REDUCING THE COST OF BALLAST TANK CORROSION

A TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC MODELLING APPROACH

Prof. capt. dr. Kris De Baere

Prof. drs. Helen Verstraelen
Prof. dr. Geert Potters

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/1

Content of this presentation

How it all started?

Do ships rust?
Ballast tanks and corrosion rates
What about sacrificial anodes?
What about corrosion rates and steel
qualities?
Economic model comparing different
approaches
Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/2

How it all started?

The Antwerp Maritime Academy : Academic
master degree in Nautical Sciences & STCW95
Certificates of Competence
Bologna declaration 1999: Scientific research
compulsory also at university colleges
Topic self-evident

Corrosion and ships are historical enemies

Post Exxon Valdez => double hull construction for
tankers accentuating the corrosion challenge.

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/3

Objectives
Target
1) Improved corrosion rate
model based on reality
=> better maintenance
2) Achievable corrective
measures

Basis
1) Written confirmation of an
increased corrosion
problem
2) Numerous lab studies
between 1 parameter and
the rate of corrosion

IN SITU
RESEARCH

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/4

Methodology
Development of a survey protocol
and sample data sheet
Spelunking in the ballast tanks of
ships of > 150 ships
Statistical interpretation with a
multidisciplinary team

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/5

Do ships rust?
Definitely they do!

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/6

Why do ballast tanks rust?

o e of the hys

Alternating wet/dry situation

Complex structure
Increased surfaces (double hull)
Use of high tensile steel
Thermos effect
Difficult and expensive maintenance
Inadequate surface preparation and
coating application at construction

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/7

The corrosion index CI

CI
or
G/F/P

Corrosion
index

Weighted
corrosion
in %

Breakdown
of coating
or area
rusted
(Local)

Breakdown
of coating
or area
rusted
(Scattered)

Local
breakdown
of coating
or rust on
edges or
weld lines

Area
of
hard
rust
scale

Good

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

Good

1.175%

0.5%

0.5%

5%

0%

Good

2.35%

1%

1%

10%

0%

Good

3.95%

2%

2%

15%

0%

Good

7.675%

3%

3%

20%

0%

Fair

10.5%

5%

5%

25%

1%

Fair

15,5%

10%

10%

30%

3%

Fair

25%

15%

15%

40%

5%

Poor

30%

20%

20%

45%

10%

Poor

34%

25%

25%

47.5%

12.5%

Poor

10

38%

30%

30%

50%

15%

Antwerp Maritime Academy

Adaptations to IACS:
11 sub-divisions
CI as a figure from 0
to 10 or a % surface

=> 1 single figure

represents the
tank condition

26 April 2012/8

Corrosion index
POOR

FAIR

GOOD

Scatter diagram & linear regression

Coating intact about 4.5 years
Corrosion about 1.7% per year.
GOOD condition about 10.4 years
POOR after about 22.1 years

Correlation between CI and ship

specific parameters?
Disappointing
No statistical correlation could be established
between corrosion rate and:

Coating type (Epoxy Coal Tar Epoxy)

Trading area (World Wide, North Atlantic, Europe, Middle and Far
East)
Type of vessel (Tankers, Containers, Dredgers, Bulk, Others)
Length of vessel (<150m, 150m<L<200m, >200m)
Country of construction (Korea, Japan, China, Europe, rest of the
world)

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/10

Presence of anodes

ANOVA
Source of Variation
Between Groups
Within Groups

SS
589.5537
19335.52

Total

19925.08

df

MS
3 196.5179
90 214.8392

The full database was sub-divided in :

AAAAAH!
tanks always wet
tanks alternating wet/dry
tanks always dry (not shown, too
small, neglected)
Each significant group was again
splitted
in function
of the
presence
of
The
advantage
of the
presence
sacrificial
ofanodes
anodes (in our databsae)
established
Of each could
groupnot
thebe
average
corrosion
rate was calculated (bar graph) and
F
P-value
F crit with the linear regression
compared
0.914721 0.437165 2.705838
line (red axis)

93

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/11

Why?

Immersion time (only 50% of the time)

Positioning/distribution
Evolution in time (function of the
damaged area)
Absence of an obligation => absence of a
control mechanism
Anodes should be installed and maintained
the correct way or should be left out

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/12

Relation chemical and physical

characteristics of ship construction steel and
corrosion rate
30 samples of grade A steel were collected
Experimental Korean corrosion resistant steel for use in ballast
tanks
Exposed respectively 6, 12 and 18 months to natural seawater
Always submerged
Alternating wet dry
Atmospheric humidity.

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/13

Research started
ntwerp Maritime Academy 2010 at the AMA

Results after 6 month permanent

immersion Experimental color method is
Corrosion rate

still experimental
LPR & Tafel very confusing
results, apparently not the
best of techniques for this
kind of research
Weight loss = for us the most
reliable method

Chemical
& physical
properties

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/15

Correlation between corrosion rate

and chemical composition
Grade A

HTS
CRS

2
3

Ordinate = Mass loss in gr/m2/year

Comp 1 = Mn, C & Fe
Comp 2 = Comp 1 +Si, Ni & Cu

Average corrosion rate

Robust
principle526
(42
3 distinctive
clusters
samples)
component
analysis &
2/year
1: Korean
g/m
regression
experimental
CRS
quantile
Average
corrosion rate
use in ballast
CRS (2for
samples):
377
tanks
g/m2/year
2: High
It seems
thatTensile
CRS Steel
3: Grade A steel
less than
corrodes
the average ship
construction steel quality

Antwerp Maritime Academy

28%

26 April 2012/16

Economic approach
Case I: Grade A steel + IMO PSPC15 coating + Zn
anodes (to be replaced every 5 years)

Case II: Increased scantlings => no more steel replacements

Case III: Improved paint system TSCF25 (Tanker Structure Co-operative Forum)
Case IV: Use of corrosion resistant steel
Case V: Grade A + PSPC15 + lifetime lasting aluminum anodes

Antwerp Maritime Academy

Economic approach

Reduction of the costs

Costs taken into account

New building prices

Repair and maintenance
Time in dry dock + loss of revenue
Reduction DWT due to increased scantlings (case II)
Scrapping value
NPV calculated with 2% inflation rate and 4% discount rate

Sources

Bahrain Dry Docks price list 2008

Updates provide by

IHC (ship construction Netherlands)

Antwerp Ship Repair
Damen ship yards
ArcelorMittal
POSCO

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/18

TCO = Total Cost Of Ownership & DR = Discount Rate

+
(NPV)

Economic approach
(NPV)

General inflation rate of 2%

Discount rate of 4%
Increase of the steel price with 6% pro anno

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/19

Economic approach

Grade A + PSPC+ Al
Grade A + PSPC+ Zn

TSCF25

CRS
Increased scantlings

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/20

Monte Carlo Simulation

In the economic model 3 types of parameters are
distinguished
Fixed parameters dete i ed y the sele ted ships odel
such as LOA, BOA, DWT, surface ballast tanks etc.
Dependent parameters which are function of other
parameters f.i. cost of the anodes is function of the
material, weight, cost of zinc or aluminum and the
installation cost
Uncertain parameters which are allowed to vary between
2 limits according a distribution model and taking into
a ou t a ost likely alue.

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/21

Monte Carlo Simulation

Uncertain parameters
Uncertain
parameter

Symbol

Min.

Most
plausible
value

Max.

Model

Unit

Initial cost
PSPC15 coating

PSPC15

40

45

60

Triangular

/m2

Grade A steel
(basic price)

AS

900

1,000

1,500

Triangular

/t

Ratio CRS
versus grade A

RACRS

1.2

1.3

1.5

Triangular

Drydock/day

CDD

2597

2885

3174

Triangular

/day

Time charter
equivalent

TC

13,963

15,514

17,065

Triangular

/day

Price zinc
Price Aluminum

PZ
PA

4
8

5
10

6
12

Triangular
Triangular

/kg
/kg

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/22

Monte Carlo Simulation

distribution model uncertain parameters
Most
Plausible
Value

Minimum

Antwerp Maritime Academy

Maximum

26 April 2012/23

Monte Carlo: Outcome

32.000.000

TCO, mean value after 5,000 trials

Error bar =
Freight loss

Price CRS

30.000.000

28.000.000

Well Matched

26.000.000
24.000.000

22.000.000
20.000.000
18.000.000

Datenreihen1

TCO Case V

TCO Case I

TCO Case III

TCO Case II

TCO Case IV

22.740.271

22.779.409

22.931.627

26.497.959

27.855.352

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/24

Sensitivity
Only the steel price is decisive
In case of construction in CRS
price ratio between grade A and
CRS is of moderate importance

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/25

Conclusions

i eased s a tli gs ot ad isa le. Loss of a go a yi g

capacity is overwhelming.
Cases V, I, and III are very well matched. The correct choice is
is function of:
Actual and future cost of steel and coating
Financial parameters such as inflation and discount rates
Ge ui e ha a te isti s of the supe pai t a d the o osio
resistant steel.

CRS => Promising alternative for the present method of

constructing ballast tanks if the cost of the CRS drops
significantly till < 1.1 x Grade A steel .

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/26

Genuine qualities of TSCF25 and CRS

The use of Corrosion Resistant Steel can only

be considered if it lives up to the promised
qualities.
Corrosion resistance seems to be OK (28% less)
Weldability has been studied and is OK
Mechanical properties are under investigation

TSCF25 is new and only scarcely applied. TSCF25

is under fire and certainly not generally
accepted.
Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/27

Contact

Easy uestio s ill e a s e ed ight a ay

A oyi g uestio s take a little it o e
time
kris.de.baere@hzs.be
helen.verstraelen@hzs.be
geert.potters@hzs.be

Antwerp Maritime Academy

26 April 2012/28