Professional Documents
Culture Documents
').
,/*<e t/
*{}f l
B. Sc .
* ( FelI ow)
and
A . W. G i l f i l l a n ,
M.Sc.
(Member)
Read at a Joint Meeting of the RINA with the Instihttion oJ Engineers and Shipbuitdei:rsin Scotland in Ranhine House,I83 Bath
Street, Glasgow on Nouentber 9, 1976, Mr lV. G. N- Geddes (Vice-President, IESS)in the Chair and in London at a meeting of the
Royal Institution of Naual Architects on Nouember 21, 1976, IrIr J. F. Leathard, B.Sc., Ph.D. (Member of Council, RINA) in the
Chair.
SIIMMARY: Fourteen years have elapsed since the publication of an eariier paper(1) by one of the authors on'Estimating
Preliminary Dimensions in Ship Design', During this period there have been, almost certainly, greater changes in ships than
in aly previous period of the same duration.
There have aiso been substantial changes in ship design methods with the deveiopment of computer technology. The present
paper reviews the design methods presented in 1962,considers to what extent these have stood the test of time and suggests
some further developmenis in them. It considers how the relationships between dimensions, the coefficients and approximate
formulae quoted have changed and why,
Fina-lly,the scope of lhe paper is extended to consider some other aspects of design.
I.
INTRODUCTION
279
Class
No of
Ships
^5
Ship
Mid 19?5
4, 984
Tankers
200
(approx)
Container Ships
A lew
conversions
Dwt
Ton
Less than
0' 1
'I
24,608
(METHANE
PIONEER)
75,000
Less than
0'1
7,46L
3 4 ,5 65
ol
Largest
Ship
Dwt
Ton
151
483,664
(GLOBTIKTOKYO)
3,711
85
419
d1
II
2,710
18,490
Others
Aggregate
Gross
Tonnage
Millions
421
21,560
Fishing Vesseis
World Tota]s
No of
Ships
137,000
'I
LNG Carrier
Largest
Qh i n
'I
1l
8,952
ao 7(1
145
63,724
64,749
(EL PASO
PAUL KAYSER)
278,000
(ZVEALAND)
48,542
(LIVERPOOLBAY)
342
n oa nin
increase in oil prices which followed the Arab/Israeli conflict of 19?3,reinforced the value of the fuel economv of the
diesel engi-ne.
New contenders to the propulsion machinerv scene appeared
in 1962 with the nuclear ship SAVANAH and in 196? with the
gas turbine ship ADMIRAL CALLAGHAN.
Nuclear power has only been fitted to three merchant ships
so far,without apparent success,but recent developmenis
suggest that an economic case might be made for its application for high powered vessels if political objections,environmental worries and energy priorities can be resolved,
Gas turbines have moved very rapidly to a dominant position
il warship machinery but so far only a comparatively small
number of merchant ships have this type of machinery. The
gas generator part of marine gas furbine installations have
been developed from both aircraft engines and from industrial
machines. Characterisiics of the former are iightness, compactness, limited Iife and repair by replacement. lndustrial
derivatives are heavier arrd more robust for 1onger life and
can run on high viscosity, cheaper fuels.
Power turbines in both cases are specially developed marine
uniis. The large increase in fuel costs of recent years appears likely to delay the use of gas turbine propulsion genelally lor merchant ships.
1.3 Design Starting Point
One of the more fundamental changes which has occurred in
the thinkiag of naval. architects during this period is concerned with the starting point of his work. The 1962 paperrs
opening statement that 'The first problem that a naval architect faces when he starts to design a ship is the selection of
main ciimensions suitable for the development of a design
meeting all the specified requirementsr was true in one
sense but now appears somewhat superficial. The requirements of deadweight or capacity, of speed and range, of cargo
handling facilitieb and of dimensional limitations have to be
stated. From the view point of a shipyard's naval architect
these may come as specilied requirements, but for an
fv- - v,,)
V h =C b o L B D '- - - - : - - - - i +V m
(1-S)
Q)
where
D1 = Capacity Depth in metres
nl
Tr +'- m
^
c-
sm :
+ sm
= c bL BTx1.0 25 (1
L
B
+ s ) = W D+ wL
Length BP in metres
= Breadth mld.in metres
Cb
(1)
281
DIMENSIONS,DSPLACEMENT
3. I
AND FORM
l[.L/
D = f(B)
T = f(D)
D = f(L)
'T
tlr'l
T = f ( B)
i 9 :@t$ 8 1 $
L ESN .
i/e\
gn permit, An approach to a c
|thE-small
ETR s
lUelationship D = I(B)
The first group which consists of vofu4g carplggcomprising fishing vessels and cargo ships whose depth is limited by stability requirements, has a B/D ratio of about 1.6b.
282
T = fD)
r 4rlrts.
vpc
toaao"
{o
50
30
- ,ar*a*
+ Br.u<cAFRrERsl
Fig.2
,
i_
:,
320
o cNERAt CARGO
-]
^.qj
"t,
,9::.,1e:. i
tt-
ot0
0r 0a) 3010
OEPIH MIRES
Fig. 3
D = f(L)
TABLE tr
Requiring an increase in
the ratio B/D
Permitting a reduction in
the ratio B,/D
:.
\L-,,1
5r n
=
Hrs
Fig.4
283
The Draught,/Lengtl
relationship
T = l(L)
T = f(D)l
a n d D= f ( L) J
or
T = f(D))
P= t(B )l
a n d B -f(L ).r
3. ? fiie Draugtt,/Beam
relationship T = f(B)
Again a secondary relationship, resulting in this case from
either of the following combinations of reiationships:
T= f ( D) l
andD=f(B)J
o"
T = f(D ))
e = i (L ) |
a n d D = f(L ),
r:?RrEs
ob
+
?rl
cl
5
o.p
q?5
r&
Fig. 5(a)
We
c u- K- o.sv/.8
with Kvarying from 1.12 to 1.08 dependingonV/.14.
In the discussion oi that paper, Conn suggested a number of
al.ternative formulae which appeared to have meri.i _notably
Telfer's proposal which broughi in L,/B as a variable and
Troost's which made a useful distinction between single and
twin screw ships.
Tlhe receni significant reduction in L/B ratio together with
the increase in the average size of ships seems, however, to
make a new approach to the block coefiicient relaiionshio
dersirabie. it was therefore with great interest that we
studied the ideas presented by Katsoulis(2).
F" eF
lnlqslUg
noted
.
appi ie s t o bwin s cTew pr-ripulsiornvE ich-G gGierally c onfired to high speed cargo liners, passenger ships and ferries.
The types of ships used in the plots are indicated showing
the areas in which they predominate. We believe ship iype
has some significance in relation to selection of C6 tiecause
of the variation in practice relating to service spe6d, margins
and engine derating adopted in different classes of ships. For bulk carriers for example it is usual to quote a service
speed based on the maximum continuous power which the
machinery develops with only a small margin for weather
and iouling. Cargo liner owners, however, take a much more
conservative view and quote speeds .ffhich can be obtained
with a quite large margin for weather and fouling and with
the power limited to a service rating which may be only
85% or 90% MCR.
where
K = constant
3.9 Displacement
f =
1- 6- . l- p' l- -.
-----.-'--"
cu = t r (v/lL)d, |[-r
aa+b+c+dt2
+[-"-" l+l
L IJJ
L I'J
(6)
RELATIONSHIPEETVEEN SLOCKCOEFRCIENT
ANO LOM! CENTREOF BUOYANCY
OF V8
EFFECT
For a single screw ship with an all welded sheil, the simplest
approximation is )2'L of the moulded displacement.
RATIO;
3wrM
o:eo
FO&
Afl
/ar,
o -65
fl i l
@
a d r cm
Allaw
EsA&r3HEo
Dlv
to uxES nrco
e3ftME
lEqs
L C .8 .
cornusarEu(r6
l.=
::'>
Em
-rl
-' i A
| 1000
Fq flE
3^aE v(t
a
sHrP WdH A U6E
!/l
MNO CA UVE
A ruLLE'
tu!
&ocK coFfftENl
lxrt YriH A 3SALL L,/c
^
1'1 0d 3
<.:=1---
-Y
FFEC T
L /E
u Tro
------)
<---]----.i
vt
(B)
toR
ffa
seq
V.E
*rt
wfH
a suaLL ^fft
HAv a tEuTrvLY
wsr
Flrg
c!.
oN! wrTx a
oEEF OUff
CAr r^VE
a etullvElY
F*L
cb
(9)
y/"(
Fd tu
sM6
a il'd
gNre oN u
sw
a
ruuEa
cb a|o n(
Lc!
FU'THER A'I
il^I
A
l r r cl E
sh r p
sR a w
'61
t^d5
o ffi
EFFECI
ff
rie. 5(b)
(10)
4.
(11)
Other items which may affect the displacement are bow ald
stern thrust tunnels, the iost buoyancy in stabiliser iin stowage recesses and in the recesses for dredge pipe trunnion
slides. All of these are, however, in the authori' opinion,
better considered as added weights in the design stage, a-l_
though for 'as fitted' documentation a rlost buoyancv' treat_
ment is usually advisable,
3.11
o.55
= 0.0 1d 3
6m
f /T\ x
ll-l
t \ H/
qTO
D
&OO
^d LINE!
FORW^RO
ro JU
o ,55
(7)
SERI
LINES
EsrA*rS
o. 75
n
[l
_f
.J
o.90
a t t -' @
FP
tl
t.oI
rcPLLE
TWIN scREwS
fr
Shell dispiacement
1'T
oF
0.95
If a more exact estimate of appendagedisplacement is required, the various appendages should be considered
individua.lly.
EFFecT
fr
t.o
3.10 Appendages
.tou
OF oR^FT;
R EM AT( S
c@ar
(i)
EFFECT
SLGK
POWERING
p"
285
/A\
(9l^
= q ( Lz - Lt ) 10- a
(12)
Notation
Appendage Resistance
K _N fi
10, 000
(13)
4. 6 Transmission
Rfficiency
Q P C =4o =
5.
LIGSTSEF
II'EIGHT
( 16)
: 0.?0 aI 0.8 O
SIANoARo BLOCKCoFFICIENT
. IAIKERS
E:
+ BLf,X CARRiERS
+ 0. 85 r t 1h1 +
o PASS|]C,R
SHIPS
o oENERALCARC'o
. CON'AINR
0. 75z , t 2h2
where I, and h, - length and heightof full width
O OPEil TYP
erections
r0000
[f + O.S( Ct 1 _ 0. ?0) ]
where
Ws = steelweight for actual C61 ai 0.8D.
Wsz= steelweight at C51 of 0{ as lifted from graph.
(rSy
O RESEARCH
} REFRIc
. TRAWIER
5 suPPtY
I IIJ6
NEl
TTONNS}
r 000
, ir ,
t'f
il
/I
r00
1000
E - uL
0m
NUMERaL
92
Fig.6
( 1?)
287
ns
T''
t_I
[-
-I
Fig.7
(1e)
,^o
l e t h d : k 6 D ; h 6 =l $ D
Then
TABLE Itr
No. of
ships in
sample
Type
Value of K
for
Tankers
0 .029-0.035
1500<E<40000
Chemical tanker
0. 0 3 6 -0 .0 3 ? 1 9 0 0 < E < 2 5 0 0
Bulk carrier
0. 0 2 9 -0 .0 3 2 3 0 0 0 < E< 1 5 0 0 0
13
I
!
0 .033-0.040
Refrig.
0. 03 2 -0 .0 3 5 E + 5000
0. 02 7 -0 .0 3 2 1 0 0 0 < E < 2 0 0 0
Offshore supply
Trawler
0. 0 4 1 -0 .0 5 1 8 0 0 < E< 1 3 0 0
0'044
350<E<450
0 .041-0 .042 2 5 0 < E < 1 3 0 0
Passenger
0. 02 4 -0 .0 3 7 2 0 0 0 < E< 5 0 0 0
0 03 ? -0 .0 3 8 5 0 0 0 < E< 1 5 0 0 0
6
2
2
,|
/
= kd = 0'50
then:
AD+AB.*=*[3]
(21)
=,("(3)
*f o.+ A.\
,.,.ln
lz\ * n
+ A-l
'r - L"\D/
5 A"
" 'l
(20)
I3
6000<E<13000
0. 0 2 9 -0 .0 3 7 2 0 0 0 < E< 7 0 0 0
Tugs
/ Iq.\
If we approximate
Cargo
Coasters
ea*\*a- i A6+A,("+q)' : q z
D
(22)
(23)
where 11= integration factor which is a function of C6
andZ : C1L2B (C6 + 0.7) cmr
e4)
(to Lloyds 19?6 rules for ships with a still water
bending moment not exceedingapproximately ?0].
of the wavebendingmoment),
In this iormula C, is not a constantbut varies from 7.84 to.
10'?5as L changesfrom 90 m to 300 m,at whichpoint it
becomessubstantiallyconstant. For present purposeswe
intend to treat it as a constant,but it could provide the
explanation for the slightly higher index of L which Sato
suggests in his formula,
As = 0'80 trD and ts = f(L) from whichAs = K(L x D)
At = f (B x D) or possibiy = f(B + D)
Hencesteel weight of hrdl = pi(CO)L
+
[mrC'i,z fi
m2LxD + m3(B xD )]
( 25)
mrC6 L2 B
m5 ff) or mu 82 L
[Side shell
and
Longitudinal
Bulkheads]
[Platrorm
-' Decks
and
Flats]
[Transve"se
Frames
Beams
Bulkheads]
Scrdp PrrcentagOeductioo
frorn hwced Stccl.
Superstructure
-' and
deck fittings]
.l/.
J2-fL
(26)
ws=c ; / 2LB
[","'3+IqDI
-)
r3p
Ws = tr1$:
tCUl* + nrL2D(C6)I + n.LBD(C6)Y +
nnL2B(Cp)z + ns (v) or n, B2L
for posscngcrs
,l-2'L
(27)
.W-l'h
ut2
l or {5 <L (60m
,3'1, tq L (45m
,l -2'L
rn
6
6
(),, rl
&,
I
zl 0
tr
o
UJ
J
i-
olq
0
which has one modulus related and one volume related term.
The similarity which this bears to Sato's expression wiil be
noted:
W, = (C6)r/s
[*, "t
'. E t wz L, (B + D)r]
(28)
5.2 Scrap
Although we have now presented our steelweight data as net
weights, it is still necessary to consider the scrap allowance
required to produce the invoiced weight used in estimating
the cost.
In 1962,12% of invoiced steel was suggested as a suitabie
scrap figure, For the wider rarge of ship sizes and types
now being considered, a single scrap figure is no longer
sensible.
The factors which aJfect the scrap deduction include:
Shipyard ordering methods-the use of standard plates,
the necessity of orderhg sections for stock to ensure
supply when required.
Shipyard constructional methods-the allowance of overlaps on prefabricated units to cut at the ship to ensure a
good fit; the use of optical and numerical methods involving nesting procedures. Extra lengths on sections to
suit the operation of cold frame benders.
The effect of the increased cost of steel in enJorcinE
economy in its use.
The skill of draughtsmen in utilising
larly in nesting of plates.
AT LI5 OEPTH
BLOCKCOEFFICIENT
Fig.8
In making up the iighiship weight an addition of 1% should be
made to this net steel weight to allow for weld metal deposited and the rolling margin on the steei.
5.3 Outfit Weight
The factors which have afiected outfit since 1962 are:
Leading to increases in weight
Higher standards of crew accommodation
All ships
Most ships
Cargo ships
Passenger ships
General cargo
ships and bulk
carriers
material, particu-
All ships
General cargo
289
-&,-rdc'
eP'
O GENERALCARC
CONTAINER
'
O OPEN TYPE
O RESEARCH
+ XETKb
S SUPRY
] TUGS
1 .2
OUTFI' WT
.1
* TRAWLER
d reRrv
,a'
1 .8
t.0
..
0-8
TRAWLEF
uo
o
0'{
D CARC
!o
o.2
.-8UrX
CARflers {xcRAtsr
200
r50
LENGIHBP {MEIRES)
F ig. 9
The choice of method ior calculating the outiit weight in the
preliminary design stage depends on the information available
for tie basis ship and the relative importance of the outfit
weight in the total weight of the iightship.
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
Dieselelectricinstallations
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
or twin screrr.
The argument for the first of these parameters is that cooling water and lub. oil piping and auxiliaries, exhaust gas
boilers, uptakes, shafting and propellers should be related to
MCR. The argument for the second parameter is that a
medium speed engine will require a much smaller engine
room with corresponding reductions in the weight of piping,
floorplates, ladders and gratings, and spare gear.
(c) The p_ositionof the engine room in the shi5amidship, 37naft, or 'all' aft.
As u'ith wood and outfit weights, accurate machi.nery weights
are best obtained by a synthesis from a number of group
weights and a suggested system for this is included in
Table fV.
A simplified treatment divides the machinery weight into
two groups-tle main engine which for diesels and gas
turbines at all events, can be obtained from a manuJacturer's
cata.logue and a remainder, which can be proportioned on a
suitable parameter from the weight of this portion of the
machinery weight of a similar installation.
o'tn
(29)
\uv
'
?
t
I
3
!
I
REUAN0RWElGHf= 0 !6 IMCRIDD
ReMArlRWEEHT: o s9 {McRlo7o
REMAiORWEIGHI= 065 {MCRIOD
:O-
@-
TANXRS
@- elssercen/renev
IQIE.RPM ARE EIIGINERRI
IPl PROPRPM
t
9
t'
NETI Wt6Ht: 9.
t
{5% A8@E
Fig.11
I4EAN LINE}
/' I
9E
=!
;i
ge
,;/
.r./
\2
//..'
\
Y
'a '
/... ".:
.//.2
./l
l
I
ffitale*."cnr
F ig. 10
-/
iilb.lg?iii!l?Ft['.
291
ercised when estimating the machinery weight and in particular when the estimate is for a more specialised vessel
detailed group v/eights should be established at the earliest
possible opportunity.
5.5 ldargin
6.
STAI{DAND CALCT'LATION
SHEET
d
i
7.
MrN
Ere$ 9#t
CAPACITY CARRIERS
In 1962,two types of ships were considered whose dimensions were determined by volume rather than by weight,
F ig. 12
LENG' g
z6
arswproNg
v!.6.5
8.215
g
d
I
:)
a
c!
Fig. 13
292
q!5t6N
aooo
oRAF?
vh
L ta
-
rC6'
TABLE ry
L Length 8P
B Beam
I = U.65
D Depthto
for Super-
S h e e tl r o n
Depih to
structures
C arpenter
metres
Length OA
StructuralCastings
S mal l C asri ngs
S mi thw ork
P l umberw ork
T Draft (Scantling)
Draft (Design)
E l ectri cal
for Deck
Houses
P ai nt
0 .8 D- T
('l - cB)/37
U phol stery
6Cs
St eelfo r L i g h t s h i p
Cs @T:
Outfit
c B' @o .8 D
S i del i ghts
Mac hi n e r v
STEEL W EI G HT
Margi n
F r o m Gr a p h
Fi refi ghti ng
Light s h i p
l + 0 .5 (c B' -0 .7 )
Gal l ey Gear
D E A DWEIGHT
Ste e l a t Cs
Dis pl a c e m e n t
Co r r e ctio n s
C argo/S toresInsul .
onnes
WE I GHTS
I nv oic e d S t e e l
Yol
Scrap{
Net S t e e l
E lec t r o d e s
tonnes
O U T F I T WE I G H T
ST E EL
L (B+ T )
- T)
0 .8 5 L (D
DIMENSIONS
D ecorator
tonnes
W. T . F . R D
. oors
A ppen d a g e s
V enti l ati on A /C
Dis pl a c e m e n t{ f u 1 | d }
S teeri ngGear
A nchors, C abl es
D RAFT
TO TAL STEEL WE I G H T
P O WERING
RESI STANCE
C argo Wi nches
T rial S p e e d
0 1 2 2 Ba sis
C argo Gear
B loc k C o e f f i c i e n t
S erv ic eS p e e d
B'
v l\/L
B' 117 :
Fn
R i ggi ng
T' f or L= 1 2 2
C anvas
T' / 8
H atchcovers
K=Ce+0.5V/vL
M u m fo r d In d ice s
OorC.
@ s2 2 Co r r e cte d
L .J.
\/3
6@= 4( 122 - L\ 1 0 - 4
g= O r z z * 6@
p-
APPENDAGE RES IS T.
{' l + a/1 00 }
(1 + x lp/{1 * x)rrrc
Bo ssin g
T O T A L O U T F I T WE I G H T
Thruster
D E A D WE I G H T
QPC=
Sta b iI ise r
Oi l Fuel
,lt
T win Ru d d e r . e tc
ur es el ul l
FreshWater
2/3
- {NVL)/]0"
A.
S t o r e s& S u n d r i e s
YO
S oeci al l tems
lVlargin
4 2 7 .1X Q P Cx 4,
E n g i n e e rTsa n k s
P, iTrial)
@ ( 1+ x ) ( 1 + a / l 0 0 )
Stores
Crew& Effects
Serv i c eM a r g i n
M ACHI NERYW E I G H T
& iService)
M a in En g in e
P asse
ngers
tonnes
tonnes
Ge a r in g
S w rmmi ng P ool s
M.C ,R.
Boiler& Conden s e r
C argo
MainEngine
Sh a ftin g & Pr o p e l l er
T O T A L D E A D WE I G H T
Ge n e r a to r s
S .W. B al l ast
F uel/D a y
Au xilia r ie s
CAPACITY
Range
GrossVolume
M iles / D a y
F u n n e l Up ta ke s
D educti on
Day s a t S e a
Be m a in d e r
N et V ol ume
Day s i n P o r t
T OT AL
Dera t i n g
N R, P. M .
M ACHY WE IGH T
C argo C ubi c {
metres-
293
R E F .SKETCHNo.
Passengers'
C a b i n sa n d P r i va teT o ile ts
= 457oI(1 to 4)
assages,
Foyers, Entrances,
P u b l i c L a v a t o r ie s,Pa n tr ie s,L o cke r s
= 40%!('10 to 'l 3)
Stairs
P u b l i c L a v a t o r ie s,Ch a n g eBo o m s
Total of 10 to 16
P . O s ' a n d C r e w' sCa b in s
= 3 5 %1 1 1 t7o 'l8 )
Sta ir s
Total of '17to 21
W h e e l h o u s eC, h a r tr o o m . Ra d io Ro o m
Totaf o{ 22 to 25
= 2\.o/oln @ 251
26 | Fan Rooms
= 3%9/os(1
to 26)
L i n i n g a n d F l ar e
GeneralCargo (8ale)
merresl
m 3 ) +0 . 8 8
RefrigeratedCargo
metres
m3)+ 0.72
Oil Fuel
to n n e s@
SG
t-
) +0 . 9 8
D i e s e lO i l
to n n e s@
SG
r+
)+ 0.98
F r e s ha n d F e edWa te r
to n n e s@ I.0 00 S G
W a t e rB a l l a s t
to n n e s@ 1 .0 25 S G
Total of 28 to 30
t +1 . 0 0 0 ) +0 . 9 8 I
t +1 . 0 2 5 ) +1 . 0 0
Total of 31 to 36
RefrigeratedStores
metres'
mj )+0.68
metres
m3)- O.E 8
Total of 37 to 38
M a c h i n e r VS p a ceto Cr o wn o f En q in eRo o m
Total of 39 to 41
P l a n t ,Sta b ilise r s,
T h r u st Un ir s
G e a r ,W in d la ss& Ca p sta nM a ch in e r y
Switchboard Rooms. Refrigeration Machinery
S w i m m i n gP o o l, T r u n ks.e tc
Total of 42 to 49
TOTAL VOLUME
294
TABLE VI
PAGENo.
RE F . S K E T CHNo.
Hull
L {B P }
T ( M l d)
fr vet
m otr 6
O e c kO l f i c e r s C
' a b i n swir h T o ile ts
Officers' Cabins wirh Toilets
C hi e f S te wa rd 's Ca b i n with loilet
Pil o t ' sC a b i nw i t h T o i le r
E n g i n eR a t i n g s ' C a b in s
C ate ri n g S ta ff C a b i n s
Total of 1 to 12
O { f i c e r sD
' i n i n gF l o o m& Du r y M e ss
Total ot 13 to 20
P.Os'& Crew'sMesses
P.Os'& Crew'sToilets
2 4 | C r e w 's L a u n d ry & Dryi ng Rooms
Total of 21 to 25
Ho s p i t a lB
, a t h & 0 i s p en sa r y
Total of 26 to 40
Passages/Stairs
7oE0 to 12)
O ut s i d eD e c kA r e a
7 o I ( 1 to 4 ' l)
295
re
TABLE VII
TABLE VIII
Automation o{ machinery
Use of self-lubricating fittings
Competition between
shipping companies as many
new nations enter the field
1962
Typical
General Cargo or
BuIk Carrier
19?6
Futur e +
Typical Automated Automated
30
26
i tr
Sophisticated
Cargo Liner or
Container Ship
JO
28
Tanker
JO
zo
" Figu.res for possible future crew numbers are taken from
Ref.14.
TABLE X
Deck Officers
including Master
Engineering Officers
including Electrical
Coasters
I
up to 200 tons gross
4
200-?00 tons
?00-1600to ns
4
over 1600 tons
A d ditionallo r2cad ets
c a rried in larg er vesse is.
Coasters
I
up to 500 BHP
over 500 BHP
2
Foreign Trade
up to 5000 BHP
3
4
over 5000 BHP
Additionally 1 or 2 junior
engineers carried in higher
powered vessels.
Radio Officers
Refrig. Engineers
Up to 500tons
Over 500tons
0
1
Engine Ratings
inc luding P. O , ' s
700 -2 5 0 to
0 ns gr os s
6
250 0 -5 5 00
t ons gr os s
7
t ons gr os s 8
55 0 0 -1 5 ,000
ove r 1 5 ,0 00t ons gr os s 1 0
Coasters
Foreign Going
(automated)
Catering
Stewards
4-5
J -'I
For 6 officers
For ?- 9 of f ic er s
For 10- 12 of f ic er s
As the design deadweight of most container ships can be obtained at a draught less than that obtainable with a Type B
freeboard, deadweight cannot be used directly to determine
the main dimensions.
Deck Ratings
incl u d i n gP . O . ' s
Longitudinal and torsional strength considerations then require a proportion of the breadth of the ship thus determined
to be devoted to structural decks, the balance of the 'open'
ship providing space for a number of container ceils with
their guides. Thus the number of container tiers determines
the number oI container rows in the breadth.
The length of ship, and very largely the number of container
rows in the length, is then determined by the economically
and technically desirable length,/beam ratio.
Of course, speed affects these numbers, both because of its
influence on the block coefficient and its inJluence on
machinery power and thus on the engine room dimensions,
but these may also be regarded as second order effects.
Fig.15 shows container numbers which give economic container ships for various speeds. It also shows the tier x row
numbers for which the midship section should be arranged.
525
|lJtER
0F
t SFOECK
@NTAIRS
|20
t I x 8l
Fig. 15
297
8.2
ios-
9ec aEt Fs Y o . F l l s
5lw(.|gx.is
Fi g. 16
9.
STABILITY
AND TRIM
t- t.+ -t
--
Where the hull below No.1 deck and the supelstructure both
contain accommodation as on a passenger ship, it may be
reasonabie to make ps = pH : 1'00 at lines 1 and 8 and apply
a correction factor to the weight obtained at line 10 to give
the 'corrected huII weight' at line 12.
With p", K, and P11known the value ol Kr f or a suitable basis
ship caln be determined by analysis starting at both top and
bottom of the table.
Using a suitable value of Ko from a good basis ship the light
ship VCG of a new design can be calculated.
The method can also be used for
with the LCG of the hull to No.1
through the relati.onship which it
course, the moulded depth D, (or
dimension).
Weight Distribution
SIP
7
m
8P
l
O.a tl
v( 8 r
. v( 8 r t Or .l
t( B.r O e r h D
tto t''.Fo .a o t
o
- Ah o l D t
) C(HOUS!
Fft-T*;;-l
M o 6 .a '
1 ,e v.8 .sr
AN O SUPEASTRUCTUF
vCG dt
'AFTICUL AFS
5
5
I
Io tr l
LCG
ti 'o m Q I
Moo..t
Lo.9{d,^.1
l ui ' )l l
on No
tr* T;;;;
r--_---l--1
l----rl -l
r<1 6o No.JO* t
No.
r0
2 Odl
Oek
EEr'od
o.
:16r@
on No.
Er<rm
on No .5 O er
Er6r@
on No. 7 Drcr
5 O6k
!2
r3
F-r+=
l-------t----.--l
I O.t.
D'r@/<r'6 'o '
-.
ri{
Source
F&
or to,dui.
l-
.l
px
Fr on
r,.
F. om o' ^, ouir h, d
o.a' our
!ai-.
- !.8.
VCBq
(H
F r om
c oi
8 !{
IE
r9
20
tr __Fj_.
-- --l--------l ,---T--l
l**
r ^D
I tl
vccr
ffi
--l;*
LCB, , - L
g u o va n cyF rdo.
r-------i-----l
fim
2l
22
l--.'*.* ---__l-----r
2a
25
:6
ffi
| I
FC,
'
O.l.r.
rh.
d.r.
blrcd
ad
to.nul&
w^(!
do nor .oorv
Fo R q i
ii" "
Fo R
FI N A I
AftSsaR
.,
FO FO
i*l
./2 1
-l
tti .t.'
ll
i-+
cexree
or pa"/ rs Db
rHa EU&s sHowN AFa 0t ^r LEO
wEGXt PERtui CUiv 5 C LCUUTO
F&
ld u^ L 5 HrE a W RE 60
rr
r ll
oERrvr|cFrGSES
l;_
1\
I
55
I to
il
"'t
,,, l
]
,i\
o FAN r o $ 6 -
I x
c0 Ftcr x I
c xr o - 5 !cr r 0 ci 6
I j 6 r r fr
rol
o F Fr i ^ tr r
sr
cE|ta
It Rt6r^Nl Drloi
a^{
tc6
x4t
F ig. 19
Fig.22
OF COMPUTERS IN PRELIMINARY
F ig.21
300
,l
t pec lf y
(?l
(3)
Trssfer
({ )
Cener ale
Dec k llnes
W . T.
Bulk head6,
e(c.
( 5)
Dec k
( hoos e
c om par lm en!
or
f r om
Zo n e
) led u -
Choos e
ner !
c om plele
( hoose \ext
( ionr pa ( n t e n !
plo !
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6,
Moor, D.I. and Pattullo, R. N. M.: 'The Effective Horsepower of Twin Screw Ships'. BSRA Report NS192,1968.
7.
B.
9.
ou!
on
Zone or Deck.
L----
Fig. 23
Inpur \lenu ol
required coBrpartmen!$
and areas
to be
8l
____J
FLOW
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ro b
l0l
o f D e s i {n
?)
W hen
to t>DI,15
( ' h@s e
al. loc at ed
DIAGRAM
11. Fisher, K.W.: 'The Relative Costs of Ship Design Param e t e r s '. T r a n s . R I N A , V o L 1 1 6 , 1 9 ? 4 .
12. Eames, M. C. and Drummond, T. G.: 'Concept ExplorationAn Approach to Small Warship Design'. Trans.RINA,
19?6.
13. Sato, S.: 'Effect of Principal Dimensions on Weight and
Cost of Large Ships'. SNAME,New York,1967.
14. Monceaux, F.: 'A Look at the Personnel of Automated
Ships'. Bureau Veritas Report, 19?6.
15. Yearbook 19?5. Summary of Agreements. National
Maritime Board.
301
SeniiiF-sfT
mr
ffi
APPENDD(
of Spaces
Tourist
5 mz
4 m2
T h re e 6 ' 0 m2
r o u r b ' b m"
(
6.
B.
9.
23. Hosoital.
Number of berths all hospitals = 2 * 1 per 100 of total
complement. 35)" of these may be upper berths.
Area per berth one or two tier = 6 m2
Gallev.
Area per person served = 0'65 m2 for small numbers
Reducing to about 0'55 m2 ior 1000 or more total
complement.
25. Laundry including Ironing Room etc.
(50 + 0'0? complement) m2
26. Fan Rooms. 2'5"t" of.total ventilated volume 1-25.
2?. Lining and Flare. 3'4% of total ventilated voiume 1-25
28-30.
1e
JO.
Solid Ballast.
en