Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
October 2010
Guidance Note
NI 558 DT R00 E
Marine Division
92571 Neuilly sur Seine Cedex France
Tel: + 33 (0)1 55 24 70 00 Fax: + 33 (0)1 55 24 70 25
Marine website: http://www.veristar.com
Email: veristarinfo@bureauveritas.com
2010 Bureau Veritas - All rights reserved
MARINE DIVISION
GENERAL CONDITIONS
ARTICLE 1 5.4. - The Services of the Society cannot create any obligation bearing on the Society or constitute any
1.1. - BUREAU VERITAS is a Society the purpose of whose Marine Division (the "Society") is the classi- warranty of proper operation, beyond any representation set forth in the Rules, of any Unit, equipment or
fication (" Classification ") of any ship or vessel or structure of any type or part of it or system therein col- machinery, computer software of any sort or other comparable concepts that has been subject to any sur-
lectively hereinafter referred to as a "Unit" whether linked to shore, river bed or sea bed or not, whether vey by the Society.
operated or located at sea or in inland waters or partly on land, including submarines, hovercrafts, drilling ARTICLE 6
rigs, offshore installations of any type and of any purpose, their related and ancillary equipment, subsea 6.1. - The Society accepts no responsibility for the use of information related to its Services which was not
or not, such as well head and pipelines, mooring legs and mooring points or otherwise as decided by the provided for the purpose by the Society or with its assistance.
Society.
6.2. - If the Services of the Society cause to the Client a damage which is proved to be the direct
The Society: and reasonably foreseeable consequence of an error or omission of the Society, its liability to-
prepares and publishes Rules for classification, Guidance Notes and other documents (Rules); wards the Client is limited to ten times the amount of fee paid for the Service having caused the
issues Certificates, Attestations and Reports following its interventions (Certificates); damage, provided however that this limit shall be subject to a minimum of eight thousand (8,000)
publishes Registers. Euro, and to a maximum which is the greater of eight hundred thousand (800,000) Euro and one
1.2. - The Society also participates in the application of National and International Regulations or Stand- and a half times the above mentioned fee.
ards, in particular by delegation from different Governments. Those activities are hereafter collectively re- The Society bears no liability for indirect or consequential loss such as e.g. loss of revenue, loss
ferred to as " Certification ". of profit, loss of production, loss relative to other contracts and indemnities for termination of oth-
1.3. - The Society can also provide services related to Classification and Certification such as ship and er agreements.
company safety management certification; ship and port security certification, training activities; all activi- 6.3. - All claims are to be presented to the Society in writing within three months of the date when the Serv-
ties and duties incidental thereto such as documentation on any supporting means, software, instrumen- ices were supplied or (if later) the date when the events which are relied on of were first known to the Client,
tation, measurements, tests and trials on board. and any claim which is not so presented shall be deemed waived and absolutely barred. Time is to be in-
1.4. - The interventions mentioned in 1.1., 1.2. and 1.3. are referred to as " Services ". The party and/or its terrupted thereafter with the same periodicity.
representative requesting the services is hereinafter referred to as the " Client ". The Services are pre- ARTICLE 7
pared and carried out on the assumption that the Clients are aware of the International Maritime 7.1. - Requests for Services are to be in writing.
and/or Offshore Industry (the "Industry") practices.
7.2. - Either the Client or the Society can terminate as of right the requested Services after giving
1.5. - The Society is neither and may not be considered as an Underwriter, Broker in ship's sale or char- the other party thirty days' written notice, for convenience, and without prejudice to the provisions
tering, Expert in Unit's valuation, Consulting Engineer, Controller, Naval Architect, Manufacturer, Ship- in Article 8 hereunder.
builder, Repair yard, Charterer or Shipowner who are not relieved of any of their expressed or implied
obligations by the interventions of the Society. 7.3. - The class granted to the concerned Units and the previously issued certificates remain valid until the
date of effect of the notice issued according to 7.2. here above subject to compliance with 2.3. here above
ARTICLE 2 and Article 8 hereunder.
2.1. - Classification is the appraisement given by the Society for its Client, at a certain date, following sur- 7.4. - The contract for classification and/or certification of a Unit cannot be transferred neither assigned.
veys by its Surveyors along the lines specified in Articles 3 and 4 hereafter on the level of compliance of
a Unit to its Rules or part of them. This appraisement is represented by a class entered on the Certificates ARTICLE 8
and periodically transcribed in the Society's Register. 8.1. - The Services of the Society, whether completed or not, involve, for the part carried out, the payment
2.2. - Certification is carried out by the Society along the same lines as set out in Articles 3 and 4 hereafter of fee upon receipt of the invoice and the reimbursement of the expenses incurred.
and with reference to the applicable National and International Regulations or Standards. 8.2. Overdue amounts are increased as of right by interest in accordance with the applicable leg-
2.3. - It is incumbent upon the Client to maintain the condition of the Unit after surveys, to present islation.
the Unit for surveys and to inform the Society without delay of circumstances which may affect the 8.3. - The class of a Unit may be suspended in the event of non-payment of fee after a first unfruitful
given appraisement or cause to modify its scope. notification to pay.
2.4. - The Client is to give to the Society all access and information necessary for the safe and efficient ARTICLE 9
performance of the requested Services. The Client is the sole responsible for the conditions of presenta- 9.1. - The documents and data provided to or prepared by the Society for its Services, and the information
tion of the Unit for tests, trials and surveys and the conditions under which tests and trials are carried out. available to the Society, are treated as confidential. However:
ARTICLE 3 clients have access to the data they have provided to the Society and, during the period of classifica-
3.1. - The Rules, procedures and instructions of the Society take into account at the date of their tion of the Unit for them, to the classification file consisting of survey reports and certificates which
preparation the state of currently available and proven technical knowledge of the Industry. They have been prepared at any time by the Society for the classification of the Unit;
are not a standard or a code of construction neither a guide for maintenance, a safety handbook copy of the documents made available for the classification of the Unit and of available survey reports
or a guide of professional practices, all of which are assumed to be known in detail and carefully can be handed over to another Classification Society, where appropriate, in case of the Unit's transfer
followed at all times by the Client. of class;
Committees consisting of personalities from the Industry contribute to the development of those docu- the data relative to the evolution of the Register, to the class suspension and to the survey status of the
ments. Units, as well as general technical information related to hull and equipment damages, are passed on
3.2. - The Society only is qualified to apply its Rules and to interpret them. Any reference to them to IACS (International Association of Classification Societies) according to the association working
has no effect unless it involves the Society's intervention. rules;
the certificates, documents and information relative to the Units classed with the Society may be
3.3. - The Services of the Society are carried out by professional Surveyors according to the applicable
reviewed during certificating bodies audits and are disclosed upon order of the concerned governmen-
Rules and to the Code of Ethics of the Society. Surveyors have authority to decide locally on matters re-
tal or inter-governmental authorities or of a Court having jurisdiction.
lated to classification and certification of the Units, unless the Rules provide otherwise.
3.4. - The operations of the Society in providing its Services are exclusively conducted by way of The documents and data are subject to a file management plan.
random inspections and do not in any circumstances involve monitoring or exhaustive verifica- ARTICLE 10
tion. 10.1. - Any delay or shortcoming in the performance of its Services by the Society arising from an event
ARTICLE 4 not reasonably foreseeable by or beyond the control of the Society shall be deemed not to be a breach of
contract.
4.1. - The Society, acting by reference to its Rules:
reviews the construction arrangements of the Units as shown on the documents presented by the Cli- ARTICLE 11
ent; 11.1. - In case of diverging opinions during surveys between the Client and the Society's surveyor, the So-
conducts surveys at the place of their construction; ciety may designate another of its surveyors at the request of the Client.
classes Units and enters their class in its Register; 11.2. - Disagreements of a technical nature between the Client and the Society can be submitted by the
surveys periodically the Units in service to note that the requirements for the maintenance of class are Society to the advice of its Marine Advisory Committee.
met. ARTICLE 12
The Client is to inform the Society without delay of circumstances which may cause the date or the 12.1. - Disputes over the Services carried out by delegation of Governments are assessed within the
extent of the surveys to be changed. framework of the applicable agreements with the States, international Conventions and national rules.
ARTICLE 5 12.2. - Disputes arising out of the payment of the Society's invoices by the Client are submitted to the Court
5.1. - The Society acts as a provider of services. This cannot be construed as an obligation bearing of Nanterre, France.
on the Society to obtain a result or as a warranty. 12.3. - Other disputes over the present General Conditions or over the Services of the Society are
5.2. - The certificates issued by the Society pursuant to 5.1. here above are a statement on the level exclusively submitted to arbitration, by three arbitrators, in London according to the Arbitration
of compliance of the Unit to its Rules or to the documents of reference for the Services provided Act 1996 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof. The contract between the Society
for. and the Client shall be governed by English law.
In particular, the Society does not engage in any work relating to the design, building, production ARTICLE 13
or repair checks, neither in the operation of the Units or in their trade, neither in any advisory serv- 13.1. - These General Conditions constitute the sole contractual obligations binding together the
ices, and cannot be held liable on those accounts. Its certificates cannot be construed as an im- Society and the Client, to the exclusion of all other representation, statements, terms, conditions
plied or express warranty of safety, fitness for the purpose, seaworthiness of the Unit or of its value whether express or implied. They may be varied in writing by mutual agreement.
for sale, insurance or chartering. 13.2. - The invalidity of one or more stipulations of the present General Conditions does not affect the va-
5.3. - The Society does not declare the acceptance or commissioning of a Unit, nor of its construc- lidity of the remaining provisions.
tion in conformity with its design, that being the exclusive responsibility of its owner or builder, 13.3. - The definitions herein take precedence over any definitions serving the same purpose which may
respectively. appear in other documents issued by the Society.
BV Mod. Ad. ME 545 k - 17 December 2008
GUIDANCE NOTE NI 558
NI 558
Guidelines for Ultra Large Container Ships
SECTION 1 GENERAL
SECTION 2 MATERIALS
SECTION 6 VIBRATION
October 2010
Section 1 General
1 General 5
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Scope of application
1.3 Definitions
Section 2 Materials
1 General 7
1.1
Section 6 Vibration
1 General 25
1.1 Specificities of Ultra Large Container Ships
1.2 Interaction between machinery and hull
1.3 Static and dynamic interactions
1.4 Importance of an integrated treatment of static and vibration phenomena
2 Vibrations analysis 26
2.1 Analysis procedure
2.2 Finite element model
2.3 Natural frequencies and vibration mode shapes
2.4 Response in forced vibrations
3 Comfort 27
3.1 General
SECTION 1 GENERAL
1 General
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 In the past few years, there has been a dramatic increase in the size of container ships. Today, it is not unusual to
come across designs with a capacity of 10,000 TEUs and above.
1.1.2 Due to the hull girder increases in size, it is no longer the case of simply applying NR467 Rules for the Classifica-
tion of Steel Ships. New engineering challenges apply to such large structures which must be addressed through direct
calculations of hydrodynamic loads and dynamic structural behaviour.
1.1.3 In particular, two dynamic phenomena, effects of whipping and springing, need to be taken into consideration for
increase in the total vertical bending moments as well as possible decreases in fatigue life of certain structural details.
Shaft alignment and vibration needs special consideration due to increase in propulsion power, size of propeller, propel-
ler shaft and engine, and inevitable increased flexing of a large structure.
1.1.4 The purpose of this Guidance Note is to bring to the attention of the designer, the particular structural, shaft align-
ment and vibration studies that needs to be carried out for Ultra Large Container Ships, respecting at the same time,
applicable NR467 Rules for the Classification of Steel Ships.
1.2.2 Unless otherwise specified, this Guidance Note is to be read and applied as additional to Guidance Note NI 532
Guidelines for Structural Analysis of Container Ships for ship structures.
1.2.3 There is no strict threshold for determining when a container ship is large enough to justify additional studies.
However, due to large deck openings and speed characteristics of container ships with classical general arrangement, it is
recommended to carry out additional studies for ships of more than 300 m length between perpendiculars.
1.2.4 For ships exceeding a length between perpendiculars of 350 m, the ship is considered as an ULCS and the Society
would require additional studies, as recommended in this Guidance Note or as deemed equivalent.
1.2.5 Between 300 m and 350 m length between perpendiculars, the analysis of the risk of springing, strong whipping
and the characteristics of the propulsion installation may allow to consider that the ship does not need to be considered
as an ULCS.
1.2.6 This Guidance Note applies to container ships with a classical general arrangement, i.e. large deck openings and
engine in the after part of accommodation in the mid-ship area. For other general arrangements, the analysis defined in
[1.2.5] will allow to determined if the ship has to be considered as an ULCS or not.
1.3 Definitions
1.3.1 NR467 Rules for the Classification of Steel Ships is referred to as Rules for Steel Ships in this Guidance Note.
1.3.2 The Ultra Large Container Ship is abbreviated as ULCS in this Guidance Note.
1.3.3 Slamming is the hydrodynamic impact caused by sudden contact of the bottom structure with the sea surface at
the fore and aft ends.
1.3.4 Slapping is the hydrodynamic impact caused by violent contact of the bow with waves, e.g. when there is a large
bow flare.
1.3.6 Whipping is the transitory vibration response of the hull girder in the first natural mode, due to impulsive loading
such as slamming.
1.3.7 "CFD", means Computational Fluid Dynamics, method for hydrodynamic calculation of the ship behaviour on
waves.
1.3.8 "BEM" means Boundary Element Model for hydrodynamic loads calculation on waves.
SECTION 2 MATERIALS
1 General
1.1
1.1.1 Materials used are to comply with Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 1. The manufacturing processes and testing
are to comply with the applicable requirements of NR216 Materials and Welding.
1.1.2 Certain structural members may need material thicknesses exceeding the limits shown in the Rules for Steel Ships
Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 1. Such materials and their characteristics are to be considered on a case by case basis, the designer pro-
viding the information required by the Society.
1.1 General
1.1.1 Navigation conditions assumptions
The fatigue and extreme analysis must take into account ship speed reduction in high sea states and route changes. The
return of experience for ship in operation shows that when the wave height increases, the ships speed decreases due to
either increase in wave resistance or when the ships route is altered by the decision of the Master. Ships motions directly
influence the decision of the Master, for example accelerations on bridge, roll and pitch angles, presence of green water
and/or slamming.
1.1.3 In quasi-static type of loading, the evaluation of the longitudinal distribution of the internal loads (bending
moment, shear forces ) are not required. The internal loads are calculated as a difference between the inertial and pres-
sure loads at each section.
1.1.4 Both linear and non-linear quasi-static calculations need to be performed. The minimum non-linearities that are to
be included are based on the Froude Krylov approximation. Linear results are used directly for spectral fatigue analysis
and for determination of the design values of different loading parameters. This is done by performing the long term prob-
ability calculations.
The non-linear quasi-static structural analysis is performed for extreme loads analysis.
Both linear and non-linear models are to be properly balanced, in particular regarding the roll damping contribution for
the internal loads and for the final loading of the FE model.
1.1.5 The oblique wave conditions for torsional loads may be critical for ULCS.
1.2 Assumptions
1.2.1 Fatigue, extreme responses
Both fatigue analysis and extreme response analysis require the description of all the navigational parameters:
scatter diagram
speed and route profile
criteria for speed reduction and route change.
Figure 1 : Operable conditions for one sea period Tp and one heading
Hs
Wave
route
leading
change
Hsmax
7 knots
Hs3
0,6 Vn
Hs2
Vn
Hs1
Ship route
Figure 2 : Operable conditions for one sea state Tp and four headings
Hsmax 1
route change
route change
7 knots
0,6Vn
Vn
Vn
route
change
2
Vn
Vn
1.3 Models
Alternatively, the special treatment of the high frequency calculations can be used in order to avoid the numerical inac-
curacies inherent to the BEM method.
Figure 6 : Typical coarse mesh model showing fine meshing of certain structural details
2.1 Assumptions
2.1.1 The appraisal in extreme conditions, according to the checking criteria in [2.4], is to be performed using the struc-
tural loads determined by the application of the present Guidance Note, but for a probability level of 10-5.
2.3 Loads
2.3.1 General
Internal loads are to be properly distributed over the model length, to obtain the actual longitudinal distribution of the
still water bending moment.
2.3.2 Lightweight
The lightweight of the ship is to be distributed over the model length, longitudinally and vertically, to obtain the actual
LCG, VCG and still water bending moment.
where:
Ry : Minimum yield stress, in N/mm2, of the material, defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7
R, m : Partial safety factors, defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 3.
Allowable stresses for coarse mesh and fine mesh, depending on steel grade and partial safety factors, are shown in Tab 1.
Ry
- 12
0 ,5 ---------
R m
Table 1 : Allowable stresses depending on material factor and partial safety factors
Von Mises equivalent stress Shear stress Material factor Partial safety factors
Steel
VM,All All k R m
192,0 96,0 Mild 1 1,2 1,02
246,1 123,1 AH32 0,78 1,2 1,02
Coarse mesh
266,6 133,3 AH36 0,72 1,2 1,02
282,3 141,2 AH40 0,68 1,2 1,02
219,4 109,7 Mild 1 1,05 1,02
281,3 140,6 AH32 0,78 1,05 1,02
Fine mesh
304,7 152,4 AH36 0,72 1,05 1,02
322,7 161,3 AH40 0,68 1,05 1,02
2.4.3 Buckling
Buckling of plate elements, which are considered as part of primary supporting members, must be carried out according
to Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 3.
The following buckling modes are to be considered:
compression and bending with or without shear
shear
bi-axial compression and shear.
3 Fatigue appraisal
3.1 Assumptions
3.1.1 Fatigue check
Fatigue verification is to be performed at hot spot cyclic stress locations defined in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 12,
App 2 (Area 9, Area 10) and at other high stressed areas resulting from the global hull response on wave as defined in this
Section.
The fatigue check is to be performed following the procedure given in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4, for
welded joints, with the use of notch stress range histograms (see [3.1.3]) and S-N curves.
Use of hot spot stress or nominal stress may be acceptable if duly documented and submitted to the Society for approval
For non-welded locations without notches, the use of local hot spot stress is to be considered.
3.1.2 Corrosion
The verified structure is assumed to be sufficiently protected against corrosion during the ships life.
In case of no corrosion protection, the S-N curve constant is considered to be reduced by a factor of 2 and the slope
parameter is constant for all stress ranges (there is no change of slope).
3.2 Models
3.2.1 General
The ship hull structure modelling has to allow for the identification of the hot spot points where fatigue verification is per-
formed.
3.3 Loads
Each ( , V , Hs/Tp) is associated with a probability of occurrence prob( , V , Hs/Tp) to be combined with the probabil-
ities of occurrence of Hs/Tp given by the wave scatter diagram as defined in [1.2.2].
For each sea direction i, from the operability analysis as defined in [1.2.4], a maximum wave significant height HSM is to
be determined above which route change is considered as necessary to respect the criteria.
when route change is not necessary and i is not the closest of the with necessary route change:
when route change is not necessary and i is the closest of the with necessary route change: prob(i , V , Hs/Tp) is
calculated so that the sum on all i of all probabilities equal 1.
Route change is to be considered for the following conditions of acceptable ship speed Vmax:
127.5 < < 232.5 and Vmax < 0.6 Vn
67.5 < < 127.5 or 232.5 < < 292.5
22.5 < < 67.5 or 292.5 < < 337.5 and Vmax < Vn.
For a given stress range histogram, the corresponding Miner sum can be calculated either by:
a direct Miner sum from the long term distribution, or
a closed form equation as defined in App 1 when the histogram is represented by a Weibull or Rayleigh distribution.
In case of no corrosion protection (see [3.1.2]):
the S-N curve constant Kp is to be divided by 2
the S-N curve is taken without change of slope.
1.1 General
1.1.1 In the case of ULCS, the first structural natural frequencies are much lower than for conventional ships, and
hydroelastic structural responses need to be considered. These hydroelastic responses are classified in two different parts,
springing and whipping:
usually springing appears in the moderate sea states which contain important energy at high frequencies. Ship speed
being important in these moderate sea states, the encounter frequency are significantly increased, consequently the
linear springing can become important both for torsion and vertical bending
the whipping response does not depend on the structural natural frequencies only, but mainly on the severity of the
impulsive loading.
1.1.2 The ULCS may have high speeds, a large bow flare and a rather flat stern area, therefore slamming and slapping
loads on the ULCS may become very important.
1.1.3 Due to their particular nature, springing is mainly important for fatigue issues while the whipping is relevant both
for fatigue and extreme structural responses.
1.1.4 Springing can be treated in frequency domain while the whipping is to be treated in time domain with proper
modelling of slamming and slapping loads.
1.1.5 Special care is to be taken when separating the quasi-static and hydroelastic parts of the responses especially for
structural details. The top down analysis for the structural details is recommended.
1.1.6 The hydroelastic modelling is to be made using the fully coupled approach. The modal superposition method is
recommended.
1.2 Models
The mass of the liquids (ballast, bunker, etc.) can be modelled using nodal masses, either spread on the tank boundary or
preferably concentrated at the liquids centre of mass.
The FE model is to be built in such a way that as few artificial natural modes are obtained as possible during the FE modal
analysis. The first natural modes of the hull girder vibration must be free of artificial Eigen modes. To this purpose:
most of the finite element nodes are to lie at the intersection of primary supporting members (coarse mesh model)
particular attention is to be given to a correct modelling of the out of plane bending stiffness of primary supporting
members.
When the response in a structural detail is required, a fine mesh or a very fine mesh model of the considered area has to
be used. This local model can be calculated separately from the global whole ship model in a static linear way, using pre-
scribed displacements obtained from the global whole ship model.
1.3.5 Fatigue
Both springing and whipping are relevant for fatigue calculations.
Springing contribution may be calculated in frequency domain within the classical spectral fatigue analysis approach
applied on the total Response Amplitude Operator (RAO) of the stress responses.
2.1 General
2.1.1 Only whipping is to be considered in addition to quasi static wave and still water loads for extreme calculations.
Allowable stresses for coarse mesh and fine mesh, depending on steel grade and partial safety factors, are shown in Tab 1.
2.2.2 Buckling
Buckling of plate elements, which are part of primary supporting members, must be carried out according to Rules for
Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 3.
The following buckling modes are to be considered:
compression and bending with or without shear
shear
bi-axial compression and shear.
Table 1 : Allowable stresses depending on material factor and partial safety factors
Von Mises equivalent stress Shear stress Material factor Partial safety factors
Steel
VM,All All k R m
225,9 96,0 Mild 1 1,02 1,02
289,6 123,1 AH32 0,78 1,02 1,02
Coarse mesh
309,7 133,3 AH36 0,72 1,02 1,02
332,2 141,2 AH40 0,68 1,02 1,02
3 Fatigue appraisal
3.1 General
3.1.1 Fatigue check
Fatigue verification is to be performed at the hot spot cyclic stress location as defined in Sec 3, [3.1.1].
Additional hot spot cyclic stress locations may be added taking into account the dynamic stress response calculations as
defined in [1.3].
The fatigue check is to be performed following the procedure given in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4 for
welded joints, with the use of notch stress range histograms (see [3.3]) and S-N curves.
3.1.4 Springing
Springing effect on fatigue damage is to be considered for navigational conditions where the first hull girder mode fre-
quency lies within the encountering wave spectrum frequency bandwith (see [1.3]).
3.1.5 Whipping
When the ship hull shape at bow and stern may give rise to possible larger slamming and slapping forces than for con-
ventional ships, a whipping analysis may be required. The analysis is to be performed according to [1.3.3] with the
objective of determining the sea states and navigational conditions where whipping response may be expected.
Whipping effects can be maintained to normal level by adapting the operational conditions, maximum ship speed versus
sea state/heading (see Sec 3, [1.2.3]).
If whipping effects cannot be limited to normal level, the impact on fatigue damage is to be considered for the naviga-
tional conditions where slamming/slapping may occur. Whipping loads and responses are to be determined as defined in
[1.4].
3.2 Loads
1 General
1.1.1 Containers on deck may be secured by means of lashing bridges permanently connected by welding to the ships
structure. Lashing bridges allow a higher level of lashing.
1.2 Materials
1.2.1 Materials used are to comply with Rules for Steel Ships Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 1. The manufacturing processes and testing
are to comply with the applicable requirements of NR216 Materials and Welding.
1.3.1 Plans of the lashing bridge structure are to be submitted to the Society together with details of the supporting struc-
ture for approval together with details of calculations performed with justifications.
1.3.2 The Society would expect calculations to be made using at least a three-dimensional beam analysis or finite ele-
ment analysis.
The calculations are to be performed for net scantlings in accordance with Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 2.
1.4.1 Continuity of structure is to be assured at the connections of the vertical supports between the lashing bridge and
the ships structure.
The Society would consider each structural detail on a case by case basis.
2 Forces to be applied
2.1 General
2.1.1 The forces applied to a lashing bridge structure are to consider the loads transferred by containers. Force intensity
is considered by the Society on a case by case basis, depending on the lashing arrangement and the proportion of the
load that is considered as transferred to the lashing bridge structure.
2.2 Calculations
2.2.1 In performing load calculations from container lashings, applicable loads for container stacks can be determined
in accordance with Rules for Steel Ships, Pt D, Ch 2, Sec 2. The accelerations are to be considered at the containers cen-
tre of gravity, as defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 5 Sec 3, [3.4].
2.2.2 Forces applied on each fixed cargo securing device on the lashing bridge, should consider forces in tension
(depending on the rolling side) and forces in the horizontal direction (i.e. Y direction as defined in Rules for Steel Ships,
Pt B, Ch 1, Sec 2). In general, the SWL (Safe Working Load) for fixed cargo securing device may be taken as 250 kN and
the applied force as 70 % of this SWL value.
2.2.3 Transverse racking forces on the lashing bridge structure (due to hull deflection and horizontal container forces)
and their effects on the hull connections and at corners of vertical and transverse members of the structure, are to be
taken into consideration. This may be achieved by means of three-dimensional or finite element analysis.
3 Strength criteria
SECTION 6 VIBRATION
1 General
1.1.2 Potential for resonant response of hull girder flexural and torsion vibration modes with main engine excitations are
higher on ULCSs than on smaller container ships.
1.4.2 Oil film stiffness in running conditions must be accurately calculated taking into account structural flexibility and
used as input data in vibration calculations.
1.4.3 Finite element model of an ULCS for calculating vibration response is sensitive to the presence of a large number
of rigid elements for connecting masses representing containers to the ship structure.
1.4.4 The big size of rudder blade of ULCS could significantly influence values of hydrodynamic excitations generated
by the propeller and consequently values of vibration response.
2 Vibrations analysis
Figure 1 : Finite element model of a ULCS having a superstructure located in the middle part of the ship
Invariably, the modelling of containers is to be done in such a way as not to induce overestimation of hull girder stiffness,
especially the torsional stiffness.
Modelling of the main engine is to be performed with care. The main consequence of having a slow speed diesel main
engine with large cylinders is that flexibility cannot be ignored. This flexibility is to be represented accurately in the finite
element model.
2.4.2 Attention has to be given to the propeller blade vibration risk, pipings which are excellent passive resonators and
so have to be detuned by acting on the position and the stiffness of their supports.
3 Comfort
3.1 General
3.1.1 Vibrations may impact the comfort and generate noise which may have to be assessed with respect to applicable
standards or owner specification requirements.
3.1.2 The assessment of the risk of non acceptable annoyance levels is covered by the additional class notation COMF
VIB as defined in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt A, Ch 1, [6.7.3].
1 Overall methodology
1.2 Models
The finite element model of aft hull structure extends from aft end up to the forward watertight bulkhead of engine room.
Nodes are restrained in displacements and rotations in way of forward transverse section of the model.
The ship's structure may be considered as finely meshed when each longitudinal secondary stiffener is modeled. As a
consequence, the standard size of finite elements used is based on the spacing of ordinary stiffeners.
The longitudinal position of equivalent supporting points is to be exactly the same on the line shafting and on the struc-
ture. The displacements in way of all supporting points in transverse and vertical directions induced by a transverse or
vertical unit force applied on a supporting points constitute a line of the flexibility matrix.
Calculations are performed using the finite element model of the whole ship (see Fig 2).
As practical alignment operations is generally performed in light conditions, relative deformations between light and any
operating condition (full load and ballast) have to be calculated in order to include corresponding relative vertical dis-
placements of bearings to the offsets.
The deformation of hull structure under waves is to be performed with hogging and sagging deformations as shown on
Fig 3. Usually the common values to be used for the calculation are:
a) 6 H s 12
L pp
b) ------
-
3
where:
Hs : Significative height of waves, in m
: Wave length, in m
The value of is to be adapted in order to take into account the maximum relative deformation of structure for
a given Hs
Lpp : Length between perpendiculars, in m.
2 Static calculation
The calculation of pressure distribution in aft stern tube bearing leads also to choose the optimum slope. Sometimes a
partial slope in aft part is necessary to keep the maximum contact pressure below the recommended limit. Usually, the
optimum load distribution in aft stern tube bearing is 2/3 of the total reaction located in aft part and 1/3 of the total reac-
tion located in forward part.
Moreover, it is recommended to check that reactions are well distributed between all bearings.
3 Running calculation
3.1.1 General
The aim of the running calculation is to check that all parameters are acceptable in order to prevent any oil film break-up or
excessive pressure on the antifriction material. The ship will be mostly operating in running conditons at maximum speed.
The optimisation at design stage of bearings offsets, stern tube bearing slope and oil groove location is then essential.
The calculations are to be performed as defined in [3.2] for all relevant operating conditions and mainly for the maxi-
mum speed and the low speed conditions. The low speed condition has to be very carefully chosen as the oil film theory
is not applicable for very small rpm.
Additionaly, when propeller diameter is very high or when wake field is strongly non homogeneous, some high hydrody-
namics forces could be foreseen during turning conditions at maximum speed. These conditions are generally critical for
the oil film and bearings behaviour. It is then important to verify also this condition when turning propeller forces are
available.
1 General
1.1 Application
1.1.1 The formula of this appendix allows the calculation of the fatigue damage ratio by means of the Miner sum as
required in Sec 3, [3.4] when the stress range histogram and the given S-N curve are defined by equations in [1.2].
m N = K p for N 107
Kp being calculated from Kp so that there is no discontinuity between the two parts of the S-N curve.
m N = K p for all N
N 1
N i = N t exp ------- or i = w ln -----i
w N t
where:
Nt : Total number of cycles during the ship life.
For short term condition, one sea state, one ship heading, one ship speed, the stress range histogram can be represented by
a Rayleigh distribution, which corresponds to the following parameters:
=2
w = 2 2m 0
where:
For long term conditions, the Weibull distribution parameters on the total ship life span, are determined from the calculated
points (see Sec 3, [3.1.3]):
R
w = -----------------------------
1
-
( ln ( p R ) )
2 Damage ratio
2.1 Formula
2.1.1 Two slopes S-N curve
When the S-N curve and the stress range histogram are given as defined in [1.2.1] and [1.2.3], the corresponding fatigue
damage ratio is to be obtained from the following formula:
N ( R )
m
m
D = -----t -------------------------- c ----- + 1
K p ( ln p R ) m
where:
m 2m 1 (1 m)
N ----- + 1, N ------------------ + 1,
= 1.0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
m
C ----- + 1
S
= ---------q ln p R
S R
N ( R )
m
m
D = -----t -------------------------- ----- + 1
K p ( ln p R ) m c
where:
C [x+1]: Complete Gamma function, as defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4.
1 General
1.1 Application
1.1.1 This appendix provides a simplified approach to evaluate the possible increase in fatigue accumulation due to whipping
as required in Sec 4, [3.1.5] and Sec 4, [3.3.3].
The approach is based on a stress range histogram represented by a stair curve (see Fig 1) and a fatigue damage calcu-
lated by the Miner sum.
The proposed approach provides an order of magnitude of the fatigue damage increase due to whipping to decide of the
necessity or not of a more detailed analysis, which method is to be submitted to the Society for approval.
1.2 Principles
1.2.1 Whipping effects
Whipping occurs after slamming or slapping. The effects on the hull girder stresses are illustrated in Fig 2:
increase of the maximum quasi-static wave stress range,
generation of decreasing high frequency (hull girder first mode) stress cycles.
log(N)
1.3 Methodology
1.3.1 General
The proposed method is based on the summation of the long term Miner sums of each selected headings where slam-
ming is expected to occur.
2 Fatigue appraisal
V CR = 0.093 9.81L bp
where:
Lbp : Length between perpendiculars, in m.
MT
MWa
MWh
n i
i closest to nwh
where:
nwh : Number of whipping on the short term state:
nwh = 0.045 nT
nT : Total number of short term cycles:
nT = n i
all
For each distribution step (i , ni) where a whipping correction is applied the stress range has to be increased to icor calcu-
lated as follows:
icor = Cwa (i Wth) + Wth for i > Wth
The whipping correction provides a new stress range distribution:
a corrected by whipping stress range steps:
icor, ni for i = 1 to k
a non modified wave stress range distribution:
i, ni for i > k+1
if j > K :
Wpij = 0
where:
C W h ( i Wth )
A i = -------------------------------------------
- if i > Wth
exp ------------------ ---
2
1 2
Ai = 0 if i W th
K so that the value of wpij for j = K becomes lower than 1/10 of the value for j = 1.
The number of pure whipping stress range cycles wpij at level i is:
nwhj = ni
D Wh ( ) = D Whi ()
i
= 240
D Tcor = D W + ( W h ( ) 1 )D Wa ( )
= 120
where:
Dw : Total wave Miner sum as calculated from Sec 3, [3.4.5]
DWa : Wave Miner sum as calculated in [2.4.1]
Wh : Whipping correction factor as calculated in [2.4.4].
1.1.2 The Hertz contact theory is considering a cylinder in a finite length cylindrical socket with a load applying on the cylin-
der. The Hertz law leads to the maximum static pressure and reaction in the contact according to the mechanical properties and
the geometry of the cylinder and the socket.
1.1.3 For the application of the Hertz theory on the shaft alignment calculations, the cylinder is the shaft and the socket is the
bearing at the supporting point. The displacement of the shaft inside the bearing is known (see Fig 1) and the contact pressure
and then the load has to be calculated considering that it has the same direction than the displacement Usb.
1.2.2 For the application of the oil film theory on the shaft alignment calculation, the displacement of the shaft inside the bear-
ing is known (see Fig 2) and the load has to be calculated by integration of pressure along the bearing circumference.
1.3.2 The equations are to take into account the mechanical parameters of all bearings. The problem is then reduced in way of
supporting points, in two dimensions (transversal and vertical)
1.3.4 The resolution of these equations are based on an iterative process using an initial displacement Usb0 close to the equilib-
rium solution. This initial displacement is used to calculate the main caracteristics of the contact, Ksb0, Fsb0 and Bsb0. Usb1 is then
found with a calculation of the global equation, see Fig 3.
1.3.5 The convergence criteria for this iterative process is calculated by maximum absolute difference of terms between Usbn
and Usbn+1. This value is to be less than 0.001mm.
Usbl = Usbo
Usbl = Usbl+1
Usbl+1
Yes
Usbn = Usbl+1