31%
of the actual lightship weight. This would yield deadweight value between 1297 and 1547 [t],
which is lower than the calculated value, though not by a large margin.
Possible reasons for this discrepancy could be the rough estimation methods, particularly for
the ships center of gravity and total lightweight. Both of these parameters are strongly
dependent on the NAPA steel model, which may not be detailed enough for a precise
estimation. About the center of gravity, the individual gravities for various components were
very roughly estimated, as it is impossible to know exact locations at this stage of the design
process. Future iterations in the design spiral may yield a better convergence.
13
Bibliography
1. McKesson, Christopher. Work Breakdown Structures. New Orleans : University of New
Orleans School of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, 2011.
2. . Estimating weight and KG. New Orleans : University of New Orleans School of Naval
Architecture and Marine Engineering, 2011.
3. Marine Systems Government, Society of Allied Weight Engineers. Weight Estimating
and Margin Manual for Marine Vehicles. Los Angeles : Society of Naval Architects and
Marine Engineers, Ship Design Panel, 2001.
4. Redmond, Mark. Ship Weight Estimated using Computerized Ratiocination. Atlanta :
Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc., 1984.
5. Taravella, Brandon. Cruise Ship Weight Estimate. New Orleans : University of New
Orleans School of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, 2003.
6. Levander, Kai. Passenger Ships. Ship Design and Construction Vol. II. Jersey City :
Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 2004.
7. DNV. Stability and Watertight Integrity. DNV Rules for Classification of Ships. 1995.
8.
ABB.
Electric
motor
data.
[Online]
[Cited:
16
2013.]
http://www.abb.com/product/seitp322/19e6c63b9837b35dc1256dc1004430be.aspx?productL
anguage=us&country=FI&tabKey=2..
9.
Cummins.
Diesel
Generator
Set.
[Online]
[Cited:
29
10
2012.]
http://www.cumminspower.com/www/common/templatehtml/technicaldocument/SpecSheets/
Diesel/na/s-1494.pdf.
10.
Wrtsil.
Generating
Sets.
[Online]
[Cited:
29
10
2012.]
http://www.wartsila.com/en/engines/gensets/generating-sets..
11. MarinArk. Marin Ark Marine Evacuation Systems. [Online] [Cited: 30 10 2013.]
http://apps2.survitecgroup.com/cms_uploads/product_pdfs/1374673010_3990a56be289cf0b6
8ccde83490f9f2df1559855.pdf.
12. Blue Water Marine Paint. Blue Water Marine Paint - Mega Gloss. North Brunswick :
s.n., 2011.
13. Teamac Marine and Industrial Coating. Teamac Farm Oxide Paint. Hull : Teamac,
2011.
14
Appendix 1 - Detailed ESWBS weight estimate

Table 5-2 -ESWBS 100 weight summary
100 - Hull Structure
Item
Steel Hull Structure
Steel Super Structure
Total
Vert
Weight VCG
[t]
[m]
Moment
1215.9
5.68
4.58
846.46 17.39 14719.94
2062.36 7.1396
Table 5-3 -ESWBS 200 estimate

200 - Propulsion System
Item
Description/ Source
Electric Engine
Steering Gear
Propellers
Bow Thruster
Bow Thruster Engine
Bow Thruster Gen. Sets
Lube Oil System
Lube Oil Pump
Dirty Oil Pump
Cabling
ABB AMZ1250 (7)
Unit
[ea.]
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Weight
[kg]
44000
15000
12000
1700
1000
800
150
75
75
6000
Total Weight
[kg]
88000
30000
24000
3400
2000
1600
300
150
150
12000
Total
161600
LCG
[m]
80
105
102
10
10
10
40
40
40
55
18378000
87.68
TCG
[m]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
VCG
[m]
3.2
4.8
2.7
3.25
3.25
3.25
4
3.25
3.25
13
863925
4.122
15

300 - Electric Systems
Item
Description/ Source
Emergency Generator
Switchboard, drives
Transformers
Lighting System
Lighting System
Lighting System
Uptakes
Genset Intake
Genset Exhaust
Fuel Service System
Fuel Service System
Electric Operation Fluids
Batteries
Battery Chargers
Main Genset
Standby Genset
Cummins DQDAA (8)

ABB ACS 6000
Navigation Lights
Exterior Lights
Interior Lights
Pipings
Valves
Wartsila 16V32 (9)

Wartsila 16V32 (9)
Unit
[ea.]
1
3
3
40
20
600
6
2
2
1
60
2
20
2
2
1
Weight
[kg]
2500
9000
200
3
4
2
40
45
250
350
2.5
60
25
100
121000
121000
Total Weight
[kg]
2500
27000
600
120
80
1200
240
90
500
350
150
120
500
200
242000
121000
Total
396650
LCG
[m]
47.9
46.2
46.2
60
60
60
105
43
43
43
43
47.9
50
50
43
43
17200688
43.36
TCG
[m]
5.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14500
0.04
VCG
[m]
10.8
3.25
3.25
16.8
14
12.3
3.25
3.25
3.25
7.8
7.8
3.25
12.3
12.3
3.2
3.2
1311794
3.31
16

400 - Command and Surveillance
Item
Telephone System
Alarm
Television
Radio
Fire Control System
Cables
Telescope
Window Wipers
Description/
Source
Unit
[ea.]
200
200
110
16
2
1
2
13
Weight
[kg]
1
1
4
2
50
200
7
7
Total Weight
[kg]
200
200
440
32
100
200
14
91
Total
1277
LCG
[m]
60
60
60
60
71
60
7
7
72155
56.50
TCG
[m]
0
0
0
0
-5.8
0
0
0
-580
-0.4542
VCG
[m]
11.5
11.5
11.5
11.5
3.25
11.5
18
18
14543
11.39
17

500 - Auxilliary Systems
Item
Pumps
Fire Fighting Piping
Freshwater Piping
Ballast Piping
Foam Piping
MER Intake Fans
Intake Fire Dampers
MER Exhaust Fans
MER Fire Dampers
Galley Air Handler
Pantry Air Handler
Head Air Handler
Laundry Air Handler
Anchor, equipment
Anchor Chain
Mooring Bitts
Mooring Chocks
Liferaft, equipment
Oil Spill Containment
Description/
Source
Bilge and ballast
MarinArk (10)
Unit
[ea.]
10
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
4
1
1
2
2
3
3
6
1
Weight
[kg]
250
1500
500
1400
400
25
25
25
25
100
100
100
50
20000
2500
800
700
5800
5000
Total Weight
[kg]
2500
1500
500
1400
400
50
50
50
50
400
400
100
50
40000
5000
2400
2100
34800
5000
Total
96750
LCG
[m]
74
60
60
60
55
55
55
55
55
91.5
91.5
72.4
25
3.5
3.5
60
60
78
60
3945590
40.78
TCG
[m]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.000
VCG
[m]
3.25
3.25
11
10
3.2
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
13.8
13.8
13.8
13.8
10
10
8
8
16.8
3.25
1134740
11.73
18

600 - Outfit and Furnishing
Item
Description/ Source
Super. Paint
Hull Paint
Hull Primer
elevator
Deck 1
Deck 2
Deck 3
Deck 4
Deck 5
Deck 6
Deck 7
Blue Water (11)

Teamac (12)
Teamac (12)
2 crew, 4 pax
stores, misc.
crew, public
public
public
public, bridge
deck, public
deck
Unit
[ea.]
1.5
1.5
1.5
6
1802
1870
2159
1959
1851
1665
930
Weight
[kg]
431.33
484.95
1718.13
2000.00
95.00
115.00
140.00
130.00
135.00
135.00
50.00
Total Weight
[kg]
646.99
727.43
2577.20
12000.00
171190.00
215050.00
302260.00
254670.00
249885.00
224775.00
46500.00
Total
1480281.62
LCG
[m]
60
60
60
60
66
64
62.9
61.8
62
63
80
94143292
63.5982
TCG
[m]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0000
VCG
[m]
16.8
6.6
6.6
13.8
4.8
7.8
10.8
13.8
16.8
19.8
22.8
19185049.02
12.96
Table 5-8 Paint data

Item
SS Paint (11)
Hull Paint (12)
Primer (12)
Coverage
[m^2/l]
9.82
13
3.44
Density
[kg/l]
1.2
1.6
1.5
Table 5-9 Paint application

Item
Superstructure Paint
Hull Primer
Hull Paint
Surface Area [m2]

3529.70
3940.25
3940.25
Liquid Volume [l]

359.44
1145.42
303.10
Liquid Weight [kg]

431.33
1718.13
484.95
19
Appendix 2 Parametric weight data

Figure 5-2 - Parametric weight data
Ship
Allure of the Seas
Freedom of the Seas
Voyager of the Seas
Radiance of the Seas
Legend of the Seas
Grandeur of the Seas
Enchantment of the Seas
Celebrity Silhouette
Celebrity Xpedition
Celebrity Constellation
Celebrity Century
Azamara Journey
Mein Shiff 2
DWT [t]
17600
11319
11073
10759
[-]
9270
10979
11894
571
11747
7260
3323
10123
LS [t]
86200
59700
53700
38612
29102
[-]
35000
50062
1769
35406
29450,5
12770
32921
B [m]
47
38,6
38,6
32,2
32
32,2
32,2
36,8
14
32,2
32,2
25,46
32,2
LOA [m]
362
339
311
293
264
279,6
302
319
88,5
294
246,1
181,28
263,9
L/B [-]
7,702
8,782
8,057
9,099
8,25
8,683
9,379
8,668
6,321
9,13
7,643
7,12
8,196
20
Appendix 3 NAPA stability curves
Figure 5-3. Stability curve, load case 1

21
22
23
24
Appendix 4 NAPA strength curves
Figure 5-7. Strength curves, load case 1
25
26
27
28
Appendix 5 NAPA loading conditions results
Figure 5-11. Stability criteria results, load case 1
29
30
31
32
Appendix 5 NAPA curves of max KG and min GM
Figure 5-15. KG limit curve
Figure 5-16. GM limit curve
33
AALTO UNIVERSITY
Marine Technology
Damage Stability
M/S Arianna
Table of Contents
1.
DAMAGE STABILITY ................................................................................................... 3

1.1
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 3
1.2
DAMAGE SCENARIOS ............................................................................................................... 3
1.3
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 4
APPENDIX 1 - DAMAGE CASE 1 FOR LOADING CONDITIONS 1, 2 AND 3 ............ 5

APPENDIX 2 - DAMAGE CASE 2 FOR LOADING CONDITIONS 1, 2 AND 3 .......... 14
APPENDIX 3 - DAMAGE CASE 3 FOR LOADING CONDITIONS 1, 2 AND 3 .......... 23
1. Damage stability
1.1 Introduction
Once the intact stability of the vessel has been assessed in the four loading conditions
described in the previous chapter, the damage stability can be assessed. At some point of the
ships lifetime, it might encounter some damage. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate some
probable damage scenarios and predict the ships ability to withstand the damage and assess
whether she will survive the damage or not. The damage stability evaluation was done in
NAPA, which calculates damage stability in different loading conditions. Thus, initial
conditions were defined by specifying draft, trim, and metacentric height, which was taken
from the intact stability assessment results. It has been decided to assess three loading
conditions, while the lightship load case was neglected. Three different damage scenarios
were made and all seemed quite reasonable for this type of ship. The calculations for damage
stability were done for each loading condition, with nine scenarios in total. The damage cases
are described in following subchapters.
1.2 Damage scenarios

1.2.1 Damage case 1
The first damage scenario simulates a side collision where another ship collides with this
particular ship at an angle of 90 degrees, therefore, the PS side machinery room is filled with
water and the middle engine room is damaged after deep penetration, after which it is slowly
filled with water. The penetrations did not reach to the SB side machinery room, so this one
remained undamaged.
1.2.2 Damage case 2

In this scenario, the bulb is damaged so that the upper and lower sections are damaged and
filled with water after the ship collides with another ship at an angle of 90 degrees. This might
be the case where ship has a straight collision with some port construction, for example. First,
the machinery room for thrusters is damaged and after that the room behind the thruster room.
1.2.3 Damage case 3

In this case, it is assumed that another ship collides with the aft of our ship at an angle of 90
degrees at 21 m from AP. First, it penetrates the outer shell and damages the side and bottom
plating of the propulsion motor room where electric generators are located. Shortly after that,
the sides of two surrounding rooms are damaged as well. Finally, nearly the whole machinery
room for generators is filled with water.
1.3 Summary
Besides the vessels intact stability calculations, it must also be assumed that the vessel
suffers some damages during her lifetime and therefore it is necessary to evaluate the ships
ability to withstand and survive such incidents with minimal losses. Damages stability
analysis of the project ship was conducted in NAPA and the results showed that the ship will
not sink in a case of damaged described in previously defined load cases. The most critical
scenario was damage case 1, with a deep side penetration due to another ship in arrival
loading condition. The ship was heeled due to that by, in the final stage, approximately 14
degrees, but with this heeling angle it manages to float and the evacuation is not needed. With
the two other scenarios, only a small trim angle was obtained and this can be balanced with
ballast tanks. Although the ship is able to float, however, it is not capable of operating by her
own power anymore, due to the damages in the propulsion motor room where generators are
located. Therefore, it is reasonable to evacuate the passengers from the ship, as this ship has to
be towed to back on the port.
With these considerations in mind, there is an endless number of possible damage cases that
are not covered in this project work and therefore analysis into the damage stability of the
ship would definitely be needed in further design. One of the scenarios that should also be
considered in analysis is a grounding scenario, as this is nowadays a statistically common case
in bad weather conditions near to the shore.
Appendix 1 - Damage case 1 for loading conditions 1, 2 and 3
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:47
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.D

=> Draught: 5.38 m, Trim: 0 m, Heel: 0 deg, GM0: 1.755 m
Damage:
MIDSHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
Damaged compartments: MACH4
---------Stage:
FINAL
DAMAGE CASE: MIDSHIP
=> Extension: frames #54...#78, transv. -3 -> 9.01 m
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.D/MIDSHIP: 1205.3 ton
DAMAGED COMPARTMENTS:
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH4
757.3
0.85
MACH4
757.3
0.85
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH5
907.2
0.85
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
FLOATING
Tm
=
Ta
=
Tf
=
Trim =
X=86
POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.D/MIDSHIP)

5.90 m
GM
=
1.56 m at zero heel
5.22 m
GM
=
2.35 m at equilibrium
6.59 m
Heel = 12.62 deg to PS side
1.38 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:47
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.D/MIDSHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
X=110
GZ CURVE AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM

Heel
0.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
GZ
-0.40-0.37-0.32-0.26-0.19-0.10-0.02 0.10 0.36 0.96 1.20 1.00
T
6.01 6.02 6.02 6.02 6.00 5.96 5.92 5.83 5.63 5.01 4.23 3.34
Trim
1.07 1.08 1.12 1.17 1.23 1.31 1.36 1.42 1.48 1.55 1.86 2.20
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ)
Max GZ at angle of heel
Range of positive GZ curve
Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
righting lever
GZ
(PS) 1.20
(PS) 40.0
(PS) 37.4
(PS) 0.531
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
-0.5
50
degree
PS
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.D/MIDSHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:47
USER TEEK
Page
3
PhaseCriterion Description
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOST CRITICAL OPENINGS:

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
2.93
3.15
3.31
Immersion Reduction per

angle[deg] 1deg. of heel
-0.13
-0.13
-0.13
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.D/MID.INTACT EQ
PS
5.38
0.00
0.0
INI.D/MID.1
EQ
PS
5.52
0.85
13.4
INI.D/MID.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.90
1.38
12.6
-
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:47
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.M

Damage:
MIDSHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
---------Stage:
FINAL
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.M/MIDSHIP: 1212.2 ton
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH4
757.3
0.85
MACH4
757.3
0.85
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH5
907.2
0.85
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
FLOATING
Tm
=
Ta
=
Tf
=
Trim =
X=86
POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.M/MIDSHIP)

5.88 m
GM
=
1.39 m at zero heel
5.18 m
GM
=
6.58 m
1.40 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:47
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.M/MIDSHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
X=110

Heel
0.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
GZ
-0.40-0.38-0.33-0.27-0.22-0.13-0.06 0.06 0.30 0.87 1.09 0.87
T
6.02 6.02 6.03 6.02 6.01 5.97 5.92 5.83 5.63 5.02 4.23 3.34
Trim
1.07 1.08 1.12 1.17 1.23 1.32 1.37 1.42 1.48 1.56 1.86 2.20
Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
righting lever
GZ
(PS) 1.09
(PS) 39.5
(PS) 36.4
(PS) 0.473
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
-0.5
50
degree
PS
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.M/MIDSHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:47
USER TEEK
Page
3
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
3.07
3.30
3.46

-0.12
-0.12
-0.12
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.M/MID.INTACT EQ
PS
5.38
0.00
0.0
INI.M/MID.1
EQ
PS
5.49
0.89
14.7
INI.M/MID.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.88
1.40
13.6
-
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:46
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.A

Damage:
MIDSHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
---------Stage:
FINAL
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.A/MIDSHIP: 1122.9 ton
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH4
757.3
0.85
MACH4
757.3
0.85
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH5
907.2
0.85
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
FLOATING
Tm
=
Ta
=
Tf
=
Trim =
X=86
POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.A/MIDSHIP)

5.46 m
GM
=
1.31 m at zero heel
4.79 m
GM
=
6.13 m
1.35 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:46
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.A/MIDSHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
X=110

Heel
0.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
GZ
-0.40-0.37-0.32-0.27-0.22-0.13-0.06 0.05 0.29 0.86 1.12 0.90
T
5.58 5.59 5.60 5.59 5.58 5.54 5.50 5.43 5.24 4.63 3.77 2.80
Trim
0.98 1.00 1.03 1.08 1.13 1.23 1.29 1.38 1.48 1.60 1.91 2.31
Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
righting lever
GZ
(PS) 1.12
(PS) 40.0
(PS) 36.2
(PS) 0.476
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
-0.5
50
degree
PS
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.A/MIDSHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:46
USER TEEK
Page
3
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
3.51
3.73
3.88

-0.12
-0.12
-0.12
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.A/MID.INTACT EQ
PS
5.00
0.00
0.0
INI.A/MID.1
EQ
PS
5.11
0.85
14.5
INI.A/MID.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.46
1.35
13.8
-
14
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:49
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.D

Damage:
FORESHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
---------Stage:
FINAL
Damaged compartments: VOID1
DAMAGE CASE: FORESHIP
=> Extension: frames #103...#116, transv. -3.63 -> 3.63 m
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.D/FORESHIP: 139.9 ton
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH9
23.1
0.85
MACH9
23.1
0.85
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------VOID1
123.0
0.95
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
FLOATING
Tm
=
Ta
=
Tf
=
Trim =
X=86
POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.D/FORESHIP)

5.48 m
GM
=
1.77 m at zero heel
5.17 m
GM
=
5.80 m
Heel =
0.00
0.63 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:49
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.D/FORESHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
GZ CURVE AT
Heel
0.00
GZ
0.00
T
5.48
Trim
0.63
X=86
X=110
FINAL EQUILIBRIUM
1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
0.03 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.33 0.40 0.52 0.73 1.17 1.37 1.13
5.48 5.47 5.45 5.42 5.36 5.31 5.22 5.02 4.43 3.56 2.60
0.63 0.64 0.66 0.69 0.75 0.80 0.86 0.96 1.13 1.42 1.80

Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
GZ
(PS) 1.37
(PS) 39.5
(PS) 50.0
(PS) 0.737
righting lever
1.5
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
PS
50
degree
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.D/FORESHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:49
USER TEEK
Page
3
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
1.48
1.58
1.65

-0.16
-0.16
-0.16
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.D/FOR.INTACT EQ
PS
5.38
0.00
0.0
INI.D/FOR.1
EQ
PS
5.39
0.08
0.0
INI.D/FOR.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.48
0.63
0.0
-
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:50
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.M

Damage:
FORESHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
---------Stage:
FINAL
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.M/FORESHIP: 139.9 ton
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH9
23.1
0.85
MACH9
23.1
0.85
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------VOID1
123.0
0.95
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
FLOATING
Tm
=
Ta
=
Tf
=
Trim =
X=86
POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.M/FORESHIP)

5.49 m
GM
=
1.59 m at zero heel
5.17 m
GM
=
5.80 m
Heel =
0.00
0.63 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:50
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.M/FORESHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
GZ CURVE AT
Heel
0.00
GZ
0.00
T
5.49
Trim
0.63
X=86
X=110
FINAL EQUILIBRIUM
1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
0.03 0.08 0.14 0.20 0.30 0.37 0.47 0.67 1.09 1.26 1.00
5.48 5.47 5.46 5.43 5.36 5.31 5.22 5.02 4.43 3.56 2.60
0.63 0.64 0.66 0.69 0.75 0.80 0.86 0.96 1.13 1.42 1.80

Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
righting lever
GZ
(PS) 1.26
(PS) 39.0
(PS) 50.0
(PS) 0.675
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
PS
50
degree
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.M/FORESHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:50
USER TEEK
Page
3
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
1.48
1.58
1.65

-0.16
-0.16
-0.16
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.M/FOR.INTACT EQ
PS
5.38
0.00
0.0
INI.M/FOR.1
EQ
PS
5.40
0.08
0.0
INI.M/FOR.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.49
0.63
0.0
-
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:48
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.A

Damage:
FORESHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
---------Stage:
FINAL
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.A/FORESHIP: 139.9 ton
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH9
23.1
0.85
MACH9
23.1
0.85
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------VOID1
123.0
0.95
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
FLOATING
Tm
=
Ta
=
Tf
=
Trim =
X=86
POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.A/FORESHIP)

5.10 m
GM
=
1.67 m at zero heel
4.76 m
GM
=
5.45 m
Heel =
0.00
0.69 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:48
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.A/FORESHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
GZ CURVE AT
Heel
0.00
GZ
0.00
T
5.10
Trim
0.69
X=86
X=110
FINAL EQUILIBRIUM
1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
0.03 0.09 0.15 0.21 0.31 0.38 0.50 0.70 1.09 1.25 1.02
5.10 5.09 5.07 5.05 4.99 4.94 4.85 4.66 4.06 3.16 2.13
0.69 0.69 0.70 0.72 0.77 0.81 0.88 1.00 1.23 1.53 1.97

Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
righting lever
GZ
(PS) 1.25
(PS) 39.0
(PS) 50.0
(PS) 0.683
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
PS
50
degree
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.A/FORESHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:48
USER TEEK
Page
3
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
1.86
1.98
2.05

-0.16
-0.16
-0.16
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.A/FOR.INTACT EQ
PS
5.00
0.00
0.0
INI.A/FOR.1
EQ
PS
5.01
0.09
0.0
INI.A/FOR.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.10
0.69
0.0
-
23
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:52
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.D

Damage:
AFTSHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
---------Stage:
2
---------Stage:
FINAL
DAMAGE CASE: AFTSHIP
=> Extension: frames #9...#30, transv. -9 -> 9 m
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.D/AFTSHIP: 927.3 ton
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH1
988.7
0.85
MACH1
988.7
0.85
VOID2
213.7
0.95
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH1
988.7
0.85
VOID2
213.7
0.95
VOID3
66.9
0.95
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
FLOATING POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.D/AFTSHIP)

Tm
=
5.77 m
GM
=
1.97 m at zero heel
Ta
=
6.68 m
GM
=
Tf
=
4.87 m
Heel =
0.00
Trim = -1.81 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:52
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.D/AFTSHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
X=110

Heel
0.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
GZ
0.00 0.03 0.10 0.17 0.24 0.34 0.41 0.51 0.70 1.14 1.32 1.10
T
5.77 5.77 5.76 5.75 5.72 5.67 5.62 5.52 5.30 4.68 3.86 2.94
Trim -1.81-1.81-1.81-1.81-1.81-1.79-1.77-1.68-1.49-1.04-0.80-0.57
Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
righting lever
GZ
(PS) 1.32
(PS) 39.5
(PS) 50.0
(PS) 0.716
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
PS
50
degree
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.D/AFTSHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:52
USER TEEK
Page
3
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
0.95
0.66
0.46

-0.16
-0.16
-0.16
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.D/AFT.INTACT EQ
PS
5.38
0.00
0.0
INI.D/AFT.1
EQ
PS
5.65 -1.16
0.0
INI.D/AFT.2
EQ
PS
5.74 -1.69
0.0
INI.D/AFT.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.77 -1.81
0.0
-
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:52
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.M

Damage:
AFTSHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
---------Stage:
2
---------Stage:
FINAL
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.M/AFTSHIP: 927.8 ton
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH1
988.7
0.85
MACH1
988.7
0.85
VOID2
213.7
0.95
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH1
988.7
0.85
VOID2
213.7
0.95
VOID3
66.9
0.95
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
FLOATING POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.M/AFTSHIP)

Tm
=
5.78 m
GM
=
1.79 m at zero heel
Ta
=
6.68 m
GM
=
Tf
=
4.87 m
Heel =
0.00
Trim = -1.81 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:52
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.M/AFTSHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
X=110

Heel
0.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
GZ
0.00 0.03 0.09 0.16 0.22 0.31 0.37 0.47 0.64 1.05 1.21 0.96
T
5.78 5.78 5.77 5.75 5.72 5.67 5.62 5.52 5.30 4.69 3.86 2.94
Trim -1.81-1.81-1.81-1.81-1.81-1.79-1.77-1.68-1.49-1.05-0.81-0.57
Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
righting lever
GZ
(PS) 1.21
(PS) 39.0
(PS) 50.0
(PS) 0.654
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
PS
50
degree
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.M/AFTSHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:52
USER TEEK
Page
3
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
0.95
0.66
0.45

-0.16
-0.16
-0.16
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.M/AFT.INTACT EQ
PS
5.38
0.00
0.0
INI.M/AFT.1
EQ
PS
5.65 -1.16
0.0
INI.M/AFT.2
EQ
PS
5.74 -1.69
0.0
INI.M/AFT.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.78 -1.81
0.0
-
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:51
USER TEEK
Page
1
INIT CASE: INI.A

Damage:
AFTSHIP
Type:
NORMAL
Side:
AUTOMATIC
Phases:
0
---------Stage:
1
---------Stage:
2
---------Stage:
FINAL
Flooded in at equilibrium of case INI.A/AFTSHIP: 876.7 ton
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH1
988.7
0.85
MACH1
988.7
0.85
VOID2
213.7
0.95
10
20
30
40
50
--------------------------------------Comp
Description
Volm
Perm
--------------------------------------MACH1
988.7
0.85
VOID2
213.7
0.95
VOID3
66.9
0.95
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
PROFILE
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=2.3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
FLOATING POSITION AT FINAL EQUILIBRIUM (CASE INI.A/AFTSHIP)

Tm
=
5.39 m
GM
=
1.96 m at zero heel
Ta
=
6.33 m
GM
=
Tf
=
4.45 m
Heel =
0.00
Trim = -1.89 m
X=110
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:51
USER TEEK
Page
2
Case INI.A/AFTSHIP
PROFILE
Z=5
Z=2.3
Z=1.2
X=56
X=86
X=110

Heel
0.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 7.0010.0012.0015.0020.0030.0040.0050.00
GZ
0.00 0.03 0.10 0.17 0.23 0.33 0.38 0.47 0.64 1.04 1.23 1.00
T
5.39 5.39 5.38 5.37 5.34 5.28 5.23 5.14 4.93 4.31 3.43 2.45
Trim -1.89-1.89-1.88-1.87-1.86-1.82-1.77-1.66-1.44-0.94-0.54-0.20
Area under GZ curve
m
deg
deg
mrad
EPHI
righting lever
GZ
(PS) 1.23
(PS) 39.5
(PS) 50.0
(PS) 0.662
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
heeling angle
PS
50
degree
Napa Oy
NAPA/D/DAM/121113
ARIANNA/A
Arianna
Damage Results
Case INI.A/AFTSHIP
DATE 2013-12-04
TIME 19:51
USER TEEK
Page
3
Req.
ATTV
Unit Status
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name
Frame
Height
#
[m]
OP1
48
6.9
OP2
30
6.9
OP3
18
6.9
Y-coord
[m]
-9.0
-9.0
-9.0
Side
PS
PS
PS
Dist. to
water [m]
1.33
1.02
0.81

-0.16
-0.16
-0.16
DURING FLOODING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Case
Stage
Phase Side
T
TR
Heel
MinGM
Severity
m
m degree
m
----------------------------------------------------------------------INI.A/AFT.INTACT EQ
PS
5.00
0.00
0.0
INI.A/AFT.1
EQ
PS
5.26 -1.22
0.0
INI.A/AFT.2
EQ
PS
5.36 -1.77
0.0
INI.A/AFT.FINAL
EQ
PS
5.39 -1.89
0.0
-
AALTO UNIVERSITY
Marine Technology
Cost and Profitability

M/S Arianna
Table of Contents
1.
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 3

1.1
ACQUISITION COST .................................................................................................................. 3
1.2
PROFITABILITY STUDIES .......................................................................................................... 9
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 14
APPENDIX 1 PARAMETRIC DATA .............................................................................. 15
APPENDIX 2 CATEGORIZED ACQUISITION COST CALCULATIONS ............... 17
APPENDIX 3 ANNUAL OPERATING CALCULATIONS ........................................... 21
APPENDIX 4 PROFITABILITY CALCULATIONS ..................................................... 23
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 - Gross registered tonnage vs. lightship weight ........................................................ 4
Figure 1-2- Newbuild cost vs. gross tonnage ............................................................................. 4
Figure 1-3- Truncated newbuild cost vs. gross tonnage ............................................................. 5
Figure 1-4- Acquisition cost breakdown .................................................................................... 8
Figure 1-5 - Categorized annual operating expense breakdown .............................................. 11
Figure 1-6 - Ticket rates by tonnage and category ................................................................... 12
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 - Acquisition cost groupings ...................................................................................... 6
Table 1-2 Costs per tonne........................................................................................................ 7
Table 1-3 ESWBS acquisition cost summary .......................................................................... 7
Table 1-4 Final acquisition cost estimate ................................................................................ 8
Table 1-5 - Operating cost categories ...................................................................................... 10
Table 1-6 - Weighted ticket price ............................................................................................. 12
break
Table A1- 1 - Parametric gross tonnage data ........................................................................... 15

Table A1- 2 - Parametric brand life data .................................................................................. 15
Table A1- 3 Truncated parametric cost data ......................................................................... 16
break
Table A2- 1 - ESWBS cost overview ....................................................................................... 17

Table A2- 2 - Cost breakdown overview ................................................................................. 17
Table A2- 3 - Margin application overview ............................................................................. 18
Table A2- 4 - ESWBS 100 costs .............................................................................................. 18
break
Table A3- 1 Annual fuel costs............................................................................................... 21

Table A3- 2 - Annual payroll costs .......................................................................................... 21
Table A3- 3 Annual port costs .............................................................................................. 21
Table A3- 4 - Annual consumable costs .................................................................................. 21
Table A3- 5 - Annual maintenance and capital costs ............................................................... 22
Table A3- 6 Total annual costs ............................................................................................. 22
break
Table A4- 1 - Daily required freight rate calculations ............................................................. 23

Table A4- 2 - Annual equivalent breakeven analysis .............................................................. 24
1. Economic analysis
Economic considerations for a cruise ship are crucial. Not only must the initial cost be
calculated, but additional factors must also be considered in order to ensure the ships
operational profitability. Annual operating costs and revenue figures are examples of
parameters that determine the success of a ship. For this analysis, it was a point not only to
compute the estimated cost of building the ship, but also to perform a profitability analysis in
order to find the minimum charge per person needed to guarantee a profit. This section of the
report summarizes all steps in performing the cost analysis for this ship.
1.1 Acquisition cost

The economic analysis was initiated with an estimation of the ships new-build cost. There
were two methods used in estimating this value: a parametric study and an overhead cost
analysis based on industry guidelines and the previously defined breakdown structure for the
ships components. Both methods should be considered when selecting the final acquisition
cost estimate.
1.1.1 Parametric Analysis
Collecting and analysing cost data for reference cruise ships gives baseline values with which
to compare later calculated ones. This will serve as a reasonability check for the selected
estimation method.
The most easily accessible measure of a cruise ships size is its gross tonnage, as this is the
parameter preferred by the industry, along with lower bed capacity and double occupancy (1).
One caveat to this is the difficulty in correlating the gross tonnage, a volumetric measurement,
with the weight displacement. The most common definition of gross tonnage is that set forth
by IMO, which relates gross tonnage to the gross volume of a ship, as follows (2).
[
)](
[1]
Since the gross volume of current ships is not often recorded, a parametric comparison
between known values for gross tonnage and lightship weight was used. After plotting the two
values for several reference ships, it is clear that a strong correlation exists between the two
parameters, as shown in Figure 1-1.
Gross Tonnage [thousand GRT]
Gross Tonnage vs. Lightship Weight

200
150
100
References
50
new design
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Lightship Weight [thousand t]
70
80
90
Figure 1-1 - Gross registered tonnage vs. lightship weight
This correlation makes it possible to compare this ship to existing references directly. From
this trend line, the gross tonnage is approximated as 6577 GRT.
In order to compile a useful set of parametric cost data, new-build cost information for 172
cruise ships was collected. After organizing the data, a very weak correlation between ship
size and acquisition cost was initially found. After taking the effect of interest into account,
however, a strong trend was identified. The simple relationship between the net present value
(NPV), interest (i), acquisition cost (AC), and age (n) was used in this regard. This
relationship is shown in the equation below.
(
1-1
Original Cost w/Inflation [mill USD]
The resultant graphical trend for all data is shown in Figure 1-2.
Newbuild Cost vs. GRT with Inflation
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
Gross Registered Tonnage [GRT]
120000
140000
160000
Figure 1-2- Newbuild cost vs. gross tonnage
An estimate with all data, however, will likely be too low. This is due to the effect of including much larger
ships into the analysis. In relation, there are fewer ships within our size range, meaning they have less effect on
the trend line than the larger ships, which include many additional components. Therefore, in order to achieve a
more accurate estimation, the data was truncated by implementing a 20,000 GRT size limit. With this truncation,
a new regression was approximated that fits the smaller ship data with much more certainty. This is shown in
Figure 1-3.
Newbuild Cost vs. GRT with Inflation
Original Cost with Inflation

[millions USD]
200
150
100
References
50
new design
0
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Gross Registered Tonnage [GRT]
12000
14000
16000
Figure 1-3- Truncated newbuild cost vs. gross tonnage
The smaller ships are no longer devalued and the result is a larger initial cost value. From this,
a final reference acquisition cost of approximately 67 million USD is selected.
1.1.2 Detailed acquisition cost estimate
A second method of estimating the acquisition cost is to systematically categorize the ships
components and estimate the cost based on weight. This method is especially useful during
early design stages, where, for typical ships, the general cost structure will be known. A high
degree of accuracy is not needed for budgeting, as variations in pricing can easily occur even
when detailed quotations are obtained; up to a
15% margin for error is expected and
acceptable at this stage of planning (3). Therefore, approximations will be used where
quotations are not available.
Based on its function, a ship component can be assigned to an appropriate category for which
historical data is available. As such, approximate unit costs can be applied in order to
calculate a total weight for any component, subsystem, or system. During the first iterations of
the design spiral, eight cost groupings are sufficient to differentiate between different items
while ensuring that component costs within a single group do not differ significantly (3).
These groupings are listed below in Table 1-1.
5
Table 1-1 - Acquisition cost groupings

Group
Name
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Steel
Steel structure-related
Cargo-related
Accomodation
Deck machinery-related
Propulsion
Auxilliary
Structure-related
Group 1 includes both the structural steel and steel labour costs related to the construction of
the hull and superstructure. The second group includes all additional structural steel weight,
such as structural castings and fabrications, hatch covers, and watertight doors. This is
neglected at this point, as it can be assumed that this will comprise only a small percentage of
the steel weight and costs. Therefore, this group is essentially absorbed into the first, as the
NAPA model does not differentiate between these weights.
The third group is not very important for a passenger vessel, but does include firefighting,
paint, and plumber work, which are present. Group 4 should contain a very large percentage
of the total acquisition cost, as the accommodation outfitting is significant in both weight and
price. This is expected, as the ship falls into the luxury cruising market and will accordingly
feature very expensive furnishings. According to this grouping system, deck coverings,
windows, galley gear, HVAC units, lifts, nautical instruments, and electrical work should also
be included within this group. The deck machinery and its related components are described
by group 5. Examples include the steering gear, bow thruster, anchoring and mooring
equipment, and davits.
The final three groups consist of machinery components. With this system, the main engines,
gearbox, shaft, and propellers are included in the propulsion group, group 6. The generators
and pumps are consolidated into group 7 while uptakes, ventilation, and engine room
pipework are included in the final group.
For each group, a unit cost per tonne is provided based on statistical data (3). However, the
data is only accurate for the time of publication and should be augmented to reflect its net
present value in the same way as before. The result is shown in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2 Costs per tonne

Cost
Group
Name
Cost per tonnne

[USD 1993]
Cost per tonnne

[USD 2014]
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Steel
Cargo-related
Accomodation
Propulsion
Auxilliary
Structure-related
3600
3600
12000
16000
14000
16000
14000
3600
5686
5686
18952
25269
22110
25269
22110
5686
Though the provided grouping is adequate for defining similar costs between components, the
final costs should be reported using the same breakdown structure from the weight estimate,
the expanded ship breakdown structure (ESWBS). Consistency in this regard is very
important, as direct comparisons cannot be made with different methods. Therefore, the
individual components from the weight breakdown were assigned to their appropriate cost
group based on the aforementioned definitions. Following this, the respective unit cost per
tonne was applied and all components were summed for each ESWBS group. The resulting
total cost can be taken as the new estimation for acquisition. The detailed calculation tables,
by ESWBS group, are provided in Appendix 2 and the summary table is shown in Table 1-3.
Table 1-3 ESWBS acquisition cost summary
SWBS
Group
Description
Weight
[t]
Weight
[LT]
100
200
300
400
500
600
[-]
[-]
[-]
[-]
[-]
Steel Structure
Propulsion Plant
Electric Plant
Auxilliary Systems
Add'l 10% Margin
Total without margin
Total
Approximated Total
2062,4
161,6
396,7
1,3
96,8
1480,3
318,5
424,7
4198,9
4933,7
[-]
2029,8
159,0
390,4
1,3
95,2
1456,9
313,5
418,0
4132,6
4855,8
[-]
Total Cost [USD]

11725619
4059472
9901466
31637
2088929
37233460
[-]
[-]
65040583
65000000
The result is an acquisition cost estimate that is very close to the parametrically estimated one.
The new estimate of roughly 65 million US dollars results in less than a 3% difference when
compared to the parametrically estimated value. This validates the chosen method and
suggests that the calculated acquisition cost is reasonable.
In addition to the final estimation, a breakdown of the acquisition costs by component is

shown in Figure 1-4, according to the SWBS breakdown. As expected, the outfitting costs are
proportionally very high.
ESWBS Acquisition Cost Breakdown
Steel Structure
18%
6%
Propulsion Plant
Electric Plant
58%
15%
3%
Command and
Surveillance
Auxilliary Systems
0%
Figure 1-4- Acquisition cost breakdown
In the same way that a service life and additional allowance were included in the lightship
weight estimate, a margin should be included for the final acquisition cost. At this design
stage, two important margins should be considered to ensure a conservative assessment. The
first is a ship owners cost margin, which covers additional expenses including spare parts,
plan approval, supervision, and administrative and legal fees (4). In addition, a design margin
should be implemented to account for design, electricity, and trial costs. Appropriate values
for these margins are 6% and 5%, respectively (2). Therefore, with margins included, the final
acquisition cost for the vessel will be approximately 72 million USD, as shown in Table 1-4.
Table 1-4 Final acquisition cost estimate
Description
Estimated acquisition cost
Shipowner's margin
Design margin
Final acquisition cost
Approximated cost
Cost [USD]
65040583
3252029
3902435
72195047
72000000
1.2 Profitability studies

The next step of the cost analysis is to measure the profitability of the ship. The goal is to
calculate the minimum ticket price needed per person in order to ensure that the ship is
profitable over the entire service life. This can be accomplished with the required freight rate
analysis, which can be considered a required ticket rate calculation for a passenger ship (1).
This is a common method used for ships designed to create revenue, including cruise ships.
There are many required inputs for this analysis method, as summarized below.
initial cost
ship service life
salvage or resale value
passenger capacity
daily passenger costs
cruise fare
operating days per year
annual revenue sales
annual operating and maintenance costs
equivalent uniform annualized costs
The operating days per year is taken as 340 days to allow for ample reserve time for
maintenance and the resale value is an estimated 25% of the acquisition cost. The service life
was based solely on luxury ship data. Contemporary cruise ships were not taken into account,
as it can be assumed that luxury ships will have a lower brand life due to the higher
expectation level associated with them. Though luxury ships are not usually scrapped
following their retirement, they have often been rebranded to other cruise lines. Therefore, the
service life is in terms of brand life and not total ship lifecycle. From the data provided in
Table A1-2, an average brand life of 14.3 years was found, which is slightly less than the
brand life of cruise ships in general. Thus, a service life of 15 years was chosen for this
design.
The remaining parameters can be divided into three major groups: acquisition cost, operating
costs, and revenue estimates. With the initial cost now known, the remaining variables must
be identified with various methods.
1.2.1 Annual operating costs

The major operating costs were divided into a six level breakdown structure, as shown in
Table 1-5. This grouping is based on the major operating cost division seen in modern cruise
lines (5). In this section, the basic estimation methods and assumptions for each group will be
discussed. The detailed calculation tables are presented in Appendix 3.
Table 1-5 - Operating cost categories
Group
1
2
3
4
5
6
Description
fuel
port docking and misc. fees
crew payroll
maintenance and capital
consumables
miscellaneous
The fuel costs will clearly contribute to a large percentage of the total annual operating costs,
as with any cruise ship. Existing prices fluctuate greatly based on date and location, but the
current price in Rotterdam, 865 USD/ton, was selected (6). Along with this, the calculated
hours at sea, average power according to our machinery calculations, and specific fuel
consumption of the engines according to their specifications were used to calculate the annual
fuel costs. As seen in Table A3-1, this is found to be approximately 5.6 million USD.
For payroll expenses, the crew was divided into five categories: captain, staff captain, senior
officer, junior officer, and general crew. The estimated monthly salary, in USD, was taken
from current averages (5), as listed in Table A3-2. The number of crew corresponding to each
position correlates with the cabin types shown in the general arrangement. The total annual
payroll expenses is calculated as 1.77 million USD.
Port fees will be relatively high for this ship, as the chosen itinerary is very port intensive,
with no full sea days in between any two. Generally, docking fees depend on gross tonnage,
and a berthing rate of 0.15 euro/GT was chosen and converted to approximately 0.20
USD/GT per day. In reality, fees will vary by port, but it was not possible to find the actual
docking fee for each of the selected cities. For additional fees, including waste disposal
charges, an additional margin was applied. With these considerations, an estimated 790,000
USD per year will be spent on port-related costs, as shown in Table A3-3.
Maintenance and capital costs were included in the same category, as each was computed as
factors of the acquisition cost. General upkeep costs were taken as 5% of this value, while
10% was taken for the more demanding refurbishment costs. The latter will be unevenly
10
distributed based on dry-dock dates, but a yearly average was used for calculations. Finally,
the capital and insurance costs were also taken as an acquisition cost percentage. The result is
a yearly maintenance and capital expense of roughly 746,000 USD, as given in Table A3-5.
Next, consumables for both the crew and passengers were estimated, as this should be a
considerable portion of the annual costs for a luxury cruise ship. Based on current figures for
the cruise market (5), an estimated 30 USD per person, per day will be spent on food, while
the corresponding cost for crewmembers was factorized. Though actual figures were not
found, an additional 10 and 15 USD per person, per day, was taken for the crew and
passengers, respectively. This will cover additional consumables such as water and other
waste needs. Table A3-4 shows the consumable calculations, resulting in nearly 2.8 million
USD per year.
The final annual operating expenses are presented as miscellaneous costs. According to
current expense profiles, cruise ships pay an additional 14-15% in terms of operating costs
that do not fit into the prior categories (5). This includes corporate, agent commission,
depreciation, and amortization costs, among others. In line with the example, miscellaneous
costs were estimated as 14% of the sum of the previously calculated costs.
Considering all six cost categories, total annual operating costs are calculated as 13.3 million
USD, as shown in Table A3-6. A breakdown of these expenses is shown in Figure 1-5.
Categorized Operating Costs
12%
fuel costs
42%
21%
port fees
crew payroll
maint/capital
6%
13%
6%
consumables
misc.
Figure 1-5 - Categorized annual operating expense breakdown
11
1.2.2 Annual revenue

The estimated revenue calculations are largely dependent on the expected ticket fare for the
various stateroom categories. These fares were estimated in line with the current luxury
market (7). As shown in Figure 1-6, the ticket prices are expected to be very high for this
vessel, as all cabins feature balconies and the ship is very small, meaning a premium will be
applied for inclusivity.
Figure 1-6 - Ticket rates by tonnage and category
With these figures in mind, conservative ticket fares were estimated in order to ensure
profitability under all circumstances, including a scenario where the demand decreases and
ticket prices drop accordingly. A weighted fare was then calculated and used for
computations. The fare categories and values, along with the corresponding weighted ticket
price, are shown in Table 1-6.
Table 1-6 - Weighted ticket price
Cabin Type
Balcony Suite
Deluxe Suite
Weighted Daily Fare
Quantity
66
10
Fare
400
600
426
Unit
USD/pp/day
USD/pp/day
USD/pp/day
In addition to ticket fares, cruise lines make a major profit on daily passenger spending,
including specialty dining, spa, alcohol, and shore excursion profits. In line with other luxury
cruise lines, the average daily profit, per person, was taken as 50 USD. A projected load
12
factor of 0.9 was also introduced. This is the ratio of average passenger capacity to that of the
maximum passenger capacity and is considered in order to replicate seasonality effects.
With these parameters, the annual ticket revenue and onboard revenue can be calculated based
on the weighted ticket fare, operating days per year, onboard spending, and passenger
capacity at the selected load factor. The full calculations are included in Table A4-1.
1.2.3 Profitability calculations
By calculating expected annual revenue and operating costs as well as compiling the previous
list of requirements, the required ticket rate calculation can be completed. The projected
equivalent uniform annualized costs (EUAC) are divided into two sections: variable operation
and maintenance (O&M) and fixed O&M. The fixed costs per passenger are the sum of crewrelated costs, ship-related costs, and general and administrative costs, while variable daily
costs are largely dependent on food and drinks. The variable costs are taken as 20% of the
total annual operating costs, with the remaining 80% allocated to fixed costs. Additionally, a
final EUAC cost is introduced by considering the assumed capital recovery factor of 0.21.
This is the ratio of a constant annuity to the present value and is considered for the entire
lifecycle of the ship. The three EUAC variables are summed to yield the total projection.
Finally, the required freight rate per day is taken as a relation between the total EUAC,
revenue, and weighted fares.
)(
(
(
)(
)
)
1-2
1-3
The result, as shown in Table A4-1, is a required ticket rate of 292 USD per person, per day.
Therefore, the ship will be profitable as long as the weighted fares are greater than this value.
With the suggested ticket prices of todays luxury cruise ships and the weighted fare of 421
USD per person, per day, the ship is projected to be profitable. For easier comparison, an
annual breakeven analysis is provided in Table A4-2. This shows the minimum annual
revenue required to run a profitable operation alongside the projected value. Again,
profitability is achieved.
13
Bibliography
1. Levander, Kai. Passenger Ships. Ship Design and Construction Vol. II. Jersey City :
Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 2004.
2. Jantunen, Olli. Passenger Ship Design, Criteria, Functions, and Features. Turku : s.n.,
2013.
3. Watson, David. Practical Ship Design. Oxford : Elsevier , 1998.
4. Benford, Harry. Cost Estimation. [book auth.] Lamb. Ship Design and Construction
Volume 1. Jersey City : s.n., 2003.
5. Financial Breakdown of Typical Cruisers. Cruise Market Watch. [Online] 2013.
http://www.cruisemarketwatch.com/home/financial-breakdown-of-typical-cruiser/.
6. Rotterdam Bunker Prices. Bunker World. [Online] November 2013. [Cited: 15
November 2013.] http://www.bunkerworld.com/prices/port/nl/rtm/?grade=MGO.
7. Katsoufis, G.P. A Decision Making Framework for Cruise Ship Design. Cambridge :
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2006.
8.
Cummins.
Diesel
Generator
Set.
[Online]
[Cited:
29
10
2012.]
http://www.cumminspower.com/www/common/templatehtml/technicaldocument/SpecSh
eets/Diesel/na/s-1494.pdf.
14
Appendix 1 Parametric data

Table A1- 1 - Parametric gross tonnage data
Ship
Oasis of the Seas
Freedom of the Seas
Voyager of the Seas
Mariner of the Seas
Radiance of the Seas
Legend of the Seas
Enchantment of the Seas
Celebrity Silhouette
Celebrity Constellation
Celebrity Century
Celebrity Xpedition
Mein Schiff 2
Azamara Quest
Lightship Weight [t]

86200
59700
53700
53100
38612
29102
35000
50062
35406
29450
1769,3
32921
12770
Deadweight [t]
17600
11319
11073
11533
10759
[-]
10979
11894
11746
7260
571,1
10123
3323
GRT
225282
154407
137276
138270
90090
69130
82910
122210
90228
70606
2842
77713
30277
Table A1- 2 - Parametric brand life data

Luxury Cruise Ship
Crystal Harmony
Radisson Diamond
Galaxy
Mercury
Royal Viking Sun
Europa
Zenith
Horizon
Entered Service
1990
1992
1996
1997
1988
1981
1992
1990
Left Service
2006
2005
2008
2008
2002
1999
2007
2005
Brand Life [yrs]

16
13
12
11
14
18
15
15
15
Table A1- 3 Truncated parametric cost data
Cruise Ship Name
Entered
Service
[Year]
Gross
Tonnage
[GRT]
Original
Cost [USD
million]
Astoria
Bremen
Club Med 2
C Columbus
Corinthian II
EasyCruise
Canodros
Hanseatic
Island Sky
Le Levant
Ocean Majesty
Paul Gauguin
Seabourn Legend
Seabourn Pride
Seabourn Spirit
SeaDreammII
Spirit of Glacier Bay
Spirit of Yorktown
Van Gogh
Vistamar
Wind Spirit
1981
1990
1992
1997
1991
1990
1990
1993
1992
1999
1966
1998
1992
1988
1989
1985
1984
1988
1975
1989
1988
18591
6751
14983
14903
4280
4077
4100
8378
4280
3504
10417
19200
9961
10000
9975
4333
1471
2354
15402
7500
5350
55
42
125
69
25
20
20
68
25
35
65
150
87
50
50
34
9
12
25
45
34
Present
Worth
[USD
million]
102
65
186
93
38
31
31
99
37
45
162
198
129
80
79
58
16
19
52
71
55
PW/GRT
[USD/GRT]
5466
9617
12397
6231
8853
7584
7541
11824
8680
12921
15516
10308
12978
8042
7904
13394
10652
8199
3377
9461
10222
16
Appendix 2 Categorized acquisition cost calculations

Table A2- 1 - ESWBS cost overview
ESWBS Cost Summary
Steel Structure
Propulsion Plant
Electric Plant
Auxilliary Systems
Add'l 10% Margin
Total without margin
Weight
[t]
2062,4
161,6
396,7
1,3
96,8
1480,3
318,5
424,7
4198,9
Weight
[LT]
2029,8
159,0
390,4
1,3
95,2
1456,9
313,5
418,0
4132,6
[-]
Total
4933,7
4855,8
[-]
Approximated Total
[-]
[-]
SWBS Group
Description
100
200
300
400
500
600
[-]
[-]
[-]
Total Cost [USD]

11725619
4059472
9901466
31637
2088929
37233460
[-]
[-]
65040583
65000000
Table A2- 2 Cost breakdown overview

Cost Breakdown Summary
SWBS Group
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Name
Steel
Cargo-related
Accomodation
Propulsion
Auxilliary
Structure-related
Total
Approximated Total
Total cost [USD]

11725619,3
0
98580
36642816
3046815
12760867
736719
29167
65040583
65000000
17
Table A2- 3 Margin application overview

Margin Application
Description
Estimated acquisition cost
Shipowners margin
Design margin
Final acquisition cost
Approximated cost
Cost [USD]
65040583
3252029
3902435
72195047
72000000
Table A2- 4 - ESWBS 100 costs

100 - Hull Structure
Item
Weight
Steel Hull Structure

Steel Super Structure
[t]
1215
846
Cost Group
Cost per tonne

[2014]
Total Cost
1
1
5686
5686
6913042
4812578
11725619

200 - Propulsion System
Item
Description/ Source
Electric Engine
Steering Gear
Propellers
Bow Thruster
Bow Thruster Engine
Bow Thruster Gen. Sets
Lube Oil System
Lube Oil Pump
Dirty Oil Pump
Cabling
ABB AMZ1250
Unit
Weight
Total Weight
[ea.]
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
[kg]
44000
15000
12000
1700
1000
800
150
75
75
6000
Total
[t]
88
30
24
3,4
2
1,6
0,3
0,15
0,15
12
161,6
Cost Group
Cost per tonne

[2014]
Total Cost
6
6
6
5
5
5
7
7
7
4
[-]
25269
25269
25269
22110
22110
22110
22110
22110
22110
25269
[-]
2223676
758071
606457
75175
44221
35377
6633
3317
3317
303229
4059471
18

300 - Electric Systems
Item
Description/ Source
Emergency Generator
Switchboard, drives
Transformers
Lighting System
Lighting System
Lighting System
Uptakes
Genset Intake
Genset Exhaust
Fuel Service System
Fuel Service System
Electric Operation Fluids
Batteries
Battery Chargers
Main Genset
Standby Genset
Cummins DQDAA
ABB ACS 6000
Navigation Lights
Exterior Lights
Interior Lights
Pipings
Valves
Wartsila 16V32
Wartsila 16V32
Unit
Weight
Total Weight
[ea.]
1
3
3
40
20
600
6
2
2
1
60
2
20
2
2
1
[kg]
2500
9000
200
3
4
2
40
45
250
350
2,5
60
25
100
121000
121000
Total
[t]
2,5
27
0,6
0,12
0,08
1,2
0,24
0,09
0,5
0,35
0,15
0,12
0,5
0,2
242
121
396,65
Cost
Group
Cost per tonne [2014]
Total Cost
7
7
7
4
4
4
8
8
8
8
8
7
4
4
6
6
[-]
22110
22110
22110
25269
25269
25269
5685
5685
5685
5685
5685
22110
25269
25269
25269
25269
[-]
55276
596981
13266
3032
2022
30323
1365
512
2843
1990
853
2653
12635
5054
6115108
3057554
9901466

400 - Command and Surveillance
Item
Telephone System
Alarm
Television
Radio
Fire Control System
Cables
Telescope
Window Wipers
Description/ Source
Unit
Weight
Total Weight
[ea.]
200
200
110
16
2
1
2
13
[kg]
1
1
4
2
50
200
7
7
Total
[t]
0,2
0,2
0,44
0,032
0,1
0,2
0,014
0,091
1,277
Cost
Group
Total Cost
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
[-]
25269
25269
25269
25269
18951
25269
25269
25269
[-]
5053
5053
11118
808
1895
5053
353
2299
31636
19

500 - Auxilliary Systems
Item
Description/ Source
Pumps
Fire Fighting Piping
Freshwater Piping
Ballast Piping
Foam Piping
Main Engine Room Intake Fans
Main Engine Room Intake Fire Dampers
Main Engine Room Exhaust Fans
Galley Air Handler
Pantry Air Handler
Head Air Handler
Laundry Air Handler
Anchor, equipment
Anchor Chain
Mooring Chocks and bits
Liferaft, equipment
Oil Spill Containment
Bilge and ballast
MarinArk
Unit
[ea.]
10
1
1
1
1
2
2
4
4
4
1
1
2
2
3
6
1
Weight
[t]
250
1500
500
1400
400
25
25
25
100
100
100
50
20000
2500
700
5800
5000
Total
Total Weight
[kg]
2,5
1,5
0,5
1,4
0,4
0,05
0,05
0,05
0,4
0,4
0,1
0,05
40
5
2,1
34,8
5
96,75
Cost Group
7
8
8
8
8
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
5
4
[-]
Cost per tonne

[2014]
22110
5685
5685
5685
5685
18951
18951
18951
18951
18951
18951
18951
22110
22110
22110
22110
25269
[-]
Total Cost
55276
8528
2842
7959
2274
947
947
1895
7580
7580
1895
947
884416
110552
99497
769442
126345
2088929

600 - Outfit and Furnishing
Item
Description/ Source
Super. Paint
Hull Paint
Hull Primer
elevator
Deck 1
Deck 2
Deck 3
Deck 4
Deck 5
Deck 6
Deck 7
Blue Water
Teamac
Teamac
2 crew, 4 pax
stores, misc.
crew, public
public
public
public, bridge
deck, public
deck
Unit
[ea.]
1,5
1,5
1,5
6
1802
1870
2159
1959
1851
1665
930
Weight
[kg]
431,33
484,95
1718,13
2000,00
95,00
115,00
140,00
130,00
135,00
135,00
50,00
Total
Total Weight
[t]
0,65
0,73
2,58
12,00
171,19
215,05
302,26
254,67
249,89
224,78
46,50
1480,28
Cost Group
Total Cost
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
[-]
18951
18951
18951
25269
25269
25269
25269
25269
25269
25269
22110
[-]
12261
13786
48842
303228
4325807
5434107
7637820
6435267
6314354
5679849
1028134
37233460
20
Appendix 3 Annual operating calculations

Table A3- 1 Annual fuel costs
parameter
fuel cost
weekly hours
yearly hours
average power
SFC
SFC
fuel consumption rate
yearly consumption
yearly consumption
annual fuel cost
value
865
70
3400
12248
180
0,18
2204
7495776
7495
5621832
unit
USD/t
hours
hours
kW
g/kwH
kg/kwH
kg/hour
kg
t
USD
Table A3- 2 - Annual payroll costs

position
captain
staff captain
senior officer
junior officer
crew
Total
unit
1
2
3
6
44
56
monthly salary [USD]

9000
7000
5000
3500
2000
[-]
yearly salary [USD]

108000
84000
60000
42000
24000
[-]
total pay [USD]

108000
168000
180000
252000
1056000
1764000
Table A3- 3 Annual port costs

parameter
berthing rate
berthing rate
daily berthing cost
annual berthing cost
annual misc. port fees
annual port fees
value
0,15
0,20
1328
451552
338663
790216
unit
euro/GT
USD/GT
USD
USD
USD
USD
Table A3- 4 - Annual consumable costs

category
food
other
total
type
crew
passengers
crew
passengers
daily total
yearly total
unit cost [USD pp/pd]

15
30
10
15
[-]
[-]
units
56
152
56
152
[-]
[-]
total cost [USD]

840
4560
560
2280
8240
2801600
21
Table A3- 5 - Annual maintenance and capital costs

parameter
initial cost
maintenance
yearly maintenance
refurbishment
yearly refurbishment
capital costs
yearly capital costs
annual maintenance and capital
cost [USD]
72196098
3609804
240654
7219610
481307
360980
24065
746026
Table A3- 6 Total annual costs

category
fuel costs
port fees
crew payroll
maint/capital
consumables
misc.
TOTAL
cost [USD]
5621832
790216
1764000
746026
2801600
1641314
13364988
percentage
42 %
6%
13 %
6%
21 %
12 %
100%
22
Appendix 4 Profitability calculations

Table A4- 1 - Daily required freight rate calculations
Input Parameters
Assumed Internal Rate of Return
20 %
[-]
Projected Ship Service Life
15
years
Days/Cruise
7
days
Initial Cost
77943221
USD
Estimated Salvage Value
19485805
USD
Passenger Accomodation Capacity and Estimated Fare
Fares based on Suggested Luxury Cruise Line fares per Cabin Type
Cabin Type
Quantity
Fare
Unit
Balcony Stateroom
0
350
USD/pp/day
Balcony Suite
66
400
USD/pp/day
Deluxe Suite
10
600
USD/pp/day
Weighted Daily Fare
426
USD/pp/day
Passenger Statistics
152
persons
Daily Cost/passenger
50
USD/pp/day
Operation Profile
Operating Days per year
340
days
Projected Load Factor
0,9
[-]
Estimated Annual Revenue Calculations
Weighted Daily Fare/person
426
USD/pp/day
Annual Ticket Revenue/person
144947
USD/pp
Total Annual Ticket Revenue
22032000
USD
Onboard Daily Revenue
50
USD/pp/day
Annual Onboard Revenue
17000
USD/pp
Total Annual Variable Revenue
2584000
USD
Total Annual Fixed Revenue
775200
USD
Total Annual Revenue
25391200
USD
Calculated Required Ticket Rate
Estimated Annual Revenue
25391200
USD
Estimated Annual Revenue at Projected L.F.
22852080
USD
Projected EUAC - Variable O&M
2672997
USD
Projected EUAC - Fixed O&M
10691990
USD
Projected EUAC (Capital Recovery)
2286826
USD
Projected EUAC Total
15651814
USD
RFR/Day at Projected L.F
292
USD
RFR/Cruise at Projected L.F.
2044
USD
23
Table A4- 2 - Annual equivalent breakeven analysis

Estimated Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs
5621832
fuel costs
port fees
790216
crew payroll
1764000
maint/capital
746026
consumables
2801600
miscellaneous
1641314
Total Annual Operating Costs
13364988
Annual Equivalent Breakeven Analysis
capital recovery factor
0,21
Acquisition Cost
-77943221
Annual Operating Cost
-13364988
Salvage Value
19485805
Ship Service Life
15
Compounded Interest Value
8%
Minimum Required Annual Revenue
22074510
Estimated Annual Revenue
25391200
Profitable?
USD
USD
USD
USD
USD
USD
USD
[-]
USD
USD
USD
years
[-]
USD
USD
YES
24
Closing
The design of M/S Arianna was a challenging project for all involved. From the initial design
challenge of creating a cruise ship without lifeboats to the final report and presentation,
critical thinking and problem solving skills have been tested. Every step of the design brought
with it unique challenges and the importance of team work was clear from the onset of the
semester.
The objective of this course and its project was to develop concepts from the Ship Conceptual
Design course at a more detailed level. The result should be a feasible design that considers
all major design phases in as holistic an approach as possible, and this report shows success in
that regard.
Throughout its completion, the project highlighted a large learning experience. Though each
task was collaborated on by all, many aspects were worked on simultaneously and major task
allocations were assigned based on experience and strengths. One key lesson in this regard
was that progress on any one area of development might need to be completely re-worked if
another area made a major conflicting decision. Seemingly, this occurred more than once.
However, this provided great insight with regard to the preliminary design stages of a ship
and truly highlighted its iterative nature. Another consequence of this was that each member
needed to be very informed about the progress of others, meaning transparent communication
was a necessity. Additionally, yet another lesson was the fact that help was needed. That is,
the guidance of professors and advice from the assignment graders were invaluable and the
final ship design is much better as a result.
Over the semester, the vessels design was constantly improving. As such, if more time were
available, each area of design could naturally benefit from further development. Design never
truly ends at this stage and there is no perfect solution, so further time would allow for
refinement or the ability to account for additional considerations. Specifically, some design
aspects could use more attention than others.
The most obvious areas of improvement are in relation to the utilized software. Though
effective, for instance, the NAPA and Construct models could certainly be developed further
to reflect a higher level of detail. In the same vain, the basic beam theory tables in the hull
structure calculations could be further improved. Similarly, the stability process, while
appropriate for early stage analysis, is by no means finalized. Additional damage cases and
conditions, for example, could be included. The cost estimate would be greatly improved
1
with the identification of major equipment and component costs. Even though it is difficult to
receive such information from suppliers, this would be a consideration in the next design
phase. The propeller and hull forms might benefit from further optimization. As this was
among the first tasks, however, it is difficult implementing changes without affecting all
downstream-completed work. As such, this is again a task for future design iterations. Some
processes, such as the general arrangement, are never truly complete at this design stage.
Having said that, as much detail as possible was put into each deliverable with regard to time
restraints and skill levels.
With these future considerations taken into account, the result is still a feasible preliminary
design that shows great improvement over that from Ship Conceptual Design. The initial
challenge was to design a vessel without lifeboats and this has been considered throughout all
phases of the project. The general arrangement is atypical in order to allow for three separate
evacuation decks and the structural calculations were completed with this in mind. Though
many alternatives exist, the selected evacuation methods are industry-approved and very
redundant and the evacuation procedure is no less safe than a typical lifeboat system.
This project has helped all involved to grow as problem solvers, communicators, and team
members, and has helped in recognizing the importance of learning before, during, and after
each design process. Though challenging, the design of M/S Arianna was a rewarding
experience that allowed for further development of the knowledge acquired in previous
courses in the completion of the project ship. In this regard, the project and course itself was a
success.

Ship Project - Final PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Ship Project - Final PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AALTO UNIVERSITY

Introduction and Feasibility Studies

PROJECT SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................. 2

VESSEL OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................. 3

FEASIBILITY STUDIES ................................................................................................ 4

The cruise industry........................................................................................................................ 5

The luxury cruise market .............................................................................................................. 5

Cruising in England ...................................................................................................................... 6

1.2 Project schedule

Task 1 resistance, propulsion, and machinery

Task 2 general arrangement

Task 3 hull structure

Task 4 lightweight and intact stability

Task 5 cost and ship price

1.3 Vessel overview

Figure 1-1 - Outboard profile

Max. Length [m]

Figure 2-1 - Cruise route

Figure 2-2 Past cruiser statistics

2.2.3 Cruising in England

Primary Dimensions and Hull Form

PARAMETRIC STUDY .................................................................................................. 2

PRELIMINARY DIMENSIONS ..................................................................................................... 2

HULL FORM DEFINITION .......................................................................................... 5

BOW SHAPE .............................................................................................................................. 5

MIDSHIP SHAPE ........................................................................................................................ 7

STERN SHAPE ........................................................................................................................... 7

PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT ......................................................................................................... 8

LENGTH OF PARALLEL MID-BODY ........................................................................................... 8

LONGITUDINAL CENTRE OF BUOYANCY .................................................................................. 9

LINES DRAWING ......................................................................................................... 10

HYDROSTATIC CURVES ........................................................................................... 11

1.1 Preliminary dimensions

Figure 1-1. Length as a function of number of passengers

Figure 1-2. Breadth as a function of number of passengers

Figure 1-3. Draft as a function of number of passengers

Figure 1-4. Breadth as a function of length

Figure 1-5. Draft as a function of length

2 Hull form definition

2.1 Bow shape

Greater volume of topsides and more space for wider decks

Less curved surface and cheaper outer shell construction

Figure 2-1. Shapes of the bow

Bulbous bows can reduce the powering requirements of the propulsion by 20 %

Course-keeping ability and manoeuvrability are improved

Figure 2-2. Modern bulb form

2.2 Midship shape

Improved flow around the bilge

Figure 2-3. Midship deadrise

2.3 Stern shape

2.4 Prismatic coefficient

Figure 2-4. Prismatic coefficient dependent of Froude number

2.5 Length of parallel mid-body

Figure 2-5. Graph for the parallel mid-body length

which is smaller than 0,65, there is an assumed zero parallel mid-body.

2.6 Location of mid-section

Figure 2-6. Location of mid - section as a function of Froude number.

As Froude number is 0,25, the location

is 0,4 and the mid section location from the

2.7 Longitudinal centre of buoyancy

Figure 2-7. Longitudinal centre of buoyancy as function of prismatic coefficient

LCB is aft of the mid-ship for small values and ahead of