IMPACT OF LARGER CONTAINER VESSELS ON PORT DESIGN AND TUG USAGE

Dr.ir. J.H.Wulder, STC-Group / SAAR , Rotterdam, The Netherlands, wulder@stc-r.nl Capt. M. J. van Hilten, PortXS, Veghel, The Netherlands, maxvanhilten@home.nl ABSTRACT Worldwide ports prepare themselves for accommodating very large container vessels over 12.500 TEU. Although these ships are a scaled version of the present highly manoeuvrable container vessels, it appears that present port designs might not be able to receive these large vessels. This paper shows by means of extensive simulator studies that it is possible to make a prediction of the bottlenecks to be encountered and the solutions to be provided. This will be done by careful analyses of the ship manoeuvring characteristics. The second topic to be addressed is the strategy applied to use the present type of tugs for larger vessels to assist these vessels, in order to overcome the manoeuvring limitations and to minimize the (costly) changes on the infrastructure. SOMMAIRE Les ports mondiaux se prparent recevoir des trs grands vaisseaux conteneurs de plus de 12.500 TEU. Bien que ces navires soient une version "cailleuse" des prsents vaisseaux conteneurs extrmement maniables, il semble que les designs de port actueles ne pourraient pas tre capables de recevoir ces grands vaisseaux. Ce papier si montre au moyen des tudes elabores a laide de simulation qu'il est possible de faire une prdiction des embouteillages qui pourront tre rencontrs et les solutions seront fournies. Ce sera fait par des analyses detailes des caractristiques manoevrable du navire. Le deuxime thme a adresser est la stratgie qui pourront tre applique pour utiliser le type prsent de remorqueur pour assister ces vaisseaux plus grands, a lordre de surmonter les restrictions de manouevrer et de minimaliser les changements ncesaires (et coteux) de l'infrastructure portuaire. 1. INTRODUCTION In order to accommodate the increasing volume of container traffic, several ports plan terminal upgrades or major port extensions. Such upgrades or extensions are designed to receive the future generation of container vessels. Often simulation studies are used to validate the new port designs. An important task of such simulation study is to establish the conditions the ship should operate in the future (e.g. year 2030) and the determination of the manoeuvring characteristics of the future ships. Questions to be answered are: o What type of ship could be expected? o What kind of (navigational) equipment will they use in e.g. the year 2030? o What will be the traffic density, and will there be a more extensive approach of VTS? Based on the available knowledge, predictions and views, solid answers have to be defined. It should be noted that the answers could significantly affect the results of the study. Although a conservative approach is recommended (to be on the safe side), the choices should be well thought out. Nowadays, a 12,500 TEU container vessel (VLCV) is often used as the design vessel for new port development. For that reason an extensive analysis was made at SAAR , to assess the impact of this type of ship on the arrival and departure procedures and safety criteria in a port. The following subjects could be distinguished: o The manoeuvring characteristics of the 12,500 TEU container vessel; o Tug operations expected; o Manoeuvring space and manoeuvring strategy. Based on these theoretical considerations, it was felt that new tug strategies should be developed to overcome the limitations in manoeuvring characteristics. 2. RELATION MANOEUVRING CHARACTERISTICS AND PORT DESIGN 2.1 Manoeuvring characteristics Very Large Container Vessel The manoeuvring characteristics of the 12,500 TEU container vessel were based on a conventional hull form in combination with a single propeller. This is the most conservative approach. The manoeuvring characteristics were (relatively) comparable with the present type of large container vessels. However, the windage area of these ships caused that the drift angle in deep water at low speed was slightly more than the present size ships. In a harbour area this was compensated by the shallow water effect, as the waterdepth/draft ratio is smaller for the VLCV (Figure 1). This positive effect of the shallow water in the channel is counter-effective when the ship has to make a turn. In case the ship has to turn, both mass and shallow water will cause the ship to require a larger area to execute this manoeuvre. In Figure 2 it is shown that the turning circle of a VLCV increases relatively more than that for the present size container vessels at a water depth of 20m. Hence, where a present size ship could turn easily, 1

this will be (relatively) more complicated for a VLCV due to her draft. Figure 2 shows that it is not allowed just to scale the port infrastructure to a larger ship, this type of tendency in the manoeuvring capability of the vessels should be taken into account also during the design phase. In addition to the higher importance of the shallow water effects, the ship should be compensated earlier for lateral deviation of the planned track, as it will cost more effort (and time) to compensate for these due to the increased mass.

14 12 drift angle (degree) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 wind velocity (knot) 40.0

deep water (12500 TEU) shallow water (12500 TEU) deep water (8700 TEU) shallow water (8700 TEU) deep water (4000 TEU) shallow water (4000 TEU)

Figure 1: Comparison drift angles container vessels at low speed.

2500
deep water

2000
shallow water (20 m water depth)

Tactical Diamter (m)

1500

1000

500

0 4000 TEU 8700 TEU Size of container vessel 12500 TEU

Figure 2: Increase of tactical diameter at 20-metre water depth for different types of container vessels.

2.2 Tug operations In order to handle a VLCV, four tugs of 110 ton bollard pull are required during wind force 8 bft scenarios (Figure 3). This type of tug is presently not common as a harbour tug, and requires changes in the dimensions to accommodate these large forces (Table 1). These dimensions were based on commercially available harbour tugs (source: Damen Shipyard and Kotug Shipbuilding and Trading). The larger tugs also need more space between the ships hull and the tugs propeller wake in combination with the larger freeboard of the VLCV, and consequently the towing line has to be enlarged (Figure 4). This means that the tugs need more manoeuvring space, and consequently the channel dimensions should be adapted to that. Alternative towing configurations could be used to counteract this effect, and separate studies were initiated to find new tug assistance methods, or to change the connection between tug and vessels.

required bollard pull (ton)

400
12500 TEU container vessel 8700 TEU container vessel

300 200 100 0 0.0 20.0 wind velocity (knot) 40.0

4000 TEU container vessel

Figure 3: Relation required bollard pull versus wind velocity for different sizes of container vessels.

Table 1: Dimensions of tugs used for this study. 110 ton ASD-tug 60/70 ton ASD-tug Length (m) 39 30.5 Beam (m) 13.5 10.6 Bollard Pull 110 ton 60 or 70 ton Distance tug + towline (m) 100 60

12.500 TEU ship Tow line 7.000 TEU ship

Future Tug 110 ton

Present Tug 65 ton

Figure 4: Larger swept path as result of larger tugs. 2.3 Manoeuvring space required Based on these considerations, it can be concluded that the VLCV has the following impact on port and fairway design: Straight channel: from the point of view of swept path the fairway should be as shallow as possible to maximize the benefits of the shallow water effects, the width of the channel should be (relative) increased as result of the additional space required for the tugs; Bend: from the point of view of ship manoeuvring, the waterdepth in the bend should be as deep as possible, furthermore the radius should be relative large as the VLCVs will turn relative slow in comparison with the present container vessels. To overcome these limitations, alternative tugboat configurations could be developed. An example of such a development is discussed below.

3. HOW SIMULATIONS LED TO DEVELOPMENT OF AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF TUG USE 3.1 Introduction Several simulation studies at SAAR revealed some specific manoeuvring-technical bottlenecks; especially in conditions of strong wind since, in such conditions, it is often of utmost importance to maintain a certain minimum speed to avoid the vessel starting to drift too much. In this context one of the most important of the revealed problems was the slow response of the VLCV to alterations of heading, even when assisted by four strong tugs. This led, too often, to turning radii being too large (rate of turn too low) and response times for smaller alterations of heading taking too much time (acceleration of turn too low). This resulted in the idea of using an alternative method of tug assistance (we gave it the name forward brake mode). See Figure 5. The intention is to maintain a constant speed through the water. As a result of this the propeller revolutions have to be substantially higher when working in forward brake mode than when working in conventional mode, consequently leading to more steering force by own ships rudder. To avoid misunderstandings: it is a well-known fact that aft tugs are, when making headway, more effective than forward tugs. However, when the aft tugs dont have enough power to build up enough rate of turn, forward tugs are often used to assist. This idea was tested on the simulators, and these trials were absolutely promising: increased acceleration of turn and increased rate of turn. See Figure 6. However it was far too early to use the proposed method during the simulation project for the Port of Rotterdam. First a number of questions had to be answered: does it work in reality and is it feasible from a practical point of view?

Figure 5: Principle of forward brake mode (left), versus the conventional mode (right); here with one tug.

Figure 6: Result of first simulator tests: two trials with four vector tugs and one trial without tugs, all trials with nearly the same speed.

3.2 Full-scale trials or not? It is absolutely clear that the initial simulator tests were one of the most important steps to initialise this project. Furthermore it has been of utmost importance that the Rotterdam Pilots Corporation wanted to give the idea a chance: they took the initiative to organize full-scale trials. The first step was a meeting with representatives of the tugboat companies and pilots. The reactions to the proposed method were diverse but it was decided to continue and prepare full-scale trials. The questions that had to be answered based on the results of the full-scale trials were:

a. can an ASD-tug working in forward brake mode in the speed range from 4-6 knots safely stay clear of the hull of the assisted vessel? b. is it safely possible, at 5 [knots] speed, for a forward made fast ASD-tug in forward brake mode, to come forward to a position in front of the assisted vessel? c. is it safely possible, at 5 [knots] speed, for a forward made fast ASD-tug in conventional mode, to come backwards from a position in front of the assisted vessel, to the required position for the forward brake mode? d. is the basic statement that, for the speed range from 4-6 knots, the use of a forward ASD-tug in forward brake mode leads to better manoeuvring capabilities of the assisted vessel, rather than using this tug in a conventional mode? e. is it feasible, from a practical point of view, to safely apply this method by ASD-tugs in daily practice? The speed ranges mentioned above are based on findings during simulations where it appeared to be advisable to maintain speeds >= 4 [knots] during strong winds. 3.3 Full-scale trials; preparation After waiting several months for the scarce combination of a vessel being available, tugs being available, not too much wind and not too much wave height, good visibility and finally also daylight, the first possibility appeared to be in July 2005. Up until now three series of full-scale trials have been conducted in co-operation with three Rotterdam based tugboat companies (Smit, Kotug and Fairplay) and two major shipping companies (Front Line and Maersk Line). The first series of trials were conducted on the 4th of July 2005 with the Front Warrior of Bermuda based Front Line and two ASD-tugs (Smit Clyde and Smit Humber) of Smit harbour towage; the second series on the 9th of January 2006 with the Gunvor Maersk of Denmark based Maersk Line and one ASD-tug (Smit Clyde) of Smit harbour towage. Recently, a third series of trials has been executed using the so-called Rotor tugs of Kotug harbour towage. In this paper only the results of the second series are provided, the other series will be published in e.g. MARSIM 2006 conference. All trials were carried out at sea in the approach area of the Port of Rotterdam, approximately 1 mile South of buoy MN2. The meteorological conditions were more or less ideal (which was, of course, one of the preconditions for a valid comparison of both methods): wind force 2-3 Beaufort from South-Easterly direction. Wave and swell heights During the first trials data like position (WGS84), heading, speed and rate of turn were determined and saved, every 2 seconds, on the pilots equipment: Navigation equipment Marginal Ships (NMS). The NMS is a PC-based carry-on-board navigation tool, which includes an ECDIS, two antennas for DGPS/GLONASS/RTK signals, a fibre optic rate of turn sensor and software to present the ships past, present and predicted motions on the electronic chart display. Environmental data can also be received and displayed. The equipment makes it possible to measure position, heading, speed and rate of turn in a reliable way and with a predictable accuracy, as the system was tested extensively before it was commissioned by the pilots. For the first trials we had to use the old version of the NMS which has been replaced, in the meantime, by a new version saving data every 0.2 seconds and which was used for the second series of trials. 3.4 Results sea-trials Gunvor Maersk and one ASD-Tug It was decided to use only one tug during the trials with the Gunvor Maersk and assume that the influence of a full pulling aft tug would be more or less the same in both modes. In order to gather more and more accurate 0 information it was decided to make 180 turns. The forward brake mode trials were executed twice, the conventional mode trial once. The trials were observed on board of the assisting tug Smit Clyde by a representative of Fairplay harbour towage. Capt. Ian R. Simpson, Secretary of Haven Pilots, Harwich, U.K. was on board of the Gunvor Maersk as observer. The pilots accurately determined the tidal stream velocity and direction just before and after the execution of the trials. For the tidal stream velocity this was done by observation of the difference of the ships Doppler log readings of both ground track and water track speeds. For determining the direction of the tidal stream the transverse Doppler speed was used by finding a heading where this reading appeared to be zero. The velocities appeared to differ somewhat from values of forecast and hindcast by the Hydro Meteo Rijnmond (HMR), department of Directorate North Sea of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works; see Figure 8. Taking into account a vertical gradient of the tidal stream velocity, the values observed (on board), for a depth of 11.55 [m], had to be translated to effective velocities. The latter were determined using the formula and power law profile (1/7th power) as proposed by the Oil Companies International Marine Forum (OCIMF). These effective velocities, derived from the Doppler observations, were used for a linear fit.

Figure 7: Gunvor Maersk; by courtesy of Harry van den Berg, engineer Smit Clyde. The Gunvor Maersk is a container vessel of Denmark based Maersk Line. The main particulars are: Length over all: 367 [m] Width: 42.8 [m] Draught forward: 11.25 [m] Draught aft: 11.85 [m] Engine power: 68.640 [kW] Deadweight: 115.700 [ton] Depth/draught (H/T): 1.64-2.11[-]

Figure 8: Effective tidal stream velocity, forecast and hindcast, during trials Gunvor Maersk.

These time-dependent velocities were used for the transfer of measured positions to correct the influence of the tidal stream. HMR has also determined the differences of the hindcast and measured values for the Maasvlakte Noord ( 8 nautical miles East of the trial area). Applying these differences to the hindcast for the trial area leads to values (triangles in fig. 7) coming rather close to those based on observations on board. The sensitivity of the trial results for errors of the tidal stream velocities and directions was also looked at. This sensitivity appeared to be of such a level that the final conclusions of the trials remained unchanged.

Figure 9: Track plots of Gunvor Maersk assisted in forward brake mode (1 and 2) and conventional mode. Positions are for middle of ship and corrected for tidal stream.

During the trials in forward brake mode the shaft revolutions of the Gunvor Maersk were limited by computer to avoid exceeding a certain maximum load; this led to a certain speed reduction but not to reductions comparable with the Front Warriors trials. The results of this series of trials definitely came up to the expectations and are shown in Figure 9. The differences 0 0 between the results of the methods can clearly be seen. The points of 90 transfer and 180 transfer are marked by X.

Figure 10: Smit Clyde assisting Gunvor Maersk in forward brake mode.

3.4.1 Sensitivity of results trials Gunvor Maersk for inaccuracies of tidal stream Effective tidal stream velocity The effective tidal stream velocities, derived from the observed differences of water track and ground track speed of the vessels Doppler log (at water depth 11.55 [m]), are, as mentioned before, based on the method as proposed by the OCIMF: a vertical tidal stream profile defined by a power law. The use of this method was considered to be acceptable since the influence of the out coming flow of fresh water of the river Nieuwe Maas, especially during ebb tide, does not reach as far as the position where the trials were conducted (approximately 9 miles from the mouth of the river). Accuracy of Doppler log observations Doppler log readings of the water track speed were shown up to one decimal. Consequently these readings are rounded values and can easily be 0.05 [knot] in error. The linear fits of the observed values plus and minus 0.05 [knots] are shown in Figure 8: the dotted lines. As can be seen from Table 2, ratios of the advance and transfer 0 (180 ) of the different modes of tug assistance appear to be hardly influenced by these possible differences of observed velocities:
0 Table 2: Ratios of advance and transfer-180 based on Doppler readings +/- 0.05 [knot].

advance Reading+ 0.05: Conv/FBM1 Conv/FBM2 Reading 0.05: Conv/FBM1 Conv/FBM2 1.18 1.25

transfer-1800 1.21 1.26

1.18 1.26

1.20 1.26

The conclusion, so far, is that the sensitivity for inaccuracies of the Doppler readings is low. Difference of Doppler log observations and predicted values of tidal stream velocities. As can be seen from Figure 8, the effective tidal stream velocities differ substantially from the values of the forecast, less from those of the hindcast and come reasonably close to values based on the hindcast corrected for measured differences of hindcast and measured values at the Maasvlakte Noord. A linear fit to the forecast values (worst case) would lead to the results shown in Table 3. 7

Table 3: Ratios based on predicted tidal stream. Conv/FBM1 Conv/FBM2 advance 1.12 1.22 transfer-1800 1.21 1.26

The conclusion, so far, is that in the worst-case scenario, the advance ratios show a certain level of sensitivity for use of the predicted tidal stream velocities instead of those based on observations. Inaccuracy of the direction of tidal stream Differences of the direction of the tidal stream for the separate trials have not been taken into account since these 0 differences have not been observed while a difference of just 3 was predicted (only) for the second trial in forward brake mode. However, to determine the sensitivity of a possible difference in direction, we have determined the 0 differences of the results in case the direction would be 10 (for all trials) to both sides. The results are shown in Table 4: Table 4: Ratios based on observed direction + /- 10 . advance Plus 100: Conv/FBM1 Conv/FBM2 Minus 100: Conv/FBM1 Conv/FBM2 1.18 1.25 1.18 1.25 transfer-1800 1.22 1.26 1.18 1.25
0

The conclusion, so far, is that the sensitivity for inaccuracies of the direction of the tidal stream is low. Influence of combination of inaccuracy of direction and the use of predicted tidal stream velocities. 0 Using a maximum difference in direction of 10 and the predicted tidal stream velocities the worst results would be as shown in Table 5:
0 Table 5: Ratios based on observed direction +/- 10 combined with predicted tidal stream velocities.

advance Plus 100: Conv/FBM1 Conv/FBM2 Minus 100: Conv/FBM1 Conv/FBM2 1.11 1.22 1.12 1.22

transfer-1800 1.21 1.25 1.20 1.26

The final conclusion is that differences in tidal stream directions and/or velocities, do, to a certain extent influence 0 the ratios of advance and transfer (180 ). However, none of the situations mentioned above undoes the advantages, in terms of increased manoeuvrability, of the proposed method. H/T ratio during trials Gunvor Maersk The H/T ratio for trial 1 was more or less constant: 1.76; for trials 2 and 3 it was varying from 2.11 (start of trials), via 1.64 (a short period) to 1.74 (end). However, trials 2 and 3 were carried out in the same area, following almost the same track. Therefore these two trials are, in the opinion of the authors, absolutely suitable for comparison of the ratios of advance and transfer of the two methods. 3.5 Acceptance in practice Based on the results of both trial series the first three questions (a. to c.) mentioned in paragraph 3.2, mainly focusing on practical aspects for the tugs, could all be answered by yes. The last question (e.) of paragraph 3 (is it feasible, from a practical point of view, to safely apply this method by ASD-tugs in daily practice?) can be answered by yes for many situations, especially for large vessels with high displacements. However in some specific situations it will not be possible/advisable to apply the proposed method. Besides, it has to be accepted by pilots and tugboat captains. At the moment of writing this paper the proposed method is not yet introduced in daily practice. This may be the case after a planned meeting with the co-operating tugboat companies and pilots. In the

meantime several existing situations were put forward where the proposed method may be very useful: not only during conditions of strong wind but also for very sharp turns in general as well as for geographically determined sharp turns in tidal streams. Implementation can result in a more assertive way of manoeuvring. A second method to achieve that the proposed tug configuration be accepted in practice, is to train the mariners involved: pilot and tug captain. Preferably they should be trained together. This is only possible by specialized training in order to ensure that the required intuitive understanding of the behaviour of ships, assisting tugs and the combination thereof, is present. It is obvious that a simulator is the ideal tool for the introduction of alternative methods of assistance of harbour tugs: training by simulation is required. Preferably simulation including the interaction ship-tugboat (see Figure 11). The latter is not only of importance to guarantee that the forces being exerted by the tugs are realistically simulated, it has to do also with the human elements as tugboat captains will act in accordance with the safety level (for tug and crew) experienced during a manoeuvre. Furthermore, both tug masters and pilots will anticipate the expected situation, and, even more importantly, they can communicate with each other as in real life. This anticipation, based on experience, is a factor of major importance and must be taken into account when evaluating tug operations. However, training is useless in the case that a trainee has insufficient knowledge of the theoretical backgrounds of manoeuvring. In this context it is, in the opinion of the authors, of importance that, instead of out-of-date theoretical models, new models be introduced. See ref. [3]. For several years the outlines of the wing theory has been used to create intuitive understanding of manoeuvring when teaching the Netherlands trainee pilots. Up until now the results are satisfactory. One of the most recent publications explaining this approach is ref. [4].

Figure 11: Interactive simulation at STC BV / MSR: the tugs captain of an ASD-tug assisting a berthing vessel.

4. CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of the study the following is concluded: For Port Design it is of importance to consider the effect of the VLCVs on the fairway dimensions, a scaling of these dimensions in relation to the present size container vessels is not recommended. The following is recommended: o Straight channel: from the point of view of swept path the fairway should be as shallow as possible to maximize the benefits of the shallow water effects, the width of the channel should be (relative) increased as result of the additional space required for the tugs; o Bend: from the point of view of ship manoeuvring, the waterdepth in the bend should be as deep as possible, furthermore the radius should be relative large as the VLCVs will turn relative slow in comparison with the present container vessels. To overcome these limitations, alternative tugboat configurations were developed. Both simulator and full-scale trials proved that these alternative tug configurations are feasible, or more specifically: o an ASD-tug working in forward brake mode can safely stay clear of the hull of the assisted vessel up to a speed of 5 [knots] (including a safety margin); o it is possible, at 5 [knots] speed, for a forward made fast ASD-tug in forward brake mode, to safely come forward to a position in front of the assisted vessel; o it is possible, at 5 [knots] speed, for a forward made fast ASD-tug in conventional mode, to safely come backwards from a position in front of the assisted vessel, to the required position for the forward brake mode; 9

o o o o o o o

the basic statement that, for the speed range from 4-6 knots, the use of a forward ASD-tug in forward brake mode leads to better manoeuvring capabilities of the assisted vessel, rather than using this tug in a conventional mode, appears to be true as long as the assisted vessel is not too much down by the stern; in many situations it is feasible, from a practical point of view, to safely apply this method by ASD-tugs in daily practice as long as the speed is not exceeding 5 knots; in some specific situations, the tugs captain may not feel safe, or the method should not be advised, due to the required way of assistance in a later phase of the planned manoeuvres; certain expectations for the results of these trials using other types of tugs (e.g. tractor tugs or Rotor tugs) do exist; however this has not been proved yet; the ideal situation is that the forward tug is already braking at the moment the turn is initiated; in this case the propeller revs. of the assisted vessel are rather high and a rudder angle is immediately very effective; the results are no guarantee that the method will be used with immediate effect in daily practice; the method can only be considered to be normal practice once it is broadly accepted by both tugboat captains and pilots; the results of this project may help solving some existing manoeuvrability problems or problems in harbour development; for the introduction of the proposed method in daily practice the acceptance by tugboat captains and pilots and the demonstrating of the advantages to solve existing manoeuvrability problems or problems in harbour development, state of the art simulation techniques including interaction ship-tugboat is absolutely a prerequisite.

Based on the positive results gained during these exercises, the authors are planning further research in optimising tug assistance in ports. The next step will be a replay of the Gunvor Maersk trials in the simulation in order to validate the simulator results for these complex situations. If, as expected, the predictable capability of the simulator is good, more new tug assistance strategies can be developed on the simulator and present strategies can be further refined. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Also on behalf of the Rotterdam Pilots Corporation, we would like to thank the companies Front Line, Maersk Line, Smit, Kotug and Fairplay for their co-operation, and Captain Louis Stevens (Rotterdam pilot) for his important contributions to this project. We are also grateful to Mr. Harry van den Berg (engineer Smit Clyde) and Capt. Jan Frans van den Hoek (manager operations Rotterdam Pilots Corporation) for their kind permission to use their photographs. Last but not least we would like to thank Marc Philippart, Msc., of Hydro Meteo Rijnmond for providing us with the invaluable information regarding the tidal stream velocities. REFERENCES W.G. Pellegrom [21 September 2004]. Ontwerp aangrijpingspunt sleeplijnen bij grote containerschepen. OCIMF [1994], Prediction of wind and current loads on VLCCs, 2nd edition, Witherby & Company Limited, pp. 6 and 23 Hensen, Henk [2003], Tug use in port, a practical guide, 2nd edition, The Nautical Institute, pp. 35 and 62 Van Hilten, Max [2001], Unpredictable behaviour; example of a reason to reconsider the theory of manoeuvring for navigators, Proc. of IMSF Annual General Meeting Genova. Clark, I.C. [2005], Ship dynamics for mariners, Nautical Institute, e.g. pp. 11-17, 2005

10