Design & Operation of Wind Farm Support Vessels, 29-30 January 2014, London, UK

XSS A Next Generation Windfarm Support Vessel

M Jupp, R Sime and E Dudson, BMT Nigel Gee, UK
SUMMARY
The global offshore wind industry has undergone a huge expansion programme in recent years and the market for
supporting and maintaining offshore wind turbines is highly competitive among turbine crew transfer operators.
However, the current fleet of windfarm support vessels has been developed to serve near shore windfarms and the
limited ability of these vessels to operate in rough weather often results in windfarms being unreachable. With
windfarms being built further offshore in more exposed locations, increased seakeeping ability of support vessels is of
paramount importance.
This paper describes the work undertaken by BMT Nigel Gee in the development and optimisation of an innovative
extreme semi-SWATH (XSS) hullform designed to meet the exacting needs of the offshore wind industry. The paper
discusses the challenges encountered, as well as the potential benefit of the vessel to the offshore wind industry.
1.

INTRODUCTION

Catamarans of up to 20 metres in length currently

operated by crew transfer operators are designed to
service wind farms located relatively close to the
mainland. For wind farms located further offshore, where
significant wave heights will be greater and transit times
will be longer, conventional catamarans of this size are
unable to meet the requirements for high speed transit
and zero speed push-up operations in high sea states and
non-optimum wave headings.
This paper starts by outlining how the offshore wind
industry is changing and goes on to describe the design
and build of the XSS, a vessel which BMT believe meets
these increasing industry requirements.
2.

INDUSTRY REQUIREMENTS

With the global expansion of the offshore wind industry

into locations further from shore, the requirements for
vessels which are used in the support and maintenance of
turbines has changed.
From an earlier analysis of locations and environments
conducted by BMT [1] in which these windfarms are
sited along with industry collaboration, the following
vessel requirements were established:
Increased Operability & Utilisation vessels must
offer a higher level of operability in existing
windfarms, as well as being capable of serving more
demanding far shore locations.
Improved Safety and Comfort vessels must deliver
higher levels of comfort in transit and at zero speed,
along with improved safety during push-up and
transfer operations.
Performance and Capability power requirements
and fuel consumption levels must be comparable to
conventional catamarans, whilst providing flexible
deadweight and cargo capacity.

2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

2.1

VESSEL REQUIREMENTS AND

CONSTRAINTS

A vessel with a load line length of under 24m, with a

limited passenger capacity of 12 does not require STCW
certification of the crew. In addition, a vessel of this
length and passenger capacity can be classified to the
requirements of the various windfarm service vessel
rules, with a significantly less onerous service notation
than vessels of 24m+.
The principal particulars for the vessel are listed in
Figure 1.
Hull Length Overall
Load Line Length
Maximum Beam Moulded
Displacement (full load)
Draught (full load)
Passengers
Crew
Cargo Capacity
Fuel Capacity
Class Notation

25.40 m
23.96 m
8.50 m
98 t
1.82 m
12
3
10 t
9800 ltr
DNV 1A1 HSLC R2
WINDFARM SERVICE 1
Figure 1 Principal Particulars Design Requirements
3.

HULLFORM TECHNOLOGY

3.1

OPTIMUM HULLFORMS FOR

SEAKEEPING

Typical methods of improving the seakeeping

performance of a catamaran in high seas are to increase
length and displacement, adopt suitable ride control
systems and reduce the waterplane area of the demihulls.
The latter option can be achieved by incorporating
narrow hull sections at the waterline along the length of
the vessel and moving the hull volume (centre of
buoyancy) far below the waterline. The effects of these
design features have been proven in commercial and
military applications by Small Waterplane Area Twin
Hull (SWATH) vessels which demonstrate by far the

Design & Operation of Wind Farm Support Vessels, 29-30 January 2014, London, UK

best seakeeping performance in large waves, but at the

expense of very high powering requirements, high capital
costs and much higher running costs in comparison to
less complex, fuel efficient catamarans.
To achieve improved seakeeping whilst maintaining
reasonable powering and fuel consumption levels semiSWATH hullforms have been developed such as BMTs
ModCat, as discussed in Section 3.2.
3.2

MODCAT TECHNOLOGY

In 2001, BMT Nigel Gee undertook a research and

development project sponsored by the US Navy Office of
Naval Research (ONR) to develop a catamaran hullform
offering significantly better seakeeping performance than
a conventional catamaran, but with minimal resistance
penalty. The advanced semi-SWATH hullform adopted
narrower sections at the waterline, with a lower centre of
buoyancy and a slender bulb at the bow. In comparison
to a conventional catamaran hullform with identical
principal particulars, physical model tests demonstrated
that the vertical accelerations of the ModCat were up to
50% lower than those of the conventional catamaran,
with only a 5% increase in power required to achieve the
same speed.
The ModCat hullform has subsequently been adopted for
military applications in the Atlantic Ocean (e.g. 79m 'Sea
Fighter' for US Navy) and for rough water ferry
operations in the Pacific Ocean (e.g. 57m 'Betico II' for
Sudiles).

developed preliminary designs for the following hullform

technologies which were considered to be the best
potential solutions for windfarm support vessels:

Monohull
Conventional Catamaran
Semi-SWATH
SWATH
Trimaran

BMT developed a scoring model to compare the five

selected hullforms against a range of technical and
commercial performance attributes. These attributes
were:
Technical:

Seakeeping / MSI in a range of sea states /

zero speed
Seakeeping / Speed loss in a range of sea
states / zero speed
Deck area

Commercial:

Vessel complexity
Maintenance costs
Fuel consumption
Capital Cost

The results for the vessel types based on Technical

criteria were:
Platform
SWATH
Semi-SWATH
Trimaran
Conventional Catamaran
Monohull
Figure 3 Technical Results

Rank
1
2
3
4
5

Figure 2 Sea Fighter

Using the fully proven ModCat hullform as a basis, the
XSS has been developed to go beyond semi-SWATH
technology, specifically to meet the exacting
requirements of the offshore wind industry.
4.

CONCEPT DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

4.1

HULLFORM COMPARISON

Prior to any development of the XSS hullform, BMT

undertook a review of existing hullform technologies to
identify which offered the best attributes when
considering the design requirements outlined in Section
2.

The results for the vessel types based on Commercial

criteria were:
Platform
Monohull
Conventional Catamaran
Semi-SWATH
Trimaran
SWATH
Figure 4 Commercial Results

Rank
1
2
3
4
5

Each vessel type has advantages and disadvantages. The

SWATH is by far the best technical solution, yet is the
most expensive and complex. Conversely the monohull
and conventional catamaran are technically poorest but
likely to be the most cost effective.

Based upon the same nominal principal particulars,

capabilities and regulatory requirements, BMT

2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

Design & Operation of Wind Farm Support Vessels, 29-30 January 2014, London, UK

4.2

EXTREME SEMI-SWATH CONCEPT

In order to develop the next generation vessel it was

considered that the vessel should achieve more of the
technical benefits of a SWATH without the associated
cost and complexity. This vessel should ideally balance
the requirement for an affordable vessel with the
requirement for significantly improved seakeeping over
what is currently available with conventional hullforms.
In the commercial world the semi-SWATH has been
developed to offer improved seakeeping compared to a
conventional catamaran, but this improvement is limited.
The semi-SWATH has been developed for the
commercial fast ferry market and therefore the design
has always been constrained by the increased fuel
consumption tolerated by the industry. This limited
increase in fuel consumption has in BMTs opinion
restricted the level of improvement in seakeeping
exhibited by semi-SWATH designs.
BMT have therefore developed the extreme semiSWATH (XSS) concept which aims to offer an improved
level of seakeeping over existing designs without the
performance and cost penalty exhibited by a full
SWATH vessel. For this hullform, with the required
level of utilisation, a higher powering requirement will
be considered acceptable in return for significant
improvement in seakeeping capability and operability.

4.3

The XSS hull lines are based largely on BMTs ModCat

hullform. The main differences are that the ModCats
semi-SWATH sections have been modified to shift the
vertical centre of buoyancy further below the waterline,
and to further reduce waterplane area.
Indicative XSS hull sections are presented in Figure 6,
alongside typical sections for equivalent ModCat and
conventional catamaran hullforms.

Figure 6 Comparative Sections Left to right;

Conventional Catamaran, ModCat, XSS
5.

MODEL TESTING

Calm water resistance and seakeeping tests were carried

out at the Haslar ship tank in Gosport, UK. The same
model was used for both tests.
5.1

The variation in vessel characteristics between a

conventional catamaran and a SWATH is illustrated in
Figure 5.

XSS HULLFORM

CALM WATER RESISTANCE TESTS

5.1 (a) Resistance Tests

Calm water resistance tests were carried out at the
estimated full load displacement of the vessel. Trim and
interceptor optimisation tests were undertaken at 21 and
27 knots to identify the optimum combination of static
trim and interceptor settings. Subsequent calm water
resistance tests were then carried out at speeds between
10 and 32 knots using these settings.
Waterjet thrust data supplied by the waterjet
manufacturer was used to develop the powering and
speed predictions.
5.1 (b) Powering Predictions

Figure 5 Relative Merits of Alternative Hullforms

The ideal balance between technical and commercial
requirements is a matter of opinion for individual
operators. However, considering the vessel requirements
outlined at the beginning of this paper, it can be seen that
the XSS hullform bridges the gap in technical ability
between a SWATH and a semi-SWATH, with only a
limited reduction in commercial performance.

2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

Figure 7 shows the 24m XSS powering requirements,

plotted against the powering requirements of a 24m
conventional vessel and a 19m conventional vessel. In
each case the vessel displacement is equivalent to 12
tonnes of deadweight being carried.
The 24m XSS has the highest powering requirement of
the three vessels due to the SWATH-type sections and
some additional T-Foil drag. However, for a given
deadweight the achievable speed is comparable to
existing 19m conventional catamarans. The 24m XSS is
superior to the 19m vessel as it has a higher deadweight
capacity and can comfortably service far shore wind
farms.

Design & Operation of Wind Farm Support Vessels, 29-30 January 2014, London, UK

The 24m conventional catamaran has a higher top speed

than the 24m XSS and a high deadweight capacity, but
would not be able to comfortably service far shore wind
farms due to its inferior seakeeping performance.

During each run measurements of heave, pitch and

vertical acceleration were recorded. Heave and pitch
were measured using potentiometers, one mounted at the
forward perpendicular (FP) and the other mounted at the
LCG.
5.2 (b) Seakeeping Test Results

Figure 7 Ship Brake Power and Speed Capability

Comparisons (with 12 tonne dwt)
5.1 (c) Range
The 24m XSS is designed with a large fuel capacity of
9800 litres, enabling the vessel to reach far shore wind
farms and remain on station for as long as possible.
The range achievable in calm water (sea state 2)
conditions at 25 knots is over 480 nautical miles.
5.2

The seakeeping tests demonstrated that the XSS

hullform, in combination with an active ride control
system (RCS) would offer motions and accelerations
experienced by passengers within long term tolerable
levels for heavy work. The XSS hullform is ideally
suited to the use of T-foils, as the reduced waterplane
area and low pitch stiffness result in lower values of
moment to change trim than for conventional catamaran
hullforms. This lower level of stiffness allows a correctly
sized ride control system to work very effectively at
reducing vessel motions and accelerations.
Initial predictions by the ride control system supplier,
NAIAD Dynamics, indicated that reductions in motions
of up to 80% could be achieved.
Following the conclusion of the model testing and a
further round of preliminary design development,
Turbine Transfers decided to proceed with the build of
the first 24m XSS. The general arrangement for this
vessel is presented in Figure 9.

SEAKEEPING TESTS

5.2 (a) Model Setup

The model was towed using two conventional heave
posts in a side-by-side arrangement (one post in each
hull) as shown in Figure 8. The posts were connected to
the model at the intersection of the longitudinal centre of
gravity (LCG) and the thrust line. The model was free to
trim and heave.

Figure 8 Seakeeping Model Test Setup

The sea keeping tests were carried out in the estimated
full load condition with the optimum static trim setting
from the calm water optimisation tests. The model was
ballasted prior to testing to achieve the correct vertical
centre of gravity (VCG) and the correct pitch radius of
gyration.

Figure 9 General Arrangement

2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

Design & Operation of Wind Farm Support Vessels, 29-30 January 2014, London, UK

6.

MACHINERY AND STABILITY

6.1

PROPULSION MACHINERY

6.1 (a) Engines

The XSS is installed with the following propulsion
machinery:
Main Engines
Propulsors

2 x MTU 12V2000M72 (1080kW)

2 x MJP 550DRB Waterjets

The extreme semi-SWATH section shapes presented

several challenges in the design of the machinery
arrangement, in particular the position and alignment of
the main engines.
As Figure 10 shows, the extreme semi-SWATH section
shape prevented the engine from being positioned within
the lower part of the hull. As is more common with
SWATH vessels, the engine is positioned in the haunch
area, and connected to the waterjet by a vertical offset
gearbox with no down angle (Figure 11). The engine
itself is set at an angle of 6.5.

The engine foundations are located on the ring frames of

the haunch section of the hull. There is no requirement
for the usual longitudinal girders (as would be found on
the hull bottom of a standard windfarm support vessel) as
the lower section of the hull effectively acts as the
longitudinal stiffening.
As the engines are located higher above the waterline
than in a standard vessel, the required extent of structural
fire protection is greater. Figure 10 shows that the
insulation extends down to roughly the bulbous section
of the hull. The engine beds are all insulated, with an
added vapour barrier in way of the sump, effectively
forming a drip tray.
6.1 (b) Waterjets
To accommodate the relatively high shaft angle and the
rise of keel aft, while retaining high propulsive
efficiencies, a bespoke intake duct and output nozzle
were designed and supplied by MJP. As Figure 11
shows, the main waterjet body and impeller are set at the
same angle as the shaft. The nozzle is then shaped with a
6.5 discharge angle, so that the output returns to the
horizontal. This simple solution allows more flexibility
in siting the engine and eliminates the need for multiple
shaft sections and inefficient joints. Importantly, this
solution also avoids the large trimming moments that
would result from a high thrust angle combined with low
waterplane area.
6.2

AUXILIARY MACHINERY

6.2 (a) Motion Damping System

The motion damping system for the XSS has been
designed and supplied by NAIAD Dynamics and
comprises of the following:

Figure 10 Engine Section View

Pair of interceptors, each of span 1.3 metres

Pair of T-foils, each of area 0.75m2

At the time of design, the 0.75m2 T-foils were

significantly smaller than any that NAIAD Dynamics had
previously produced. Additionally, it is understood that
these are the first aluminium T-Foils developed by
NAIAD.
6.2 (b) Cargo Handling Cranes
The XSS has been built to carry cargo handling cranes on
both the fore and aft decks. The structural foundations
for these cranes have been designed to accept a variety of
commonly used marine cranes.

Figure 11 Engine and Jet Arrangement

2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

The fore deck crane is located on the port side, near to

the bulwark, where it does not hinder the use of the cargo
loading area. The aft deck crane is located on the port
side, where the foundation is built into the transom. If not

Design & Operation of Wind Farm Support Vessels, 29-30 January 2014, London, UK

required, the cranes can be removed, leaving the decks

flush and clear for other uses.
6.3

7.

CONSTRUCTION AND SEA TRIALS

7.1

CONSTRUCTION

STABILITY

6.3 (a) Classification

As discussed in Section 2.1 of this paper, the Load Line
Length of the XSS has been limited to below 24 metres,
to allow classification under any of the current Windfarm
Service Vessel rules offered by the major classification
societies. By doing so, the more stringent criteria of the
High Speed Craft Code are avoided.

The XSS was built between August 2011 and March

2013 at the Sepers Group Shipyard, The Netherlands.
The entire structure was 3D CAD modelled and then
CNC cut. All plating is Aluminium alloy 5083-H321
and extrusions 6082-T6.

The XSS is currently classed to the DNV Tentative Rules

for Domestic Service Craft, January 2011. It has the
following class notation:
DNV 1A1 HSLC R2 WINDFARM SERVICE 1
6.3 (b) Loading & Stability Results
The XSS has a 10 tonne cargo carrying capacity, which
allows 5 tonnes to be carried on both fore and aft decks,
either containerised or loose. The vessel passes all
stability criteria (both Intact and Damage Stability) with
the maximum 5 tonnes of cargo on either the fore or aft
deck alone, with no counter loading required (i.e. cargo
does not have to be evenly distributed between decks).
This offers greater flexibility and cargo carrying options
to vessel operators.

Figure 13 Hull During Construction

Figure 12 shows a 3D model rendering of the XSS in the

worst damage case and loading condition. In all cases of
damage no counter flooding is required to keep the vessel
within the maximum acceptable angle of inclination. As
the image shows, there is no deck edge immersion
anywhere on the vessel and there are dry-shod
evacuation routes to either side of the vessel for
embarkation into the liferafts.

The XSS hullform is more sophisticated than a standard

windfarm support vessel and contains areas of complex
3D curvature.

As the superstructure is a separate and resiliently

mounted unit, this allowed for construction in parallel to
the hull units. Pre-outfitting prior to attachment to the
hull also enabled the construction programme to be
compressed.
7.1 (a) Challenges

BMT realised the importance of reducing man-hours

associated with shaping plates and therefore developed
rolling templates to allow plate suppliers to cut and roll
plates at their own facility. The additional man-hours
spent at this stage of the design saved many more hours
that would have been used later on in production, if the
yard had been required to form the plates themselves.
Once delivered to the yard, the components were
assembled with the aid of detailed isometric drawings
developed by BMT. No additional cutting or component
fabrication was required.
7.2

SEA TRIALS

7.2 (a) Calm Water Trials

Figure 12 Rendered Model of Worst Damage Stability

Equilibrium Condition

Before entering service a limited set of sea trials were

undertaken in calm water to confirm the speed capability
of XSS. Speeds of up to 28 knots have been measured,
and the vessel is capable of operating comfortably at a
service speed of around 25-26 knots.

2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

Design & Operation of Wind Farm Support Vessels, 29-30 January 2014, London, UK

7.2 (b) Seakeeping Trials

Trials conducted by NAIAD on the XSS have
demonstrated the effectiveness of the ride control system
in rougher seas (SS3). The vessel was trialled off the
North East coast of the UK, during which the active ride
control system was intermittently switched on and off to
quantify the effects of the active RCS on vessel motions.
Figure 14 and Figure 15 show the time histories for pitch
and roll rate when the RCS is ON (active T-foil
deflection and active interceptor deployment) and OFF
(fixed zero T-foil deflection and fixed fully retracted
interceptors).

% Reduction in
% Reduction in
RMS Pitch Rate RMS Roll Rate
Heading
Data
Data
Data
Data
Set 1
Set 2
Set 1
Set 2
Head
60.7 /
44.2 /
45.0 /
46.2 /
63.0
47.2
55.9
52.1
Ave. = Ave. = Ave. = Ave. =
61.9% 45.7% 50.5% 49.2%
Stern Quartering 41.7 /
50.4 /
60.2 /
67.1 /
46.5
49.1
58.0
68.0
Ave. = Ave. = Ave. = Ave. =
44.1% 49.8% 59.1% 67.6%
Figure 16 Measured RMS Pitch & Roll Rates
In addition to the low vessel motions, only a very small
speed loss in waves has been observed.

Figure 14 Time History in Head Seas

Figure 17 XSS During Trials

8.

DESIGN FEATURES

Figure 15 Time History in Stern Quartering Seas

Figure 14 and Figure 15 show that when the RCS is OFF,
the pitch and roll motions are considerably higher than
when the RCS system is ON. The corresponding RMS
figures are presented in Figure 16, where it can be seen
that pitch and roll rate reductions of between 42-68%
were achieved in bow and stern quartering seas.
It is evident that the NAIAD active RCS is extremely
effective at reducing vessel motions when combined with
the XSS hullform.

2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

Figure 18 XSS Design Features

The XSS advanced hullform is complemented by a
number of additional design features to improve vessel
performance and ensure the safety and comfort of
maintenance technicians and crew, including:
8.1

ACTIVE INTERCEPTORS & T-FOILS

Active T-foils and interceptors are fitted to give a very

high level of motion control, as demonstrated during the
full scale sea trials.

Design & Operation of Wind Farm Support Vessels, 29-30 January 2014, London, UK

8.2

ACTIVE FENDER SYSTEM

9.

The XSS is fitted with a modular Active Fender System,

which has been developed to minimise the impact loads
experienced by the turbine foundations by up to a factor
of 3 compared to a conventional fender system.
8.3

There is no requirement for a dynamic positioning

system, which enables the system to be installed on
standard windfarm support vessels. A further major
advantage of TAS is that at no point does the system
attach to the turbine.
Comprehensive HAZID and HAZOP assessments have
been undertaken with vessel operators, windfarm
developers and turbine suppliers. Fitted to a 24m
windfarm support vessel the TAS has undergone
extensive sea trials and successfully demonstrated
increased operability.
8.4

SUSPENSION SEATS

Suspension seats are provided for all passengers as well

as crew, to deliver increased comfort levels during transit
and reduce whole body vibrations.
8.6

FLEXIBLE CARGO STOWAGE

Containerised cargo can be stowed on both fore and aft

decks, using standard flush mounted container locking
mounts. Loose cargo can also be secured in place via the
numerous flush mounted deck tie down points.
8.7

10.

CARGO HANDLING

The XSS is fitted with foundations and all of the

necessary powering to carry cargo handling cranes on
both the fore and aft decks. These cranes can be
positioned depending on the specific operator
requirements.

All year round support for far shore installations

High speed transit in high sea states
Zero speed motions comparable to SWATH
hullforms
Increased safety and comfort for personnel
No ballast systems
CONCLUSIONS

This paper has described the design development, testing,

construction and in-service performance of the XSS
windfarm support vessel. The result is a vessel which
offers exceptional capability in high speed transit as well
as zero speed push-up operations in high sea states.
The paper has demonstrated that through the adaptation
of an existing proven hullform, combined with several
highly effective technological features, the ability to
service the increasing number of far shore windfarms has
been achieved.
11.

REFERENCES

1.

COCKBURN, C. L., STEVENS, S., DUDSON,

E., Accessing the Far Shore Wind Farm,
RINA Marine Renewable and Offshore Wind
Energy April 2010, 2010

12.

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES

RESILIENTLY MOUNTED
SUPERSTRUCTURE

The resiliently mounted superstructure is designed to

eliminate the structure borne vibration and reduce the
ambient noise levels in the cabin, leading to a more
comfortable experience for both crew and technicians.
Noise levels achieved are below 65 dB.
8.5

POTENTIAL TURBINE ACCESS SYSTEM

(TAS)

Developed in partnership with Houlder, the Turbine

Access System (TAS)TM is a lightweight, heave
compensated gangway system which has the potential to
significantly improve the safety of personnel transfer and
will also allow transfer in higher wave conditions.

BENEFITS OF XSS TO THE OFFSHORE

WIND INDUSTRY

Matthew Jupp holds the current position of Naval

Architect at BMT Nigel Gee Ltd. He is responsible for
all aspects of design and engineering for projects ranging
from commercial vessels to yachts. His previous
experience includes key involvement with numerous
windfarm support vessel and crew boat projects.
Matthew is an Associate Member of the Royal Institution
of Naval Architects.
Rob Sime holds the current position of Naval Architect
at BMT Nigel Gee Ltd. He is responsible for a wide
range of naval architectural duties from concept design
through to detail design, including hull lines
development, stability calculations, performance
predictions, model testing and sea trials supervision.
Rob was heavily involved in the early design
development of XSS.
Ed Dudson holds the current position of Technical
Director at BMT Nigel Gee Ltd. He graduated from the
University of Southampton in 1990 and joined BMT
Nigel Gee the same year where he has worked
continuously with the exception of a years sabbatical in
MARINTEK. He is a Chartered Engineer and Fellow of
the Royal Institute of Naval Architects.

2014: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects