Guidelines for Ultra Large Container Ships

October 2010

Guidance Note NI 558 DT R00 E

Marine Division 92571 Neuilly sur Seine Cedex France Tel: + 33 (0)1 55 24 70 00 Fax: + 33 (0)1 55 24 70 25 Marine website: http://www.veristar.com Email: veristarinfo@bureauveritas.com 2010 Bureau Veritas - All rights reserved

ARTICLE 1 1.1. - BUREAU VERITAS is a Society the purpose of whose Marine Division (the "Society") is the classification (" Classification ") of any ship or vessel or structure of any type or part of it or system therein collectively hereinafter referred to as a "Unit" whether linked to shore, river bed or sea bed or not, whether operated or located at sea or in inland waters or partly on land, including submarines, hovercrafts, drilling rigs, offshore installations of any type and of any purpose, their related and ancillary equipment, subsea or not, such as well head and pipelines, mooring legs and mooring points or otherwise as decided by the Society. The Society: prepares and publishes Rules for classification, Guidance Notes and other documents (Rules); issues Certificates, Attestations and Reports following its interventions (Certificates); publishes Registers. 1.2. - The Society also participates in the application of National and International Regulations or Standards, in particular by delegation from different Governments. Those activities are hereafter collectively referred to as " Certification ". 1.3. - The Society can also provide services related to Classification and Certification such as ship and company safety management certification; ship and port security certification, training activities; all activities and duties incidental thereto such as documentation on any supporting means, software, instrumentation, measurements, tests and trials on board. 1.4. - The interventions mentioned in 1.1., 1.2. and 1.3. are referred to as " Services ". The party and/or its representative requesting the services is hereinafter referred to as the " Client ". The Services are prepared and carried out on the assumption that the Clients are aware of the International Maritime and/or Offshore Industry (the "Industry") practices. 1.5. - The Society is neither and may not be considered as an Underwriter, Broker in ship's sale or chartering, Expert in Unit's valuation, Consulting Engineer, Controller, Naval Architect, Manufacturer, Shipbuilder, Repair yard, Charterer or Shipowner who are not relieved of any of their expressed or implied obligations by the interventions of the Society. ARTICLE 2 2.1. - Classification is the appraisement given by the Society for its Client, at a certain date, following surveys by its Surveyors along the lines specified in Articles 3 and 4 hereafter on the level of compliance of a Unit to its Rules or part of them. This appraisement is represented by a class entered on the Certificates and periodically transcribed in the Society's Register. 2.2. - Certification is carried out by the Society along the same lines as set out in Articles 3 and 4 hereafter and with reference to the applicable National and International Regulations or Standards. 2.3. - It is incumbent upon the Client to maintain the condition of the Unit after surveys, to present the Unit for surveys and to inform the Society without delay of circumstances which may affect the given appraisement or cause to modify its scope. 2.4. - The Client is to give to the Society all access and information necessary for the safe and efficient performance of the requested Services. The Client is the sole responsible for the conditions of presentation of the Unit for tests, trials and surveys and the conditions under which tests and trials are carried out. ARTICLE 3 3.1. - The Rules, procedures and instructions of the Society take into account at the date of their preparation the state of currently available and proven technical knowledge of the Industry. They are not a standard or a code of construction neither a guide for maintenance, a safety handbook or a guide of professional practices, all of which are assumed to be known in detail and carefully followed at all times by the Client. Committees consisting of personalities from the Industry contribute to the development of those documents. 3.2. - The Society only is qualified to apply its Rules and to interpret them. Any reference to them has no effect unless it involves the Society's intervention. 3.3. - The Services of the Society are carried out by professional Surveyors according to the applicable Rules and to the Code of Ethics of the Society. Surveyors have authority to decide locally on matters related to classification and certification of the Units, unless the Rules provide otherwise. 3.4. - The operations of the Society in providing its Services are exclusively conducted by way of random inspections and do not in any circumstances involve monitoring or exhaustive verification. ARTICLE 4 4.1. - The Society, acting by reference to its Rules: reviews the construction arrangements of the Units as shown on the documents presented by the Client; conducts surveys at the place of their construction; classes Units and enters their class in its Register; surveys periodically the Units in service to note that the requirements for the maintenance of class are met. The Client is to inform the Society without delay of circumstances which may cause the date or the extent of the surveys to be changed. ARTICLE 5 5.1. - The Society acts as a provider of services. This cannot be construed as an obligation bearing on the Society to obtain a result or as a warranty. 5.2. - The certificates issued by the Society pursuant to 5.1. here above are a statement on the level of compliance of the Unit to its Rules or to the documents of reference for the Services provided for. In particular, the Society does not engage in any work relating to the design, building, production or repair checks, neither in the operation of the Units or in their trade, neither in any advisory services, and cannot be held liable on those accounts. Its certificates cannot be construed as an implied or express warranty of safety, fitness for the purpose, seaworthiness of the Unit or of its value for sale, insurance or chartering. 5.3. - The Society does not declare the acceptance or commissioning of a Unit, nor of its construction in conformity with its design, that being the exclusive responsibility of its owner or builder, respectively.

SNOITIDNOC LARENEG NOISIVID ENIRAM

5.4. - The Services of the Society cannot create any obligation bearing on the Society or constitute any warranty of proper operation, beyond any representation set forth in the Rules, of any Unit, equipment or machinery, computer software of any sort or other comparable concepts that has been subject to any survey by the Society. ARTICLE 6 6.1. - The Society accepts no responsibility for the use of information related to its Services which was not provided for the purpose by the Society or with its assistance. 6.2. - If the Services of the Society cause to the Client a damage which is proved to be the direct and reasonably foreseeable consequence of an error or omission of the Society, its liability towards the Client is limited to ten times the amount of fee paid for the Service having caused the damage, provided however that this limit shall be subject to a minimum of eight thousand (8,000) Euro, and to a maximum which is the greater of eight hundred thousand (800,000) Euro and one and a half times the above mentioned fee. The Society bears no liability for indirect or consequential loss such as e.g. loss of revenue, loss of profit, loss of production, loss relative to other contracts and indemnities for termination of other agreements. 6.3. - All claims are to be presented to the Society in writing within three months of the date when the Services were supplied or (if later) the date when the events which are relied on of were first known to the Client, and any claim which is not so presented shall be deemed waived and absolutely barred. Time is to be interrupted thereafter with the same periodicity. ARTICLE 7 7.1. - Requests for Services are to be in writing. 7.2. - Either the Client or the Society can terminate as of right the requested Services after giving the other party thirty days' written notice, for convenience, and without prejudice to the provisions in Article 8 hereunder. 7.3. - The class granted to the concerned Units and the previously issued certificates remain valid until the date of effect of the notice issued according to 7.2. here above subject to compliance with 2.3. here above and Article 8 hereunder. 7.4. - The contract for classification and/or certification of a Unit cannot be transferred neither assigned. ARTICLE 8 8.1. - The Services of the Society, whether completed or not, involve, for the part carried out, the payment of fee upon receipt of the invoice and the reimbursement of the expenses incurred. 8.2. Overdue amounts are increased as of right by interest in accordance with the applicable legislation. 8.3. - The class of a Unit may be suspended in the event of non-payment of fee after a first unfruitful notification to pay. ARTICLE 9 9.1. - The documents and data provided to or prepared by the Society for its Services, and the information available to the Society, are treated as confidential. However: clients have access to the data they have provided to the Society and, during the period of classification of the Unit for them, to the classification file consisting of survey reports and certificates which have been prepared at any time by the Society for the classification of the Unit; copy of the documents made available for the classification of the Unit and of available survey reports can be handed over to another Classification Society, where appropriate, in case of the Unit's transfer of class; the data relative to the evolution of the Register, to the class suspension and to the survey status of the Units, as well as general technical information related to hull and equipment damages, are passed on to IACS (International Association of Classification Societies) according to the association working rules; the certificates, documents and information relative to the Units classed with the Society may be reviewed during certificating bodies audits and are disclosed upon order of the concerned governmental or inter-governmental authorities or of a Court having jurisdiction. The documents and data are subject to a file management plan. ARTICLE 10 10.1. - Any delay or shortcoming in the performance of its Services by the Society arising from an event not reasonably foreseeable by or beyond the control of the Society shall be deemed not to be a breach of contract. ARTICLE 11 11.1. - In case of diverging opinions during surveys between the Client and the Society's surveyor, the Society may designate another of its surveyors at the request of the Client. 11.2. - Disagreements of a technical nature between the Client and the Society can be submitted by the Society to the advice of its Marine Advisory Committee. ARTICLE 12 12.1. - Disputes over the Services carried out by delegation of Governments are assessed within the framework of the applicable agreements with the States, international Conventions and national rules. 12.2. - Disputes arising out of the payment of the Society's invoices by the Client are submitted to the Court of Nanterre, France. 12.3. - Other disputes over the present General Conditions or over the Services of the Society are exclusively submitted to arbitration, by three arbitrators, in London according to the Arbitration Act 1996 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof. The contract between the Society and the Client shall be governed by English law. ARTICLE 13 13.1. - These General Conditions constitute the sole contractual obligations binding together the Society and the Client, to the exclusion of all other representation, statements, terms, conditions whether express or implied. They may be varied in writing by mutual agreement. 13.2. - The invalidity of one or more stipulations of the present General Conditions does not affect the validity of the remaining provisions. 13.3. - The definitions herein take precedence over any definitions serving the same purpose which may appear in other documents issued by the Society.
BV Mod. Ad. ME 545 k - 17 December 2008

GUIDANCE NOTE NI 558

NI 558 Guidelines for Ultra Large Container Ships

SECTION 1 SECTION 2 SECTION 3 SECTION 4 SECTION 5 SECTION 6 SECTION 7 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 2 APPENDIX 3

GENERAL MATERIALS GLOBAL QUASI-STATIC WAVE LOADING AND STRUCTURAL RESPONSES HYDRO-ELASTIC STRUCTURAL RESPONSES (SPRINGING AND WHIPPING) LASHING BRIDGE VIBRATION SHAFT ALIGNMENT CLOSED FORM EQUATION FOR MINER SUM FATIGUE WHIPPING CORRECTION SHAFT ALIGNMENT CALCULATION METHODS

October 2010

Section 1

General
1 General
1.1 1.2 1.3 Introduction Scope of application Definitions

Section 2

Materials
1 General
1.1

Section 3

Global Quasi-Static Wave Loading and Structural Responses

1 Overall methodology for hydrodynamic loading
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 General Assumptions Models Stress calculation principle

Extreme conditions appraisal

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Assumptions Model construction Loads Checking criteria

12

Fatigue appraisal
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Assumptions Models Loads Fatigue criteria

14

Section 4

Hydro-elastic Structural Responses (Springing and Whipping)

1 Overall methodology for hydrodynamic loadings
1.1 1.2 1.3 General Models Dynamic loads and responses

18

Hull structure in extreme conditions

2.1 2.2 General Checking criteria

20

Fatigue appraisal
3.1 3.2 3.3 General Loads Short term histograms

21

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

Section 5

Lashing Bridge
1 General
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Container securing Materials Strength verification General arrangement

23

Forces to be applied
2.1 2.2 General Calculations

23

Strength criteria
3.1 Allowable stress

24

Section 6

Vibration
1 General
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Specificities of Ultra Large Container Ships Interaction between machinery and hull Static and dynamic interactions Importance of an integrated treatment of static and vibration phenomena

25

Vibrations analysis
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Analysis procedure Finite element model Natural frequencies and vibration mode shapes Response in forced vibrations

26

Comfort
3.1 General

27

Section 7

Shaft Alignment
1 Overall methodology
1.1 1.2 Assumptions and influence parameters Models

28

Static calculation
2.1 2.2 Input data and assumptions Alignment analysis

31

Running calculation
3.1 3.2 Input data and assumptions Alignment analysis

33

Shaft alignment checking and procedure

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 General requirements Optical checking Gap and sag Jack-up tests Control in running condition

35

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

Appendix 1 Closed Form Equation for Miner Sum

1 General
1.1 1.2 Application Required data

37

Damage ratio
2.1 Formula

38

Appendix 2 Fatigue Whipping Correction

1 General
1.1 1.2 1.3 Application Principles Methodology

39

Fatigue appraisal
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Whipping occurrence Whipping correction factors Stress range distributions correction Miner sum

40

Appendix 3 Shaft Alignment Calculation Methods

1 General calculations methods
1.1 1.2 1.3 Hertz contact theory Oil film theory Global equations: equilibrium of system

44

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 1

SECTION 1

GENERAL

1
1.1

General
Introduction

1.1.1 In the past few years, there has been a dramatic increase in the size of container ships. Today, it is not unusual to come across designs with a capacity of 10,000 TEUs and above. 1.1.2 Due to the hull girder increases in size, it is no longer the case of simply applying NR467 Rules for the Classification of Steel Ships. New engineering challenges apply to such large structures which must be addressed through direct calculations of hydrodynamic loads and dynamic structural behaviour. 1.1.3 In particular, two dynamic phenomena, effects of whipping and springing, need to be taken into consideration for increase in the total vertical bending moments as well as possible decreases in fatigue life of certain structural details. Shaft alignment and vibration needs special consideration due to increase in propulsion power, size of propeller, propeller shaft and engine, and inevitable increased flexing of a large structure. 1.1.4 The purpose of this Guidance Note is to bring to the attention of the designer, the particular structural, shaft alignment and vibration studies that needs to be carried out for Ultra Large Container Ships, respecting at the same time, applicable NR467 Rules for the Classification of Steel Ships.

1.2

Scope of application

1.2.1 This Guidance Note applies to Ultra Large Container Ships complying with NR467 Rules for Steel Ships under the service notation container ship as defined in NR467 Rules for Steel Ships, Pt A, Ch 1, Sec 2, and where additional structural (hydrodynamic) and engineering assessment is needed owing to their large size. 1.2.2 Unless otherwise specified, this Guidance Note is to be read and applied as additional to Guidance Note NI 532 Guidelines for Structural Analysis of Container Ships for ship structures. 1.2.3 There is no strict threshold for determining when a container ship is large enough to justify additional studies. However, due to large deck openings and speed characteristics of container ships with classical general arrangement, it is recommended to carry out additional studies for ships of more than 300 m length between perpendiculars. 1.2.4 For ships exceeding a length between perpendiculars of 350 m, the ship is considered as an ULCS and the Society would require additional studies, as recommended in this Guidance Note or as deemed equivalent. 1.2.5 Between 300 m and 350 m length between perpendiculars, the analysis of the risk of springing, strong whipping and the characteristics of the propulsion installation may allow to consider that the ship does not need to be considered as an ULCS. 1.2.6 This Guidance Note applies to container ships with a classical general arrangement, i.e. large deck openings and engine in the after part of accommodation in the mid-ship area. For other general arrangements, the analysis defined in [1.2.5] will allow to determined if the ship has to be considered as an ULCS or not.

1.3

Definitions

1.3.1 NR467 Rules for the Classification of Steel Ships is referred to as Rules for Steel Ships in this Guidance Note. 1.3.2 The Ultra Large Container Ship is abbreviated as ULCS in this Guidance Note. 1.3.3 Slamming is the hydrodynamic impact caused by sudden contact of the bottom structure with the sea surface at the fore and aft ends. 1.3.4 Slapping is the hydrodynamic impact caused by violent contact of the bow with waves, e.g. when there is a large bow flare.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

NI 558, Sec 1

1.3.5 Springing is the resonant wave induced hull girder vibrations. 1.3.6 Whipping is the transitory vibration response of the hull girder in the first natural mode, due to impulsive loading such as slamming. 1.3.7 "CFD", means Computational Fluid Dynamics, method for hydrodynamic calculation of the ship behaviour on waves. 1.3.8 "BEM" means Boundary Element Model for hydrodynamic loads calculation on waves.

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 2

SECTION 2

MATERIALS

1
1.1

General

1.1.1 Materials used are to comply with Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 1. The manufacturing processes and testing are to comply with the applicable requirements of NR216 Materials and Welding. 1.1.2 Certain structural members may need material thicknesses exceeding the limits shown in the Rules for Steel Ships Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 1. Such materials and their characteristics are to be considered on a case by case basis, the designer providing the information required by the Society.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

NI 558, Sec 3

SECTION 3

GLOBAL QUASI-STATIC WAVE LOADING AND STRUCTURAL RESPONSES

1
1.1

Overall methodology for hydrodynamic loading

General

1.1.1 Navigation conditions assumptions The fatigue and extreme analysis must take into account ship speed reduction in high sea states and route changes. The return of experience for ship in operation shows that when the wave height increases, the ships speed decreases due to either increase in wave resistance or when the ships route is altered by the decision of the Master. Ships motions directly influence the decision of the Master, for example accelerations on bridge, roll and pitch angles, presence of green water and/or slamming. 1.1.2 Global quasi-static wave hydrodynamic loading The quasi-static part of the hydrodynamic loading is calculated by a validated numerical seakeeping code. The use of codes based on the Boundary Element Method (BEM) are recommended. Quasi-static part of the loading allows for the hydrodynamic and structural calculations which are to be performed independently. The ship is considered rigid and the resulting hydrodynamic pressures and inertial loads are considered to be transferred to the structure. 1.1.3 In quasi-static type of loading, the evaluation of the longitudinal distribution of the internal loads (bending moment, shear forces ) are not required. The internal loads are calculated as a difference between the inertial and pressure loads at each section. 1.1.4 Both linear and non-linear quasi-static calculations need to be performed. The minimum non-linearities that are to be included are based on the Froude Krylov approximation. Linear results are used directly for spectral fatigue analysis and for determination of the design values of different loading parameters. This is done by performing the long term probability calculations. The non-linear quasi-static structural analysis is performed for extreme loads analysis. Both linear and non-linear models are to be properly balanced, in particular regarding the roll damping contribution for the internal loads and for the final loading of the FE model. 1.1.5 The oblique wave conditions for torsional loads may be critical for ULCS. 1.1.6 Local hydrodynamic effects Large bow flare and relatively flat stern area may be sensitive to local slamming/slapping induced structural responses. A dedicated model for transfer of the slamming/slapping pressures to the finite element model is to be used. Quasi-static structural response can be considered. Either CFD or Boundary Element Method can be used for calculation of slamming/slapping pressures, provided they are properly validated and coupled with the seakeeping code. Alternatively model test results can be used. The green water loading are to be evaluated either experimentally or using the CFD methods.

1.2

Assumptions

1.2.1 Fatigue, extreme responses Both fatigue analysis and extreme response analysis require the description of all the navigational parameters: scatter diagram speed and route profile criteria for speed reduction and route change.

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 3

1.2.2 Scatter diagram For the fatigue calculation, the scatter diagram used is to be a worldwide scatter diagram, except if the ship is designed for North Atlantic or North Pacific. For extreme response analysis, the IACS scatter diagram (See IACS Rec. 34), that describes North Atlantic conditions is recommended. 1.2.3 Calculation conditions Computations are to be carried out for: 24 headings (in 15 steps) at least 3 ship speeds: Full nominal speed Vn 0.6 Vn a minimum speed of 7 knots.

1.2.4 Operation conditions For each heading, ship speed and sea state wave period, the ship behaviour is computed applying the spectral method. In considering all the criteria defined in [1.2.5], the following can be determined for each heading: the acceptable maximum speed versus the wave height the maximum wave height above which the ship route is to be changed, as shown in Fig 1. For any given sea state, the speed is first reduced to satisfy the criteria, and if this is not possible the route is changed. For each sea state period it is defined the operable conditions providing for each heading the possible ship speed as defined in [1.1.1] versus the wave height and the wave height above which the ship route is changed as illustrated in Fig 2. Figure 1 : Operable conditions for one sea period Tp and one heading
Hs route change 7 knots 0,6 Vn Hs2 Vn Hs3 Wave leading

Hsmax

Hs1 Ship route

Figure 2 : Operable conditions for one sea state Tp and four headings
Hsmax route change 7 knots 0,6Vn route change

Vn Vn Vn route change

Vn

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

NI 558, Sec 3

1.2.5 Ship behaviour criteria A criteria must be defined to take into account the speed reduction and the route change. As a basis, the following values can be used: pitch: 1.5 RMS (Root Mean Square) roll: 4 RMS transverse acceleration at bridge: 0.1g RMS vertical acceleration at bridge (ships side): 0.2g RMS slamming event at bow: 20/h. Any other values can be used if duly justified and documented. 1.2.6 Criteria calibration Due to the existence of various computing methods, it is recommended to calibrate the criteria on a size of a ship for which Rules for Steel Ships are applicable, by verification of the obtained vertical hull girder bending moment.

1.3

Models

1.3.1 Hydrodynamic model Typical hydrodynamic mesh for hydrodynamic calculation is shown in Fig 3. In the case of linear calculations the mesh contains the mean underwater part only, while for the nonlinear calculation it contains also the part above the mean waterline. Mesh sizes are to be chosen so that the minimal wave length (defined on the basis of encounter frequency) is covered by at least 6 panels. Alternatively, the special treatment of the high frequency calculations can be used in order to avoid the numerical inaccuracies inherent to the BEM method. In any case the problem of irregular frequencies is to be sufficiently solved. Special care should be given to the inclusion of roll damping. Figure 3 : Typical hydrodynamic mesh for linear (yellow) and non linear (yellow+green) seakeeping calculations

10

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 3

1.3.2 Finite element model A finite element model of the whole ship is required. For the purpose of yielding check, fine meshing is to be used for primary supporting members. For the purpose of fatigue check, very fine meshing of local details are to be used (See Fig 4). The model may be a coarse mesh model (see Fig 5 and Fig 6), but so that the stiffness of the hull girder and all primary supporting members are properly represented In such a case, prescribed displacements obtained from the global coarse mesh model are used at the boundaries of the local models. Figure 4 : Very fine mesh of local details

Figure 5 : Typical coarse mesh model

Figure 6 : Typical coarse mesh model showing fine meshing of certain structural details

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

11

NI 558, Sec 3

1.4

Stress calculation principle

1.4.1 General The hydrodynamic seakeeping of the rigid body provides the different loading cases for FEM model. Each loading case is composed of the hydrodynamic pressure loading on the wetted panels, and the inertial and gravity loading on each finite element. The perfect equilibrium of the overall loading needs to be ensured. Due to the differences between the hydrodynamic and the structural meshes, a special care needs to be taken for the pressure transfer. Both pressure and nodal forces approaches for pressure transfer are acceptable. 1.4.2 Extreme wave stresses Extreme wave loading cases are defined using the equivalent wave concept and non linear ship motion computation. A linear long term analysis (with a 25 year return period) is performed for different loading parameters, taking into account all the operating conditions described in [1.2]: Vertical Bending Moment at 0.5 L Vertical Shear Force at 0.25 L and 0.75 L Horizontal Bending Moment at 0.5 L Horizontal Shear Force at 0.25 L and 0.75 L Torque at 0.25 L and 0.75 L. For each loading parameter, the long term analysis results in a linear long term value and a long term most contributive condition (speed, heading, sea state). Speed and heading of the most contributive condition are used to choose the corresponding RAO. The equivalent design wave is built from this RAO. The wave frequency is the one for which the RAO takes its maximum. The wave amplitude is given by the ratio of the long term design value by the maximal RAO. For this equivalent design wave the non-linear ship motions and corresponding loads are computed using a time domain seakeeping program. The extreme values of the stresses are calculated by 3D FEM analysis. All extra forces needed in the time domain simulation to ensure course keeping and to avoid low frequency motions are to be properly included in the loading of the structural mesh. 1.4.3 Fatigue wave stresses Fatigue calculations within the quasi static approach are based on the linear spectral analysis, which can eventually be corrected for the details close to the mean water level in order to include the intermittent wetting effects. Response Amplitude Operators (RAO) of stresses are built for every speed and heading given in the operating conditions (see [1.2]). Special care is to be given to the choice of the stress direction versus the weld joint.

2
2.1

Extreme conditions appraisal

Assumptions

2.1.1 The appraisal in extreme conditions, according to the checking criteria in [2.4], is to be performed using the structural loads determined by the application of the present Guidance Note, but for a probability level of 10-5.

2.2

Model construction

2.2.1 Elements The structural model is to represent the primary supporting members with the plating to which they are connected. Ordinary stiffeners are also to be represented in the model in order to reproduce the stiffness and the inertia of the actual hull girder structure. 2.2.2 Net scantlings All the elements described in [2.2.1] are to be modelled with their net scantlings according to Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 2. Therefore, also the hull girder stiffness and inertia reproduced by the model are for net scanlings of the hull structure.

12

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 3

2.2.3 Model extension The complete ship is to be modelled so that the coupling between torsion, horizontal and vertical bending is properly taken into account in the structural analysis. Superstructures are to be modelled for correct lightweight distribution. 2.2.4 Boundary conditions of the model To prevent rigid body motions of the overall model, the constraints defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, App 3, Tab 2 are to be applied.

2.3

Loads

2.3.1 General Internal loads are to be properly distributed over the model length, to obtain the actual longitudinal distribution of the still water bending moment. 2.3.2 Lightweight The lightweight of the ship is to be distributed over the model length, longitudinally and vertically, to obtain the actual LCG, VCG and still water bending moment. 2.3.3 Container loads The container loads are to be properly modelled, to reproduce the weight distribution along the ship and the local reactions on the structure. Containers in holds and deck containers may be modelled by means of bays, being connected to double-bottom, transverse bulkheads, and/or hatch coamings. 2.3.4 Liquid internal loads Due consideration is to be given to the loads imposed by liquids in tanks on the hull structure.

2.4

Checking criteria

2.4.1 Yielding criteria The allowable stresses for coarse mesh and fine mesh, depending on the steel grade, are obtained from the following formulae: Von Mises equivalent stress: Ry VM, All = --------R m Shear stress: All = 0,5Ry /( R m) (N/mm2) where: Ry R, m : Minimum yield stress, in N/mm2, of the material, defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7 : Partial safety factors, defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 3.

Allowable stresses for coarse mesh and fine mesh, depending on steel grade and partial safety factors, are shown in Tab 1. 2.4.2 Additional criteria for analysis based on fine mesh models Fine mesh finite element models are defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, App 1, [3.4]. For all the elements modelled in fine mesh, it is to be checked that the normal stresses 1 and 2 and the shear stress 12, calculated according to Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, App 1, [5], are in compliance with the following formulae: Ry --------- max( 1 , 2 ) R m

Ry 0 ,5 --------- 12 R m

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

13

NI 558, Sec 3

Table 1 : Allowable stresses depending on material factor and partial safety factors
Von Mises equivalent stress VM,All 192,0 Coarse mesh 246,1 266,6 282,3 219,4 Fine mesh 281,3 304,7 322,7 Shear stress All 96,0 123,1 133,3 141,2 109,7 140,6 152,4 161,3 Material factor k 1 0,78 0,72 0,68 1 0,78 0,72 0,68 Partial safety factors R 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,05 1,05 1,05 1,05 m 1,02 1,02 1,02 1,02 1,02 1,02 1,02 1,02

Steel Mild AH32 AH36 AH40 Mild AH32 AH36 AH40

2.4.3 Buckling Buckling of plate elements, which are considered as part of primary supporting members, must be carried out according to Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 3. The following buckling modes are to be considered: compression and bending with or without shear shear bi-axial compression and shear.

3
3.1

Fatigue appraisal
Assumptions

3.1.1 Fatigue check Fatigue verification is to be performed at hot spot cyclic stress locations defined in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 12, App 2 (Area 9, Area 10) and at other high stressed areas resulting from the global hull response on wave as defined in this Section. The fatigue check is to be performed following the procedure given in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4, for welded joints, with the use of notch stress range histograms (see [3.1.3]) and S-N curves. Use of hot spot stress or nominal stress may be acceptable if duly documented and submitted to the Society for approval For non-welded locations without notches, the use of local hot spot stress is to be considered. 3.1.2 Corrosion The verified structure is assumed to be sufficiently protected against corrosion during the ships life. In case of no corrosion protection, the S-N curve constant is considered to be reduced by a factor of 2 and the slope parameter is constant for all stress ranges (there is no change of slope). 3.1.3 Stress range histogram The short term stress range histograms may be represented by either: a direct calculated cumulative distribution (i , Ni), or a Rayleigh distribution obtained from the stress range spectrum area. The long-term stress range histograms may be represented by a direct calculated cumulative distribution (i , Ni). If deemed necessary, a two-parameter Weibull distribution may be determined from the calculated distribution. The two Weibull law parameters, the curve shape and the reference stress range R are estimated from the computed probability stress range distribution as follows: a best fitting curve is obtained by a regression curve (following a Weibull law) using the calculated distribution within the range of probability [10-1, 10-4] the reference stress range R is fitted as best as possible at the reference probability of exceedance pR =10-2.

14

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 3

3.2

Models

3.2.1 General The ship hull structure modelling has to allow for the identification of the hot spot points where fatigue verification is performed. Modelling principles are given in [1.3.2]. 3.2.2 Model extension The complete ship is to be modelled so that the coupling between torsion, horizontal and vertical bending is properly taken into account in the structural analysis. Superstructures are to be modelled in order to reproduce the correct lightweight distribution. 3.2.3 Net scantlings All the elements in [2.1.1] are to be modelled with their net scantlings according to Rules for Steel Ships Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 2. Therefore, also the hull girder stiffness and inertia to be reproduced by the model are those obtained by considering the net scantlings of the hull structures.

3.3

Loads

3.3.1 Ship loading conditions The ship loading conditions to be considered are defined in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4. 3.3.2 Ship navigation conditions The navigation conditions to be taken into account for the determination of the short term stress range histograms has to consider the design sea states (Hs/Tp), the possible wave heading () and ship speed versus wave significant height and period as defined in [1.2]. 3.3.3 Sea states The sea states to be considered are defined in [1.2.2]. Other scatter diagram may be applied if duly justified and submitted to the Society for approval. 3.3.4 Probability ( , V , HS/Tp) Each ( , V , Hs/Tp) is associated with a probability of occurrence prob( , V , Hs/Tp) to be combined with the probabilities of occurrence of Hs/Tp given by the wave scatter diagram as defined in [1.2.2]. For each sea direction i, from the operability analysis as defined in [1.2.4], a maximum wave significant height HSM is to be determined above which route change is considered as necessary to respect the criteria. Hs HSM is associated with a probability prob(i , V , Hs/Tp) = prob (i) Hs > HSM is associated with a probability: when route change is necessary: p(i , V , Hs/Tp) = 0 when route change is not necessary and i is not the closest of the with necessary route change: prob(i , V , Hs/Tp) = prob (i) when route change is not necessary and i is the closest of the with necessary route change: prob(i , V , Hs/Tp) is calculated so that the sum on all i of all probabilities equal 1. The global probability of occurrence of (i , V , Hs/Tp) is equal to: prob(i , V , Hs/Tp) prob(Hs/Tp)

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

15

NI 558, Sec 3

Route change is to be considered for the following conditions of acceptable ship speed Vmax: 127.5 < < 232.5 and Vmax < 0.6 Vn 67.5 < < 127.5 or 232.5 < < 292.5 22.5 < < 67.5 or 292.5 < < 337.5 and Vmax < Vn.

3.4

Fatigue criteria

3.4.1 General The cumulative damage during the design life of the ship is measured by the total Miner sum (see App 1) which can be calculated with the applicable S-N curve: either by the sum of the elementary calculated Miner sums with the stress range histograms determined for each selected short term conditions: sea state, sea heading, ship speed or directly from the long term stress range distribution as defined in [3.3.2]. 3.4.2 Fatigue strength The S-N curve to be used for fatigue verification depends on the hot spot location: welded joint non weld location. Fatigue life time improvement can be obtained by post weld treatment such as: grinding needle or ultrasonic peening TIG or plasma dressing. In principle, when a post weld improvement treatment is applied, it concerns a limited number of locations. 3.4.3 Welded joint S-N curves For welded details, the S-N curve to be applied is the S-N curve defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4. This curve has to be associated to notch stress range values, i.e., taking into account the misalignment factor Km and the fatigue notch factor KF as defined in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4. When a post weld improvement treatment is applied, the S-N curve is to be determined from applicable standards duly justified and submitted to the Society for approval. The S-N curve may be modified for corrosion effects during the ship life as defined in [3.1.2]. 3.4.4 Non welded detail S-N curve For non-welded details the S-N curve to be applied is the S-N curve of Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4. This curve has to be associated to corrected stress range values with specific factor KF. KF values are function of the cutting quality, post treatment and control quality and are given in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4. Any other S-N curve may be accepted on a case by case basis, if duly justified. In such case, the S-N curve has to take into account: the mean stress level (R ratio) due to static loads effect of maximum and minimum stress of the cycles exceeding the yield strength, if relevant possible corrosion effects during the ships life as defined in [3.1.2]. 3.4.5 Damage ratio The total damage ratio during the ship life can be calculated either by: the long term stress range histogram as defined in [3.1.3], or the short term stress range histogram as defined in [3.1.3] for considered navigational condition ( , V , Hs/Tp) as defined in [3.3], and the applicable S-N curve. When the short term approach is applied, the total damage is the sum of all short term damages, each of them affected by the probability defined in [3.3.4].

16

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 3

For a given stress range histogram, the corresponding Miner sum can be calculated either by: a direct Miner sum from the long term distribution, or a closed form equation as defined in App 1 when the histogram is represented by a Weibull or Rayleigh distribution. In case of no corrosion protection (see [3.1.2]): the S-N curve constant Kp is to be divided by 2 the S-N curve is taken without change of slope. 3.4.6 Checking criteria The cumulative damage ratio D calculated according to [3.4.5] is to comply with the criteria of Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

17

NI 558, Sec 4

SECTION 4

HYDRO-ELASTIC STRUCTURAL RESPONSES (SPRINGING AND WHIPPING)

1
1.1

Overall methodology for hydrodynamic loadings

General

1.1.1 In the case of ULCS, the first structural natural frequencies are much lower than for conventional ships, and hydroelastic structural responses need to be considered. These hydroelastic responses are classified in two different parts, springing and whipping: usually springing appears in the moderate sea states which contain important energy at high frequencies. Ship speed being important in these moderate sea states, the encounter frequency are significantly increased, consequently the linear springing can become important both for torsion and vertical bending the whipping response does not depend on the structural natural frequencies only, but mainly on the severity of the impulsive loading. 1.1.2 The ULCS may have high speeds, a large bow flare and a rather flat stern area, therefore slamming and slapping loads on the ULCS may become very important. 1.1.3 Due to their particular nature, springing is mainly important for fatigue issues while the whipping is relevant both for fatigue and extreme structural responses. 1.1.4 Springing can be treated in frequency domain while the whipping is to be treated in time domain with proper modelling of slamming and slapping loads. 1.1.5 Special care is to be taken when separating the quasi-static and hydroelastic parts of the responses especially for structural details. The top down analysis for the structural details is recommended. 1.1.6 The hydroelastic modelling is to be made using the fully coupled approach. The modal superposition method is recommended.

1.2

Models

1.2.1 Hydrodynamic models The requirements for a hydrodynamic model does not differ much from that for quasi-static loading. However the calculations need to run for higher encounter frequencies, therefore the mesh is to be properly refined or alternatively, special numerical treatment of the high frequency range is to be made to improve accuracy. 1.2.2 Finite element model A finite element model (FE model) of the whole ship is to be used. The model is to be such that the stiffness of the hull girder and all the primary supporting members is properly modelled. For the purpose of modal analysis, the mass of the finite element model needs to include both the lightweight and the deadweight mass and inertia distributions. To this purpose, the combination of the following two techniques can be used: additional nodal masses fitted either directly on the structural model or through additional elements designed in order to transfer loads without introducing artificial stiffness (interpolation elements for example) modification of the mass property of the plate and beam elements. Special attention has to be given to the modelling of massive items (main engine, container stacks, etc.). The mass of the liquids (ballast, bunker, etc.) can be modelled using nodal masses, either spread on the tank boundary or preferably concentrated at the liquids centre of mass.

18

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 4

The FE model is to be built in such a way that as few artificial natural modes are obtained as possible during the FE modal analysis. The first natural modes of the hull girder vibration must be free of artificial Eigen modes. To this purpose: most of the finite element nodes are to lie at the intersection of primary supporting members (coarse mesh model) particular attention is to be given to a correct modelling of the out of plane bending stiffness of primary supporting members. When the response in a structural detail is required, a fine mesh or a very fine mesh model of the considered area has to be used. This local model can be calculated separately from the global whole ship model in a static linear way, using prescribed displacements obtained from the global whole ship model.

1.3

Dynamic loads and responses

1.3.1 Springing appraisal Springing hydrodynamic loading and corresponding structural responses are calculated by applying the fully coupled hydroelastic analysis within the so-called modal analysis. 1.3.2 Modal analysis The first step in the analysis is the modal analysis of the 3D FE structural model. The modal analysis is to be done with care. Local structural modes are to be excluded. Normally 10 dry modes are considered to be sufficient. Once the dry modes are calculated, the modal displacements are to be transferred from the structural model to the hydrodynamic model and hydrodynamic problems are to be evaluated. Once the hydrodynamic problem are evaluated, a fully coupled dynamic equation is analysed resulting in modal amplitudes. Special care is to be given to the separation of the quasi-static and dynamic parts of the response, to ensure a proper correlation of the results. The quasi-static part of the response is calculated using the method explained in Sec 3. The dynamic part of the response is calculated by summing up the dynamic contribution of each mode. Special attention is to be given to the top down analysis for the dynamic part. Typical structural response is shown in Fig 1. Figure 1 : Typical first structural natural mode shape

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

19

NI 558, Sec 4

1.3.3 Whipping loads Evaluation of the whipping loads and responses is performed in time domain using a non-linear approach for the hydrodynamic part whilst the structural part remains linear. Modal superposition method is applied in time domain. Special care is to be given to the evaluation of slamming loads. Calibrated 2D strip approach may be accepted. Sectional slamming loads may be calculated using the Boundary Element Method. 1.3.4 Extreme behaviour Only whipping is relevant for extreme structural behaviour. The whipping contribution is to be calculated on the equivalent design wave condition considered in Sec 3, [1.2.3]. 1.3.5 Fatigue Both springing and whipping are relevant for fatigue calculations. Springing contribution may be calculated in frequency domain within the classical spectral fatigue analysis approach applied on the total Response Amplitude Operator (RAO) of the stress responses.

2
2.1

Hull structure in extreme conditions

General

2.1.1 Only whipping is to be considered in addition to quasi static wave and still water loads for extreme calculations.

2.2

Checking criteria

2.2.1 Yielding criteria The allowable stresses for coarse mesh, depending on the steel grade, are obtained from the following formula: Von Mises equivalent stress: Ry --------- VM R m Shear stress: All = 0,5 /( R m) (N/mm2) Allowable stresses for coarse mesh and fine mesh, depending on steel grade and partial safety factors, are shown in Tab 1. 2.2.2 Buckling Buckling of plate elements, which are part of primary supporting members, must be carried out according to Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 3. The following buckling modes are to be considered: compression and bending with or without shear shear bi-axial compression and shear. Table 1 : Allowable stresses depending on material factor and partial safety factors
Von Mises equivalent stress VM,All 225,9 Coarse mesh 289,6 309,7 332,2 Shear stress All 96,0 123,1 133,3 141,2 Material factor k 1 0,78 0,72 0,68 Partial safety factors R 1,02 1,02 1,02 1,02 m 1,02 1,02 1,02 1,02

Steel Mild AH32 AH36 AH40

20

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 4

3
3.1

Fatigue appraisal
General

3.1.1 Fatigue check Fatigue verification is to be performed at the hot spot cyclic stress location as defined in Sec 3, [3.1.1]. Additional hot spot cyclic stress locations may be added taking into account the dynamic stress response calculations as defined in [1.3]. The fatigue check is to be performed following the procedure given in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4 for welded joints, with the use of notch stress range histograms (see [3.3]) and S-N curves. 3.1.2 Damage ratio The damage ratio is to be calculated as defined in Sec 3, [3] taking into account the requirements in [3.3]. 3.1.3 Checking criteria The checking criteria is given in Sec 3, [3.4.6]. 3.1.4 Springing Springing effect on fatigue damage is to be considered for navigational conditions where the first hull girder mode frequency lies within the encountering wave spectrum frequency bandwith (see [1.3]). 3.1.5 Whipping When the ship hull shape at bow and stern may give rise to possible larger slamming and slapping forces than for conventional ships, a whipping analysis may be required. The analysis is to be performed according to [1.3.3] with the objective of determining the sea states and navigational conditions where whipping response may be expected. Whipping effects can be maintained to normal level by adapting the operational conditions, maximum ship speed versus sea state/heading (see Sec 3, [1.2.3]). If whipping effects cannot be limited to normal level, the impact on fatigue damage is to be considered for the navigational conditions where slamming/slapping may occur. Whipping loads and responses are to be determined as defined in [1.4].

3.2

Loads

3.2.1 Sea states, sea headings and ship speed The sea states, sea headings and ship speeds to be considered are defined in Sec 3, [1.2]. For springing and whipping analysis, the number of headings may be reduced taking into account the objective i.e. extreme loads or fatigue, and the computing method. 3.2.2 Probability ( , V , HS/Tp) The probabilities of the navigational conditions ( , V , Hs/Tp) are defined in Sec 3, [3.3.4]. 3.2.3 Springing/Whipping combination Due to different origins of both phenomena, it is assumed that they do not occur for the same navigational conditions and therefore they should not to be combined.

3.3

Short term histograms

3.3.1 Stress range histograms When relevant, whipping and springing responses are to be taken into account in addition to the wave response. In such a case, the short term stress range histograms are represented by either: the direct calculated cumulative distribution (i , Ni), or the Rayleigh distribution calculated from the response spectrum, or the Weibull distribution best fitting the calculated distribution.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

21

NI 558, Sec 4

3.3.2 Springing correction The short term distribution is to be calculated from the stress range spectrum including wave and springing responses as defined in [1.3]. The short term cumulative distribution is to be calculated as: (i , Ni) distribution from a time signal simulation and Rainflow counting, or a Rayleigh distribution considering the global spectrum response (wave plus springing) area. 3.3.3 Whipping correction App 2 provides a practical simplified method for determining the necessity of whipping correction (see [3.1.5]). When required, the short-term stress distribution is to be determined from the wave short-term distribution modified to take into account the stress range increase and transient response decaying cycles. The short-term distribution is to be calculated as: (i , Ni) distribution from the time signal simulation and Rainflow counting, or a Weibull distribution best fitting the calculated distribution, when possible.

22

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 5

SECTION 5

LASHING BRIDGE

1
1.1

General
Container securing

1.1.1 Containers on deck may be secured by means of lashing bridges permanently connected by welding to the ships structure. Lashing bridges allow a higher level of lashing.

1.2

Materials

1.2.1 Materials used are to comply with Rules for Steel Ships Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 1. The manufacturing processes and testing are to comply with the applicable requirements of NR216 Materials and Welding.

1.3

Strength verification

1.3.1 Plans of the lashing bridge structure are to be submitted to the Society together with details of the supporting structure for approval together with details of calculations performed with justifications. 1.3.2 The Society would expect calculations to be made using at least a three-dimensional beam analysis or finite element analysis. The calculations are to be performed for net scantlings in accordance with Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 4, Sec 2.

1.4

General arrangement

1.4.1 Continuity of structure is to be assured at the connections of the vertical supports between the lashing bridge and the ships structure. The Society would consider each structural detail on a case by case basis.

2
2.1

Forces to be applied
General

2.1.1 The forces applied to a lashing bridge structure are to consider the loads transferred by containers. Force intensity is considered by the Society on a case by case basis, depending on the lashing arrangement and the proportion of the load that is considered as transferred to the lashing bridge structure.

2.2

Calculations

2.2.1 In performing load calculations from container lashings, applicable loads for container stacks can be determined in accordance with Rules for Steel Ships, Pt D, Ch 2, Sec 2. The accelerations are to be considered at the containers centre of gravity, as defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 5 Sec 3, [3.4]. 2.2.2 Forces applied on each fixed cargo securing device on the lashing bridge, should consider forces in tension (depending on the rolling side) and forces in the horizontal direction (i.e. Y direction as defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 1, Sec 2). In general, the SWL (Safe Working Load) for fixed cargo securing device may be taken as 250 kN and the applied force as 70 % of this SWL value. 2.2.3 Transverse racking forces on the lashing bridge structure (due to hull deflection and horizontal container forces) and their effects on the hull connections and at corners of vertical and transverse members of the structure, are to be taken into consideration. This may be achieved by means of three-dimensional or finite element analysis.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

23

NI 558, Sec 5

3
3.1

Strength criteria
Allowable stress

3.1.1 Allowable stresses are to be in accordance with Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 3 for all supports and plating elements.

24

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 6

SECTION 6

VIBRATION

1
1.1

General
Specificities of Ultra Large Container Ships

1.1.1 A typical ULCS may have main dimensions exceeding 350 m length overall and 50 m breadth., with a propulsive plant output power of about 80 MW on a single shaft, 12 or even 14 cylinder slow speed diesel engine, a shaft diameter exceeding 1,000 mm, and a propeller weighing 100 tons or more. These proportionally large scale characteristics may have a direct influence on the vibration response of the hull steelwork, which must remain within the same limits as for more conventional ships. Limits are defined for example in ISO 6954 or ISO 6954-200 standards. 1.1.2 Potential for resonant response of hull girder flexural and torsion vibration modes with main engine excitations are higher on ULCSs than on smaller container ships.

1.2

Interaction between machinery and hull

1.2.1 The following are considered to have a particular importance with respect to vibrations for ULCSs due to their large scale characteristics. The direct consequences of a large length and breadth are: a dramatic increase of hull steelwork flexibility, especially in the engine room and in way of the double bottom a decrease of natural frequencies corresponding to hull girder vibration modes, with a potential for resonant response of these modes with excitation frequencies of the main engine. The direct consequence of a big shaft diameter is a very big increase of its stiffness (increasing twofold), considering the shaft diameter increases the flexural moment of inertia by about 16 times. As a conclusion, it is not possible to ignore machinery-hull interaction on ULCSs and potential vibration problems must be carefully investigated using a scientific approach, taking into account all relevant parameters. In addition, the consequences of high output power on ULCSs are that propeller forces and moments are potentially high, having a direct influence on the level of vibration response.

1.3

Static and dynamic interactions

1.3.1 When performing ship vibration analysis, one has to keep in mind that the static (or quasi-static) contact conditions between interdependent parts, i.e. machinery and steel-work, influence significant number of parameters playing a part in the vibration phenomena. These contact conditions may even modify the concerned elastic systems, and consequently change the values of their respective natural frequencies. Basically, the bearing offsets defined when performing shaft alignment operations have a direct influence on oil film characteristics in running conditions (oil film thickness and oil film stiffness). Natural frequencies and corresponding vibration mode shapes of line shafting and engine room/double bottom steelwork depend on the distribution of this oil film stiffness because the oil film connects the shaft to the structure. It is important to keep in mind that oil film thickness (and consequently stiffness) also strongly depends on the mean values of propeller forces and moments, which are potentially high (or even very high) on ULCSs, due to the power output.

1.4

Importance of an integrated treatment of static and vibration phenomena

1.4.1 Considering strong interaction between hull and propulsive plant in ULCSs, it is no longer possible to perform separately vibration analysis and shaft alignment studies (see Sec 7). 1.4.2 Oil film stiffness in running conditions must be accurately calculated taking into account structural flexibility and used as input data in vibration calculations.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

25

NI 558, Sec 6

1.4.3 Finite element model of an ULCS for calculating vibration response is sensitive to the presence of a large number of rigid elements for connecting masses representing containers to the ship structure. 1.4.4 The big size of rudder blade of ULCS could significantly influence values of hydrodynamic excitations generated by the propeller and consequently values of vibration response.

2
2.1

Vibrations analysis
Analysis procedure

2.1.1 The final objective of a vibration analysis of a ship is to keep the vibration level onboard within permissible limits (as recommended by recognized standard such as ISO, or as required by the Owners specification). In order to comply with these requirements, it is of primary importance to perform adequate studies, as early as possible at the design stage, to be in a position to take the necessary decisions to avoid costly structural modifications later on. Choice of number of propeller blades is to be made with vibration in mind. The target is to minimise, as far as possible, the risk of resonance between natural frequencies of the ship structure and excitation frequency generated by the propeller, this frequency depends on the number of propeller blades and on the rpm value.

2.2

Finite element model

2.2.1 Although it is possible to perform vibration analysis using a finite element model which has been developed for strength or fatigue calculations, it is always preferable to use a finite element method specifically developed for dynamic analysis. A fine mesh is usually needed for static calculations. However, such a fine mesh model potentially generates a large number of local vibration modes which in turn can make the overall results meaningless. Fig 1 shows a finite element model of a ULCS, typically having a superstructure located in the middle part of the ship. The vibration analysis is always performed for relevant loading conditions (i.e. in ballast and loaded). The containers in a full load condition are to be represented and accordingly distributed with care in the modelling as this may have a significant impact on the results. On a container ship, the masses corresponding to cargo loads are distributed over the length of the ship, however they are also distributed over the height (this is about twice that of the hull girder depth). Consequently, it is not possible to assume in the vibration analysis that the mass of a stack of containers is concentrated only on the double bottom. The modelling therefore has to reflect accurately the position of centre of gravity of the stack, as well as the mass and the mass inertia. Usually, mass of containers is represented in the model by concentrated masses. These masses are to be linked to the finite element model representing hull structure. If rigid elements are used for modelling the connection between the containers and the hull structure along hull girder, it may induce an overestimated stiffness in torsion of the hull girder. This results in having a very significant influence on values of natural frequencies of torsional vibration modes of the hull girder. The number of such modes are high on a container ship, and particularly high on an ULCS. Figure 1 : Finite element model of a ULCS having a superstructure located in the middle part of the ship

26

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 6

Invariably, the modelling of containers is to be done in such a way as not to induce overestimation of hull girder stiffness, especially the torsional stiffness. Modelling of the main engine is to be performed with care. The main consequence of having a slow speed diesel main engine with large cylinders is that flexibility cannot be ignored. This flexibility is to be represented accurately in the finite element model.

2.3

Natural frequencies and vibration mode shapes

2.3.1 The purpose of calculating natural frequencies and corresponding vibration mode shapes is identical on ULCSs than for any other ship. It is for determining the risk of resonance, which occurs when one or several natural frequencies are located close to excitation frequencies generated by propeller or slow speed diesel engine. Fig 2 shows a typical flexural vibration mode shape of hull girder. Such a mode can be potentially excited depending of forces and moments generated by main engine and location of main engine on hull girder. Following considerations apply more particularly to ULCSs: an optimum location of superstructures on hull girder may exist in case of risk of resonance between natural frequency of hull girder mode (in vertical or transverse direction, or in torsion). This optimum location is to be defined in relation with the position of main engine with respect to the concerned vibration mode shape. Position of the main engine is an important parameter in the assessment of the potential excitation by forces and moments generated by the main engine oil film stiffness calculated as a function of alignment conditions is to be implemented in finite element model to calculate as accurately as possible natural frequencies corresponding to lateral vibrations of line shafting. This may be coupled with vibrations of the structure on ULCSs due to very big propeller weight and flexibility of aft structure, especially in the transverse direction.

2.4

Response in forced vibrations

2.4.1 Once natural frequencies and corresponding vibration mode shapes are accurately calculated, the calculations of response in forced vibrations for determination of the vibration levels are straightforward. These calculations are to be performed on the basis of accurate values of propeller hydrodynamic excitations. Corresponding propeller forces and moments and hull surface forces must be determined on the basis of a realistic wake field taking into account rudder, the effects of which are potentially significant on ULCSs due to the size of rudder blade. Calculated vibrations levels must be compared to a recognized standard such as ISO 6954 or as required by the Owner's specification. 2.4.2 Attention has to be given to the propeller blade vibration risk, pipings which are excellent passive resonators and so have to be detuned by acting on the position and the stiffness of their supports.

3
3.1

Comfort
General

3.1.1 Vibrations may impact the comfort and generate noise which may have to be assessed with respect to applicable standards or owner specification requirements. 3.1.2 The assessment of the risk of non acceptable annoyance levels is covered by the additional class notation COMF VIB as defined in the Rules for Steel Ships, Pt A, Ch 1, [6.7.3]. Figure 2 : Typical flexural vibration mode shape of hull girder.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

27

NI 558, Sec 7

SECTION 7

SHAFT ALIGNMENT

1
1.1

Overall methodology
Assumptions and influence parameters

1.1.1 General Considering the ship structure and the line shafting general arrangement, the maximum propulsion power and the propeller size, the Society may requires a shaft alignment verification as defined in this Section. 1.1.2 Definitions of elastic alignment calculations The elastic alignment calculations consider the complete shaft line from propeller to the crankshaft and all its supports. For each operating condition, the offsets of supports and the loading of the line shafting are investigated. The offsets of supports are the initial offsets defined by the alignment procedures and modified by the flexibility of the structure, the loading deformations and the thermal deformations. The equilibrium of flexible beam elements subjected to the external forces and supported by bearings is calculated in three dimensions (vertical and horizontal displacements). In addition, it is strongly recommended to include the flexibility matrix of the aft part of the ship. The conditions of calculation have to be the closest as possible to the real operating conditions, and all the relevant parameters have to be taken into account: a) Deformation of ship structure with respect to the loading conditions of the ship (full load, ballast, light). b) Thermal expansion of supports (seat, sleeve, antifriction material). c) Rotational speed of the shaft. d) Deformation of main engine foundation with pre-sag of main engine bearings. Additional parameters could be taken into account for more precise calculations : a) Deformation of ship structure with respect to the sea swell. b) Propeller hydrodynamic forces for turning condition including rudder effects. c) Thermal effect on lubrication by a calculation of local and global dissipation. In static condition the reactions are calculated by the Hertz contact formula. In running condition (quasi-static), the reactions are calculated by integration of the oil film pressure which is defined by the Reynolds equations for a journal bearing (see App 3). These alignment calculations are a more refined method which enable to optimise the aft stern tube slope and partial slope. It is also possible to ensure a secure location of the shaft with respect to the oil groove for all the running conditions. The assesment of the alignment conditions is based on the reactions distribution between all the bearings and inside the aft stern tube bearing, on the static and oil film pressure and on the shaft location inside the bearings in running conditions. Finally, this calculation could be supplemented by a global whirling calculation of shaft line and ship structure which are connected with the oil film stiffness and damper (see Sec 6). 1.1.3 Documents used for the models The shaft line model is based on the exact geometry and mechanical characteristics of all shafts and masses from propeller to the crankshaft. The crankshaft equivalent model could be used when the exact stiffness matrix of crankshaft is not available. The loading conditons on shafts are determined according to shafts weights including buoyancy where relevant, the fly wheel weight, the propeller weight including buoyancy and the external forces such as propeller hydrodynamics forces in running conditions for ballast and full loading, chain force or piston forces. The model of supports is based on exact dimensions of bearings and takes into account the oil grooves location, the values of clearances, mechanical properties and eventual slopes or partial slopes. The structural finite element model is performed using at least drawings of structural part and steel work of engine room and double bottom.

28

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 7

1.1.4 Necessary data and influence parameters Data and influence parameters to be used for the elastic alignment calculations are shown in Tab 1. Table 1 : Data and influence parameters
No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
(1)

Name of parameters and data Oil viscosity. Running temperature and thermal expansion of bearings. Maximum rpm and low rpm with the direction of rotation (clockwise or counter-clockwise). Propeller weight and mean values of hydrodynamics propeller forces for all operating conditions. (1) Clearances, thickness and effective length of all bearings. Bearing antifriction material stiffness and thickness. Crankshaft equivalent model or crankshaft stiffness matrix supplied by engine manufacturer. Chain force value (if any). Alignment condition of crankshaft bearings supplied by engine manufacturer (pre-sag). Diagram of bending moment and shear force in way of main engine coupling supplied by manufacturer. Weights and dimensions of additional parts : shrunk coupling, controllable pitch command, flywheel, etc.
The weight used in the calculation is to be reduced by the buoyancy effect on the propeller. The relevant operating conditions could include straight and turning conditions in all loading conditions of the vessel.

1.2

Models

1.2.1 Hull flexibility matrix The hull flexibility matrix is computed using a finite element model. The finite element model of aft hull structure extends from aft end up to the forward watertight bulkhead of engine room. Nodes are restrained in displacements and rotations in way of forward transverse section of the model. The ship's structure may be considered as finely meshed when each longitudinal secondary stiffener is modeled. As a consequence, the standard size of finite elements used is based on the spacing of ordinary stiffeners. The structural model is to be built on the basis of the following criteria : a) Webs of primary members are to be modeled with at least three elements on their height. b) The plating between two primary supporting members is to be modeled with at least two elements stripes. c) The ratio between the longer side and the shorter side of elements is to be less than 3 in the areas expected to be highly stressed. d) Holes for the passage of ordinary stiffeners may be disregarded. Cast part of bossing as well as forward stern tube bush is modeled using solid elements (eight node bricks) and intermediate bearings are represented by an equivalent rigid beam model as shown on Fig 1. The longitudinal position of equivalent supporting points is to be exactly the same on the line shafting and on the structure. The displacements in way of all supporting points in transverse and vertical directions induced by a transverse or vertical unit force applied on a supporting points constitute a line of the flexibility matrix. 1.2.2 Line shafting/crankshaft bearing relative displacements Calculations of hull steel work deformation is required in shaft alignment studies for determination of the relative displacements of line shafting and crankshaft bearings as a function of loading and operating conditions. Calculations are performed using the finite element model of the whole ship (see Fig 2). As practical alignment operations is generally performed in light conditions, relative deformations between light and any operating condition (full load and ballast) have to be calculated in order to include corresponding relative vertical displacements of bearings to the offsets.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

29

NI 558, Sec 7

Figure 1 : Model in way of bossing and intermediate bearing

Figure 2 : Finite element model of the whole ship fully loaded

The deformation of hull structure under waves is to be performed with hogging and sagging deformations as shown on Fig 3. Usually the common values to be used for the calculation are: a) 6 H s 12 L pp b) -----3 where: Hs : : Significative height of waves, in m Wave length, in m The value of is to be adapted in order to take into account the maximum relative deformation of structure for a given Hs Lpp : Length between perpendiculars, in m.

30

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 7

Figure 3 : Hogging and sagging deformations of aft hull structure

1.2.3 Line shafting and supports Line shafting is modeled using circular beam elements. Mass densities of these elements have to be adjusted in order to take into account local masses (i.e. propeller, turning wheel, buoyancy, etc) in addition to the shaft self-weight. The mass of the propeller has to be adapted taking into account the exact percentage of its immersion. In most cases the crankshaft is modeled by an equivalent beam model. Each bearing is modeled with one equivalent supporting point except the aft bush bearing which is generally modeled with 10 supporting points, and each supporting point is restrained in transverse and vertical directions. Stiffness characteristics of assembly of tail shaft, intermediate shafts and crankshaft are represented by reduced stiffness matrix in way of bearings. Terms of the stiffness matrix represent transverse and vertical reactions values on all equivalent supporting points of shaft line assembly when a unit displacement is successively applied to each bearing in vertical and transverse directions. In addition to the above described stiffness calculations, the external load vector has to be calculated taking into account the external loads which are applied on the line shaft assembly such as: a) Self weight of line shafts (gravity acceleration g = 9.81 m/s2, vertical direction). b) Propeller forces and moments for all loading conditions (ship going straight and ship turning). c) Chain force. d) Buoyancy where applicable (sea water, oil, etc). For each relevant loading cases of line shafting, reactions in way of bearings in transverse and vertical directions are calculated, which constitute the load vector.

2
2.1

Static calculation
Input data and assumptions

2.1.1 General The aim of the static calculation is to check that all parameters are acceptable in order to prevent any failure or excessive wear down in stopped condition, for start up and slow down operation. The optimisation at design stage of bearings offsets and stern tube bearing slope is then essential. The static alignment calculations are to be performed as defined in [2.2] in order to anticipate as precisely as possible the conditions for alignment procedures as the static reactions could be easily measured. The hot and cold cases could be calculated for all loading conditions of the ship, as well as the open shaft conditions. 2.1.2 Input data The input data used in the calculation of static alignment are presented in Tab 2.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

31

NI 558, Sec 7

Table 2 : Input data for a static calculation

No Calculation data 1 2 3 4 5 Shaft 6 7 8 General 9 10
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Name of parameters and data Initial squeezing of antifriction material Offsets taking into account thermal expansion, pre-sag and structural deformation (1) Effective length of supporting points (2) Internal and external diameters of antifriction material and bushes Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio of the antifriction material and bushes External diameter of shafts in way of supporting points Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio of shaft in way of all supporting points Stiffness matrix of shaft line in way of supporting points [Ks] (3) External load vector in way of supporting points [Fext] (4) Elasticity matrix of steel work [Eh] (5)

Supporting points

Structural deformations are calculated according to [1.2.1] with respect to all relevant operating condition. Offsets are defined by the centre line of each bearing. If there is ten supporting points on a bearing, the length is equal to the bearing effective length divided by ten. The stiffness matrix of shaft is calculated according to [1.2.3] The external load vector is calculated according to [1.2.3] and take into account weights of additional parts The elasticity matrix is calculated according to [1.2.1]

2.2

Alignment analysis

2.2.1 Methodology The analysis may be performed through a finite element modelling as mentioned in [1.2]. The line shafting equilibrium is determined through an iterative process as described in App 3, [1.3] taking into account the static characteristics and the Hertz contact theory as given in App 3, [1.1]. 2.2.2 Output data The results which are necessary for the assesment of static alignment are : the maximum contact pressure in bearings the distribution of reactions in bearings the squeezing of antifriction material in bearings the shaft deflection and slope the shaft bending stress and bending moment. The values of these parameters are then to be calculated for all the relevant operating conditions. 2.2.3 Acceptable limits The most restrictive and most important parameter in static calculation is the maximum contact pressure between the shaft and the bearings. This parameter is to be under 110 bars in all conditions. It is also necessary to check that the reactions in way of bearings satisfy the manufacturer limits and that in bushes the specific pressure is less than 0.8 for bushes with white metal and 0.6 for bushes with other antifriction material. The shaft slope with respect to the bushes axis is to be less than the radial clearance divided by the bearing effective length. The bending moment and bending stress of shaft is to satisfy the engine manufacturer diagram at the aft crankshaft coupling. 2.2.4 Improvement at design stage At design stage, it is necessary to choose the optimum alignment in order to satisfy the limits indicated in [2.2.3] for all relevant operating conditions (ex: full load, ballast, cold, hot, etc). This leaves enough safety margin for all unpredictibles conditions.

32

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 7

The calculation of pressure distribution in aft stern tube bearing leads also to choose the optimum slope. Sometimes a partial slope in aft part is necessary to keep the maximum contact pressure below the recommended limit. Usually, the optimum load distribution in aft stern tube bearing is 2/3 of the total reaction located in aft part and 1/3 of the total reaction located in forward part. Moreover, it is recommended to check that reactions are well distributed between all bearings.

3
3.1

Running calculation
Input data and assumptions

3.1.1 General The aim of the running calculation is to check that all parameters are acceptable in order to prevent any oil film break-up or excessive pressure on the antifriction material. The ship will be mostly operating in running conditons at maximum speed. The optimisation at design stage of bearings offsets, stern tube bearing slope and oil groove location is then essential. The calculations are to be performed as defined in [3.2] for all relevant operating conditions and mainly for the maximum speed and the low speed conditions. The low speed condition has to be very carefully chosen as the oil film theory is not applicable for very small rpm. Additionaly, when propeller diameter is very high or when wake field is strongly non homogeneous, some high hydrodynamics forces could be foreseen during turning conditions at maximum speed. These conditions are generally critical for the oil film and bearings behaviour. It is then important to verify also this condition when turning propeller forces are available. 3.1.2 Input data The input data used in the calculation in running condition are presented in Tab 3. Table 3 : Input data for a running calculation
No Calculation data 1 2 3 4 5 6 Shaft 7 8 General 9 10 11 12
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Name of parameters and data Initial position of shaft in its bearing Offsets taking into account thermal expansion, pre-sag and structural deformation (1) Effective length (2) Internal and external diameters of antifriction material and bushes Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio of the antifriction material and bushes Oil groove location External diameter of shafts in way of supporting points Stiffness matrix of shaft line in way of supporting points [Ks] (3) Oil viscosity (dynamic) Rotational speed of shaft N (RPM) External load vector in way of supporting points [Fext] (4) Elasticity matrix of steel work [Eh] (5)

Supporting points

Structural deformations are calculated according to [1.2.1] with respect to all relevant operating condition. Offsets are defined by the centre line of each bearing. If there is ten supporting points on a bearing, the length is equal to the bearing effective length divided by ten. The stiffness matrix of shaft is calculated according to [1.2.3] The external load vector is calculated according to [1.2.3] and takes into account all weights, propeller forces and moments, etc Elasticity matrix calculated according to [1.2.1]

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

33

NI 558, Sec 7

3.2

Alignment analysis

3.2.1 Methodology The analysis may be performed through a finite element modelling as mentioned in [1.2]. The line shafting equilibrium is determined through an iterative process as described in App 3, [1.3] taking into account the running characteristics and the oil film theories as given in App 3, [1.2]. 3.2.2 Output data The data which are necessary for this assesment are: the maximum local oil film pressure in bearings Pmax the relative position of the journal with respect to the oil groove the minimum oil film thickness Hmin the distribution of reaction in bearings Fsb the squeezing of antifriction material in bearings the shaft deflection and slope the shaft bending stress and bending moment. The values of these parameters are then to be calculated for all the relevant operating conditions. 3.2.3 Acceptable limit Usually the oil film pressure is lower than the contact static pressure. The local oil film pressure is not to be over 80 bars in running condition. One other essential parameter is the position of the journal with respect to the oil groove, see Fig 4. The minimum oil film thickness is also a relevant parameter. It is recommended to have a minimum oil film thickness higher than 30 mm. Below this value, the oil film theory and its assumptions may not be acceptable. 3.2.4 Improvement at design stage When the journal is located in an unsafe area of the bearing then the oil groove can be moved up by an angle usually between 15 and 30. In that way the safety margin increases and prevents any oil film break-up. If the minimum oil film thickness is too low or the maximum local pressure is too high, it is recommended to change the aft bush bearing slope. It is reminded that when the value of aft bush slope is modified or when a bearing offset is changed then static and running conditions have to be run again in order to check if both conditions are still acceptable from the safety point of view. Figure 4 : Scale of severity zone (0 = most dangerous area)

34

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, Sec 7

4
4.1

Shaft alignment checking and procedure

General requirements

4.1.1 General requirements The final practical alignment procedures are to be performed with the ship afloat in order to take into account the hull deformations due to hydrostatic pressure. Also the main engine is to be predeformed according to the manufacturer limits in order to anticipate the effects of thermal dilatations as well as the deformations due to loading conditions and sea state.

4.2

Optical checking

4.2.1 Relative position of bushes The sloping of aft and forward bushes must be carried out when all weldings of the neighbouring steel work of the aftbody of the ship are completed. Once the sloping has been realised and the aft and forward bush bearing fitted, it is very important and even essential to check as accurately as possible the exact relative position of aft and forward bush bearings. The relative positions (vertical and horizontal locations and slopes) of these two bearings are to be in accordance with the theoretical alignment calculation (difference less than 0.01 mm). The most suitable means is to carry-out this checking with a laser device. Other means are availibale but gives less accuracy, as the piano wires for example.

4.3

Gap and sag

4.3.1 Positioning of intermediate bearings and main engine Once the tail shaft has been fitted, the forward seal tightened, stern tube filled with oil and the ship is afloat then the practical alignment continues by the positioning of the various sections of the intermediate shaft(s) in respect to the tail shaft ending by the positioning of the bearings of the propulsion apparatus. The method of gap and sag is the most used due to its flexibility of application and the good results obtained in its correct application. In fact, it consists in realising the precalculated coupling conditions between the different partial iso-static systems of the shaft line assembly. When these conditions are reached (tolerance on gap and sag about 0.02 mm), this means that the bearings supporting the line shafting are located on precalculated position which, once the coupling are bolted, imposes the desired reactions to the line shafting bearings. In order to have an iso-static system, some temporary supports can be fitted for adjusting coupling flange and then can be removed.

4.4

Jack-up tests

4.4.1 Load of bearings Once the practical alignment of line shafting assembly is completed the reactions has to be checked in way of : a) Forward bush bearing b) Intermediate bearings c) Three aftmost main engine bearings. The tools to check the reactions are a jack with a pressure gauge and a displacement gauge located on the shaft. This method is based on the principle that, for a beam of a given span the deflection under the influence of a force is a linear function. It consists in determining experimentally this function by lifting or lowering a bearing. Once in possession of the curves representing the influence coefficient of the considered bearing it is deduced its reaction value. It is reminded that the value of reaction obtained has to be corrected with a correction factor calculated theoretically as a function of the distance between the jack and the bearing. In case of the value of reaction is not obtained, the intermediate bearings can be adjusted in height in order to improve the final shaft alignment.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

35

NI 558, Sec 7

4.5

Control in running condition

4.5.1 Checking of alignment in service The experience has shown that the conditions of alignment during outfitting are modified during operation. For this reason some disposition could be taken in order to check the correct behaviour of the bearings / supports and the journals of the various parts of the line shafting. The following checkings may be recommended: a) Measurements of temperature and pressure b) Measurements of the shaft displacement inside its bearings at least for both aft and forward bush bearings with contactless transducers c) Measurements of bearings reactions after a period of relaxation d) Measurements of the deformations of the double-bottom steel work e) Measurements of shaft bending moments in various locations with strain gauges.

36

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, App 1

APPENDIX 1

CLOSED FORM EQUATION FOR MINER SUM

1
1.1

General
Application

1.1.1 The formula of this appendix allows the calculation of the fatigue damage ratio by means of the Miner sum as required in Sec 3, [3.4] when the stress range histogram and the given S-N curve are defined by equations in [1.2].

1.2

Required data

1.2.1 S-N curve with two slopes The S-N curves is defined by the following equations: m N = K p 2m-1 N = Kp for N 107 for N > 107

Kp being calculated from Kp so that there is no discontinuity between the two parts of the S-N curve. 1.2.2 S-N curve without change of slope The S-N curves is defined by the following equation: m N = K p for all N

1.2.3 Stress range histogram The stress range histogram is defined by the following equation (Weibull or Rayleigh distribution):

Bureau Veritas

where: Nt : Total number of cycles during the ship life.

For short term condition, one sea state, one ship heading, one ship speed, the stress range histogram can be represented by a Rayleigh distribution, which corresponds to the following parameters: =2

w = 2 2m 0

where: m0 : Response sprectrum area.

For long term conditions, the Weibull distribution parameters on the total ship life span, are determined from the calculated points (see Sec 3, [3.1.3]): : Shape factor of the best fitting Weibull curve

R w = ----------------------------- 1 ( ln ( p R ) )

October 2010

N i = N t exp -----w

or

N i = w ln -----i Nt

37

NI 558, App 1

2
2.1

Damage ratio
Formula

2.1.1 Two slopes S-N curve When the S-N curve and the stress range histogram are given as defined in [1.2.1] and [1.2.3], the corresponding fatigue damage ratio is to be obtained from the following formula: N ( R ) m D = -----t -------------------------- c ---- + 1 K p ( ln p R ) m
m

where: m 2m 1 (1 m) N ---- + 1, N ----------------- + 1, = 1.0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------m C ---- + 1 S q = -------- ln p R S R Sq

: Stress range at N=107 cycles of the S-N curve, Sq=(Kp 10-7)1/m

N [x+1, ]: Incomplete Gamma function, as defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4 C [x+1]: Complete Gamma function, as defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4. 2.1.2 S-N curve without change of slope When the S-N curve and the stress range histogram are given as defined in [1.2.2] and [1.2.3], the corresponding fatigue damage ratio is to be obtained from the following formula: N ( R ) m D = -----t -------------------------- c ---- + 1 K p ( ln p R ) m
m

where: C [x+1]: Complete Gamma function, as defined in Rules for Steel Ships, Pt B, Ch 7, Sec 4.

38

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, App 2

APPENDIX 2

FATIGUE WHIPPING CORRECTION

1
1.1

General
Application

1.1.1 This appendix provides a simplified approach to evaluate the possible increase in fatigue accumulation due to whipping as required in Sec 4, [3.1.5] and Sec 4, [3.3.3]. The approach is based on a stress range histogram represented by a stair curve (see Fig 1) and a fatigue damage calculated by the Miner sum. The proposed approach provides an order of magnitude of the fatigue damage increase due to whipping to decide of the necessity or not of a more detailed analysis, which method is to be submitted to the Society for approval.

1.2

Principles

1.2.1 Whipping effects Whipping occurs after slamming or slapping. The effects on the hull girder stresses are illustrated in Fig 2: increase of the maximum quasi-static wave stress range, generation of decreasing high frequency (hull girder first mode) stress cycles. 1.2.2 Cumulative fatigue Considering the Miner sum and the rainflow counting method (see Fig 1), the wave stress range must be increased and new cycles added corresponding to the decreasing high frequency stress cycles generated. When the stress range histogram is represented by a stair diagram, each step represents constant range cycles and: taking into account the slamming occurrence frequency, the number of cycles can be split into wave without whipping cycles and wave with whipping cycles, on the cycles with whipping, a correction (increase) of the range can be performed to take into account the whipping stress amplitude, a complementary stress range distribution can be determined for the high frequency whipping cycles.
Figure 1 : Stair diagram of a stress range histogram

log(N)

Figure 2 : Whipping effects illustration on regular waves

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

39

NI 558, App 2

1.2.3 Slamming/slapping threshold The slamming and slapping phenomenon presents a threshold versus wave heights and therefore wave response stress ranges.
Each step being considered corresponding to a regular wave response, the correction is to be performed for the stress range histogram steps above the threshold.

1.2.4 Slamming/slapping occurrence Considering the criteria for speed reductions and route changes (see Sec 3, [1.2.4]), slamming or slapping, and so whipping, may be considered occurring no more than 20 times per hour (see Sec 3, [1.2.5]). 1.2.5 Whipping stress range The whipping stress amplitude is assumed linear versus the wave height between the threshold value to the maximum possible wave height for the considered navigation conditions.

1.3

Methodology

1.3.1 General The proposed method is based on the summation of the long term Miner sums of each selected headings where slamming is expected to occur. 1.3.2 Calculation steps The calculation steps are the following: a) selection of wave headings from the selected cases defined in Sec 3, [1.2.3], in principle two headings b) determination of the maximum wave height for each selected ship speed from the operability criteria (see Sec 3, [1.2.4]) c) calculation of the wave short term hull girder stress range distribution for each heading (all sea states and associated ship speeds), without whipping, but with springing when relevant, and of the corresponding Miner sum as calculated from Sec 3, [3.4.5] d) for both headings, determination of wave threshold HSth for whipping, of the associated maximum wave height HMth e) for both heading, calculation of the whipping hull girder stresses on a reference irregular or regular wave and of the corresponding stress range f) determination of the whipping correction factor to be applied to the quasi-static (plus springing if relevant) wave stress range for the selected headings g) correction of the wave stress range short term distributions taking into account the slamming occurrence frequency h) calculation of the total (wave and wave plus whipping) long term Miner sum and of the increase factors, total long term Miner sum versus only wave Miner sum (step c above) for the two headings i) determination of the pure whipping (high frequency) response stress range distributions and of the corresponding Miner sums (number of whipping cycles function of the whipping damping) j) correction of the wave (plus springing when relevant) Miner sums of the long term calculation by application of the two heading increase factors to adjacent headings (see Sec 3, [1.2.3]) k) calculation of the total Miner sum with springing, all headings (0 to 360), without whipping and with whipping.

2
2.1

Fatigue appraisal
Whipping occurrence

2.1.1 Whipping response The slamming/slapping occurrence is calculated using short term irregular waves with the spectral approach, and the whipping response is calculated by the time step approach as defined in Sec 4. 2.1.2 Wave incidence Two wave incidences are considered for the calculations: headings = 180 and 135 (180 = head sea).

40

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, App 2

2.1.3 Sea states The fore part relative motion velocity VR is calculated with the spectral approach for each Tp of the selected scatter diagram defined in Sec 3, [3.3.3] and Hs = 3 m. The maximum relative velocity is to be calculated in two points where bottom slamming and slapping are expected.
For each considered heading, taking into account the maximum Hs of the scatter diagram, the Tpsl() (slamming/slapping) providing the highest value of VR is selected for the determination of the whipping correction factor. In case of equal values, the lowest Tp value is to be used.

2.1.4 Ship speed The considered ship speeds are Vmax() corresponding to the selected sea states defined in [2.1.3]. 2.1.5 Threshold wave
With the obtained Tpsl(), the significant wave height HSth() (threshold) at which the maximum relative velocity is equal to the following critical value VCR , in m/s, is determined:

V CR = 0.093 9.81L bp where: Lbp : Length between perpendiculars, in m.

2.2

Whipping correction factors

2.2.1 Maximum wave height From the scatter diagram defined in [2.1.3] and [2.1.4] and the possible navigation conditions determined in Sec 3, [1.2.4], for each Tpsl(), the maximum significant wave height HSM() is determined. 2.2.2 Whipping stress response For each maximum wave, HSM()/Tpsl() the hull girder response as specified in Sec 4, [1.3.3] is calculated The whipping damping necessary for the hull girder response calculation has to be duly justified. The calculation will provide (see Fig 3): the maximum stress range MT(), quasi-static wave plus the whipping stress the maximum quasi-static wave stress range MWa() the maximum whipping stress range MWh(). Figure 3 : Whipping stress response

MT

MWa MWh

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

41

NI 558, App 2

2.2.3 Wave stress range response The threshold wave stress ranges Wth are taken equal to: H S th ( ) Wth ( ) = MWa ( ) ------------------H SM ( ) 2.2.4 Whipping wave stress range correction factor The whipping wave stress range correction factor Cwa() is calculated as: MT ( ) Wth ( ) C Wa ( ) = -------------------------------------------------------MWa ( ) W th ( ) 2.2.5 Whipping stress range factor The whipping stress range correction factor Cwh() is calculated as: MWh ( ) C Wh ( ) = ------------------------------------------------------- MW a ( ) Wth ( )

2.3

Stress range distributions correction

2.3.1 Quasi-static wave stress range

The short term stress range distributions (i, ni) are determined for each defined in [2.1.2] (all ship speeds, all sea states).

2.3.2 Whipping correction of the wave stress range distribution

For each distribution where max > Wth a whipping correction is to be applied on the highest quasi-static wave stress range steps i > Wth limited to i = k so that:

n
i

closest to nwh

where: nwh nT : Number of whipping on the short term state: nwh = 0.045 nT : Total number of short term cycles: nT =

n
all

For each distribution step (i , ni) where a whipping correction is applied the stress range has to be increased to icor calculated as follows: icor = Cwa (i Wth) + Wth for i > Wth

The whipping correction provides a new stress range distribution: a corrected by whipping stress range steps: icor, ni for i = 1 to k a non modified wave stress range distribution: i, ni for i > k+1 2.3.3 Whipping stress range distribution For each distribution step (i , ni), i = 1 to k as defined in [2.3.2], the whipping stress range distribution is determined as follows for j = 1 to K:
if j K :

Wpij = A i exp ----------------- ( 4j 3 ) -2 2 1

if j > K :

Wpij = 0

42

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, App 2

where: C W h ( i Wth ) A i = ------------------------------------------ -exp ----------------- -2 1 2 Ai = 0 if i W th

if i > Wth

K so that the value of wpij for j = K becomes lower than 1/10 of the value for j = 1.

The number of pure whipping stress range cycles wpij at level i is: nwhj = ni

2.4

Miner sum

2.4.1 Wave stress range Miner sum

The Miner sums DWa() corresponding to the stress range distribution (i , Ni) as defined in [2.3.1] is calculated as defined in Sec 3.

2.4.2 Wave stress range corrected for whipping Miner sum The Miner sums DWcor() corresponding to the stress range distributions as defined in [2.3.2] are calculated as defined in Sec 3. 2.4.3 Whipping stress range Miner sum
The Miner sums at each step (i) DWhi() corresponding to the stress range distributions (Wpij , ni) as defined in [2.3.3] is given

by: n m D Whi ( ) = ---i A i D 0 C where:

j=1

The whipping Miner sum at incidence is the given by: D Wh ( ) =

D
i

Whi

()

2.4.4 Miner sum with whipping correcting factor The whipping correcting factor versus is given by: D Wc or ( ) + D Wh ( ) Wh ( ) = -------------------------------------------------DW a ( ) wh(165) = wh(195) = wh(180) wh(120) = wh(150) = wh(210) = wh(225) = wh(240) = wh(135) wh() = 1 for all the other headings 2.4.5 Miner sum with whipping The total Miner sum corrected for whipping is given by:
= 240

D Tcor = D W +

= 120

( W h ( ) 1 )D Wa ( )

where: : Total wave Miner sum as calculated from Sec 3, [3.4.5] Dw DWa : Wave Miner sum as calculated in [2.4.1] Wh : Whipping correction factor as calculated in [2.4.4].

October 2010

D0 =

exp ----------------- ( 4j 3 ) -2 2 1

for

= 180 and 135

Bureau Veritas

43

NI 558, App 3

APPENDIX 3

SHAFT ALIGNMENT CALCULATION METHODS

1
1.1

General calculations methods

Hertz contact theory

1.1.1 When the shaft line is laying on all bearings without rotation, the Hertz contact theory is applicable to describe the characteristics of the contact: stiffness, reaction, length of contact, maximum pressure, squeezing. This calculation is a part of the global resolution of equilibrium (see [1.3]). 1.1.2 The Hertz contact theory is considering a cylinder in a finite length cylindrical socket with a load applying on the cylinder. The Hertz law leads to the maximum static pressure and reaction in the contact according to the mechanical properties and the geometry of the cylinder and the socket. 1.1.3 For the application of the Hertz theory on the shaft alignment calculations, the cylinder is the shaft and the socket is the bearing at the supporting point. The displacement of the shaft inside the bearing is known (see Fig 1) and the contact pressure and then the load has to be calculated considering that it has the same direction than the displacement Usb.

1.2

Oil film theory

1.2.1 When the shaft starting to rotate to a sufficient speed, a flow of oil induced by its viscosity and the shaft speed create a lift on the shaft. There is no more contact between the shaft and the bearing: the oil film is built-up. The calculation of this oil film is to be carried-out on the basis of two equations: A differantial hydrodynamic equation which determines the behavior of a thin and viscous fluid (Reynolds equation) A geometric equation which determines the height of the oil film according to the relative position between the deformed journal of the shaft and its machined profile. These equations leads to the characteristics of oil film: stiffness, reactions, oil pressure, damper. This calculation is a part of the global resolution of equilibrium (see [1.3.3]). 1.2.2 For the application of the oil film theory on the shaft alignment calculation, the displacement of the shaft inside the bearing is known (see Fig 2) and the load has to be calculated by integration of pressure along the bearing circumference. Figure 1 : Bearing and shaft positions according to reference line

44

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

NI 558, App 3

Figure 2 : Bearing and shaft positions according to reference line

1.3

Global equations: equilibrium of system

1.3.1 The global equations are based on the quasi-static equilibrium of the shaft with the structure, the bearings and external forces. The aim is to reach by an iterative process the equilibrium position of the shaft line inside the bearings and with a final Hertz or oil film calculation to obtain the characteristics of shaft behaviour in all bearings (see Fig 3). 1.3.2 The equations are to take into account the mechanical parameters of all bearings. The problem is then reduced in way of supporting points, in two dimensions (transversal and vertical) 1.3.3 The parameters of calculation of equilibrium are defined below: Bsb Eh Fext Fsb Ks Ksb Ub Us Usb
0

: Non linear part of contact or oil film forces vector : Matrix of elasticity of structure reduced in way of supporting points and calculated with a finite element model, see Sec 7, [1.2.3] : External forces vector including shaft self-weight, propeller forces and moments...reduced in way of supporting points, see Sec 7, [1.2.3] : Contact forces vector calculated with the Hertz contact theory or oil film theory, see [1.1] : Matrix of shaft stiffness calculated with a finite element model, see Sec 7, [1.2.3] : Matrix of contact stiffness or oil film stiffness, see [1.1] : Vector of initial offsets of all bearings centres without shaft weight depending on the loading condition, temperature, other deformations and alignment procedure, see Fig 1 and Fig 2 : Vector of shafts centre displacements in way of all supporting points with respect to the reference line, see Fig 1 or Fig 2 : Vector of relative displacements of shaft in way of supporting points, see Fig 1 and Fig 2.

1.3.4 The resolution of these equations are based on an iterative process using an initial displacement Usb0 close to the equilibrium solution. This initial displacement is used to calculate the main caracteristics of the contact, Ksb0, Fsb0 and Bsb0. Usb1 is then found with a calculation of the global equation, see Fig 3. 1.3.5 The convergence criteria for this iterative process is calculated by maximum absolute difference of terms between Usbn and Usbn+1. This value is to be less than 0.001mm.

October 2010

Bureau Veritas

45

NI 558, App 3

Figure 3 : Flow chart of iterative process

Usbl = Usbo Usbl = Usbl+1 Resolution of Hertz formula / Oil film calculation

Fext, Ubo, Ks, Eh

Fsbl, Ksbl, Bsbl

Resolution of the shaft global equilibrium equation

Usbl+1

Convergence criteria reached Max (Usbl+1 - Usbl) < 0.001 mm Yes Usbn = Usbl+1

No

Resolution of Hertz formula / Calculation of oil film parameters

46

Bureau Veritas

October 2010

Achev dimprimer sur les presses dEdiprint 53940 Saint Berthevin (France) Octobre 2010