5 views

Uploaded by 1mmahoney

ballast-free bulk carrier concept

ballast-free bulk carrier concept

© All Rights Reserved

- Merc Service Manual 6 3c
- Konica Minolta Bizhub 163 - 7616 Parts Manual
- Boat Motor Service Manual
- 703451009-MIT
- Diferentes Software Para Simular Cavitacion
- ajme-1-8-1
- Ada 197091
- Tidal Turbine
- Integrated Design and Realization of a Hubless Rim-driven Thruster
- JINT-D-16-00451
- Assignment
- Natalia G. Berloff- Solitary Waves on Vortex Lines in Ginzburg-Landau Models for the Example of Bose-Einstein Condensates
- Vertex Sedding
- nouri2016.pdf
- 2014.pdf
- 1969_55.pdf
- P. Voinovich and E. Timofeev- On the formation and development of a toroidal vortex and a highly curved Mach disk in the course of shock wave/axis-of-symmetry interaction
- rev3.kinaci - BRODOGRADNJA Template.pdf
- An Introduction To
- Defect Detection in Plates Using Guided Waves

You are on page 1of 17

Michael G. Parsons, (FL), Arthur F. Thurnau Professor, University of Michigan

The hydrodynamic aspect of the Ballast-Free Ship concept is further investigated in order to analyze the water

discharge effect on the resistance and propulsion of a vessel. For this purpose, a Seaway-sized bulk carrier model

was tested in the towing tank of the University of Michigan Marine Hydrodynamics Laboratory. Additional results

were obtained with the aid of Computational Fluid Dynamics. The cost effectiveness of the concept is demonstrated

through a detailed economic analysis.

ACC - annual cargo capacity and 10 microns and adds specific requirements for selected

B - bias error smaller pathogens (i.e., toxicogenic Vibrio cholerae,

CP - pressure drag coefficient Escherichia coli, and intestinal enterococci). Even though the

CF - friction drag coefficient introduction of the requirements will not be in full effect until

CRF - Capital Recovery Factor 2014 for existing vessels; starting in 2009, ships without an

CT - total (friction plus pressure) drag coefficient approved ballast treatment system will have to conduct ballast

D - experimental form factor water exchange on the high seas, a method that has been

E - comparison error criticized regarding its effectiveness (Forsberg et al. 2005, Kent

k - form factor and Parsons 2004).

k-ε - turbulence closure model

k-ω - turbulence closure model A combination of a primary treatment system (e.g., filtration

P - precision error with backflush) to remove the larger organisms and a secondary

Qm - model-scale ballast trunk flow rate treatment system (UV irradiation, chemical treatment) has

Qs - full-scale ballast trunk flow rate proven to be effective in many cases. The installation of a

rG - grid refinement ratio ballast water treatment system, though, significantly increases

UD - experimental data uncertainty the capital and operating costs for trans-oceanic vessels. An

UG - grid uncertainty alternative to ballast treatment systems is the Ballast-Free Ship

UI - iterative uncertainty concept (U.S. Patent #6,694,908 2004), a new paradigm that

USN - simulation numerical uncertainty approaches ballast operation as the reduction of buoyancy rather

UT - total experimental uncertainty than the addition of weight to get the vessel to its required

UV - validation uncertainty ballast drafts. The feasibility and effectiveness of the Ballast-

y+ - non-dimensional distance to centroid of Free Ship concept has been demonstrated (Kotinis et al. 2004).

cell nearest wall This is a sequel to that earlier SNAME paper.

∆A - change in annual cost

In the Ballast-Free Ship concept, the traditional ballast tanks are

∆P - change in capital cost

replaced by longitudinal trunks that extend beneath the cargo

∆RFR - change in Required Freight Rate

region of the ship below the ballast draft. The trunks are

λ - geometric scale ratio connected to the sea through symmetrical with respect to the

ship centerplane plena; one at the bow and one at the stern. The

INTRODUCTION pressure developed on a moving ship is positive close to the

The detrimental environmental and socio-economic effects of bow stagnation point and negative (suction) near the stern.

the introduction of nonindigenous aquatic species into coastal Therefore, the hydrodynamic pressure differential between the

waters have motivated the international maritime regulatory bow and the stern region of a ship is theoretically able to induce

bodies to adopt strict regulations in order to control and a slow water flow inside the ballast trunks without the need for

eventually eliminate this phenomenon. The International pumps. While the ship is in the ballast condition, these trunks

Maritime Organization (IMO) has recently adopted new are constantly flooded with “local seawater,” thus, reducing the

regulations (IMO 2004) applicable to both new and existing buoyancy of the vessel. The net result is the elimination of the

vessels that conduct ballast operations. These regulations transportation of foreign ballast water and the nonindigenous

mandate the utilization of a ballast water treatment system and aquatic species it may contain.

prescribe strict limits regarding the concentration of viable

organisms in the discharged ballast water. The new IMO ballast

1

In this paper, the hydrodynamic aspect of the concept is further condition corresponds to heavy ballast used under extreme

investigated in an attempt to better understand the effect of the weather conditions.

water discharge on the flow around the ship hull and the

propeller operation. The current research focuses on ships A significant parameter in determining the geometric scale

deballasting in the Great Lakes; however, this does not limit the factor of the Ballast-Free bulk carrier model was the size of the

validity or applicability of the results. A scaled model of a available stock propellers. The No. 23 stock propeller at the

typical Seaway-sized bulk carrier was constructed and utilized MHL was the available propeller providing the highest

during resistance and propulsion tests performed at the propulsive efficiency and, at the same time, satisfying the hull

University of Michigan Marine Hydrodynamics Laboratory clearance requirements, assuming a full-scale propeller diameter

(MHL). The experimental results were supplemented by of 6.0 m. The corresponding geometric scale ratio λ = 37.92.

theoretical (numerical) results obtained through Computational Constraints relative to the avoidance of the blockage and

Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations performed using the shallow water effects were also taken into account during this

commercial CFD software FLUENT® (Fluent 2006). The selection process. The propeller characteristics for the No. 23

numerical investigation was performed before the experimental model propeller are shown in Table 2. The non-dimensional

investigation. First, the flow around the hull without any water thrust and torque coefficients plotted versus the coefficient of

suction or discharge was analyzed (initial case). Subsequently, advance (Kt, Kq – J) of the No. 23 model propeller are shown in

an analysis was attempted for the effect of the water suction on Fig.1. The main particulars of the Ballast-Free bulk carrier

the flow at the bow and the effect of the water discharge on the model in the ballast condition are listed in Table 3. The bow

flow at the stern (modified case). Finally, the numerical results and the stern of the constructed model are shown in Figs. 2 and

were compared with the experimental results, and a validation 3, respectively.

procedure was performed for the integral variables of the initial

case. Table 2. Characteristics of the MHL No. 23 Propeller

The initial investigation of the Ballast-Free Ship concept Diameter (m) 0.158

demonstrated the general feasibility of the concept (Kotinis et al. Hub diameter (m) 0.031

2004, Kotinis 2005), with an emphasis on the invasive aquatic Pitch-diameter ratio 1.08

species problem as encountered in the Great Lakes. The Expanded area ratio 0.55

majority of the transoceanic vessels entering the Great Lakes

through the St. Lawrence Seaway are Handymax bulk carriers

(Farley 1996). The current research attempts to analyze the

impact of the ballast trunk discharge on the flow around the hull

of a typical Seaway-sized bulk carrier in addition to its effect on

the propeller operation.

was designed and utilized in towing tank experiments and a

numerical hydrodynamic investigation. The bulk carrier was

designed using data from similar vessels. These vessels were

the Isa owned by the Polish Steamship Company and a bulk

carrier designed by the Jiangnan shipyard in China. The vessel

was designed using the commercial ship design software

Maxsurf® (Formation Design Systems 2006). The main

particulars of the vessel are presented in Table 1.

Figure 1. Propeller Coefficients versus Advance Coefficient

Table 1. Main Particulars of the Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier

Table 3. Characteristics of the Ballast-Free Bulk

Maximum beam (m) 23.76

Carrier Model in Ballast Condition

Depth to main deck 16.00

Full-load draft (m) 10.70 Waterline length (m) 5.00

Block coefficient 0.835 Maximum beam (m) 0.627

F.P. draft @ 40% DWL (m) 0.113

The service speed is assumed to be 14.5 knots and the speed of A.P. draft @ 70% DWL (m) 0.198

the vessel while at ballast drafts 15.5 knots. During ballast

Wetted surface area (m2) 5.34

operation, the ship drafts at the forward and aft perpendiculars

Geometric scale ratio λ 37.92

are 40% and 70% of the design draft, respectively. This

2

The friction and pressure drag coefficients on the hull and the

nominal wake fraction at the propeller plane were monitored to

ensure the convergence of the integral variables. The finest grid

was utilized for the hydrodynamic investigation and the

selection of the inlet/outlet positions. The post-processing of the

CFD results was aided by the utilization of Tecplot 360®

(Tecplot 2006).

were modeled and their effect on the hull resistance was

investigated. An attempt was also made to analyze the effect on

propulsion in a qualitative manner.

Figure 2. Bow View of the Seaway-sized Bulk Carrier Model

Description of the Numerical Solver

The numerical solver of FLUENT is based on a finite volume

method with the flow properties calculated at the cell centers.

The mesh, in 3-D problems, can be either structured or

unstructured, single-block or multi-block, with cells of various

topologies (hexahedral, tetrahedral, pyramidal, and prismatic).

For incompressible flows, a pressure-based segregated solver is

typically utilized. The fluid velocity is obtained by the solution

of the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations.

The pressure-velocity coupling is achieved through an iterative

procedure where a pressure correction equation is utilized to

ensure conservation of mass and eventually compute the

Figure 3. Stern View of the Seaway-sized Bulk Carrier pressure field. For steady-state flows, either the SIMPLE or

Model SIMPLEC algorithms are usually employed. The diffusion

terms in the RANS equations are discretized with a central

NUMERICAL HYDRODYNAMIC differencing scheme. The convection terms are discretized

INVESTIGATION using a higher-order upwind scheme to minimize numerical

The commercial CFD software FLUENT® (Fluent 2006) was diffusion; for unstructured meshes with tetrahedral elements a

utilized to study the external flow around the bulk carrier model. second-order upwind scheme is typically utilized. The

An IGES file of the model-scale design was imported into discretized equations are solved using the Gauss-Seidel iterative

Gridgen (Gridgen 2007) and the flow domain was meshed

® algorithm. The solution convergence is accelerated through the

using a multi-block hybrid grid, which is shown in Fig. 4. A utilization of an algebraic multi-grid method. Further details of

'double-body' flow model, which does not take the free-surface the numerical methods can be found in (Mathur et al. 1997) and

flow into account, was adopted considering the free surface as a (Kim et al. 1998).

plane of symmetry. In addition to this, only half of the hull

surface was considered assuming the flow to be symmetric with Turbulence and Near-Wall Modeling

respect to the centerplane. The shape of the flow domain was a The turbulence model utilized in the present computations was

quarter-cylinder; the outer cylindrical boundary, which was the shear-stress transport (SST) model (Menter 1994). This

treated as a slip wall, has a radius equal to half a ship length. At model implements a blending function in order to apply the

the velocity inlet, which was placed at a distance equal to half a standard k - ω model close to solid boundaries (ship hull) and a

ship length upstream of the forward stagnation point, a uniform transformed version of the k - ε model in the far field. The SST

velocity boundary condition was imposed. The flow domain model has been shown to provide quite accurate results for ship

was truncated downstream of the hull stern at a distance flows (Kim and Rhee 2002, Duvigneau et al. 2002).

approximately equal to one ship length. At this location, the

flow had essentially regained its parallel character; thus, it was A mesh capable of fully resolving the viscosity-affected near-

being unaffected by the presence of the ship hull. At the outlet wall region was constructed. This was deemed necessary,

of the flow domain, a Neumann boundary condition was especially in the modified case where the interaction of the

imposed and the flow properties were obtained by extrapolating water discharge with the boundary layer flow needs to be

the values from the interior of the domain. adequately modeled. In addition to this, a low-Reynolds-

number version of the k - ω model, which applies a damping

In order to obtain a converged solution for the initial case, three coefficient to the turbulent viscosity, was employed.

different grids were created using a systematic refinement

method and a verification procedure was applied to the results.

3

Figure 4. Computational Domain for the Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier

Numerical Results

Computations were performed for the Ballast-Free bulk carrier Table 4. Grid Dimensions and y+ Values

model in the ballast condition, where the model-scale speed is

1.295 m/s and the corresponding Reynolds number (in fresh Grid Total Number of y+

water at 15°C) is 6.10e+6. The corresponding friction Cells

coefficient based on the ITTC model-ship correlation line is Coarse 510,613 4.6

3.28e-3. The stopping criterion for the simulations was the Medium 715,410 3.3

convergence of the total resistance coefficient and the reduction Fine 1,019,973 2.4

of the solution residuals by four orders of magnitude. Prior to

analyzing the numerical results, a grid convergence study was

performed. The dimensions of the three grids utilized for this Table 5. Grid Convergence Study

grid study are listed in Table 4 along with the y+ values. The y+

value is the non-dimensional distance between the centroid of Grid Coarse Medium Fine

the cell adjacent to the solid boundary and the solid boundary. CP 1.167e-3 1.155e-3 1.154e-3

A systematic refinement was achieved by adjusting the grid Change (%) -1.0 -0.1

spacing on the hull surface and in the flow domain around the CF 2.932e-3 2.975e-3 2.999e-3

hull so that the resulting grid refinement ratio between Change (%) 1.5 0.8

consecutive grids was rG = 2 . CT 4.099e-3 4.130e-3 4.153e-3

Change (%) 0.8 0.6

Verification Procedure. A verification study was performed Form Factor k 0.250 0.259 0.266

using the methodology developed in (Stern et al. 2001) in order Change (%) 3.8 2.6

to assess the simulation numerical uncertainty. The computed

values of the pressure, friction, and total drag coefficients along The total drag coefficient listed above is not the overall drag

with the corresponding form factor are listed in Table 5. coefficient as it does not include the contribution of the wave

drag nor its interaction with the viscous drag. On the other

hand, the 'double body' flow model is ideal for the estimation of

the form factor. This is why the latter was selected as the

integral variable to utilize in the verification and validation

procedure.

4

The results in Table 5 show that the friction drag coefficient CF

is monotonically convergent and the pressure drag coefficient

CP is grid-independent. The physics behind the friction and

pressure drag coefficients are different; a fact that partially

justifies the different convergence behavior. The total drag

coefficient CT was monotonically convergent with a change of

only 0.6% between the medium and fine grid. The convergence

ratio is defined as the solution change between the medium and

fine grid over the solution change between the coarse and

medium grid. The convergence ratio for the total drag

coefficient is 0.74, a value that demonstrates monotonic

convergence. The form factor k is computed by dividing the Figure 5. Pressure Coefficient Contours at the Bow of the

computed total 'double-body' drag coefficient by the ITTC Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier Model – Initial Case

friction coefficient value. The value of the form factor and its

corresponding uncertainty was also determined during the The corresponding pressure coefficient contours at the stern are

towing tank experiments. presented in Fig.7. Suction pressure exists over the parallel

section and most of the ship stern, with a peak contour value

The simulation numerical uncertainty, USN, for steady-state close to the keel at Station 18 ( x/L = 0.90). Between Stations

simulations consists of iterative uncertainty, UI, and grid 17 and 18 (0.85≤x/L≤0.90) and close to the free surface, a lower

uncertainty, UG. Iterative uncertainty, which is defined as half suction pressure region exists, which combined with the suction

the range of maximum and minimum values of the integral pressure peak produces a considerable girthwise pressure

variable over the last two periods of oscillation (before the gradient. The latter results in the formation of a streamwise

stopping criterion is reached), was monitored and found to be vortex in that area; a typical phenomenon for ships with full hull

negligible compared to grid uncertainty. The estimated order of shapes.

accuracy based on the solution change between grids and the

refinement ratio value is 0.86. This value is relatively far from

the theoretical value of 2.0, which is the formal order of

accuracy of the utilized spatial discretization formulation.

However, this result is not uncommon for non-orthogonal, non-

uniform grids (Wilson et al. 2001). The grid uncertainty of the

uncorrected solution is estimated using a generalized

Richardson Extrapolation. The estimated value is equal to about

7.6% of the computed value using the fine grid.

Carrier Model and Investigation of Nominal Wake. The

pressure coefficient contours and the velocity vectors at the bow Figure 7. Pressure Coefficient Contours at the Stern of the

of the Ballast-Free bulk carrier model in the ballast condition are Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier Model – Initial Case

shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. Large pressure gradients

exist in a small region around the stagnation point, with a Axial vorticity contours at x/L = 0.93 and x/L = 0.95 are

significant pressure relief occurring immediately after that displayed in Figs. 8 and 9, respectively. At x/L = 0.93, the

region. The positive pressure area at the bow extends up to vorticity contours reveal the existence of a streamwise bilge

approximately 7% of the ship length aft of the F.P.; thus, the vortex. This vortex crosses the propeller plane, as demonstrated

available locations for the inlet of the bow plenum are limited. in Fig. 9. In the same figure, the existence of a small counter-

In order to ensure an adequate pressure differential to drive the rotating vortex at the base of the bulbous stern is also displayed.

ballast trunk flow, it was decided to place the water inlet at the

center of the bulbous bow and close to the keel to take full The nominal wake at the propeller plane was investigated in

advantage of the stagnation pressure in that area and to avoid order to help understand and quantify the effect of the

potential problems due to bow emergence. The velocity vectors longitudinal bilge vortex. Axial velocity contours (non-

depicted in Fig. 6 show the downward fluid flow induced by the dimensionalized by the parallel flow velocity) and axial vorticity

bulbous bow, even though the ballast condition is not the contours in the propeller disk are shown in Figs. 10 and 11,

operating condition for which the bulbous bow has been respectively. In order to investigate the uniformity of the flow

optimized. This downward flow is expected to reduce the in the propeller disk, the simplistic method of computing the

height of the bow wave; a low bow wave height was observed, standard deviation of the axial velocity was applied. The

indeed, during the towing tank model tests. computed value is 0.205 m/s. The area-weighted average value

-1

of the axial vorticity is 10.7 s .

5

Figure 6. Velocity Vectors at the Bow of the Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier Model – Initial Case

Figure 8. Axial Vorticity Contours at x/L = 0.93 – Initial Figure 9. Axial Vorticity Contours at x/L = 0.95 – Initial

Case Case (the propeller disk is also shown in the figure)

6

Selection of Inlet and Outlet Plena Locations

Based on the aforementioned flow analysis, it was decided to

locate the water inlet right on the face of the bulbous bow in the

area around the stagnation point to take advantage of the high

positive pressure in this region. In this way, the water exchange

goal of 99% in less than two hours can be reached, or even

exceeded (Kotinis 2005). For the utilized ballast speed of 15.5

knots (assuming no voluntary speed reduction due to heavy

weather), the flow exchange will be achieved in a distance less

than 30 nautical miles. A similar approach regarding the water

inlet location selection has been followed successfully by

Teekay Shipping for a source of pressure to drive flow-through

ballast exchange, at a reduced ballast tank level, without the use

of pumps (BWN 2002).

plena inlet and outlet to ensure a smooth inflow and outflow

without imposing severe constraints on the structural

arrangements. The corresponding inlet/outlet diameter value in

model scale is approximately 2.6 cm. The flow rate in the

longitudinal trunks was calculated assuming a full-scale volume

of ballast water equal to 18,500 m3. This value, which was

Figure 10. Axial Velocity Contours in the Propeller Disk – obtained from similar ships, is based upon flooding both the

Initial Case normal ballast tanks and a central cargo hold for a heavy

weather ballast condition. Assuming an exchange time of 90

min and utilizing Froude scaling, the internal flow rate in model

scale is Qm = Qs λ-5/2 = 3.9·10-4 m3/s. Using the continuity

equation and assuming a symmetrical plenum about the

centerplane, the discharge fluid speed is 0.382 m/s.

approximately 25% DWL above the keel as shown in Fig. 12.

The relatively low forward draft in ballast condition (40%

DWL) imposes the controlling constraint regarding this

selection. The selected position was a trade-off between

structural arrangement feasibility and avoidance of water inlet

emergence.

a careful consideration of the pressure coefficient contours at the

stern and the axial velocity contours in the propeller disk. If

trunk flow rate maximization were the only criterion, the water

outlet should be located in an area with high suction pressure to

maximize the pressure differential. On the other hand, when the

propeller operation is taken into account, the objective is to

minimize the power requirements subject to achieving adequate

flow. The discharge location then can only be determined

through a propeller flow analysis and propeller performance

optimization procedure. It is generally accepted that a more

Figure 11. Axial Vorticity Contours in the Propeller Disk – uniform wake and, thus, a more uniform loading on the

Initial Case propeller blades results in less required power for a given

delivered thrust. This criterion, though simplistic, can be

evaluated initially by merely computing the standard deviation

of the axial velocity in the propeller disk.

7

exact positioning of the discharge locations could only be

determined after all the model construction and arrangement

constraints in the Ballast-Free bulk carrier model were taken

into account. The major constraints are the available interior

space of the model for the testing equipment (i.e. propeller

motor, dynamometer, heave staff) and the feasibility of drilling

holes and installing the pipes required for the trunk flow

modeling at certain locations inside the model.

process stems from the fact that required power minimization

and trunk flow rate maximization constitute conflicting criteria

in the system optimization. This fact was demonstrated in the

initial investigation and development of the Ballast-Free Ship Figure 13. Location of Ballast Trunk Discharges

concept (Kotinis 2005). Observing the axial velocity contours

in Fig. 10, the upper half-plane is dominated by the primary Modeling and Numerical Investigation of the

longitudinal vortex, which provides a significant level of

homogenization, but also low fluid velocity, which reduces the

Water Inlet at the Bow and the Water Discharge

propeller loading in this region. On the other hand, a strong at the Stern

velocity gradient dominates the lower half-plane. Even though The effect of the water suction at the bow and the water

the secondary vortex covers a smaller region in the propeller discharge close to Station 17 on the flow around the model was

disk, it has considerable vorticity and opposes the action of the investigated numerically with the aid of FLUENT®. The

primary vortex. discharge flow direction was set to 10° with respect to the

surface tangent. Apparently the lower the angle value, the less

If the water outlet is placed in a position where it can supply the obstructive the water discharge would be to the boundary layer

fluid particles in the inner boundary layer with additional flow. This was suspected to be the reason behind the significant

momentum to delay the separation point and also provide increase in power requirements (+ 7.4% for a faster hull form)

additional momentum to the fluid that flows through the upper observed during the initial investigation of the Ballast-Free Ship

half-plane in the propeller disk, then a more uniform wake concept (Kotinis et al. 2004). A smaller angle, even though

might occur. On the other hand, given that the water suction is feasible in the numerical computations, would probably be an

located at a high positive pressure region and the longitudinal unattainable goal during the towing tank experiments or a full-

pressure gradient at the stern is not steep, the trunk flow rate is scale implementation.

not expected to be highly sensitive to the longitudinal position

of the water outlet. The major modeling requirement was to provide adequate grid

resolution to account for the interaction between the boundary

In order to investigate the effect of the water discharge location layer flow and the trunk inflow and outflow. This was

on the flow at the stern, it was decided to test two different accomplished by creating a mesh fine enough to resolve the

discharge locations during the towing tank experiments; one flow in the viscous sublayer, which is the portion of the

close to Station 17 and one close to Station 19 as shown in Fig. boundary layer adjacent to the hull solid boundary, in the region

13. Station 17 is approximately at the location of the forward around the inlet and discharge locations. For this purpose, a

engineroom bulkhead in the full-scale ship; Station 19 is slightly modified version of the fine grid created for the initial

approximately at the aft engineroom bulkhead. The discharge at case was utilized. The modifications were limited to the

Station 17 was located about 45% DWL and the discharge at modeling of the region close to the inlet and discharge locations.

Station 19 about 30% DWL. In this way, the effect on the flow In this case, the total number of cells is 1,074,580.

in the upper half-plane of the propeller disk could be

investigated, in addition to the effect of discharging water before

and after the formation of the primary longitudinal vortex. The

8

Figure 14. Velocity Vectors at the Bow of the Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier Model – Modified Case

The pressure coefficient contours at the bow are shown in Fig. 19 corroborate the aforementioned conclusion. The area-

15. A comparison with the pressure coefficient contours in Fig. weighted average value of axial vorticity is 10.5 s-1.

5 reveals that the positive pressure levels increase in the vicinity

of the water inlet, even though this effect vanishes downstream,

of x/L = 0.02. This observation is corroborated by the velocity

vectors displayed in Fig. 14. In the same figure, a slightly

accelerated fluid flow on the edge of the water inlet is displayed,

which can be attributed to the suction effect.

Fig. 16. The effect of the water discharge on the pressure

distribution seems to be limited to the vicinity of the discharge

location. A small reduction in suction pressure, relative to the

pressure distribution of the initial case shown in Fig. 7, is

observed slightly upstream of the discharge location. The Figure 15. Pressure Coefficient Contours at the Bow of the

opposite effect is observed slightly downstream. Therefore, the Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier Model – Modified Case

net effect on the pressure force is expected to be minimal.

coefficients are 2.995e-3 and 1.195e-3, respectively. The total

drag coefficient is equal to 4.190e-3, an increased of 0.9%

compared to the initial case. The corresponding form factor

value is 0.277, approximately 4.1% higher, than the initial case.

This increase can be attributed mainly to the existence of the

water inlet at the bow .

initial case are demonstrated in Figs. 17 and 18, respectively. At Figure 16. Pressure Coefficient Contours at the Stern of the

x/L = 0.93, the vorticity contours reveal that the flow discharge Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier Model – Modified Case

close to Station 17 causes a slight stretching of the longitudinal

vortex in the transverse direction. Further downstream, at x/L = The axial velocity contours in the propeller disk for the modified

0.95, the interaction between the two counter-rotating vortices is case are plotted in Fig. 20. Compared to the initial case, the

significantly affected by the stretching of the primary vortex, as standard deviation of the axial velocity is slightly reduced. Its

the secondary vortex generated at the bulbous stern, now affects value is 0.201 m/s, which corresponds to a reduction of

a larger region of the lower half-plane in the propeller disk. approximately 2%. Even though this suggests a more

The axial vorticity contours in the propeller disk shown in Fig. homogeneous wake field, with a potential benefit for the

9

propeller operation, the changes in the wake distribution

necessitate the direct investigation of their effect on the

operating propeller.

Modified Case

Figure 17. Axial Vorticity Contours at x/L = 0.93 – Modified

Case

Figure 18. Axial Vorticity Contours at x/L = 0.95 – Modified Figure 20. Axial Velocity Contours in the Propeller Disk –

Case (the propeller disk is also shown in the figure) Modified Case

10

EXPERIMENTAL HYDRODYNAMIC

INVESTIGATION

The insight gained through the numerical hydrodynamic

investigation of the Ballast-Free Ship concept described above

was utilized as the starting point for the experimental towing

tank model test investigation. The experimental investigation

also provided the opportunity for a qualitative and quantitative

validation of the numerical results.

Marine Hydrodynamics Laboratory (MHL) towing tank using

the Ballast-Free bulk carrier model. The total resistance and the

propulsion requirements of the model were determined for three

different speeds in the ballast condition where the ballast trunks

would be used. All the tests were carried out at the ballast

drafts. The experimental test plan is shown in Table 6. Figure 21. Internal Flow Details in the Bow Region

(knots) (m/s) number

1st speed 14.50 1.210 0.173

2nd speed 15.50 1.295 0.185

3rd speed 16.50 1.378 0.197

attempt to minimize the precision error. In addition, a

randomized testing sequence was utilized to allow for

minimization of the effect of extraneous variables. Prior to the

model testing, a static calibration of the load cell was performed

in order to estimate the instrument error. The unmodified hull,

shown in Figs. 2 and 3, was tested first. Subsequently, the hull

was modified, as shown in Figs. 12 and 13, and the tests were

repeated, first, for the water discharge high close to Station 17

and then for the low discharge close to Station 19.

Figure 22. Internal Flow Details in the Stern Region –

Because the modeling of the internal flow trunks could not be Looking Forward

reliably scaled at the small model scale used, the scaled total

trunk flow was pumped rather than using natural flow. The

internal flow was modeled primarily by a 1-inch internal

diameter flexible pipe, which was connected to the water suction

at the bow and the water discharge at the stern. The internal

flow was aided by a flexible-impeller pump, which was used to

achieve the scaled flow rate. The flow rate was controlled by a

high-precision needle valve and monitored by a flow meter.

The flow was diverted to the selected discharge location and

subsequently split to provide a symmetric water discharge at the

stern of the model. Details of the internal pipe connections and

system are displayed in Figs. 21, 22 and 23. As already

mentioned, the model-scale internal flow rate was set to 3.9·10-4

m3/s or 6.1 gallons per minute.

11

Resistance Tests

The resistance of the Ballast-Free bulk carrier model was Table 8. Form Factor and Uncertainty

determined for the three speeds listed in Table 6. The measured

total resistance was corrected using the calibration results and Form factor k Uncertainty (%D)

then extrapolated to full scale by utilizing the ITTC- Initial case 0.291 6.0

recommended method (ITTC 1978). For all testing conditions, Discharge at St.17 0.259 9.4

the results are reported at a standard temperature of 15°C. The Discharge at St.19 0.282 6.3

uncertainty in the full-scale resistance and effective power was

estimated by taking into account both bias and precision errors. The experimental form factor value (D) of the baseline (initial)

Errors related to the static calibration and the form factor case listed in Table 8 can be utilized to validate the CFD results

derivation were considered as sources of bias error. During the using the methodology derived in Stern et al. (2001). The

uncertainty analysis, a 95% level of confidence was assumed. experimental data uncertainty, UD, combined with the computed

In general, the propagation of the bias limit from a single error simulation numerical uncertainty USN = 7.6%D, provides the

source to the result (i.e. full-scale resistance) was calculated by validation uncertainty, UV:

utilizing sensitivity indices and assuming that the error sources

are statistically independent. The sensitivity index relates how 2

U V = U SN + U 2D = 9.2%D (2)

changes in each of the error sources affect the result. The total

bias limit includes the contribution of all the bias error sources. This value is compared to the absolute value of the comparison

The total precision limit is a measure of the random variation in error, |E|, which is equal to the difference between the numerical

the results. It is equal to the standard deviation of the average result at the fine grid and the experimental result. In this case,

result value at each speed multiplied by the appropriate Student- the absolute value of the comparison error is equal to 8.4%D;

t distribution value based on the confidence interval and the thus, the form factor value is validated at the uncertainty level of

number of measurements. The total uncertainty is calculated as UV = 9.2%D. Further reducing the levels of validation

the root sum square of the total bias limit and the total precision uncertainty would require reduction in both experimental and

limit: simulation numerical uncertainty.

ship resistance and the corresponding effective power were

calculated for each of the three cases. The results are shown in

Static Calibration. A static calibration of the load cell was Figs. 24 and 25. The water discharge close to Station 17

performed by utilizing a sequential test. The results are shown appears to have a negative effect on ship resistance and, to a

in Table 7. It needs to be mentioned that the hysteresis error lesser extent, the same is true for the discharge close to Station

observed during the calibration procedure was negligible. The 19. This conclusion, regarding the effect of the water discharge

bias limit reported in Table 7 corresponds to the standard error close to Station 17 on the hull resistance, is supported,by the

due to the scatter in the load cell calibration dataset relative to a numerical results. The computed form factor value for the

linear least-squares regression curve fit assuming a 95% modified case is greater than the computed value for the initial

confidence interval. Other contributions to the bias limit of the case. The corresponding values based on the experimental

load cell measurement can be considered negligible (Longo and results showed a different trend; however, the experimental

Stern 2005). uncertainty was rather high, especially when discharging close

to Station 17. The analysis of the numerical results provided a

Table 7. Static Calibration Results reasonable explanation for the relative increase of the form

factor value. Despite the fact that the average resistance values

Calibration curve slope 1.0003 plotted in Fig. 24 reveal an increase in resistance, the difference

Zero drift -0.012 N with respect to the baseline case is not statistically significant as

Bias limit 0.036 N seen by the overlapping error bands.

Form Factor Calculation and Validation Procedure. The form Propulsion Tests

factor k was obtained by measuring the model resistance at low The resistance tests were followed by a series of propulsion tests

Froude numbers and then utilizing a linear least-squares using the MHL stock model propeller No. 23. The thrust and

regression curve fit. The intercept of the regression model torque measurements at the self-propulsion condition at each

corresponds to the form factor value plus 1. The form factor speed were analyzed using the ITTC-recommended method

uncertainty is also reported in Table 8. (ITTC 1978). The calculated delivered power is shown in Fig.

26. An uncertainty analysis was also performed for the

propulsion test results.

12

900

850

800

750

baseline

RTs (kN)

St.19

700

St.17

650

600

550

500

14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0

Ship Speed (knots)

8,000

7,000

baseline

Effective Power (kW)

St.19

6,000 St.17

5,000

4,000

3,000

14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0

Ship Speed (knots)

13

11,000

10,000

9,000

Delivered Power (kW)

baseline

St.19

St.17

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0

Ship Speed (knots)

The plotted results reveal a significant reduction in the powering unchanged. Thus, an appropriate measure of merit is the change

requirements caused by the water discharge at the stern. It in the Required Freight Rate (∆RFR) using the equation

needs to be emphasized that these results were obtained with a (Mackey et al. 2000):

non wake-adapted stock propeller. This reduction can be

attributed to increased homogenization of the wake field in the ∆RFR = (CRF(i, n)· ∆P + ∆A)/ACC (3)

propeller disk, as demonstrated in the numerical investigation,

but also to changes in the inflow to the propeller, as shown in where ∆P is the change in the capital cost, ∆A is the change in

Figs. 10 and 20. The physics behind the significant reduction in the annual operating cost, ACC is the constant annual cargo

powering requirements due to the water discharge close to

capacity, and CRF(i, n) is the Capital Recovery Factor for an i

Station 17 cannot be explained further without a detailed

return on investment over a ship life of n years.

analysis of the effective wake. However, judging from the

numerical results obtained for the discharge close to Station 17,

A realistic scenario was adopted for the economic analysis: a

it can be speculated that the interaction between the water

discharge and the longitudinal vortices contributes to the Handymax bulk carrier transporting grain from the upper Great

considerable change in delivered power. Lakes (e.g. Duluth, Thunder Bay) to ports in Northern Europe

and occasionally transporting steel into the Great Lakes. A

At the ballast speed of 15.5 knots, the reduction in delivered North Atlantic voyage route between Rotterdam and Montreal,

power is 7.3% for the discharge close to Station 17 and 2.1% for entering the Great Lakes through the St. Lawrence Seaway

the discharge close to Station 19. The location near Station 17 while in a ballast condition, is assumed.

would also be preferred from an engineroom arrangements

viewpoint since the ballast trunks would not have to be carried A major, conservative assumption is that the 2.1% and 7.3 %

through the engineroom. reductions in the required power of the Ballast Free bulk carrier

will not be enough to permit a change in the main engine; thus,

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS no propulsion machinery capital cost reduction is included. For

The economic impact of the Ballast-Free Ship concept on the the specific vessel type investigated in this study, the reduction

capital and operating cost of a typical Seaway-sized bulk carrier in the delivered power indicated by the propulsion results would

was estimated in a manner similar to that used in the initial lead to decreased fuel use, assuming constant ship speed, but

investigation of the concept (Kotinis et al. 2004). Because the would probably not actually permit a change in number of

Ballast-Free bulk carrier was designed to maintain the same cylinders or a move to a smaller alternative engine model. The

grain capacity, its annual cargo capacity (ACC) would be

14

results for the water discharge close to Station 17 and close to useful insight regarding the physics of the flow and, to a certain

Station 19 are presented in Fig. 27. extent, provided quantitative results to compare with the

experimental outcomes.

Based on the results of the initial investigation (Kotinis 2005),

an increase in the block coefficient value from 0.835 to 0.841 The selection of the trunk flow inlet and outlet locations utilized

was required in order to permit the transportation of equal in the towing tank experiments was guided by these numerical

annual cargo capacity and offset the lost buoyancy of the results. The trunk flow inlet was located in the center of the

flooded plena at constant Seaway draft while fully loaded. The bulbous bow. Two different locations were tested for the water

increase in ship powering requirements due to the higher block discharge: one high close to Station 17 and one lower close to

coefficient value was factored in the analysis input data. The Station 19.

increase in the hull steel weight results in a moderate increase in

the hull steel cost. Foreign new construction, typical of Korea, The experimental hydrodynamic investigation consisted of

was assumed for the calculation of the hull steel and other resistance and propulsion experiments in the towing tank. The

construction costs. The eliminated ballast water treatment analysis of the model test data revealed that the experimental

system was assumed to consist of automatic backflush filtration results were in good agreement with the numerical results.

as a primary treatment combined with UV irradiation for a

secondary treatment. The estimated cost of this treatment In general, the water discharge at the stern was shown to

equipment was based upon a study commissioned by the Great increase ship resistance. On the other hand, it has a very

Lakes Ballast Technology Demonstration Project (Hurley et al. favorable effect on the propulsion characteristics for this

2001). Several other costs relative to changes in arrangements Seaway-sized bulk carrier design. The reduction in powering

and outfitting are also taken into account. A detailed description requirements, compared to the baseline case, was 7.3% for water

of these can be found in (Kotinis 2005). discharge close to Station 17 and 2.1% for water discharge close

to Station 19 at the assumed ballast speed of 15.5 knots.

It needs to be emphasized that no account was taken for the

power consumption, crew workload, and maintenance savings It must be cautioned that since some of the effect of the water

associated with the elimination of the ballast water treatment discharge may be related to the location of the separation near

system. This would further reduce the annual operating cost and the stern, and this is known to not scale effectively for models of

favor the use of the Ballast-Free Ship concept. The lifecycle the size used in this testing, the exact magnitude of the full-scale

cost of the aforementioned ballast treatment system would power improvement cannot be stated absolutely. The 5-m

probably exceed $800,000 (Hurley et al. 2001). model used in this experimental work was the largest that could

be tested in the University of Michigan MHL so further

The net savings in terms of the ∆RFR with the ballast trunk confirmation would have to be made in a larger facility that

water discharge close to Station 17 is estimated to be about would permit the use of a larger model.

$0.93 per ton of cargo. The corresponding savings with the

water discharge close to Station 19 is estimated to be about A realistic operating scenario was adopted in order to

$0.44 per ton of cargo. These savings are relative to the use of investigate the economic impact of the Ballast-Free Ship

filtration primary and UV secondary ballast water treatment concept. Based on the aforementioned reduction in powering

when ballast water exchange is no longer permitted in the requirements, the net savings with respect to a ballast treatment

future. system would be $0.93 per ton of cargo for the water discharge

close to Station 17 and $0.44 per ton of cargo for the water

discharge close to Station 19.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The initial development and investigation of the Ballast-Free

The Ballast-Free Ship concept essentially eliminates the

Ship concept demonstrated its feasibility and efficiency, but

transport of foreign ballast water from ships operating in the

failed to show its full cost-effectiveness. The main reason was

ballast condition. The elimination of the fuel penalty found

the significant fuel penalty, resulting from increased power

earlier makes the Ballast-Free Ship concept a very attractive

requirements found in the initial preliminary testing of an

alternative to more costly ballast water treatment systems.

existing, higher-speed vessel with a non-optimum propeller

(Kotinis et al. 2004).

Further numerical hydrodynamic investigation that includes the

propeller effect is expected to provide an optimum location for

The current paper focused on a more detailed hydrodynamic

the water discharge position. This will be confirmed by

investigation of the concept for a Seaway-sized bulk carrier in

additional MHL testing planned in 2008.

order to obtain a more realistic assessment of these effects. For

this purpose, a new Seaway-sized bulk carrier model was

designed and built. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This paper is a result of work sponsored by the Great Lakes

The hydrodynamic investigation was performed in two parts. In Maritime Research Institute (GLMRI), a Consortium of the

the first part, the numerical investigation using CFD provided University of Wisconsin, Superior, and University of Minnesota,

15

Duluth. The GLMRI is funded by the U. S. Department of KIM, S.E., and RHEE, S.H. 2002 “Assessment of Eight

Transportation, Maritime Administration, under contract Turbulence Models for a Three-Dimensional Boundary Layer

DTOS59-05-G-00019 and agreement DTMA1G0605. This involving Crossflow and Streamwise Vortices,” AIAA 2002-

financial support is gratefully acknowledged. 0852, 40th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit,

Reno, NV, Jan.

REFERENCES

BWN 2002 “Alternative Exchange Design Proposed,” Ballast KOTINIS, M. 2005 “Development and Investigation of the

Water News, Global Ballast Water Management Program, Ballast-Free Ship Concept,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of

IMO, 8, January-March. Michigan, Department of Naval Architecture and Marine

Engineering.

DUVIGNEAU, R., VISONNEAU, M. and DENG, G.B. 2002

“On the Role Played by Turbulence Closures in Hull Shape KOTINIS, M., PARSONS, M. G., LAMB, T. and SIRVIENTE,

Optimization at Model and Full Scale,” 24th Symposium on A. 2004 “Development and Investigation of the Ballast-Free

Naval Hydrodynamics, Fukuoka, Japan, August 8-13. Ship Concept,” Transactions SNAME, 112, pp. 206-240.

FARLEY, R. 1996 “Analysis of Overseas Vessel Transits Into LONGO, J. and STERN, F. 2005 “Uncertainty Assessment for

the Great Lakes and Resultant Distribution of Ballast Water,” Towing Tank Tests with Example for Surface Combatant

Report No. 331, University of Michigan, Department of Naval DTMB Model 5415,” Journal of Ship Research, 49(1), pp. 55-

Architecture and Marine Engineering. 68.

FLUENT 2006 “FLUENT 6.3 User’s Manual,” Fluent Inc., MACKEY, T. P., TAGG, R. D. and PARSONS, M. G. 2000

Lebanon, NH. “Technologies for Ballast Water Management,” 8th

ICMES2000/SNAME New York Metropolitan Section

Symposium, May 22-23.

FORMATION DESIGN SYSTEMS Pty 2006 “MAXSURF

Windows Version 12 User’s Manual.”

MATHUR, S.R. and MURTHY, J.Y. 1997 “A Pressure-Based

Method for Unstructured Meshes,” Numerical Heat Transfer,

FORSBERG, R., BAIER, R., MEYER, A., DOBLIN, M., and

31, pp. 195-215.

STROM, M. 2005 “Fine Particle Persistence in Ballast Water

Sediments and Ballast Tank Biofilms,” 28th Annual Meeting

MENTER, F.R. 1994 Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence

of The Adhesive Society, Mobile, Alabama, February 13-16.

Models for Engineering Applications,”

AIAA Journal, 32(8):1598-1605, August.

GRIDGEN 2007 “Gridgen 15.1 User Manual,” Pointwise Inc.,

Fort Worth, Texas.

STERN, F., WILSON, R.V., COLEMAN, H.W., and

PATERSON, E.G. 2001 “Comprehensive Approach to

HURLEY, W. L. JR., SCHILLING, S. S. JR. and MACKEY, T.

Verification and Validation of CFD Simulations – Part 1:

P. 2001 “Contract Designs for Ballast Water Treatment

Methodology and Procedures,” ASME Journal of Fluids

Systems on Containership R. J. Pfeiffer and Tanker Polar

Engineering, 123, pp. 793-802.

Endeavor,” SNAME/ ASNE Marine Environmental

Engineering Technical Symposium, Arlington, VA, May 31-

TECPLOT 2006 “Tecplot 360 User’s Manual,” Tecplot Inc.,

June 1 (CD).

Bellevue, WA.

IMO 2004 “International Convention for the Control and

U. S. PATENT #6,694,908 2004 “Ballast Free Ship System,” U.

Management of Ships’ Ballast Water & Sediments,”

S. Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC.

Diplomatic Conference, February, London.

WILSON, R.V., STERN, F., COLEMAN, H.W., and

ITTC 1978 “15th International Towing Tank Conference, 3-10

PATERSON E.G. 2001 “Comprehensive Approach to

September 1978, The Hague, The Netherlands”, Netherlands

Verification and Validation of CFD Simulations – Part 2:

Ship Model Basin, Wageningen.

Applications of RANS Simulation of a Cargo/Container Ship,”

ASME Journal of Fluids Engineering, 123, pp. 803-810.

KENT, C.P. and PARSONS M.G. 2004 “Computational Fluid

Dynamics Study of the Effectiveness of Flow-Though Ballast

Exchange,” Transactions SNAME, 112.

CHOUDHURY, D. 1998 “A Reynolds-Averaged Navier-

Stokes Solver using Unstructured Mesh-Based Finite Volume

Scheme,” AIAA Paper 98-0231.

16

Vessel data and trip scenario Typical bulk carrier Ballast-free bulk carrier Comments

Discharge at St.17 Discharge at St.19

Round-trip distance (nautical miles) 6,280 Montreal (CAN) to Rotterdam (NL) through the Seaway

Service speed (kts) 14.5 Typical data for an ocean-going Handymax bulk carrier transporting grain cargo from the

Speed in ballast condition (kts) 15.5 Great Lakes (Duluth, Thunder Bay) to ports in Northern Europe and occasionally

Proportion of miles in ballast (%) 35 transporting steel into the Great Lakes.

Average loaded cargo / maximum cargo (%) 90

Load factor (%) 58.5

Days of navigation through the Great Lakes 8 Passage up through the Great Lakes towards the western end

Port days per round trip 14 Includes loading/unloading time, bunkering time, and time waiting for berth

Round trips per annum 7

Maximum payload (metric tons) 32,000

Cargo carried per annum (metric tons) 131,000

Engine nominal MCR (kW) 8,580 Data for the MAN B&W 6S50MC two-stroke engine

Block coefficient 0.835 0.841 Compensate for increased hull steel weight and lost buoyancy at plena

Hull steel weight (metric tons) 5,550 5,770

Hull steel cost ($) 2,220,000 2,308,000 Assuming a steel price of $400/metric ton

Continuous service rating in ballast condition (kW) 7,700 7,140 7,540 Includes 15% sea margin and effect of change in CB value

Continuous service rating in full load condition (kW) 7,700 7,155 7,555 Includes 15% sea margin and effect of inlet/outlet hull openings and change in CB value

Specific fuel consumption (g/(kW*hr)) 168.7 166.4 168.0 Data for the MAN B&W 6S50MC engine, ISO ambient conditions

Annual heavy fuel cost ($) 1,039,000 951,000 1,014,000 Fuel price (IFO380) of $270/metric ton, transatlantic part of trip only

Changes in capital cost

Additional hull steel cost ($) 88,000

Sluice gates cost ($) 260,000 Acquisition cost plus labor for 52 450x600 mm sluice gates (@ $5,000 each)

Elimination of ballast tank valves ($) -14,000 14 @ 1,000 each

Reduction in ballast piping cost ($) -314,000 Removal of main ballast headers (material plus labor)

Reduction in welding cost ($) -9,500 Reduced welding at the bottom of solid floors (material plus labor)

Additional ballast piping cost ($) 79,000 Addition of ballast piping for F.P. tank (material plus labor)

Additional welding cost ($) 2,600 Additional welding due to raise of inner bottom (material plus labor)

Elimination of ballast water treatment system ($) -375,000 Assuming automatic backflush filtration combined with UV irradiation

Changes in operating cost

Discharge at St.17 Discharge at St.19

Change in heavy fuel oil cost ($) -88,000 -25,000

Net capital cost change ($) -282,900

Net operating cost change per annum ($) -88,000 -25,000

Capital recovery factor 0.1175 i = 10%, n = 20 years

Change in required freight rate ($/metric ton) -0.93 -0.44 savings

Figure 27. Economics Summary Comparing a Typical Bulk Carrier with Filtration and UV Treatment with Ballast-Free Bulk Carrier with Two Discharge Locations

17

- Merc Service Manual 6 3cUploaded byHayduke them
- Konica Minolta Bizhub 163 - 7616 Parts ManualUploaded bygamatoys
- Boat Motor Service ManualUploaded bymmcsw75
- 703451009-MITUploaded byGlenn Tørå
- Diferentes Software Para Simular CavitacionUploaded byvictoria
- ajme-1-8-1Uploaded byAndrés Sánchez González
- Ada 197091Uploaded byEdward Nigma
- Tidal TurbineUploaded bypothirajkalyan
- Integrated Design and Realization of a Hubless Rim-driven ThrusterUploaded bynascosannascosan
- JINT-D-16-00451Uploaded byGerardo
- AssignmentUploaded bymynameshu
- Natalia G. Berloff- Solitary Waves on Vortex Lines in Ginzburg-Landau Models for the Example of Bose-Einstein CondensatesUploaded by23213m
- Vertex SeddingUploaded byVenkata Raju Kalidindi
- nouri2016.pdfUploaded bybe
- 2014.pdfUploaded byPratyushAgarwal
- 1969_55.pdfUploaded byChien Manh Nguyen
- P. Voinovich and E. Timofeev- On the formation and development of a toroidal vortex and a highly curved Mach disk in the course of shock wave/axis-of-symmetry interactionUploaded byArchmca
- rev3.kinaci - BRODOGRADNJA Template.pdfUploaded bykemal kinaci
- An Introduction ToUploaded byEreen
- Defect Detection in Plates Using Guided WavesUploaded bynadine
- MEL 417 Lubrication Lec 180211Uploaded byAbhishek Yamini
- propellerUploaded bychip02
- On the Model Tests and Design Method of Hybrid CRP PoddUploaded byndlongnd
- PDR-AUEUploaded bysanthosh Kumar R
- Crow GarethUploaded byRebecca Clark
- Kuhn Archimedean ScrewsUploaded byitovarsilva
- 20090027755_2009028349Uploaded byrajnishkin
- 3Uploaded byluma fadhil
- 11.SPME10081Uploaded byIJIRAE- International Journal of Innovative Research in Advanced Engineering
- C. Reichhardt and C.J. Olson Reichhardt- Vortex Molecular Crystal and Vortex Plastic Crystal States in Honeycomb and Kagome Pinning ArraysUploaded byKoldde

- Action Plan Process IntensificationUploaded by1mmahoney
- Blast Resistant Equipment CentersUploaded by1mmahoney
- Aug2009 ATP Presentation.pdfUploaded by1mmahoney
- issue 5-2Uploaded by1mmahoney
- Deshidratacion de crudoUploaded bychirinoslaa
- COMPRESSORtech2 Small Scale MR vs Big BlockUploaded by1mmahoney
- 4.1.6 Technology Report Pulsed Combustion Drying KudraUploaded by1mmahoney
- Desalter Upgrade Final - FormattedUploaded by1mmahoney
- Argyropoulou Christina MSc 2017Uploaded by1mmahoney
- 20100211 Sams DesaltingUploaded byJose Montenegro
- 20150904-5415(30862823)Uploaded by1mmahoney
- 06-22-18-DEIS.pdfUploaded by1mmahoney
- 2014_02715_DWGS TERMINAL 1.pdfUploaded by1mmahoney
- ESIAUploaded by1mmahoney
- Sakhalin Fact Sheet ENGUploaded by1mmahoney
- LNG IGRC Innovations in Natural Gas LIQUEFACTON TechnologyUploaded byMerlando Mds
- Deepwater Dry Tree Units for Southeast AsiaUploaded by1mmahoney
- 19780005307 Dry Coal FeederUploaded by1mmahoney
- SchedaENG_Isolmant TelogommaUploaded by1mmahoney
- 3mtm-viscoelastic-damping-polymers-112-130.pdfUploaded by1mmahoney
- Pizeoelectric Gas BearingsUploaded by1mmahoney
- TLP Tendon Tubulars Ep Tp 72 06enUploaded by1mmahoney
- Great River Energy-Coal Creek-R1Upd1Uploaded by1mmahoney
- Alstom-Boilers.pdfUploaded byAsad Mohammad Rafique
- DryTreeSemiFloaTEC HartE&PSept07Uploaded by1mmahoney
- Nh3fcx Keynote Steve WittrigUploaded by1mmahoney
- NansenRiserDeployedESP 20081007_080529Uploaded by1mmahoney
- Shell Perdido Article PDFUploaded byhailay83
- Conic Flow Series Silencers SpecificationsUploaded by1mmahoney

- Marsig - Seemp TemplateUploaded byZamfir Daniela
- Loadign/cargando ALHD CanberraUploaded bymareira8720
- Simplified Method for Estimating Maximum Ship’s Draught when Navigating in Shallow Water on the South of Stolpe Bank in the Aspect of the Vessels with Maximum Dimensions and Draught.pdfUploaded bymanon160
- SIMRAD SAL R1a Easy Tank User ManualUploaded byDeepak Haridas
- Ship Geometry & Hull CharacteristicsUploaded byjishnusaji
- Autohydro ManualUploaded byQbakus
- CE Complete ReportUploaded byPradeep Kumar
- General Arrangement DockingPlanUploaded byiris2326
- muUploaded byΓιώργοςΣκάζας
- manual_722_287_mc0.pdfUploaded byYoel Bagus
- Bulk Carrier Safety ClauseUploaded bytanerkpt
- Mars User Guide r01Uploaded byCarlos Prego
- ABS CSR BulkCarriersUploaded byAgung Prasetyo
- 200 ORAL QUESTION AND ANSWERSUploaded byRejoGevargheseRajan
- Stability Problems 4Uploaded byStaicu-Anghel Elena
- Presentation Part 1Uploaded byDaniel Inemugha
- blu codeUploaded byManupriya Chauhan
- Naval Arch TermsUploaded byArun Prasad
- 4 Grain LoadingUploaded bynvn
- Puffers - The Supreme Marine Achievement of Man's InventionUploaded byClyde Steamers
- IRS Guidelines for Conducting Inclining Experiment of Small BoatsUploaded bydevu103
- Kandla Port RestrictionsUploaded bysushsush2k
- GSMGUploaded byHenry Maeda
- US Army: RTK GPS Water NavUploaded byArmy
- @_Ports & Harbors TerminologyUploaded byapi-3709579
- Ponta Da Madeira – Port RestrictionsUploaded bybiclioma
- Colreg ExplainationUploaded byGiorgi Ardzenadze
- 3-1 Under Keel ClearanceUploaded byErsin Salt
- Ship-Form-Coefficient.pdfUploaded byMahesh Kumar K B
- q88 of Genmar Phoenix-1Uploaded byHxan