17th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION ON

17th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION

LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG 17)
ON LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG 17)

DESIGN OF THE EVOLUTIONARY LNG

CARRIER “SAYAENDO”

By
<Title of of
<Title Presentation>
Presentation>
Koichi Sato
By:
By:<Author
<AuthorName>,
Name>,<Organization>
<Organization>
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), Ltd. Japan
<Date>
<Date>
&
Henry Chung
Lloyd’s Register Group Limited (LR)
Yokohama Design Support Office, Japan

18 April 2013

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved.

 INTRODUCTION

1. MHI has developed a next-generation spherical tank LNG

carrier with a continuous tank cover, nicknamed
SAYAENDO, meaning “peas in a pod”.

2. SAYAENDO has many advantages, such as lighter steel

weight, improved fuel consumption, better terminal
compatibility, better maintainability.

3. This presentation
introduces the design of
SAYAENDO and the
state-of-the-art
engineering verification
methodologies applied.

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 1

 CONTENTS OF PRESENTATION

1. Design concept of SAYAENDO

(comparison with conventional)

2. Technical key points

3. Advanced Structural Analysis

4. Application to 155 km3 LNGC

5. Application to cold region

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 2

 MHI SPHERICAL LNGC DESIGN HISTORY

1. Forty-two LNG carriers delivered since 1983.

2. Epoch making “2nd generation LNGC" with a lower BOR

with a forcing vaporizer.

3. Continuous developement with 3rd generation (137km3)

and 4th generation (147km3)

1st 4th

2nd 3rd

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 3

 SAYAENDO vs CONVENTIONAL (1)

Reduction of steel weight by 5-10%,

for ship over 147 k-m3 due to new
structural concept.

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 4

 SAYAENDO vs CONVENTIONAL (2)

Increase of height of tank cover

 Increase of steel weight of non hull girder member

Increased
Increased steel weight
weightofofcover
cover
(increased
(increased steel weight
weightofof
non-strength
non-hull girdermember)
member)

Tank cover
(non strength member)

stretched

Main hull
(strength member)

125 k-m3 LNGC 155 k-m3 LNGC (with stretched tank)

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 5

OVERALL CONFIGRATION OF SAYAENDO

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 6

 KEY POINTS IN DEVELOPMENT

1. Structural design and assessment

Longitudinal strength assessment
Detail connection design
Tank cover and main hull connections including
fore and aft ends
Interaction between cargo tank and hull
Fatigue assessment for structural detail

2. Aerodynamic assessment with wind-tunnel tests

3. Manoeuvrability simulation and mooring analysis

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 7

 ADVANCED ANALYSIS BY MHI-DILAM (1)

1. Advanced structural analysis by MHI-DILAM carried out

for yield, buckling and fatigue criteria.

2. Yield and buckling strength confirmed acceptable

against maximum load in ship lifetime.

Higher stress

Lower stress

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 8

 ADVANCED ANALYSIS BY MHI-DILAM (2)

1. 50 years of design fatigue life fit for world-wide LNG

trading has been confirmed.

2. Reduced hull girder stress has favourable effect in

SAYAENDO, allowing possibility of efficient structural
design to achieve the given fatigue design specification.

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 9

 ADVANCED ANALYSIS BY MHI-DILAM (3)

1. Comparison of hull girder stress (Deck and Bottom)

2. Comparison of hull / tank interaction force

Point-A
Deck stress

100

Point-A
Deck stress 80
Point-C Point-C
Tank stress by Tank stress by
hull deflection hull deflection
Upp. Dk. 60
Upp. Dk.
Tank Tank
connection
147 LNGC
connection 40
155 SAYAENDO
skirt Neutral axis
20
connection
skirt Neutral axis
connection
0
[Point-A] Deck [Point-B] Bottom [Point-C] Tank
stress stress stress by hull
deflection
Point-B Point-B
Bottom Bottom
stress 147km3 LNGC Conventional moss type stress
155km3 LNGC SAYAENDO type

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 10

 THE 155k-m3 SAYAENDO (1)

Conventional 147 k-m3 Sayaendo 155 k-m3

Tank capacity Approx. 147,200 m3 Approx. 155,300 m3
(stretched)
Loa 288 m 288 m
B (mld.) 49.0 m 48.94 m
D (mld.) 26.8 m 26.0 m
Speed Approx. 19.5 knot Approx. 19.5 knot
Main Propulsion Conventional UST
Plant steam turbine (Ultra steam turbine)

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 11

 THE 155k-m3 SAYAENDO (2)

1. MHI-UST (Ultra Steam Turbine plant), a new turbine plant

2. 25% reduction in fuel consumption compared with

conventional ships

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 12

 ICE BREAKING SAYAENDO

1. Independent tank system: tolerant to local ice impact

2. Overall hull girder strength: highly effective in resisting

global ice impact loads.

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 13

 CONCLUSIONS

1. State-of-the-art engineering verification methodologies

by the shipyard and the classification society were
applied to validate the new design to meet the stringent
technical, regulatory and safety requirements of the LNG
shipping industry.

2. As a product, SAYAENDO has the following advantage.

New structural concept offering more rigidity with less light weight.
Compact design, especially in ship’s depth.
Lower maintenance cost, due to omission of flying passage.
Suitability for navigation in cold region.

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 14

© 2012 MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD. All Rights Reserved. 15
Lloyd’s Register: Marine

Notable Aspects of Class Consideration

Class notation for standard ship:

✠100A1 Liquefied Gas Carrier, Ship Type 2G, Methane (LNG) in
independent spherical tanks type B, Maximum vapour pressure 0.25bar,
Minimum temperature –163C, ShipRight(SDA, FDA plus(50,WW), CM,
ACS(B)), *IWS, LI, ✠LMC, UMS, ICC with the descriptive notes
ShipRight(SCM, BWMP(T)), ETA.
Structural Consideration focusing on the Tank Cover:
(1) Tank Cover as a Protective Structure for the Cargo Tanks
(2) Tank Cover as a Primary Hull Strength Member
Design Verification using LR’s ShipRight Procedures
Safety of overall ship arrangement in respect of:
(1) LNG cargo manifold system
(2) Arrangement of the cargo machinery room

© 2012 Lloyd’s Register Group Limited. All Rights Reserved. 16

 Lloyd’s Register: Marine

Typical Fatigue Checking Locations on Tank Cover

Opening iwo Cargo

Tank Dome

Knuckles iwo
Cofferdam BHD

Aft Scarphing Structure

Upper and Lower Corners

iwo Manifold Recess
Forward Scarphing
Structure

Fine mesh hotspot stress

Screening

© 2012 Lloyd’s Register Group Limited. All Rights Reserved. 17

 Lloyd’s Register: Marine

Typical LNG Trading Pattern for ShipRight(FDA) notation

Trading Routes
North Sea – NE USA
North Africa – NE USA
North Africa – Gulf of Mexico
North Africa – N Europe
Middle East – NE Asia
NW Australia – NE Asia
SE Asia – NE Asia

© 2012 Lloyd’s Register Group Limited. All Rights Reserved. 18