Trans RINA, Vol 153, Part A1, Intl J Maritime Eng, Jan-Mar 2011 possible and profound effect on the statistical distributions which is not explicitly evident.
This project is scheduled to take place over three years, after which the results will be presented to the IMO. 5.4 OTHER DEVELOPMENTS For projects in which we are not
available these will be used increasingly in the industry. At present
these generally remain outside the basic involved, we look
forward particularly to the results of the developments in the EU FLOODSTAND project also covered by the FP7 framework. This project is investigating more reliable information and modelling of ship flooding with a view to developing new methods for analysing the flooding extent
on board, as well as new methods of
comprehensive measures of ship damaged stability. This will resolve difficulties and unknowns in the flood water assumptions currently used for our damages stabilities regulations.
6. CONCLUSIONS
The latest set of survivability requirements mark a changed trend from deterministic to probabilistic methodologies, opening up the direction to risk-based platforms for assessment.
The new SOLAS 2009 regulations challenge designs for complex vessels such as passenger ships. The recent changes have had a marked effect on the physical designs; not only structurally but also on systems, closing appliances, fire protection, cross flooding and many other items, resulting in considerable cost increases.
Cargo ships have also experienced difficulties, with requirements such as increased double bottom heights and new permeability requirements marking step changes in series built vessels.
Time is needed to fully understand the implications of SOLAS 2009 on fundamental designs
and already
investigations are being carried out (e.g. GOALDS) to look at current issues that are being raised such as the effects of water on deck on Ro-Ro passenger ships.
Understanding the fundamental concepts requires a
detailed knowledge of how the probabilities for the damage characteristics have been established, together with the associated applications implicitly included in defining the measure for adequate survivability. These items re-open fundamental and basic concepts of naval architecture.
Further developments in ship survivability requirements are on the cards, for both intact and damage stability assessment under varying conditions. For example, the IMO is investigating performance-based standards for assessing ships in the intact state and real time flooding for addressing ship abandonment following a casualty. As real-time modelling solutions become more readily
A sincere thank you to all my colleagues and friends in the industry for their support and many hours of debate and patience, without which this paper on the ‘black arts’ would not be possible.
8. REFERENCES
1. International Maritime Organization, ‘Adoption of Amendments to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, As Amended’, MSC Res.216(82), 8 December 2006
2. International Maritime Organization ‘Explanatory Notes to the SOLAS Chapter II-1 Subdivision and Damage
Resolution.281(85), 4 December 2006 Stability Regulations’ MSC
regulatory framework. Due to their complexity, they are not so widely accessible and are costly. Having said that, the value and power of these tools is clear. Lloyd’s Register is not currently active in this area but does have non-linear time domain tools such as PRETTI which, by virtue of its relationship to the CRS PRECAL group of programmes, can be used for analysing first order ship motions and sea keeping.
Lloyd’s Register employs personnel experienced in
aspects covering the HARDER project, IMO attendance and software tool developments. We pride ourselves in acting as mediators between the drivers of the academic world pushing ahead with the latest technology and the practicalities experienced by our clients in building modern state- of-the-art ships.
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
A-8
©2011: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74