37 views

Uploaded by Coleasa Stefan Ciprian

Propulsion of 2 200-2-800 Teu Container Vessel
Propulsion of 2 200-2-800 Teu Container Vessel

- Ship Resistance 2
- Future Ship Powering Options Report
- Calculation of Marine Propellers
- astm17_0107
- Schottel pump jet
- Boat Building Books
- An Overall Ship Propulsion Model for Fuel Efficiency Study
- hong kong port
- Rules for the Classification Naval Ships Part a - Classification and Surveys - Chapter 1 Al 5 - NR 483.A1 DT R01 E_2011-11
- 8-8-Henry_Chung
- RL33360.pdf
- Mahesa CV July 2014
- Propeller Fitting Instructions
- Numerically-based ducted propeller design using vortex lattice lifting line theory
- Cpp
- 1910 problemofflightt00chatrich
- Hélices
- psdsp-toader
- Calculation of Marine Propellers
- Factotum Dm Cornish PDF

You are on page 1of 24

Container Vessel

Content

Introduction.................................................................................................. 5

EEDI and Major Ship and Main Engine Parameters........................................ 6

Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI)....................................................... 6

Major propeller and engine parameters..................................................... 7

2,500 teu container vessel....................................................................... 8

Main Engine Operating Costs 20.0 knots.................................................... 9

Fuel consumption and EEDI................................................................... 10

Operating costs..................................................................................... 12

Main Engine Operating Costs 19.0 knots.................................................. 13

Fuel consumption and EEDI................................................................... 13

Operating costs..................................................................................... 15

Retrofit of Existing 7L70ME-C8.2 with EGB-LL for Reduced Ship Speeds.... 16

Exhaust gas bypass Low Load (EGB-LL)............................................. 17

Saving in operating costs and payback time........................................... 17

Summary.................................................................................................... 18

Introduction

see Fig. 1.

Recent development steps have made

Parameters

(EEDI)

later in Fig. 4.

11,588

10,738

1,500

1,262

2,067

1,300

1,990

S60ME-C8.2

4,220

3,980

3,770

2,330

10,418

As the two-stroke main engine is di-

L70ME-C8.2

Fig. 2: Main dimensions for the new G60ME-C9.2 and existing S60ME-C8.2 engines and the L70ME-C8 applied earlier

G60ME-C9.2

According to the black curve, the ex-

about 97 r/min.

recovery systems.

sumption (SFOC).

lower EEDI than the 2013 reference figure, see later in Figs. 8 and 14.

Major propeller and engine parameters

In general, the highest possible propulsive efficiency required to provide a

given ship speed is obtained with the

Propulsion

SMCR power

kW

5-bladed FP-propellers

13,500

d = Propeller diameter

p/d = Pitch/diameter ratio

Design Ship Speed = 19.0 kn

Design Draught

= 10.0 m

13,000

SMCR power and speed are inclusive of:

15% sea margin

10% engine margin

5% propeller light running

12,500

1.20

optimum pitch/diameter ratio p/d.

12,000

S60ME-C8.2

d

6.8 m

0.95

7.2 m

1.10

7.6 m

p/d

p/d

0.80

0.90

0.98

1.01

G60ME-C9.2

11,500

various propeller diameters (d)

with optimum p/d ratio

if possible, means approximately 10%

higher optimum propeller speed, and

the given propeller diameter

d = 7.2 m with different p/d ratios

11,000

60

70

80

90

100

110 r/min

Engine/propeller speed at SMCR

increased, and vice versa when going

Fig. 3: Influence of propeller diameter and pitch/diameter ratio on SMCR for a 2,500 teu feeder container

speed.

2,500 teu container vessel

Furthermore, due to lower emitted

as main engine.

Existing

7.0 m 6

Propulsion

SMCR power

kW

30,000

Dprop = Nblade:

Future

7.6 m 5

constant ship speed coefcient = 0.19

25,000

20,000

8 L7

Tdes = 10.0 m

0ME

-C8

10,000

9.2

M E- C

7G 6 0 M6

9.2

ME- C M4

6G6 0

M5

22.0 kn

6 L7 0

M5

7S6 0

M3 M2

M4

M3

M2

M E- C

6 S 6 0M

M1

M E- C

21.0 kn

8.2

20.0 kn

8.2

M1

E-C 8.2

19.0 kn

18.0 kn

7.6 m 4 7.2 m 4

6.8 m 4

5,000

23.0 kn

.2

E- C 8

60

70

80

Existing

6.8 m 5

.2

7 L7 0

15,000

Existing

7.2 m 5

MM

15% sea margin

10% engine margin

5% light running

23.0 kn, 7.0 m 6

MM = 26,160 kW 108 r/min (8L70ME-C8.2)

105 r/min

97 r/min

90

100

108 r/min

110

22.0 kn

22.0 kn, 7.1 m 5

M = 21,780 kW 108 r/min (7L70ME-C8.2)

20.0 kn

20.0 kn, 6.7 m 5

M1 = 15,200 kW 105 r/min (7S60ME-C8.2)

20.0 kn, 7.0 m 5

M2 = 14,970 kW 97 r/min (7S60ME-C8.2)

20.0 kn, 7.0 m 5

M3 = 14,970 kW 97 r/min (6G60ME-C9.2)

20.0 kn, 7.4 m 5

M4 = 14,730 kW 89 r/min (6G60ME-C9.2)

20.0 kn, 7.4 m 5

M5 = 14,730 kW 89 r/min (7G60ME-C9.2)

20.0 kn, 7.6 m 5

M6 = 14,570 kW 84 r/min (7G60ME-C9.2)

19.0 kn

19.0 kn, 6.7 m 5

M1 = 12,570 kW 98 r/min (6S60ME-C8.2)

19.0 kn, 7.0 m 5

M2 = 12,420 kW 92 r/min (6S60ME-C8.2)

19.0 kn, 7.0 m 5

M3 = 12,420 kW 92 r/min (6G60ME-C9.2)

19.0 kn, 7.4 m 5

M4 = 12,180 kW 83 r/min (6G60ME-C9.2)

19.0 kn, 7.6 m 5

M5 = 12,070 kW 79 r/min (6G60ME-C9.2)

120

130

140 r/min

Engine and propeller speed at SMCR

Fig. 4: Different main engine and propeller layouts and SMCR possibilities (M1, M2, M3, etc. for 20.0 knots and M1, M2, M3, etc. for 19.0 knots) for a 2,500

teu container ship operating at 20.0 knots and 19.0 knots, respectively

follows:

Main Engine

20.0 knots

are as follows:

Scantling draught

34,800

11.4

dwt

27,700

Design draught

10.0

Length overall

203.0

197.0

Deadweight, design

comparison

between

the

new

Length between pp

Breadth

m 30.0

Sea margin

15

Engine margin

10

Type of propeller

FPP

target

Propeller diameter

Based on the above-stated average

Operating

Costs

20.0 kn

1 Dprop = 6.7 m 5

M1 = 15,200 kW 105 r/min

7S60ME-C8.2

2 Dprop = 7.0 m 5

M2 = 14,970 kW 97 r/min

7S60ME-C8.2

3 Dprop = 7.0 m 5

M3 = 14,970 kW 97 r/min

6G60ME-C9.2

4 Dprop = 7.4 m 5

M4 = 14,730 kW 89 r/min

6G60ME-C9.2

5 Dprop = 7.4 m 5

M5 = 14,730 kW 89 r/min

7G60ME-C9.2

6 Dprop = 7.6 m 5

22.0 kn

7L70ME-C8.2

0.19 [ref. PM2 = PM1 (n2/n1).

7G60ME-C9.2

1 Dprop = 7.1 m 5

M = 21,780 kW 108 r/min

have been calculated and described.

container ship earlier designed for

Propulsion power

demand at N = NCR

kW

16,000

14,000

Relative power

reduction

%

8

13,680 kW

13,473 kW

13,473 kW

13,257 kW

13,257 kW

13,113 kW

13,428 kW

12,000

10,000

4.1%

8,000

4,000

3.1%

3.1%

6,000

1.8%

1.5%

1.5%

2,000

0

0%

7S60ME-C8.2

N1

Dprop:

6.7 m 5

N2

N3

N4

N5

N6

7.0 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.6 m 5

7L70ME-C8.2

N

7.1 m 5

Fig. 5: Expected propulsion power demand at N=NCR = 90% SMCR for 20.0 knots (N = 61.7% SMCR for 7L70ME-C8.2)

sea margin).

Fig. 5 shows the influence of the propeller diameter with five propeller

blades when going from about 6.7 m to

7.6 m. Thus, N6 for the 7G60ME-C8.2

with a 7.6 m propeller diameter has a

propulsion power demand that is about

SFOC

g/kWh

176

175

173

172

170

169

engine efficiency, indicated by the Specific Fuel Oil Consumption, SFOC, for

167

N2

165

N

N4

164

N1

M3 6G60ME-C9.2 7.0 m x 5

(M) 7L70ME-C8.2 7.1 m x 5

M6 7G60ME-C9.2 7.6 m x 5

163

N3

M5 7G60ME-C9.2 7.4 m x 5

162

N6

161

159

N5

Basis

0.9%

157

1.5%

156

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

For 7L70ME-C8.2

-1.1%

-0.7%

-0.4%

0.0%

158

M4 6G60ME-C9.2 7.4 m x 5

M1 7S60ME-C8.2 6.7 m x 5 Basis

166

160

D prop

M2 7S60ME-C8.2 7.0 m x 5

168

SFOC is 164.2 g/kWh, for N5 = 90%

Standard high-load

optimised engines

171

propeller diameter of about 6.7 m.

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

LCV = 42,700 kJ/kg

174

85

90 95 100% SMCR

Engine shaft power

N = NCR M = SMCR

61.7%

68.6%

2.3%

Savings in SFOC

2025.

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

LCV = 42,700 kJ/kg

Fuel consumption

of main engine

t/24h

70

60

53.91

t/24h

53.68

t/24h

52.63

t/24h

52.42

t/24h

Relative saving of

fuel consumption

%

14

51.06

t/24h

50

53.30

t/24h

50.90

t/24h

10

40

30

5.3%

20

0%

7S60ME-C8.2

N1

Dprop: 6.7 m 5

5.6%

6

4

2.8%

2.4%

10

0

12

1.1%

0.4%

7S60ME-C8.2

N2

7.0 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

N3

7.0 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

N4

7.4 m 5

7G60ME-C9.2

N5

7.4 m 5

7G60ME-C9.2

N6

7.6 m 5

7L70ME-C8.2

N

7.1 m 5

2

0

Fig. 7: Expected fuel consumption at N = NCR = 90% SMCR for 20.0 knots (N = 61.7% SMCR for 7L70ME-C8.2)

CO2 emissions

gram per dwt/n mile

75% SMCR and 70% of max dwt: 20.2 kn without sea margin

25

EEDI reference (21.29/100%)

Actual/Reference EEDI %

110

EEDI actual

20.44

20

17.69

83%

15

13.49

13.43

13.19

63%

13.13

63%

62%

62%

12.81

60%

96%

12.76

60%

Year

100 2013

90

80

before 1 January

2020

70

2025

60

50

10

40

30

5

20

10

N1

N2

N3

N4

N5

N6

N

NN

Dprop: 6.7 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.6 m 5

7.1 m 5

7.0 m 5

(22.0 kn)

(23.0 kn)

Fig. 8: Reference and actual Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for 20.0 knots

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

250 days/year

NCR = 90% SMCR (61.7% for 7L70ME-C8.2)

Fuel price: 700 USD/t

Million USD/Year

Relative saving

in operating costs

%

10.0

10 Maintenance

9.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

5.1%

5.0

Lubricating oil

Fuel oil

5.4%

5

4

4.0

3.0

2.5%

2.9%

2.0

1.0

0.4%

0%

0.0

2

0.8%

N1

N2

N3

N4

N5

N6

N

7.0 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.6 m 5

7.1 m 5

Dprop: 6.7 m 5

Fig. 9: Total annual main engine operating costs for 20.0 knots

Operating costs

Million USD

11

N6: 7.6 m 5

7G60ME-C9.2

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

N = NCR = 90% SMCR (61.7% for 7L70ME-C8.2)

250 days/year

Fuel price: 700 USD/t

Rate of interest and discount: 6% p.a.

Rate of ination: 3% p.a.

10

9

8

7

N5: 7.4 m 5

7G60ME-C9.2

of 700 USD/t, are shown in Fig. 9. The

lube oil and maintenance costs are

shown too. As can be seen, the major

operating costs originate from the fuel

costs about 96%.

N4: 7.4 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

N3: 7.0 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

5

4

After some years in service, the relative savings in operating costs in Net

Present Value (NPV), see Fig. 10, with

the existing 7S60ME-C8.2 used as

2

1

0

0

10

15

20

25

Fig. 10: Relative saving in main engine operating costs (NPV) for 20.0 knots

N:7.1 m 5

7L70ME-C8.2

N2: 7.0 m 5

7S60ME-C8.2

N1: 6.7 m 5

7S60ME-C8.2

30 Years

Lifetime

of about 6.7 m, indicates an NPV saving for the new 7G60ME-C9.2 engine.

After 25 years in operation, the saving

is about 8.7 million USD for N5 with

7G60ME-C9.2 with the SMCR speed

of 89.0 r/min and propeller diameter of

about 7.4 m.

19.0 knots

The calculated main engine examples

Propulsion power

demand at N = NCR

kW

14,000

12,000

are as follows:

11,313 kW

11,178 kW

11,178 kW

10,962 kW

10,863 kW

11,117 kW

10,000

19.0 kn

3 Dprop = 7.0 m 5

M3 = 12,420 kW 92 r/min

6G60ME-C9.2

4 Dprop = 7.4 m 5

M4 = 12,180 kW 83 r/min

6G60ME-C9.2

5 Dprop = 7.6 m 5

M5 = 12,070 kW 79 r/min

6G60ME-C9.2

1.2%

2,000

0%

N1

N2

N3

N4

N5

N

Dprop: 6.7 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.6 m 5

7.1 m 5

for 7L70ME-C8.2)

SFOC

g/kWh

176

175

174

173

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

LCV = 42,700 kJ/kg

172

171

170

Standard high-load

optimised engines

169

N

N2

166

7L70ME-C8.2

165

D prop

7.0 m x 5

M1 6S60ME-C8.2

(M) 7L70ME-C8.2

6.7 m x 5 Basis

7.1 m x 5

M5 6G60ME-C9.2 7.6 m x 5

M4 6G60ME-C9.2 7.4 m x 5

164

163

N4

161

160

M3 6G60ME-C9.2 7.0 m x 5

Basis

0.0%

N3

1.6%

158

157

156

-1.3%

-0.9%

N5

162

Savings

in SFOC

2.2%

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100% SMCR

Engine shaft power

SMCR, but N = 51% SMCR for the existing 7L70ME-C8.2, have been calcu-

M2 6S60ME-C8.2

N1

159

Fig. 11: Expected propulsion power demand at N = NCR = 90% SMCR for 19.0 knots (N = 51% SMCR

167

1 Dprop = 7.1 m 5

1.2%

168

22.0 kn

1.7%

4,000

3.1%

6,000

2 Dprop = 7.0 m 5

M2 = 12,420 kW 92 r/min

6S60ME-C8.2

6

5

4.0%

8,000

1 Dprop = 6.7 m 5

M1 = 12,570 kW 98 r/min

6S60ME-C8.2

Relative power

reduction

%

7

For 7L70ME-C8.2

3.6%

N = NCR M = SMCR

51.0%

56.7%

ship speed of 19.0 knots, which is prob-

1.3%.

dwt. (without sea margin).

figures have been calculated and are

shown in Fig. 14 (EEDIref = 174.22

max. dwt

-0.201

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

LCV = 42,700 kJ/kg

Fuel consumption

of main engine

t/24h

Relative saving of

fuel consumption

%

70

14

60

12

be seen for all five cases with 6S60MEC8.2 and 6G60ME-C9.2 and layouted

for 19.0 knots, the actual EEDI figures

are much lower than the reference figure because of the relatively low ship

speed of 19.0 knots.

50

44.83

t/24h

44.69

t/24h

42.72

t/24h

42.36

t/24h

44.64

t/24h

40

10

8

30

42.46

t/24h

4.7%

5.3%

5.5%

20

2025.

10

0%

As for the earlier stated cases based

on 20 knots, the EEDI for the old cases

0.4%

0.3%

N1

N2

N3

N4

N5

N

Dprop: 6.7 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.6 m 5

7.1 m 5

2

0

7L70ME-C8.2 (22 kn.) and 8L70MEC8.2 (23 kn.) is also shown in Fig. 14

Fig. 13: Expected fuel consumption at N = NCR = 90% SMCR for 19.0 knots (N = 51% SMCR for

for information.

7L70ME-C8.2)

CO2 emissions

gram per dwt/n mile

75% SMCR and 70% of max dwt: 19.2 kn without sea margin

25

EEDI reference (21.29/100%)

Actual/Reference

EEDI %

110

EEDI actual

20.44

20

17.69

83%

96%

15

10

Year

100 2013

90 2015 Contract date

80 2020

70 2025

11.86

11.82

56%

56%

11.33

11.26

53%

53%

11.23

53%

60

50

40

30

20

10

NN

N

N5

N4

N3

N2

N1

7.0 m 5

7.1 m 5

7.6 m 5

7.4 m 5

7.0 m 5

7.0 m 5

Dprop: 6.7 m 5

(23.0 kn)

(22.0 kn)

Fig. 14: Reference and actual Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for 19.0 knots

before 1 January

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

250 days/year

NCR = 90% SMCR (51.0% for 7L70ME-C8.2)

Fuel price: 700 USD/t

Million USD/Year

9.0

Relative saving

in operating costs

%

8.0

7.0

6.0

5.1%

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

1

0%

0.3%

-1.0

Dprop:

6S60ME-C8.2

N1

6.7 m 5

Fuel oil

5.4%

4.5%

0.0

Maintenance

Lubricating oil

-0.3%

6S60ME-C8.2

N2

7.0 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

N3

7.0 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

N4

7.4 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

N5

7.6 m 5

7L70ME-C8.2

N

7.1 m 5

-1

Fig. 15: Total annual main engine operating costs for 19.0 knots

Million USD

9

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

N = NCR = 90% SMCR (51.0% for 7L70ME-C8.2)

250 days/year

Fuel price: 700 USD/t

Rate of interest and discount: 6% p.a.

Rate of ination: 3% p.a.

8

7

6

Operating costs

The total main engine operating costs

N5: 7.6 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

N4: 7.4 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

N3: 7.0 m 5

6G60ME-C9.2

also shown at the top of each column.

As can be seen, the major operating

costs originate from the fuel costs

about 96%.

N2: 7.0 m 5

6S60ME-C8.2

N1: 6.7 m 5 Basis

6S60ME-C8.2

N:7.1 m 5

7L70ME-C8.2

0

1

0

10

15

20

25

Fig. 16: Relative saving in main engine operating costs (NPV) for 19.0 knots

30 Years

Lifetime

ler diameter of about 6.7 m used as basis, indicates an NPV saving after some

years in service for the new 6G60MEC9.2 engine. After 25 years in operation, the saving is about 7.3 million USD

for N4 with the 6G60ME-C9.2 with the

SMCR speed of 83.0 r/min and propeller diameter of about 7.4 m.

LL-EGB for Reduced Ship Speeds

As mentioned earlier in this paper, the

as

t G ld

us ifo

ha an

Ex M

Expansion Joint

(Compensator)

Pipe Support

(Slide Point)

Pipe Support

(Fix Point)

Expansion Joint

(Compensator)

EGB-Valve

r

ve

ei

ec ine

t R ng

us E

ha ain

Ex M

rates, and stricter EEDI demands have

Yard

Supply

Orice

MAN B&W

Supply

relatively low ship speed compared to

what was originally intended, i.e. to operate the main engine continuously at

Exhaust Gas Bypass, EGB open and closed EGB (for guidance only) ME/ME-C

Closed

Partly open

60

70

Low-Load (LL)

Open

80

Engine load

90

100% SMCR

Fig. 17: Exhaust gas bypass for Low Load tuning (LL-EGB)

Retrot

7L70ME-C8.2 with LL-EGB

SMCR = 21,780 kW 108 r/min

SFOC

g/kWh

176

175

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

LCV = 42,700 kJ/kg

174

173

New average

service

172

171

170

LL-EGB

168.7

169

HL-Standard

168

167

166

165

163.7

164

163

162

161

160

159

Case B: 7L70ME-C8.2 with LL-EGB (Retrot)

158

157

156

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95 100% SMCR

Fig. 18: SFOC reduction for 7L70ME-C8.2 with LL-EGB operating at 45% SMCR at reduced ship speed

Fuel consumption

of main engine

t/24h

70

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

LCV = 42,700 kJ/kg

Retrot

7L70ME-C8.2 with LL-EGB

SMCR = 21,780 kW 108 r/min

60

50

39.67

t/24h

40

Relative saving of

fuel consumption

%

7

6

5

38.50

t/24h

3.0%

30

(LL-EGB)

A reduction of SFOC when operating at

low loads is possible but is limited by

NOx regulations on two-stroke engines.

Thus, NOx emission will increase if the

SFOC is reduced and vice versa.

20

10

0%

7L70ME-C8.2

HL-Standard

A

7L70ME-C8.2

LL-EGB

B

but at the expense of a higher SFOC in

the high-load range without exceeding

the IMO NOx limit.

This is possible by means of an exhaust

gas bypass, low load optimised, see Fig.

a 7L70ME-C8.2 with SMCR = 21,780

kW x 108 r/min is shown in Fig. 18.

Relative saving

in operating costs

%

Million USD/Year

10.0

9.0

8.0

Retrot

7L70ME-C8.2 with LL-EGB

SMCR = 21,780 kW 108 r/min

250 days/year

Fuel price: 700 USD/t

Maintenance

Lubricating oil

2.9%

6.0

4.0

3.0

speed of 22.0 knots has been used as

basis.

been calculated valid for the new average engine service load of 45% SMCR

which more or less corresponds to

2.0

0.0

5.0

1.0

back time

Fuel oil

7.0

knots, case A, see Figs. 18 and 19.

0%

7L70ME-C8.2

HL-Standard

A

7L70ME-C8.2

LL-EGB

B

consumptions valid for LL-EGB, case

B, is also shown in Figs. 18 and 19.

The LL-EGB case B has an about 3%

Fig. 20: Total annual main engine operating costs in average service on 45% SMCR

lower fuel consumption than for the HLstandard tuned engine, case A.

The annual operating costs are shown

in Fig. 20, and the saving in operating

Summary

even larger propellers has been thoroughly evaluated with a view to using

propulsion.

technology will be an advantage.

Million USD

4.0

7L70ME-C8.2

LL-EGB

IMO Tier ll

ISO ambient conditions

250 days/year

Fuel price: 700 USD/t

Rate of interest and discount: 6% p.a.

Rate of ination: 3% p.a.

3.5

3.0

The new and ultra long stroke G60MEC9.2 engine type meets this trend in

the large feeder container market. This

paper indicates, depending on the propeller diameter used, an overall efficiency increase of up to 5-6% when using

G60ME-C9.2, compared with the existing main engine type S60ME-C8.2.

2.5

2.0

1.5

(EEDI) will also be reduced when usof lower design ship speed may by it-

1.0

stricter EEDI demands in the future may

0.5

always be met.

7L70ME-C8.2

HL-Standard

0

0.5

for high ship speeds, the retrofit of the

main engine with a LL-EGB may reduce

1.0

0

10

15

20

25

30 Years

Lifetime

when sailing at reduced ship speeds.

The payback time may be about 2

Fig. 21: Relative saving in Net Pressent Value costs in average service on 45% SMCR

All data provided in this document is non-binding. This data serves informational

purposes only and is especially not guaranteed in any way. Depending on the

subsequent specific individual projects, the relevant data may be subject to

changes and will be assessed and determined individually for each project. This

will depend on the particular characteristics of each individual project, especially

specific site and operational conditions. CopyrightMAN Diesel & Turbo.

5510-0145-00ppr Oct 2013 Printed in Denmark

Teglholmsgade 41

2450 Copenhagen SV, Denmark

Phone +45 33 85 11 00

Fax

+45 33 85 10 30

info-cph@mandieselturbo.com

www.mandieselturbo.com

- Ship Resistance 2Uploaded byPrem Ceaseless
- Future Ship Powering Options ReportUploaded byRaniero Falzon
- Calculation of Marine PropellersUploaded byGoutam Kumar Saha
- astm17_0107Uploaded bysmithwork
- Schottel pump jetUploaded byPobesneliMrav
- Boat Building BooksUploaded byVelmohana
- An Overall Ship Propulsion Model for Fuel Efficiency StudyUploaded byFernandocf90
- hong kong portUploaded byravi_chandigarh87
- Rules for the Classification Naval Ships Part a - Classification and Surveys - Chapter 1 Al 5 - NR 483.A1 DT R01 E_2011-11Uploaded byArboleda M
- 8-8-Henry_ChungUploaded byVatze
- RL33360.pdfUploaded byDusan Cincar
- Mahesa CV July 2014Uploaded byNelum Perera
- Propeller Fitting InstructionsUploaded byrubens0001
- Numerically-based ducted propeller design using vortex lattice lifting line theoryUploaded byDanton05
- CppUploaded bySlamet Prayitno Heta
- 1910 problemofflightt00chatrichUploaded byUlf Dunell
- HélicesUploaded byfedeo
- psdsp-toaderUploaded byIonut-Octavian Toader
- Calculation of Marine PropellersUploaded bysinas13
- Factotum Dm Cornish PDFUploaded byKrista
- What Are the Essential Requirements for Unattended Machinery Space (UMS) ShipUploaded bystamatis
- container_ship_revolution.pdfUploaded bySutan Aditya
- ITTC Recommended Procedures and Guidelines.pdfUploaded byKariem Zaki
- ts402.pdfUploaded byRobin Gu
- Sms 7 - Shallow Water EffectsUploaded byRajiv Vig
- inspeccion por claseUploaded byOscar Ortiz Vazquez
- MTU Submarine Charging Unit 12V 4000Uploaded byselleriverket
- TLA BásicaUploaded byJesús Manuel Padilla Ramos
- h 1502024853Uploaded byGarry Sam
- Documents and certifications to be kept on boardUploaded bygeorgesaguna

- Atos White Paper - Internet of ThingsUploaded bySam
- TORQUES Actuator for Ball valve.pdfUploaded byChaerul Anwar
- EPB-Electric-Power-(Chattanooga)-SGSB---Dispersed-Power-ProgramUploaded byGenability
- IRP 3Uploaded bycheesewizz
- Crompton GreavesUploaded byAbhishek Kumar
- HRST Boiler Biz Newsletter - Winter 07Uploaded bySeindahNya
- Software Sep2w Sms(1)Uploaded byadenijisegun
- LitioUploaded byHubertZenonQuentaCondori
- Buy Gbl-buy Gbl OnlineUploaded bybuygblonline
- Halo Energy - Ralph Kappler - Sorb Press Conference - London 2002Uploaded byRalph Thomas Kappler
- mpp sampleUploaded byosama_ahmad125
- HUL ProjectUploaded bySarvesh Singh
- Bs 220 Final TripUploaded byratheeshkumard
- Physical Settlement of Stock DerivativesUploaded byreenu malik
- 2012 Asia Pacific District Cooling ForumUploaded bychronometry
- Transformers FabricationUploaded byNaren Kumar
- Maharashtra Emerging as Wind Energy HubUploaded byDevesh Ghirnikar
- 160927_SEC_NICAD_017Uploaded bynenaddejanovic
- Imperial Storage Solutions' Ground Breaking ExpansionUploaded byPR.com
- Two Wires a and B of the Same Material and Length L and 2L Have Radius r Ad 2r RespUploaded byKaran Rathore
- EExp_02.pdfUploaded byaielec
- valve case study.docxUploaded bycynthia
- RavelliInstallatorManual2012 EnUploaded bysdancer75
- Dando Watertec 12.8 (Dando Drilling Indonesia)Uploaded byDando Drilling Indonesia
- Momentum Energy - United Energy ResUploaded byGenability
- American Marsh SremUploaded bydiuska13
- Berthing ProgramUploaded byAnanth Krishnan
- ABB Johannesburg Microgrids - Case Study v9 LoResUploaded bytanzeel307
- 2015 Cost Review of Wind Energy by NERLUploaded byHimanshu1712
- 3 SagarUploaded bySurya Teja