Passing Ship Seelig

A
AL
FAC ILI
I
E
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SERVICE CENTER
EN
TER
E
ENGIN
Port Hueneme, California 93043-4370
E
IN
C
G SERVI
Technical Report
TR-6027-OCN
PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS
by
William N. Seelig, P.E.
NFESC East Coast Detachment

Washington Navy Yard
1435 10TH STREET SE Suite 3000
Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5063
20 November 2001
Prepared for:
Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering Command
Engineering Innovation & Criteria Office
Distribution is unlimited .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
If a moving ship passes a moored ship too close or too fast, then the
moored ship can be subjected to high forces and moments ( Wang, 1975,
Flory, 2001 and many other references). The resulting moored ship
response to the passing ship can cause serious accidents.
Therefore, the Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering Command,
Engineering Innovation & Criteria Office tasked the Naval Facilities
Engineering Command (NFESC) to develop methods for analyzing
passing ship effects on moored ships. These methods can be used to
improve mooring safety and aid in developing rules-of-the-road for U.S.
ports.
The approach taken in this report is to use the deepwater numerical results
of Wang (1975) to evaluate passing ship forces and moments on a moored
ship. Shallow water correction factors are then applied. The shallow water
correction factors are developed by empirically re-analyzing results from a
number of scale physical model studies. The resulting information can be
used in a number of engineering tools including:
PASS-MOOR.xls An engineering spread sheet was developed as part of
this project. This spread sheet uses the mooring efficiency approach
(Seelig, NFESC Report TR-6005-OCN, Rev B May 1998) to statically
estimate the number of mooring lines needed to safely secure a ship in
passing ship events. This spread sheet also estimates peak forces and
moments on a moored ship due to a passing ship that can be used in static
analyses. Finally, this spread sheet produces applied force and moment
time histories that can be used in full dynamic analyses.
STATIC ANALYSES. The peak forces and moments on the moored ship
computed by PASS-MOOR can be input into various static mooring
software packages (FIXMOOR, OPTIMOOR, AQWA LIBRIUM, etc.).
These programs can be used to estimate static tensions in various
mooring lines and static offset of the ship from a given position for passing
ship events.
DYNAMIC ANALYSES. The force and moment time histories on the
moored ship computed by PASS-MOOR can be input into various dynamic
mooring software packages (AQWA DRIFT, etc.) to evaluate moored ship
response to passing ships.
TR-6027-OCN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Pg.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................i

TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................ ii
LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................ ii
1.0
INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE .....................................................................1
1.1 Far-Field Ship-Generated Waves ........................................................1
1.2 Near-Field Effects................................................................................1
1.3 Moored Ship Coordinate System.........................................................4
1.4 Definition of the Problem .....................................................................5
1.5 Typical Channel Water Depths in the U.S. ........................................11
2.0
FORCES AND MOMENTS APPLIED TO THE MOORED SHIP

BY THE PASSING SHIP ........................................................................14
2.1 Forces and Moments in Deepwater...................................................14
2.2 Shallow Water Correction Factors .....................................................24
3.0
COMPUTATIONS ....................................................................................31
3.1 The PASS-MOOR Spread Sheet and an Example ..........................31
3.2 The Influence of Parameters .........................................................35
4.0
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................38
5.0
POINTS OF CONTACT............................................................................40
6.0
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................................41

LIST OF APPENDICES
A.
B.
NOTATION USED
PREVIOUS WORK
TR-6027-OCN
ii

By
William N. Seelig, P.E.
1.0
INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE
As vessels move through the water they generate waves and other
phenomena that may influence moored vessels, contribute to coastal
erosion, etc.. Therefore, Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command (NAVFACENGCOM) Engineering Innovation and Criteria Office
tasked the Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center (NFESC) to
develop criteria for ship-generated waves.
Two key phenomena of practical interest to engineers are investigated in
recent efforts: far-field wave effects and near-field effects.
1.1
FAR-FIELD SHIP-GENERATED WAVES
As a vessel moves through the water it produces water waves. Detailed

information on how to predict characteristics of these water waves at some
distance from the vessel is presented in Seelig, W. and Kriebel, D., Ship
Generated Waves, NFESC TR-6022-OCN, (draft in prep).
1.2
NEAR-FIELD EFFECTS
As a vessel moves through the water there is a pressure field developed in

the vicinity of the moving ship. If the moving ship passes close to a
moored ship, then high temporary forcing on the moored ship may occur.
For example, the moored ship can be violently pulled off the pier or wharf
due to a combination of wave and Bernoulli effects. This problem occurs
even for low passing-ship Froude numbers. In these cases there may be
no obvious surface wave produced by the moving ship. In other cases the
surface wave can be relatively large.
A number of very serious mooring accidents have occurred due to passing
ships. Examples are provided in Table 1. Figure 1 shows the tanker
JUPITER, which was totally destroyed by fire. A passing ship caused the
mooring to fail, fuel hoses broke and unleaded gasoline caught on fire
causing death, injury, total loss of the ship and damage to the pier.
TR-6027-OCN
Table 1. SAMPLE ACCIDENTS/EVENTS CAUSED BY PASSING SHIPS

CASE
NOTES
Two battleships (BB-62

class) moored at the
Philadelphia Naval
Shipyard drydock wharf
1990s
USNS REGULUS and
USNS POLLUS;
13 June 1998
Tanker U.S. JUPITER

10,900 DWT Length 382
feet;
16 Sep 1990
QUEEN ELIZABETH II
Length 963 feet, Width 105
feet and Draft 32.6 feet;
and AFDM-7
7 Jan 1976 at 2 pm
TR-6027-OCN
These battleships were moored side-by-side

with over twenty legs of 2.5-inch chain and
sinkers. The two battleships would surge 12
to 15 feet as larger commercial ships passed
the site causing accelerated wear on
mooring hardware.
Two MSC ships were moored side-by-side at
Berth #5, Violet Dock Port at Violet, LA with
USNS REGULUS the inboard ship next to
the pier. A woman and child visiting this U.S.
Navy ship were both seriously hurt when
they were run over by a rolling 3,000 pound
gangway. The gangways sudden motion
occurred when both of the moored ships
surged as large cargo ships passed nearby
in the Mississippi River.
U.S JUPITER was moored and unloading
unleaded gasoline when BUFFALO (17,500
DWT and 635 feet long) traveling at about
4.2 knots passed with a gap between the
vessels of 60 to 65 feet. JUPITER had
mooring lines break, the discharge hose
broke and the resulting fire caused 1 death,
18 injuries, JUPITER was a total loss and the
pier was damaged.
QUEEN ELIZABETH II passed
approximately 1,600 feet from the Norfolk,
VA waterfront at an estimated speed of 15 to
20 knots. AFDM-7 parted three 3.5-inch
mooring chains; the ship in dock shifted on
its blocks. All up and down the waterfront
numerous Navy ships broke mooring lines,
shore cables broke, utilities failed, brows
failed and pier pilings were broken.
Figure 1. TANKER JUPITER TOTALLY DESTROYED IN A FIRE

CAUSED BY A PASSING SHIP
Near-field effects are highly complex, so the work of several investigators

is compiled and re-analyzed in this report. The methods developed in this
report are then used to systematically show the importance of typical
conditions on moored ships in an easy-to-use form.
Appendix A summarizes notation used in this report. Appendix B
summarizes previous work on this topic and provides laboratory
measurements made by various researchers.
An spreadsheet PASS-MOOR.xls is provided to perform preliminary
analyses. This spread sheet can also be used to develop input for static
analyses (using tools such as FIXMOOR, OPTIMOOR, AQWA LIBRIUM,
etc.). The spread sheet also provides force and moment time histories for
input into full dynamic analyses (AQWA DRIFT, etc.).
TR-6027-OCN
1.3
MOORED SHIP COORDINATE SYSTEM
The moored ship, designated as Ship 1, is the primary ship of interest in

this study. The coordinate system assigned to the initial position of the
moored ship is a local right-handed coordinate system (see Figure 1.3-1)
with:
X = distance forward from midships
Y = distance towards port from ship centerline
Z = distance upwards from the ship baseline (i.e. keel) and
L1 = length of the moored ship
Angles are measured positive in a counter-clockwise direction.
See Appendix A for notation used in this report.
TR-6027-OCN
F X+
Pier or
Wharf
M+
L1
FY+
Ship 1
Moored
Figure 1.3-1. COORDINATE SYSTEM FOR FORCES/MOMENTS ON
THE MOORED SHIP DUE TO THE PASSING SHIP AT
AN INSTANT IN TIME
1.4
DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM
In this report we take for simplicity the case of a ship moored on its
starboard in still water, as shown in Figure 1.4-1 (moored ship is on the
right). This moored ship can be described as moored in the upstream
direction.
A moving ship with a speed, V, relative to the world fixed coordinate
system is traveling upstream. If the moving ship passes too close to the
moored ship or at too high of a speed, then moored ship transient motions
and resulting high dynamic mooring forces may occur.
TR-6027-OCN
At any instant in time the longitudinal distance between ship midships is x,

the lateral distance between ship centerlines is and the lateral gap
between the ships is G. In the case shown in Figure 1.4-1, x is negative
because the passing ship is behind the moored ship. As the midships of
the passing ship moves forward of the moored ship, then x becomes
positive.
The relative speed, VR, between the ship and current speed, VC, (if any)
is:
VR = V VC
Eq (1)
For the case shown in Figure 1.4-2 the ship and current speeds are the
same magnitude and direction (i.e. current is flood and the passing ship is
moving upstream). In this case the relative ship speed is zero, so the
passing ship effects will be minimal. In the case of the passing ship
traveling at the same speed and direction as the current, the passing ship
has little effect on the moored ship because the passing ship effectively
acts like a slug of water moving by the moored ship.
If on the other hand the passing ship is moving upstream and the current is
ebbing down stream in the opposite direction of the ship motion, as shown
in Figure 1.4-3, then the relative ship speed, VR, effects may be very
significant on the moored ship. In this case the relative ship speed through
the water is higher than the world ship speed, V.
The special case of the passing ship moving upstream at a slower speed
than a flooding current (i.e. the ship has reverse thrust, but still moving
upstream) is not covered in this report, since this case is not likely to be a
problem.
For other cases, such as the moored ship with its port side to the pier, the
passing ship moving in the downstream direction, etc., the engineer can
use methods in this report and change signs and coordinate systems to
meet his particular situation.
Note that the ship speed, V, relative to the world fixed coordinate system is
the velocity that determines how quickly the passing ship encounters the
moored ship.
TR-6027-OCN
In this report the surge, sway and yaw degrees-of-freedom are considered.
Heave, roll and pitch are not addressed, because they are believed to be
less important.
In this study it is assumed that a vessel of interest is moving at a constant
velocity in constant water depth. The passing ship is assumed to be
parallel to the moored ship.
TR-6027-OCN
x
G
Ship 2
Moving
Ship 1
Moored
Figure 1.4-1 SAMPLE CONDITION FOR THE CASE OF NO CURRENT

( x is negative at this time because the moving ship is
behind the moored ship)
TR-6027-OCN
VR = V - V c = 0
Vc = current
Ship 2
Moving
Ship 1
Moored
Figure 1.4-2 SAMPLE CONDITION FOR THE CASE OF A SHIP TRAVELING

AT THE SAME VELOCITY AS THE CURRENT
(In this case there is little passing ship effect)
TR-6027-OCN
VR = V - Vc
(Vc is negative in this case)
V
Vc = current
Ship 2
Moving
Ship 1
Moored
Figure 1.4-3 SAMPLE CONDITION FOR THE CASE OF A SHIP TRAVELING

IN AN OPPOSING CURRENT
(In this case there may be significant passing ship effects)
TR-6027-OCN
10
1.5
TYPICAL CHANNEL WATER DEPTHS IN THE U.S.
The ratio of ship draft to water depth is an important parameter in passing

ship processes. A list of typical water depths of U.S. navigation channels
is shown in Table 1.5-1. The median navigation channel depth is 12 m (40
feet) for this list. However, there is considerable variation in depth, as
shown in Table 1.5-1 and Figure 1.5-1.
TR-6027-OCN
11
Table 1.5-1. WATER DEPTHS OF REPRESENTATIVE

MAJOR CHANNELS
Dmin (m) Dmax (m) Dmin (ft) Dmax (ft) DATUM
Port Location
State
Port of Anchorage
Canaveral Port Authority
Port of Coos Bay
Port of Everett
Port Everglades
Port of Galveston
Port Authority of Guam
Port of Gulfport
Port of Houston
Port of Hueneme
Jacksonville Port Authority
Port of Kalama
Port of Long Beach
Port of Los Angeles
Port Manatee/Tampa Bay
Maryland Port Administration
Massachusetts (Boston) Port Authority
Port of Miami
Port of New Orleans
Port Authority of NY and NJ (New York)
North Carolina State Ports Authority (Wilmington)
Port of Oakland
Port of Olympia
Port of Orange
Port of Palm Beach District
Panama City Port Authority
Port of Pascagoula
Port of Pensacola
Port of Philadelphia/Camden
Port of Portland
Port of Richmond
Port of Richmond
Port of Sacramento
San Diego Unified Port District
Port of San Francisco
Port of Seattle
South Carolina State Ports Authority (Charleston)
Port of Stockton
Port of Tacoma
Tampa Port Authority
Port of Vancouver
Virginia Port Authority (Norfolk)
Port of Wilmington
* DATUM NOT GIVEN
AK
FL
OR
WA
FL
TX
MS
TX
CA
FL
WA
CA
CA
FL
MD
MA
FL
LA
NY
NC
CA
WA
TX
FL
FL
MS
FL
PA
OR
CA
VA
CA
CA
CA
WA
SC
CA
WA
FL
WA
VA
DE
9.14
11.89
11.28
12.19
14.33
12.19
10.36
10.97
10.97
10.67
11.58
12.19
23.16
13.72
12.19
15.24
12.19
12.80
10.97
10.67
12.19
12.80
9.14
9.14
10.06
9.75
11.58
10.06
12.19
12.19
11.58
7.62
9.30
12.50
16.76
16.76
12.19
10.67
13.72
13.11
12.19
15.24
11.58
21.34
34.14
13.72
15.24
13.72
13.72
13.72
13.72
16.76
30
39
37
40
47
40
34
36
36
35
38
40
76
45
40
50
40
42
36
35
40
42
30
30
33
32
38
33
40
40
38
25
30.5
41
55
55
40
35
45
43
40
50
38
70
MLLW
MLW
MLLW
*
MLW
112
*
*
*
MLLW
*
*
*
*
MLW
*
MLW
*
*
*
*
*
MLLW
*
*
*
*
MLW
*
*
*
*
*
MLLW
*
*
MLW
MLLW
MLLW
*
MLW
*
MLW
45
50
45
45
45
45
55
Reference: American Association of Port

Authorities, 1999 AAPA Directory, "Seaports of the
Americas", Compass North America, Inc., 1999
TR-6027-OCN
12
25
20
60
55
50
15
45
40
35
10
30
25
DEPTH (ft)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
CUMULATIVE PROBABILITY (%)
Figure 1.5-2. CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF MINIMUM

CHANNEL DEPTHS
(Major Channels in the U.S.)
TR-6027-OCN
13
2.0
FORCES AND MOMENTS APPLIED TO THE MOORED SHIP

BY THE PASSING SHIP
Deepwater: For the deepwater case (i.e. T/d is small for both the passing
and the moored ship) forces and moments applied to the moored ship by
the passing ship are computed using the method of Wang (1975).
Shallow Water: Most cases of interest to designers are for relatively
shallow water (i.e. T/d large). Wang (1975) provides a method for
determining shallow water correction factors. However, the Wang method
does not cover the zone of interest to most design situations. Therefore,
physical scale model laboratory test results from previously conducted
studies are re-analyzed to develop shallow water correction factors. These
correction factors are applied to the predicted deepwater forces and
moments to determine values used for realistic shallow water cases.
2.1
FORCES AND MOMENTS IN DEEPWATER
Wang (1975) develops a numerical method for determining forces and

moments applied to the moored ship by a passing ship in deepwater (i.e.
T/d = 0). Figure 2.1-1 shows the results of Wangs work in dimensionless
form.
Physical model tests show a pattern very similar to that of Figure 2.1-1.
Also, physical model and other numerical model simulation methods give
results similar to Wang (1975) for cases of small T/d, so Wang (1975) is
used for deepwater.
In this report Ship 1 is taken as the moored ship and Ship 2 is taken as the
passing ship (see Appendix A for notation used).
TR-6027-OCN
14
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
DIMENSIONLESS FORCE / MOMENT
X+ = ship forward
Y+ = ship to port
M+ = ship counterclockwise
0.6
Y
M
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
X- = ship backward
Y- = ship to starboard
M- = ship clockwise
after Wang (1975)

Fig. 2
-0.8
-0.9
-1.0
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
x/L
Figure 2.1-1 DIMENSIONLESS PASSING SHIP FORCING

ON MOORED SHIPS FOR DEEP WATER
(after Wang, 1975)
TR-6027-OCN
15
Figure 2.1-2 shows the effect of a passing ship (Ship 2) moving upstream
on a moored ship (Ship 1), where L is the average of the two ship lengths
L1 and L2. The forces and moments on the moored ship at various stages
of ship passage are discussed below.
a) At a distance of 2 ship lengths (i.e. x / L < -2 ) there is little

passing ship effect (Figure 2.1-2).
b) At a distance of approximately negative one-third a ship length
(i.e. x / L = -0.35 ) there is maximum negative longitudinal force
and negative moment on the moored ship (Figure 2.1-3).
c) There is maximum positive Y force on the ship when the ships
are adjacent (i.e. x / L = 0.0 ) (Figure 2.1-4).
d) At a distance of approximately positive one-third a ship length
(i.e. x / L = +0.35 ) there is maximum positive longitudinal force
and positive moment on the moored ship (Figure 2.1-5).
e) The passing ship effect on the moored ship is once again
negligible by the time the moving ship is two ship lengths past the
moored ship (i.e. x / L > 2 ).
Note that distance, x , between the passing and moored ships can also be
expressed in terms of time, t , since the passing ship has a velocity, V,
relative to the world fixed coordinate system.
TR-6027-OCN
16
Pier or
Wharf
L1
Ship 1
Moored
x
L
< - 2.0
L2
Ship 2
Moving
Figure 2.1-2. APPROACHING SHIP

(Little Passing Ship Effect at this Point)
TR-6027-OCN
17
Ship 1
Moored
Pier or
Wharf
Ship 2
Moving
x
L
FY+
M-
F X= -0.35
Figure 2.1-3. APPROACHING SHIP AT x/L = -0.35

(Maximum Negative X Force at this Position)
TR-6027-OCN
18
Ship 1
Moored
Pier or
Wharf
FY+
Ship 2
Moving
x
L
= 0.0
Figure 2.1-4. APPROACHING SHIP AT x/L = 0.0

(Maximum Positive Y Force at this Position)
TR-6027-OCN
19
Ship 1
Moored
Pier or
Wharf
FX+
M+
FYShip 2
Moving
x
L
= 0.35
Figure 2.1-5. APPROACHING SHIP AT x/L = 0.35

(Maximum Positive X Force and Moment at this Point)
TR-6027-OCN
20
Wangs numerical work shows that in deepwater with no current the

magnitudes of the peak forces and moment on the moored ship are
functions of the ship sizes, relative distance between the ship centerlines
and speed of the passing ship.
Figures 2.1-6, -7 and 8 show predicted peak non-dimension forces and
moments in deepwater. Note that these values have been made nondimensional by Wang (1975) using the parameter, Q, where:
Q = V2 (L1)2(S1/L12)(S2/L22)
Eq (2)
Figures 2.1-6, -7, 8 and Eq (2) are used to find peak forces and moments
on moored ships due to passing ships in deepwater for the case of no
current. The computed peak values are then applied to the curves shown
in Figure 2.1-1 to calculate time histories of forces and moments acting on
a moored ship due to a passing ship.
TR-6027-OCN
21
10
2.0
pass-wang.xls
9
8
1.6
After WANG (1975) Fig. 3 Left
Fx/Q
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.8
3
0.7
2
0.6
0.5
1
L2/L1
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
/L1
Figure 2.1-6. NON-DIMENSIONAL PEAK FORCE IN THE SURGE

DIRECTION ON THE MOORED SHIP (after Wang, 1975)
FOR DEEPWATER
TR-6027-OCN
22
35
2.0
1.6
1.2
30
After WANG (1975) Fig. 3 Middle
1.0
25
pass-wang.xls
0.9
Fy/Q
20
15
0.8
10
0.7
0.6
0.5
L2/L1
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
/L1
Figure 2.1-7. NON-DIMENSIONAL PEAK FORCE IN THE SWAY

FOR DEEPWATER
TR-6027-OCN
23
10
9
2.0
1.6
After WANG (1975) Fig. 3 Right
pass-wang.xls
7
1.2
M/(L1*Q)
6
1.0
0.9
0.8
5
4
0.7
0.6
0.5
2
1
L2/L1
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
/L1
Figure 2.1-8. NON-DIMENSIONAL PEAK MOMENT IN THE YAW

FOR DEEPWATER
2.2
SHALLOW WATER CORRECTION FACTORS
A majority of projects involving passing ship effects on moored ships are

for a finite water depth, such as shown in Figure 2.2-1 (i.e. 0 < T/d < 1).
TR-6027-OCN
24
LHA-1
T/B = 0.245
End View
Figure 2.2-1. SAMPLE OF A SHIP IN SHALLOW WATER
The approach taken in this report is:

Use Wangs (1975) method for deepwater. A shallow water correction
factor is then defined as the ratio of a force or moment measured in the
laboratory, (Fx)lab , in finite water depth to the value predicted by Wang
(1975) in deepwater, (Fx)0 . For example the shallow water correction
factor for the peak force in the X-direction is defined as:
CFx = (Fx)lab / (Fx)0
Eq (3)
The shallow water correction factor is defined in a similar manner for the
force in the Y-direction and moment, M, in the yaw direction.
Appendix B, Table B-2, includes the correction factors determined from
each laboratory experiment. Note that some researchers performed a
large number of experiments. However, all efforts to find a complete data
set have failed suggesting that the detailed results are no longer available.
Only those tests with complete information known are used in this report.
TR-6027-OCN
25
Fortunately there are some with numerous parameters fixed. Then a key
parameter was systematically varied. This allows detailed study of the
effects of a single parameter. For example Remery (1974), Muga and
Fang (1975) and Cohen (1983) performed certain tests over a common set
of parameters where (T/d ) was the key parameter varied.
Figure 2.2-2, for example, shows the shallow water correction factor for the
force in the sway direction. Laboratory data is shown as points. A curve
has been fit through the data showing that the ratio of ship draft to water
depth (T/d ) has a strong influence on passing ship peak sway force. Note
that the curve fit to the data was selected to have a value of 1.0 at (T/d ) =
0.0, so the peak sway force approaches the deep water value as (T/d )
becomes small.
35
PASS.XLS
30
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Remery (1974), Muga and Fang (1975) &
Cohen (1983)
with:
G/B = 1.5
T/B = 0.4
25
CFY
20
15
CFY = 1 + 30 * (T/d)4
10
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
T/d
Figure 2.2-2. SAMPLE SHALLOW WATER CORRECTION FACTOR

FOR THE PEAK SWAY FORCE
TR-6027-OCN
26
Unfortunately, several of the researchers did not report the peak force
measured in the surge direction, so the range of conditions tested is not as
wide. Inspection of the data suggests that the finite water depth surge
force correction is not as strongly dependant on the ratio of ship draft to
water depth, (T/d ), as shown in Figure 2.2-3.
20
18
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Remery (1974), Muga and Fang (1975)
16
14
CFX
12
10
REMERY
MUGA
8
6
4
2
PASS.XLS
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
T/d
Figure 2.2-3. SAMPLE SHALLOW WATER CORRECTION FACTOR

FOR THE PEAK SURGE FORCE
TR-6027-OCN
27
Inspection of available data suggests that the correction factor shown in

Figure 2.2-4 is reasonable for the maximum surge force. This figure
shows that as the gap between the passing ship and moored ship
becomes large and as (T/d ) becomes small, the surge force approaches
the value in deepwater.
18
PASS.XLS
CFX=1 + 16 * (T/d) * EXP(-0.08 * ((G/B) - 3.5)2)
16
T/d =
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
14
12
CFX
10
0
0
10
11
12
G/B
Figure 2.2-4. SHALLOW WATER CORRECTION FACTOR

FOR THE PEAK SURGE FORCE
TR-6027-OCN
28
The shallow water correction factors found for peak sway force and
moment are similar, so the recommended values are shown in Figure 2.25. This figure illustrates the case for T/B = 0.4. The sway and moment
corrections are very sensitive in shallow water, as was shown in Figure
2.2-2, so two versions of Figure 2.2-5 are provided to cover the range of
interest.
45
CFY= CFM = 1 + 25 * (T/B)
-0.35
* (T/d) * EXP(-0.08 * ((G/B) - 3.3)2)
40
T/B = 0.4
35
T/d =
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.0
CFY and CFM
30
25
20
15
10
0
0
10
11
12
G/B
Figure 2.2-5. SHALLOW WATER CORRECTION FACTOR

FOR THE MAXIMUM SWAY FORCE AND MAXIMUM YAW MOMENT
FOR T/B = 0.4
TR-6027-OCN
29
8.0
7.5
-0.35
CFY= CFM = 1 + 25 * (T/B)
7.0
* (T/d) * EXP(-0.08 * ((G/B) - 3.3)2)
T/B = 0.4
6.5
6.0
T/d =
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.0
5.5
CFY and CFM
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0
10
11
12
G/B
Figure 2.2-5. cont. SHALLOW WATER CORRECTION FACTOR

FOR THE MAXIMUM SWAY FORCE AND MAXIMUM YAW MOMENT
FOR T/B = 0.4
TR-6027-OCN
30
3.0
COMPUTATIONS
3.1
THE PASS-MOOR SPREADSHEET AND AN EXAMPLE
A spread sheet is provided that performs the computations described in

this report. The spread sheet:
(1) Has an input section.
(2) Calculates peak forces and moments for deepwater using Wang
(1975).
(3) Determines shallow water correction factors using methods
presented in this report.
(4) Calculates peak forces and moments for finite water depth.
(5) Uses the mooring efficiency approach (Seelig, 1998) to estimate
the number of mooring lines required.
(6) Outputs time histories of applied forces and moments on the
moored ship.
The peak forces and moments in Item (4) can be used with various
software packages (FIXMOOR, OPTIMOOR, AQWA LIBRIUM, etc.) to
perform static mooring analyses. These static programs can be used to
estimate line tensions and moored ship offsets from initial position.
The force and moment time histories applied to the moored ship, Item (6),
can be used as input to dynamic simulation software packages (AQWA
DRIFT, etc.) to calculate dynamic response of a moored ship to a passing
ship.
EXAMPLE
The use of this spread sheet is illustrated with the example shown in
Figure 3.1-1.
INPUT
Figure 3.1-2 shows the input screen. Cells in yellow are for input. Cells in
green are output. Totally black cells are blank.
Note that the methods described in this report were developed for a
specific range of conditions. If a user inputs a value that results in a case
outside the valid range, then the message Error !!! is displayed in the
Error Flag column E. For example, if the length of Ship 1 is input as a
TR-6027-OCN
31
Pier or
Wharf
NO CURRENT
Ship 1
Moored
V = 7 knots
L=843'
B=121'
T=52'
d=59'
Ship 2
Passing
L=991'
B=153'
T=52'.5
d=59'
223'
Figure 3.1-1. EXAMPLE
negative number then the message Error !!! is displayed, as shown in

Figure 3.1-3.
The user should not proceed if any of the Error !!! flags are turned on,
because output results will be incorrect.
TR-6027-OCN
32
Figure 3.1-2. PASS-MOOR INPUT FOR THE EXAMPLE OF A MOORED

TANKER AND PASS TANKER MOVING AT 7 KNOTS
(Note that Input Cells are Yellow)
Figure 3.1-3. ILLUSTRATION OF AN INPUT ERROR,

A SHIP LENGTH OF NEGATIVE 100 FEET IS INPUT FOR SHIP 1
TR-6027-OCN
33
OUTPUT
Figure 3.1-4 shows a sample output screen. Output is shown in green.
For the sample problem the predicted peak loads are:
Longitudinal Peak Force =

Lateral Peak Force =
Peak Yaw Moment =
232,800 pounds force

1,295,700 pounds force
200,731,000 foot*pounds
Figure 3.1-4. OUTPUT FOR THE EXAMPLE
The quick mooring efficiency analysis for this example, Figure 3.1-5,
suggests that on the order of 16 parts of breasting line and 6 parts of
spring line would be required for this case to maintain a factor of safety of
2 on mooring lines.
TR-6027-OCN
34
Figure 3.1-5. MOORING EFFICIENCY OUTPUT
The PASS-MOOR spread sheet also provides plots of force and moment
time histories, as illustrated in Figure 3.1-6. In this spread sheet time 0 is
the point where the passing ship just starts to have an influence on the
moored ship (i.e. at x/L = -2).
For this example the moored ship is pushed onto the pier with maximum
forces (negative) at times of 100 and 210 seconds. The highest force
pulling the ship off the pier occurs at 155 seconds. The maximum force
pulling the moored ship in the aft direction occurs at 130 seconds and the
maximum force pushing the moored ship in the forward direction occurs at
180 seconds. The highest moments also occur at times of 130 and 180
seconds.
3.2
THE INFLUENCE OF PARAMETERS
Parameters can by systematically varied in PASS-MOOR to show their

various effects.
SHIP VELOCITY
Figure 3.2-1 shows that as the passing ship velocity increases, the peak
sway force dramatically increases for the example.
WATER DEPTH
Figure 3.2-2 shows that a small decrease in the water depth causes a
large increase in peak sway force for the example.
TR-6027-OCN
35
APPLIED FORCES TO THE MOORED SHIP (kips)
1500
1000
Fx (kips)
Fy (kips)
500
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
TIME (sec)
-500
-1000
APPLIED MOMENT TO THE MOORED SHIP (foot * kips)
250000
200000
150000
100000
M (ft*kips)
50000
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
-50000
TIME (sec)
-100000
-150000
-200000
-250000
Figure 3.1-6. APPLIED FORCES/MOMENTS ON THE MOORED SHIP FOR

THE EXAMPLE
TR-6027-OCN
36
1400
PASS.XLS
PEAK SWAY FORCE (thousands pounds)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
PASSING SHIP VELOCITY (knots)
Figure 3.2-1. INFLUENCE OF PASSING SHIP VELOCITY

ON PEAK SWAY FORCE FOR THE EXAMPLE
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
PASS.XLS
0
50
55
60
65
70
75
WATER DEPTH (ft)
Figure 3.2-2. INFLUENCE OF WATER DEPTH ON

PEAK SWAY FORCE FOR THE EXAMPLE
TR-6027-OCN
37
CURRENT SPEED
Figure 3.2-3 shows that an ebb current opposing a passing ship causes a
dramatic increase in peak sway force on the moored ship. A flood current,
on the other hand, causes the peak sway force on the moored ship to
decrease.
DISTANCE BETWEEN SHIPS
Figure 3.2-4 shows that the peak sway force increases as the passing ship
gets closer to the moored ship.
4.0
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A passing ship may have a major influence on a nearby moored ship due
to a combination of wave, pressure, Bernoulli and other effects. The
moored ship may be pushed in the fore and aft directions, pushed into the
pier, pulled off the pier and forced to yaw in response to the passing ship.
In this report forces and moments on the moored ship due to the passing
ship are estimated by:
(a) Using the method of Wang (1975) to estimate values for the deepwater
case.
(b) Correcting for realistic finite depth effects using correction factors
developed from re-analyses of scale model laboratory data.
(c) Using the spreadsheet PASS-MOOR.xls to estimate the peak forces
and moments. These forces vary as a function of time, so the spread
sheet outputs time series.
The mooring efficiency approach (Seelig, 1998) is incorporated into the
spread sheet to give a preliminary estimate of the number of mooring lines
that would be required to secure the moored ship in a passing ship event.
TR-6027-OCN
38
3000
PASS.XLS
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
EBB FLOW
FLOOD FLOW
0
-4
-3
-2
-1
CURRENT VELOCITY (knots)
Figure 3.2-3. INFLUENCE OF CURRENT VELOCITY ON

2500
PASS.XLS
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
DISTANCE BETWEEN SHIP CENTERLINES (ft)
Figure 3.2-4. INFLUENCE OF SHIP SPACING ON

TR-6027-OCN
39
Some of the methods that can be used to estimate passing ship forces and
moments on moored ships are:
The PASS-MOOR spread sheet discussed in this report.
The reader can perform his own inspection of previous model test
results summarized in Appendix B, Figures 2.2-2 and -3, etc.
Flory (2001) provides an empirical method.
Wang (1975) provides a method based on computations.
Pinkster (2000) provides a computational numerical model.
Specific laboratory scale models can be conducted.
Full-scale tests can be conducted.
Forces and moments on moored ships can then be used as input to
various mooring software packages, such as FIXMOOR, OPTIMOOR,
AQWA LIBRIUM, AQWA DRIFT, etc., to determine ship offsets from its
initial position, mooring line tensions, moored ship motions, velocities,
accelerations, etc.
5.0
POINTS OF CONTACT
Points of contact are provided in Table 5.

TABLE 5. POINTS OF CONTACT
NAME
PHONE
EMAIL
Frank Cole (NAVFAC)
757-322-4203
ColeFB@efdlant.navfac.navy.mil
Bill Seelig (NFESC)
202-433-2396
fax -5089
SeeligWN@nfesc.navy.mil
TR-6027-OCN
40
6.0
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cohen, S. and Beck, R., "Experimental and Theoretical Hydrodynamic Forces on

a Mathematical Model in Confined Waters", Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 27,
No. 2, June 1983.
De-bo, Huang and Yunbo, Li, Ship Wave Resistance Based on Noblesses
Slender Ship Theory and Wave-Steepness Restriction, Ship Technology
Research, Vol. 44, pp. 198-202, 1977.
Flory, J., A Method for Estimating Passing Ship Forces, ASCE, Proceedings
Ports 2001, 2001.
Grollius, W., Muller, E., Lochte-Holtgreven, H., and Guesnet, Th., Results of
Model Tests with Fast Unconventional Ships in Shallow Water, Proceedings, 3rd
Int. Conf. On Fast Sea Transport, FAST 95, Vol. 2, Schiffbautechnische
Gesellschaft (STG), Berlin, 1995.
Husig, A., Linke, T. and Zimmermann, C., Effects from Supercritical Ship
Operation on Inland Canals, ASCE, Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and
Ocean Engineering, Vol. 126, No. 3, May/June 2000, pp. 130-135.
King, G.W., "Unsteady Hydrodynamic Interactions Between Ships", Journal of
Ship Research, Vol. 21, No. 3, Sep 1977.
Kizakkevariath, S., Hydrodynamic Analysis and Computer Simulation Applied to
Ship Interaction During Maneuvering in Shallow Water, Ph.D. Dissertation,
VPISU, May, 1989.
Kurata, K. and Oda, K., Ship Waves in Shallow Water and Their Effects on
Moored Small Vessel, Proceedings Coastal Engineering Conference, pp. 32583273, 1984.
Lean, G.H., and Price, W.A., "The Effect of Passing Vessels on a Moored Ship",
The Dock and Harbour Authority, Nov. 1977.
Muga, B. and Fang S.,Passing Ship Effects from Theory and Experiment,
Proceedings Offshore Technology Conference, Paper No. 2368, 1975.
Muga, B., Overton, M. and Sidiropoulos, Effects Induced by Passing Ships on
Waterfront Facilities, Dept. of CE, Duke University, Report for NAVFAC,
Contract No. N00025-76-C-0026, March, 1978.
TR-6027-OCN
41
National Transportation Safety Board, Explosion and Fire Aboard the U.S.
Tankship Jupiter, Bay City, Michigan, September 16, 1990, Marine Accident
Report, PB91-916404, NSTB/MAR-91/04, Adopted Oct. 29, 1991.
Occasion, L. K., The Analysis of Passing Vessel Effects on Moored Tankers,
Directed Research PTE-490x, 616-03-8123, Dec. 10, 1996.
Pinkster, J. (description of the program DELPASS provided by email), MARIN,
2000.
Remery, G.F.M., Mooring Forces Induced by Passing Ships, OTC 2066, 1974.
Seelig, W., EMOOR - A Quick and Easy Method of Evaluating Ship Mooring at
Piers and Wharves, NFESC Report TR-6005-OCN, Rev B May 1998.
Seelig, W. (ed.), Mooring Design, MIL-HDBK-1026/4, 1999.
Spencer, J., McBride, M., Beresford, P. and Goldberg, D., Modeling the Effects
of Passing Ships, Proceedings, International Colloquium on Computer
Applications in Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Kuala Lumpa, June 1993.
Wang, Shen, Dynamic Effects of Ship Passage on Moored Vessels, ASCE,
Journal of the Waterways, Harbors and Coastal Engineering Division, WW3, pp.
247-258, Aug. 1975.
TR-6027-OCN
42
APPENDIX A - NOTATION USED

The following notation is used in this report:
Variable
Description
Units
Ship width
Cb
Ship block coefficient
Cm
Mid-ships coefficient, Cm = maximum ship end-on

submerged cross-sectional area divided by ship
width times draft
Finite depth correction factors for peak forces in

the X direction, Y direction and yawing moment.
Water depth
fx, fy, m
Dimensionless forces and moments on the

moored ship
Fx, Fy, M
Forces and moments on the moored ship
CFX, CFY, CFM

d
F, F*L
Gap distance between ships
Acceleration due to gravity
Mean ship length = 0.5 *(L1 + L2)
Lengths of ships 1 and 2 at waterline
Demonimator Q = V2 (L1)2(S1/L12)(S2/L22)
S1, S2
Cross-sectional midship submerged areas of

Ships 1 and 2
L2
Ship draft of moored Ship 1
Time
L1, L2
L
L/T2
VR
Passing ship velocity relative to the water
L/T
Passing ship velocity relative to the world
L/T
VC
Current velocity
L/T
X-coordinate
Y-coordinate
Lateral distance between ship centerlines
Subscripts
0
TR-6027-OCN
Deepwater (i.e. T/d = 0)
43
Moored ship (the subscript may be omitted)
Moving ship
Lab
Experimental measurement in the laboratory
Peak force in the x-direction
Peak force in the y-direction
Peak moment in the yaw direction
UNITS:
= dimensionless
L
= length
T
= time
ANG = ang
F
= force
TR-6027-OCN
44
APPENDIX B - PREVIOUS WORK

The interactions between a moored and a moving ship nearby can be
highly complex. Therefore, several investigators have used scale model
studies and/or theoretical calculations to examine these phenomena. The
various studies are discussed below.
REMERY (1974)
Remery (1974) performed a systematic set of laboratory studies. He fixed
the ship draft to water depth ratio at T / d = 0.87 for the moored ship.
Moving ships were tests at three speeds. Three different moving ships
were tested, which had masses 30%, 110% and 160% of the mass of the
moored ship.
The moored ship was initially held rigidly and forces/moments on the
moored ship were measured. Then linear mooring systems with various
amounts of stiffness were installed on the moored ship and experiments
re-run.
Remery (1974) concluded:
The loads induced by a passing ship on a moored vessel are proportional
to the square of the speed of the passing vessel for no current and are
related to the relative position between both vessels.
The stiffness of the mooring system has a considerable effect on the
mooring forces. When only small excursions are allowable, a stiff system
tends to result in the smallest mooring forces.
Muga and Fang (1975)
Muga and Fang (1975) performed 47 laboratory tests with identical moored
and passing ships (250 000 DWT tankers). Tests were conducted over a
range of conditions with and without a current. Most of the data from this
research appear to be lost. Some data can be taken from figures in this
paper. However, it appears the data was plotted with an error of 2 or the
y-axes of the figures were mis-labeled. Corrected data is used in this
report.
Lean and Price (1977)

Lean and Price (1977) performed 135 laboratory tests. Only a fraction of
the data are reported. These authors concluded that pressure gradients
associated with the passing ship are important because the observed
waves had small height at low ship speed and the length of the observed
surface waves were short in comparison with the size of the moored ship.
The authors conclude that slack lines are to be avoided and that some
relief in maximum line loads can be achieved by increasing the line
pretension.
King (1977)
King developed a numerical model and performed selected model tests.
Only sway force and yaw moment were measured. The surge force was
not reported.
Cohen and Beck (1983)

These authors developed a numerical model and performed selected
model tests. Only sway force and yaw moment were measured. The
surge force was not reported.
Kizakkevariath, S. (1989)
Kizakkevariath, S. (1989) performed various numerical simulations of
passing ship and other effects.
Flory, J. (2001)
Flory developed an empirical method for estimating passing ship forces
and moments on a moored ship based on a re-analysis of existing
information.
Table B-1 summarizes the previous model tests reanalyzed in this report.
Table B-1. SHALLOW WATER CORRECTION FACTORS DETERMINED

FROM LABORATORY SCALE MODEL STUDIES OF PASSING SHIP
EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS
Data Pt #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
d/L
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.068
0.068
0.068
0.08
0.068
0.066
0.066
0.062
0.075
0.075
0.075
0.075
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.094
0.094
0.094
0.094
0.063
0.063
0.063
0.063
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
L2/L1
0.712
0.712
0.712
0.973
0.973
0.973
0.973
1.175
1.175
1.175
1.175
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
2.000
1.333
1.000
0.667
0.500
eta/L1
0.239
0.356
0.589
0.267
0.384
0.617
0.928
0.279
0.396
0.629
0.94
0.292
0.385
0.477
0.385
0.385
0.385
0.292
0.292
0.167
0.229
0.292
0.354
0.167
0.229
0.292
0.354
0.167
0.229
0.292
0.354
0.167
0.229
0.292
0.354
0.625
0.417
0.313
0.208
0.156
T/d
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.870
0.909
0.909
0.909
0.769
0.909
0.943
0.943
1.000
0.833
0.833
0.833
0.833
0.833
0.833
0.833
0.833
0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667
0.667
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
CFX
8.027
10.274
12.75
8.871
11.348
CFY
CFM
GAP/B1
T/B
Source
10.675
9.308
0.815
0.402
REMERY (1974)
14.694
14.762
1.630
0.402
REMERY (1974)
20.345
23.220
3.261
0.402
REMERY (1974)
12.075
10.261
0.815
0.374
REMERY (1974)
15.469
10.787
1.630
0.374
REMERY (1974)
13.190
9.584
3.261
0.374
REMERY (1974)
9.699
10.355
7.604
5.435
0.374
REMERY (1974)
9.636
11.910
11.899
0.815
0.344
REMERY (1974)
15.530
15.386
1.630
0.344
REMERY (1974)
11.146
16.306
14.550
3.261
0.344
REMERY (1974)
9.308
10.908
9.592
5.435
0.344
REMERY (1974)
10.9245
18.865
11.580
0.900
0.402
MUGA (1975)*
13.623
24.364
15.248
1.500
0.402
MUGA (1975)*
17.4565
24.737
18.278
2.100
0.402
MUGA (1975)*
9.9455
11.666
21.046
1.500
0.402
MUGA (1975)*
13.623
24.364
15.248
1.500
0.402
MUGA (1975)*
15.009
27.707
33.184
1.500
0.402
MUGA (1975)*
11.831
20.608
25.158
0.900
0.402
MUGA (1975)*
10.179
29.903
32.067
0.900
0.402
MUGA (1975)*
6.736
6.415
0.336
0.500
COHEN (1983)
8.157
8.879
0.832
0.500
COHEN (1983)
10.595
8.618
1.336
0.500
COHEN (1983)
12.450
10.114
1.832
0.500
COHEN (1983)
8.412
9.661
0.336
0.333
COHEN (1983)
11.057
11.303
0.832
0.333
COHEN (1983)
15.666
11.350
1.336
0.333
COHEN (1983)
16.357
13.663
1.832
0.333
COHEN (1983)
4.272
4.311
0.336
0.500
COHEN (1983)
5.220
5.223
0.832
0.500
COHEN (1983)
6.248
6.601
1.336
0.500
COHEN (1983)
6.874
6.616
1.832
0.500
COHEN (1983)
4.663
4.402
0.336
0.333
COHEN (1983)
5.928
5.911
0.832
0.333
COHEN (1983)
7.478
6.674
1.336
0.333
COHEN (1983)
8.950
8.831
1.832
0.333
COHEN (1983)
10.246
1.500
0.400
KING (1977)
14.408
1.500
0.600
KING (1977)
16.176
7.687
1.500
0.800
KING (1977)
18.038
1.500
1.200
KING (1977)
25.098
1.500
1.600
KING (1977)
* AUTHOR MADE AN ERROR OF 2.0 WHEN PLOTTING
18
16
14
PREDICTED CFX
12
10
6
CFX=1 + 16 * (T/d) * EXP(-0.08 * ((G/B) - 3.5)2)
2
PASS.XLS
0
0
10
12
14
16
18
MEASURED CFX
Figure B-1. MEASURED VS. PREDICTED CFX
35
30
-0.35
CFY= 1 + 25 * (T/B)
* (T/d) * EXP(-0.08 * ((G/B) - 3.3)2)
PREDICTED CFY
25
20
15
10
5
PASS.XLS
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
MEASURED CFY
Figure B-2. MEASURED VS. PREDICTED CFY
35
35
CFM= 1 + 25 * (T/B)
-0.35
* (T/d) * EXP(-0.08 * ((G/B) - 3.3)2)
PREDICTED CFM
30
25
20
15
10
5
PASS.XLS
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
MEASURED CFM
Figure B-3. MEASURED VS. PREDICTED CFM
35

Passing Ship Seelig

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Passing Ship Seelig

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SERVICE CENTER

Port Hueneme, California 93043-4370

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

NFESC East Coast Detachment

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................i

FORCES AND MOMENTS APPLIED TO THE MOORED SHIP

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................38

REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................................41

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

FAR-FIELD SHIP-GENERATED WAVES

As a vessel moves through the water it produces water waves. Detailed

As a vessel moves through the water there is a pressure field developed in

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Table 1. SAMPLE ACCIDENTS/EVENTS CAUSED BY PASSING SHIPS

Two battleships (BB-62

Tanker U.S. JUPITER

These battleships were moored side-by-side

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Figure 1. TANKER JUPITER TOTALLY DESTROYED IN A FIRE

Near-field effects are highly complex, so the work of several investigators

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

MOORED SHIP COORDINATE SYSTEM

The moored ship, designated as Ship 1, is the primary ship of interest in

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

At any instant in time the longitudinal distance between ship midships is x,

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Figure 1.4-1 SAMPLE CONDITION FOR THE CASE OF NO CURRENT

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Figure 1.4-2 SAMPLE CONDITION FOR THE CASE OF A SHIP TRAVELING

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Figure 1.4-3 SAMPLE CONDITION FOR THE CASE OF A SHIP TRAVELING

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

TYPICAL CHANNEL WATER DEPTHS IN THE U.S.

The ratio of ship draft to water depth is an important parameter in passing

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Table 1.5-1. WATER DEPTHS OF REPRESENTATIVE

Reference: American Association of Port

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

CUMULATIVE PROBABILITY (%)

Figure 1.5-2. CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF MINIMUM

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

FORCES AND MOMENTS APPLIED TO THE MOORED SHIP

FORCES AND MOMENTS IN DEEPWATER

Wang (1975) develops a numerical method for determining forces and

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

DIMENSIONLESS FORCE / MOMENT

after Wang (1975)

Figure 2.1-1 DIMENSIONLESS PASSING SHIP FORCING

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

a) At a distance of 2 ship lengths (i.e. x / L < -2 ) there is little

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Figure 2.1-2. APPROACHING SHIP

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Figure 2.1-3. APPROACHING SHIP AT x/L = -0.35

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Figure 2.1-4. APPROACHING SHIP AT x/L = 0.0

PASSING SHIP EFFECTS ON MOORED SHIPS

Figure 2.1-5. APPROACHING SHIP AT x/L = 0.35