Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Experimental and numerical investigations on the ultimate longitudinal

strength of an ultra large container ship
Chonglei Wang a, b, c, Jiameng Wu a, b, c, d, Deyu Wang a, b, c, *
a
School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
c
The Collaborative Innovation Center for Advanced Ship and Deep-Sea Exploration, Shanghai, China
d
Marine Design & Research Institute of China, Shanghai, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper figures out investigations into the ultimate strength of ultra large container ships (ULCS). Both the
Ultimate strength experiment and non-linear finite element method (NFEM) are utilized to evaluate the ultimate longitudinal
ULCS strength behaviors of hull girder for ULCS in this study. Firstly, an experiment regarding the similar model is
Progressive collapse behaviors
carried out to examine the characteristics of the ultimate longitudinal strength of the ultra large container ship’s
Similar model
Experimental investigations
hull girder structures. The test model is designed by similar theory to reflect the progressive collapse behaviors of
NFEM actual hull girder under hogging bending moment. Secondly, the results of simulations performed by numerical
analysis into hull girder ultimate strength are compared with the experimental results. The results show good
agreement with model test demonstrating the reliability of NFEM. Finally, a series of non-linear finite element
analysis is performed to assess the ultimate strength of hull girder taking into account the effects of initial im­
perfections and both material and geometric nonlinearities, in which the typical 4,000 TEU, 10,000 TEU and
20,000 TEU representing normal and ultra large container ships are adopted as study cases to clarify the ultimate
strength characteristics of ULCS. This analysis can help to cognize the ultimate longitudinal strength of ULCS.

1. Introduction
Knowing the maximum load carrying capacity of actual hull girder is
very important in the structural ultimate limit state design for ships and
offshore structures, of which the ultimate longitudinal strength is
especially important usually referring to as the maximum hull girder
ultimate strength. There are big advantages in the process of trans­
porting goods for container ships, such as high loading-unloading effi­
ciency and small wastage. Therefore, container ships become larger and
larger with the recent increasing economy. However, ultra large
container ships will encounter more problems regarding strength due to
big scale and high speed. Actually, whipping is very important for the
verification of the ultimate bending moment capacity of the hull girder.
Because whipping response may significantly increase the wave fre­
quency vertical wave bending moment. Meanwhile for ULCS, whipping
loads are extremely sensitive to the ship speed and the effect on wave
induced loads will be further amplified under high ship speed (Jasna
et al., 2014). There have been many news about hull girder rupture for
ultra large container ships at present. Ultimate longitudinal strength
assessment of a typical ultra large container ship is taken into account in
this paper through experimental and numerical analysis. The torsional
ultimate strength is not considered although it is important for ULCS due
to large deck opening. But for the present study purpose it focuses on the
main ultimate strength relatively for ship structures, i.e., the ultimate
longitudinal strength.
There have been many research works conducted on the ultimate
strength behaviors of hull girder including local members such as plates,
stiffened panels and box girders. The formulas assessing the ultimate
strength and progressive collapse behaviors of plates subjected to
combined compression and lateral pressure including the effects of
initial imperfection had been presented by Guedes Soares and Gordo
(1996). A series of numerical and experimental investigations into the
ultimate strength and residual ultimate strength of unstiffened and
stiffened plates had been studied under combined biaxial compressive
and lateral pressure loads, and some simple formulas had been proposed
to predicting the ultimate strength and residual ultimate strength with
transverse and longitudinal cracks (Paik et al., 1995, 2005, 2009a;
2009b). And also a series of model test about plates and stiffened plates

* Corresponding author. School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
E-mail address: dywang@sjtu.edu.cn (D. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106546
Received 17 May 2019; Received in revised form 1 September 2019; Accepted 5 October 2019
Available online 12 October 2019
0029-8018/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C. Wang et al.
Fig. 1. The transverse mid ship section of the 10,000 TEU container ship (all dimensions in mm).
had been investigated by Xu et al. (2012, 2013a, 2013b). Qi et al. (2005)
studied systematically the theoretical calculation approaches about
evaluating ultimate strength of ships and ship-shaped offshore structures
such as FEM, ISUM, SM (simplified method) and AM (advanced
analytical method) based on long-time theoretical and experimental
work, in which some useful conclusions can be obtained through
comparative investigations. Hirdaris et al. (2014) had presented a re­
view regarding the benchmark work of assessment of design loads for
ship structures based on ultimate strength scaled model tests, full-scale
surveys and theoretical approaches taking into account especially
environmental and operational loads. Seo et al. (2016) had numerically
investigated the ultimate strength of stiffened curved plates subjected to
axial compressive actions, of which a total of 150 scaled models and over
400 study cases were adopted with different parameters such as slen­
derness ratio, curvature, web height and stiffener shapes to propose the
2
Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546
equation for predicting the ultimate strength characteristics and
post-collapsed behaviors of stiffened curved plates. The dynamic ulti­
mate strength of plates and stiffened plates had been numerically
investigated by Yang et al. (2016, 2018a, 2018b). Iijima et al. (2015)
had performed ultimate strength test of scaled model to study the
post-ultimate strength progressive collapse behaviors of hull girder
under whipping actions, in which it can be concluded that the collapse
area was smaller when whipping loads have shorter duration. Shi et al.
(2016) had studied the failure probability of hull girder subjected to
combined loads like still-water and wave-induced loads taking into the
effects of slamming loads. Shi and Wang (2012a, 2012b) had studied the
residual ultimate strength of cracked and open box girders respectively.
For ultimate strength investigations of model test for large scale ship and
ship-shaped offshore structures, a lot of meaningful methods had been
presented. Benson et al. (2013) had experimental studied the ultimate
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Fig. 2. The scantlings of scale model (all dimensions in mm).

and post-ultimate strength behaviors of hull girder adopting three small
scale box girder representing mid-section of ship structure. Saad-Eldeen
et al., (2011a, 2011b, 2015) had performed a series of ultimate strength
tests of box girders to obtain the progressive collapse characteristics,
post-ultimate strength behaviors and the residual ultimate strength
taking into account the effects of corrosion. Gordo and Soares (2014)
had experimentally studied the effects of spacing between transverse
frames into the ultimate strength of hull girder using three steel box
girders under pure vertical bending moment, of which the dissipation of
energy by plasticity and internal friction were evaluated.
Sun et al. (2003) had experimentally studied the torsional ultimate
strength of hull girder with two ship hull models under pure torsion and

3
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Fig. 3. Hogging bending setup for the model test (all dimensions in mm).

Fig. 5. Uncertainty analysis for the hogging bending experiment setup.

fact that dimensions of ULCS are outside the margin of the classification
society’s rules and those are not readily applicable. New computational
methods accounting for different loads responses of these ships are
attempting to be used in their design. Such complex numerical methods
are still under development and safety margin resulting from their
implementation is actually unknown. Confidence in application of
computational methods may be improved by comparison with model
tests and numerical calculations. Thus, this paper mainly figures out
investigations into the longitudinal ultimate strength characteristics of
ULCS through comparison between experiment and non-linear finite
element method. However, the detailed research work regarding ulti­
Fig. 4. The hogging bending test setup.
mate strength characteristics of ULC are relatively rare from literature
review. In This paper a scaled model test regarding the ultimate longi­
tudinal strength for a typical ultra large container ship is carried out. The
cycle actions respectively. Shi et al. (2012) had investigated the vertical
experiment is performed using a scaled model designed through simi­
bending ultimate strength of a container ship with scaled model under
larity theory. The numerical results of test model are compared with
pure bending moment. Tanaka et al. (2015) had also experimentally
model test to verify the reliability of numerical method. Moreover, three
studied the ultimate strength for a 5,250 TEU container ship with scaled
typical container ships are adopted and modeled as study case repre­
model, in which the combined loads were applied. Liu et al. (2018)
senting middle and ultra large container ships. The collapse sequence,
performed a scaled model experiment and obtained some useful and
the collapse mode, the reason of final collapse and the differences be­
meaningful insights on the transverse ultimate strength of a SWATH
tween container ships of the progressive collapse behaviors are
ship.
numerically discussed and presented.
In the present, ULCS is considered as the representative of new-type
ship and will be more and more important. ULCS represents a challenge
in the design process, where a significant role play estimation of design
loads and ultimate strength of hull girder. Particular problem represent

4
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Fig. 7. The standard specimen (all dimensions in mm).

Fig. 8. Stress-strain curve for test specimen.

Fig. 9. Most possible collapsed sections.

Fig. 6. The process of initial deflection measurement.

5
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

scale model, like the section modulus, the location of neutral axis and
the inertia moment about neutral axis of cross-section, can be designed
by geometry similarity. Along the longitudinal direction, hull girder
could be treated as a thin-wall beam with varying cross sections. Ge­
ometry similarity could be obtained between scale model and true ship
using thin-wall mechanics theory, in which internal bending and
deformation could be expressed as the following:
8
>
> M
>
> σ¼
>
> W
>
>
>
> σ
>
>ε ¼ E
>
<
ML (1)
>
> θ¼
>
> EIyy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ML2
>V ¼
: EIyy

where σ is the normal stress of hull girder cross section, ε is the strain. M
is bending moment, W is the section modulus in bending and E is the
Young’s modulus. θ is the beam rotation angle, V is the displacement of
mid-beam, L is beam length and І yy is the moment of inertia about cross-
sectional neutral axis.
The geometric similarity relationship will be derived under the same
boundary conditions as the following express.
8 CM
>
> Cσ ¼
>
> CW
>
>
>
>
>
> Cσ
>
>
> Cε ¼
>
< CE
(2)
>
> C C
> Cθ ¼ M L
>
>
> CE CIyy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> C C2
: Cv ¼ M L
CE CIyy

where C denotes the similarity coefficient between real ship and test
scale model. The scantlings of cross-section including local members
should be optimized and satisfied Eq. (2), which means the objective
function of geometry similarity criterion.
Strength similarity criterion should also be taken into account in
addition to the geometry similarity. The critical stress of scale model is
likely to be inconsistent with the true ship designing local members such
as the scantling of stiffener, the spacing between longitudinal girders or
stiffeners, and the longitudinal space of adjacent transverse frames with
geometry similarity only which is linear scale at root. Local strength
correction including elastic buckling and ultimate strength of panels and
stiffened plates should be taken into account as shown in Eq. (3)– (5),
respectively.

π2 E � t �2
σE ¼ k (3)
12ð1 v2 Þ b

where σ E is the buckling strength of local panels, k means buckling co­

� �2
a
efficient for the corresponding load and k ¼ mb þ mba where m means
Fig. 10. Strain gauges arrangement at sections A, B and C.
a
pffiffiffi
the number of buckling half wave, when 1 � b � 2, m ¼ 1; when
2. Experimental procedure pffiffiffi a pffiffiffi pffiffiffi
2 < b � 6, m ¼ 2; when 6 < ab � 3, m ¼ 3; when ab > 3, m ¼ 4. v
denotes the Poisson’s ratio, t means plate thickness, a and b are the
2.1. Model design length and width of plate, respectively.

Designing a similar scale model of a true ship can be of particular σu 2

¼
1
(4)
significance for the ultimate strength experiment, which can reflect the σy β β2
progressive collapse behaviors of the true ship. Because it is extremely
expensive and difficult to conduct an experiment using a true ship. where σ u denotes the ultimate strength of local panels and the plate
qffiffiffi
Similarity of geometry and loads parameters between the scale model slenderness ratio β ¼ bt Ey .
σ

and true ship has to be satisfied in scale model test. Overall scantlings of

6
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Fig. 11. Arrangement of gauges in practical model test.

7
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

again in this paper for the present study purpose. According the simi­
larity theory, a similar scaled model of a typical ultra large container
ship can be created for the model test regarding ultimate strength. The
cross section of the ultra large container ship (i.e., the objective ship 10,
000 TEU container ship) is shown in Fig. 1. The scantlings of scale model
are presented in Fig. 2. The length and width of the whole test model is
3 m and 1.81 m respectively including transition and buffer block.

2.2. Experiment setup

The container ship is statically in hogging condition when traveling.

And the ship is possible to collapse under hogging moment due to spring
back when after the first sagging moment by slamming in rough sea. The

Fig. 12. Experimental load-displacement curve of the test model.

σu 1 1
¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi (5)
σy β0:28 1 þ λ3:2

where σu denotes the ultimate strength of local stiffener plates, the range
of this formula is applied to β < 5 and λ < 1.0, and β ¼ 1.25, if β < 1.25.
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
λ ¼ ða =πrÞ σ y =E, r ¼ I=A is the radius of gyration of the stiffener
including associated full-width plating; I is the moment of inertia and A
is the cross-sectional area of the stiffener including associated full-width
plating.
The more detailed information and verifications about the similarity
theory and model design including mesh sensitivity analysis are illus­
trated in our previous paper (Wang et al., 2019), which is not stated Fig. 14. Test model symmetry check.

Fig. 13. Final collapse deformation of the test model.

8
C. Wang et al.
Fig. 15. Neutral axis measurement.
possibility of collapse under sagging moment is much smaller than that
of under hogging moment in the case of container ship because of static
hogging moment. Thus, the hogging load case is more serious for
container ships (Wang et al., 2018). Here the ultimate strength model
test under hogging bending is simulated with a four-point bending
mechanism as shown in Fig. 3, including two buffer blocks (loading arm)
which are used to produce bending moments, and two transitions which
are connected to buffer blocks for the force transitivity and should be
more rigid than the test block so that the test block could collapse first.
Two reaction frames are adopted to apply the loads through
hydro-cylinders as shown in Fig. 4, in which the bottom of bulkhead is
simply supported at both end sections. Progressive collapse behavior
characteristics of hull girder under hogging bending in actual situation
could be obtained with this four-point bending experiment setup.
The loads are applied as force and displacement forms respectively to
analyze the uncertainty of the model experiment setup. It can be
emphasized that there is no apparent bifurcation phenomenon when the
load as force form is applied, but the applied load cannot be increased
more when it exceeds the maximum load carrying capacity of the whole
structure. As shown in Fig. 5, the same progressive collapse process of
the test model could be obtained with two different loading forms,
proving the stability of the experiment setup.
9
Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546
Fig. 16. Verification of typical section.
2.3. Initial deflection measurement
The initial imperfections of construction members would be pro­
duced as a result of welding deflection and residual stress in the
manufacture process. As basically assumed, initial imperfections will
have a significant effect on the ultimate strength of hull girder. But
welding residual stress is not considered for study purpose in this paper.
And it should be noted that when the construction model is placed for a
certain period of time, some residual stress could be released, and some
cyclic loading in the elastic range of test model will be applied to release
some residual stress before the collapse experiment. Nevertheless, the
effects of initial deflection should be accounted for and measured before
ultimate strength model experiment for the following numerical
analysis.
One kind of hand laser scanning system is adopted for the initial
deflection measurement, which uses the latest dynamic gauge points
tracking image technology to accurately obtain the details of complex
structures and quickly achieve the shape of object 3D model by pro­
fessional optimization of the visual algorithm and multiple laser lines.
The whole set of equipment has a high degree of integration and con­
venience in actual operation. Firstly, the gauge points are marked
randomly in the outside plates of test model. Secondly, the coordinates
of every gauge point can be obtained by the hand laser scanning system.
Finally, the post-welding initial deflection of plates can be fitted using
the dates obtained by buckling mode based on double Fourier series. The
process of initial measurement is presented in Fig. 6.
2.4. Standard specimen tensile test
Before the experiment, it is necessary to conduct a tensile test for the
standard specimen of the steel used to fabricate the model for obtaining
the yield strength accurately. For this model, the plates of 8 mm, 5 mm,
4 mm and 3 mm thickness were selected as tensile specimens according
to the plates used. The dimensions of specimen are shown in Fig. 7. The
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Fig. 18. Results of strain gauges of four typical locations.

Fig. 19. Finite element model of test model.

Fig. 17. Comparison between the measured results of different cross-sections at

the same height. Fig. 20. Numerical calculation of horizontal neutral axis.

tensile tests were conducted in Structural Mechanics Laboratory. The calculation which can be obtained according to Eq. (6)
tensile test curve for specimens are shown in Fig. 8. � �
The yield strength and properties of the material can be obtained by εtrue ¼ ln 1 þ εeng �
(6)
tensile test of the plate. The engineering stress-strain curve of the ma­ σtrue ¼ σeng 1 þ εeng
terial can be directly obtained by the tensile test of the material, but the It can be seen that the yield strength of all kinds of specimens is
true stress-strain of the material should be used in the numerical 300 MPa and young’s modulus is 201 GPa, which should be adopted in

10
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Fig. 21. Comparison of ultimate strength between numerical calculation and

model test.

the numerical calculation.

2.5. Strain gauges arrangement

Strain gauges can be used to monitor the collapse behaviors of hull

girder (Shi and Wang, 2012). The damaged parts of hull girder under
hogging bending moment are concentrated in the middle of the ship
including the deck, bottom plates and side shells. Thus, single strain
gauges are arranged along the ship length at five most possible collapsed
sections as is shown in Fig. 9. Most of the strain gauges are arranged on
the middle of local plate and longitudinal. Strain gauges are mainly
arranged on one side and only a small quantity is arranged at another
side to verify the deformation symmetry and the repeatability of test
data as is shown in Fig. 10. Moreover, some strain gauges are arranged at
outboard side shell lengthwise to check the location of horizontal
neutral axis based on numerical calculations, and also at the location
between the test and transition block to monitor the weld stress in case
this location collapses first due to the insufficient weld strength.
Meanwhile, three displacement transducers are arranged below the test
model at mid-span of bulkhead in order to measure the vertical defor­
mation of hull girder. The arrangements of strain gauges and displace­
ment transducers in practical model test are shown in Fig. 11. Here, the
static strain testing analysis system DH3816 is used for output data of
strain gauges and displacement transducer.

3. Experiment results analysis

During the model experiment, all the data can be recorded auto­
matically at each loading step. At the beginning of the model test the
deformation of the model will be very small and still within the range of
linear elasticity, thus, the applied load increment could be large rela­
tively, which however should be very small to facilitate the observation
of the progressive collapse behaviors of the model components when the Fig. 22. Numerical calculations for the progressive collapse behaviors.
nonlinear range of the test model appears. With the increase of the
applied load, the bending moment of the model is increasing and 3.1. Ultimate strength curve
buckling will be shown in the plate under compression. With the
continuous expansion of the compression area, the loading carrying The progressive collapse curve of the test model is presented in
capacity of the test model is gradually decreased. The judgment for the Fig. 12, in which the relationship of the experimental load-displacement
ultimate limit state of test model is that the model will show a sudden of the test model is shown, E represents the proportional limit of load
large deformation phenomenon accompanying a loud noise when a and U represents the maximum load. The loading denotes loads applied
small load is applied. At this time the test model cannot continue to bear by each hydraulic cylinder, and the displacement denotes the measured
a larger load. The corresponding bending moment is the ultimate results of bulkhead by the displacement transducer.
strength of the model.

11
C. Wang et al.
Fig. 23. The transverse mid ship section of the 20,000 TEU container ship (all dimensions in mm).
Before the point E, the linear relationship between the load and
displacement of the model is very favorable indicating that the pro­
portional limit of the loading load has not been reached. When the
applied load reaches around 95 tons, the sound caused due to internal
failure and deformation can be heard during the model test. From the
point E to U, the slope of the curve slowly diminish with the increase of
applied loads indicating the overall stiffness of whole structure gradu­
ally decreases. Meanwhile, most of the structural members in the test
section gradually become plastic. When the applied loads continue to be
increased, significant failure deformation occurs in the test section, and
many strain gauges will peel off, which indicates that the ultimate limit
state of the test model has been reached. Thus, the ultimate hogging
bending strength of the test scaled model is 3553.5 kN m (¼
12
Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546
1184.5 kN � 3 m).
3.2. Collapse modes analysis
The final collapse deformation shape of test model is presented in
Fig. 13. It can be seen that the test model mainly collapses at section B
due to buckling of outer bottom and nearly side shell plates, which
means the buckling of the bottom plates and the upper part of the side
shell led to the overall collapse of the test model. And it is obvious from
the internal failure status that the inter bottom plates and the corre­
sponding longitudinal stiffeners also have serious buckling deformation.
Therefore, the failure of the whole test model under the hogging bending
moment is mainly caused by the buckling of the bottom plates and
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Fig. 24. The transverse mid ship section of the 4,000 TEU container ship (all dimensions in mm).

Table 1 Table 2
Principal particulars of the object ships. Main details in the 4,000TEU container ship.
Description 4,000TEU (m) 10,000TEU (m) 20,000TEU (m) Description Stiffeners (mm) Plate Thickness (mm)

Length O.A. 261.10 337.00 399.80 Upper deck 600 � 50 EH36 FB 50 EH36
Length B.P. 245.00 320.00 383.00 2ND deck 220 � 10 AH BP 14 AH
Breadth Moulded. 32.25 48.20 58.60 4304 platform 200 � 12 AH BP 11 AH
Depth Moulded. 19.30 27.20 30.50 Outer&Inner bottom shell 320 � 12 AH BP 19&13 AH
Design Draft 11.00 13.00 14.00 Outer&Inner side shell 220 � 11 AH BP 15&12 AH
Scantling Draft 12.60 15.00 16.00 Bilge side shell 340 � 12 AH BP 16 AH

13
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Table 3
Main details in the 10,000TEU container ship.
Description Stiffeners (mm) Plate Thickness (mm)

Upper deck 760 � 58 EH40 FB 62 EH40

2ND deck 260 � 10 AH BP 15 AH
4791 platform 320 � 12 AH BP 14 AH
Outer&Inner bottom shell 200 � 12 AH BP 23&16 AH
Outer&Inner side shell 150 � 11 AH BP 16&13 AH
Bilge side shell 350 � 11/150 � 15 AH TB 19 AH

Table 4
Main details in the 20,000TEU container ship.
Description Stiffeners (mm) Plate Thickness (mm)

Upper deck 1200 � 85 EH47 FB 85 EH47

2ND deck 200 � 10 AH BP 13 AH
3RD deck 150 � 11 AH BP 11AH
5152 platform 350 � 12 AH BP 17 AH
Outer&Inner bottom shell 350 � 15 AH BP 24&18 AH
Outer&Inner side shell 300 � 13 AH BP 17&14 AH
Bilge side shell 400 � 11/150 � 16 AH TB 24 AH

gradually expands to the side shell area.

The results of some strain gauges symmetrical with each other
relative to the length direction of test model on section B (No.14 and
No.77, No.20 and No.79, No.25 and No.80, and No.28 and No.81 see
Fig. 10) are presented in Fig. 14. It can be seen from Fig. 14, the results of
each group of strain gauge are the same during the test process, indi­
cating that the suffered force and deformation of the test model have a
good left and right symmetry meeting the requirements of ultimate
strength test model. The analysed value takes the material yield stress
(300 MPa according to specimen tensile test, i.e., the strain is around
1500 � 10 6) since the formulae of material mechanics for calculating
the stresses is based on linear elasticity. Thus, the values measured in the
ultimate strength test can be neglected when exceeding this magnitude
because the strain gauges will over flow in large plastic deformation.
The location of horizontal neutral axis of the test model measured is
shown in Fig. 15(a), from which it can be observed that the six strain
gauges are within the range of linear elasticity during the whole model
test, indicating that the horizontal neutral axis is around this area, and
the line closest to the neutral axis is the strain gauge No.101–104. The
progress of approximate vertical movement of the neutral axis is studied
using the strain gauges provided at bay B (as illustrated in Fig. 10(b))
choosing three typical states: the proportional limit, after the propor­
tional limit and the ultimate limit as shown in Fig. 15(b), from which it
can be seen that when the test model reaches the ultimate strength, the
neutral axis has totally moved about 160 mm (1/2 distance from B-24 to
B-21) towards the deck direction which also accord with Smith method.
Geometry similarity conditions are derived based on the assumption
of uniaxial stress because when test model is subjected to hogging
bending moment most members of structure are under uniaxial load,
and also in the model experiment normal stresses are measured. Thus,
the verification of normal stress similarity between true ship and scale
model is conducted as shown in Fig. 16 (a) firstly. It can be known that
the normal stress of typical section of true ship and scale model are quite
similar. Fig. 16 (b) shows the measured results of strain gauges on the
section B, from which it is observed that the stress along the horizontal
neutral axis of cross-section is symmetrical according with the normal
stress distribution of beam section under pure bending. Fig. 17 shows the
Fig. 25. FE models of the object ships.
results of strain gauges in different cross-sections at the same height of
test model. It can be seen that the changes of stress are basically the same
the upper deck, No.20 representing the upper part of side shell and
for different cross-sections of hull girder parallel middle body, indicating
No.60 representing the inner bottom. The results are presented in
that complex ship hull girder model can be simplified into a single frame
Fig. 18. According the slope of curves shown in Fig. 18, it can be seen
model in the calculation of ultimate bending strength. To study the
that the upper deck that is the farthest from the horizontal neutral axis
progressive collapse behaviors of hull girder, four typical points are
comes into tensile yielding stage firstly. And then, the outer bottom
adopted, i.e., No.11 representing the outer bottom, No.29 representing

14
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

block of experiment setup) and x, y, and z respectively means longitu­

dinal, transverse and vertical directions. Relevant discussions conducted
in the following analysis are based on this coordinate system.
Fig. 20 shows the numerical calculation of horizontal neutral axis. It
can be seen that the numerical result is the same as the test result as
stated about Figs. 11 (d) and Fig.15. The comparison of ultimate
strength between numerical calculation and model test is presented in
Fig. 21, from which it can be seen that the ultimate strength of test
model by numerical calculation is 1294 kN, while the ultimate strength
through test model is 1184 kN, with an error of 8.5%. In the elastic range
of the model, the two curves show a good agreement. In the plastic stage,
the ultimate strength value is slightly different. In fact, when the applied
load is around the ultimate limit state, the test section of scaled model
will be destroyed to a large extent. At this time, the strain values are too
large to accurately be obtained. In addition, some plates buckled seri­
ously, meanwhile the deformation of the test model will be very large in
a flash, which will increase the difficulty of data collection corre­
spondingly. Additionally the initial deformation, residual stress and
boundary conditions will affect or even change the ultimate strength of
the structure to some extent. Moreover, since the actual initial defor­
Fig. 26. Comparison of progressive collapse behaviors of three typical
container ships.
mation and residual stress in the test specimen cannot be fully reflected
in the numerical analysis, there will be difference in local failure and
deformation of some constituting members, which could result in the
Table 5
numerical-test deviation of ultimate capacity. In general, the test results
Comparison of ultimate strength of the object ships. can verify the reliability of the finite element analysis within the margin
of error.
Object ships Proportional elastic Ultimate strength Bending
limit resistance
Based on the existing similarity theory and model test, the ultimate
strength of longitudinal bending of an actual 10,000TEU container ship
4,000TEU (sag/ 8.03/7.02 � 109 Nm 8.52/7.59 � 109 5.3 � 109 Nm
can be calculated by Eq. (1) and Eq. (2). Namely, the ultimate bending
hog) Nm
10,000TEU (sag/ 1.72/1.71 � 1010 2.12/2.23 � 1010 2.31 � 1010 Nm strength of a real ship can be calculated by Mp ¼ Cσ � CW � Mm . After
hog) Nm Nm conversion, the ultimate strength of the real ship under hogging bending
20,000TEU (sag/ 3.47/3.40 � 1010 4.13/4.12 � 1010 2.32 � 1010 Nm is 1:83 � 1010 ​ Nm(355
300 � 4350 � 3554 kNm).
hog) Nm Nm
Fig. 22 shows the numerical calculations of progressive collapse
Note: “Bending resistance” here means “Vertical bending moment/Bending behaviors for the test model. It can be observed that the numerical
angle”. analysis is the same as the measured results by model test as illustrated
about Fig. 18. Conclusions could be drawn for the hull girder under
plates are compressed to fail. Then, the inner bottom plating and a large hogging bending that the members which are farthest from the hori­
area of side shell are compressed to fail. Finally, the hull girder fails zontal neutral axis such as the deck and upper part of side shell will come
because of the buckling of double bottom structures. into yield firstly. Then the outer bottom plating, longitudinal stiffeners
and parts of side shell begin to fail due to buckling under compression
4. Numerical analysis of ultimate strength for ULCS and meanwhile a large area of side shell above the neutral axis begin to
yield due to tension stress. And then failure of the inner bottom plating
4.1. Comparison between the calculated and measured results of test and longitudinal stiffeners gradually occurs due to compression. Finally,
model the overall hull girder fails as a result of the collapse of double bottom
structures due to compressive buckling. Moreover, the final collapse
Nonlinear finite element method for ultimate strength calculation is mode is the same as the model test result (see Fig. 13(a)). From com­
very convenient and common. The accuracy of numerical calculation parisons between the numerical calculated and measured results of test
results can be verified by experiment. The verification is taken into ac­ model, it can be observed that the accuracy and reliability of nonlinear
count from three aspects: comparison of horizontal neutral axis, com­ finite element method can be verified.
parison of ultimate strength value and comparison of progressive
collapsed behaviors such as which member is collapsed first and how is
the collapse developed. For the accuracy of numerical calculation, the 4.2. Ultimate strength characteristics of ULCS
finite element model should be closest to the real test model. Thus, the
model modification should be considered based on the tensile test of In this section, typical 4,000 TEU, 10,000TEU and 20,000TEU rep­
material, the initial deformation measurement result and the weight resenting normal and ultra large container ships respectively are adop­
correction due to plate thickness tolerance. ted as study cases to investigate the ultimate strength characteristics of
The finite element software Abaqus CAE is adopted to create the ultra large container ship through numerical analysis. Longitudinal
finite element model of the actual ship and scaled model in this paper. bending moment of ship hull girder is decreased gradually from mid-
The type of S4R and S3 elements are adopted, which are four-node ship to both ends, thus the ultimate strength of ship can be deter­
doubly curved general purpose shell elements that can be used for mined by the maximum load carrying capacity of mid ship section. As a
reduced integration and three-node triangular general purpose shell study case in this paper, one full hull compartment between two adja­
element, respectively. These types of elements could take membrane cent transverse watertight bulkheads located at mid-ship is chosen to be
rigidity, bending rigidity and large deflection into account during the analysed through nonlinear finite element method. The typical cross
numerical analysis and make computation less expensive and results section and main scantlings and most details of the three adopted object
more accurate. Shown in Fig. 19 is the FE model of scaled model (test ships are shown in Figs. 1 and 23 and Fig. 24 in conjunction with
Tables 1–4, respectively.

15
C. Wang et al.
Fig. 27. The Von-Mises stress distributions of the hull girder for the three type of consider ship.
The FE models of three object ships are shown in Fig. 25, in which the
appropriate boundary condition takes the place of bulkheads repre­
senting its influence and imposed to the FE model. The material of
construction members is taken into account elastic perfectly plastic with
yield stress of 315 MPa for AH material, 355 MPa for EH36 material,
390Mpa for EH40 material and 460 MPa for EH47 material. Young’s
modulus is 2.06 � 105 MPa, Poisson’s ratio is 0.3, and the density is
7.85 � 10 9 t/mm3. Some key influence factors of numerical calculation
for ultimate strength such as mesh size, initial imperfection, load
application and boundary conditions have been introduced in detail in
previous paper (Wang et al., 2018) which are not stated in this paper.
And numerical simulations presented below in this paper are performed
adopting the method shown in that paper.
Fig. 26 shows the comparison of progressive collapse behaviors of
these three typical container ships. The sum of results are presented in
16
Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546
Table 5. It can be observed that the proportional elastic limit and ulti­
mate strength of 10,000 TEU container ship is twice that of 4,000 TEU
container ship and half that of 20,000 TEU container ship, in which the
ultimate strength of 4,000 TEU container ship is similar with that
calculated as Paik (2001) for the similar container ship, indicating the
NFEM adopted in the present study is reliable. The bending resistance of
10,000 TEU container ship is four times that of 4,000 TEU and the same
as that of 20,000 TEU container ship indicating the cross-section
scantlings of ultra large container ship are similar. Fig. 27 shows the
Von-Mises stress distributions for the three type of container ship under
vertical bending moment. Good agreement can be found between the
collapse modes of the three type of container ships, indicating pro­
gressive collapse behaviors of container ships are consistent.
C. Wang et al.
5. Conclusions
This paper investigated the ultimate longitudinal strength charac­
teristics of ULCS through experimental and numerical analysis. A
detailed model test regarding ultimate strength of a similar scaled model
for a typical 10,000 TEU container ship under hogging bending moment
was introduced. The mechanical mechanism of ultimate strength and
progressive collapse behaviors of hull girder are explained more intui­
tively from physical model experiment. And the numerical calculation of
the same test model was carried out. The comparison between calcu­
lated and measured results was studied to investigate the accuracy and
reliability of NFEM taking into account the comparison of horizontal
neutral axis, ultimate strength value and progressive collapsed behav­
iors such as which member is collapsed first and how is the collapse
developed. Moreover, numerical analysis for three type of container
ships representing middle and ultra large container ships respectively
was carried out to investigate the ultimate strength characteristics of
ULCS. Based on the model test and computed numerical calculations
from the present study, the following conclusions can be drawn:
(1) Based on the model test results, the symmetry of hull girder was
studied firstly. The results show that the ship cross-section stress
along the horizontal neutral axis has a good symmetry, which
conforms to the distribution law of normal stress on the beam
section under pure bending moment, indicating beam bending
theory can be applied to hull girder.
(2) The stress vs. strain relationship at different cross sections under
the same ship height is basically the same, which indicates the
unity of the cross sections of hull girder in mid-ship. In addition,
the complex ship hull girder can be simplified into a single frame
model to facilitate the calculation of ultimate bending strength.
(3) The progressive collapse behaviors was obtained according to
model test. Yield failure occurred first farthest from the hori­
zontal neutral axis of the model under tensile stress such as upper
deck, and the tensile stress of hull girder gradually expanded to
the upper part of side shell. Then, buckling failure occurred under
compression like outer bottom, and the compressive stress
gradually expanded to the lower part of side shell. Meanwhile,
inner bottom plating and corresponding stiffeners gradually
buckled due to increasing compression. When the buckling
deformation of double bottom plates was very large and the
whole structure will not be able to bear larger load, the ultimate
limit state is reached.
(4) The numerical calculation and experimental results are compared
in three aspects: the position of horizontal neutral axis, the ulti­
mate strength curve and the progressive collapse behaviors
including the sequence and development of model failure. All the
results are consistent which verified the accuracy and reliability
of NFEM.
(5) Progressive collapse behaviors of ultra large container ships are
similar with middle container ships, but the proportional elastic
limit and ultimate strength are very different from each other
which are almost multiplied with the cargo capacity, which can
provide a reference for the ship structure design of different type
of container ships.
In the future task, further experiments are encouraged to be per­
formed regarding ultimate strength investigation of ultra large container
ships, such as torsion model test and combined loads model test for
obtaining adequate more detailed insights into the collapse behaviors of
hull girder to help cognize ultimate strength of ULCS more
comprehensively.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge the Chinese
17
Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546
Government Key Research Project KSHIP-II Project (Knowledge-based
Ship Design Hyper-Integrated Platform, with No. 201335), and the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.51809168 and
No.51979163), by which this paper is supported.
References
Benson, S.D., Abubakar, A., Dow, R.S., 2013. A comparison of computational methods to
predict the progressive collapse behaviour of a damaged box girder. Eng. Struct. 48,
266–280.
Garbatov, Y., Saad-Eldeen, S., Guedes Soares, C., 2015. Hull girder ultimate strength
assessment based on experimental results and the dimensional theory. Eng. Struct.
100, 742–750.
Gordo, J.M., Guedes Soares, C., 2014. Experimental analysis of the effect of frame
spacing variation on the ultimate bending moment of box girders. Mar. Struct. 37,
111–134.
Guedes Soares, C., Gordo, J.M., 1996. Compressive strength of rectangular plates under
biaxial load and lateral pressure. Thin-Walled Struct. 24, 231–259.
Hirdaris, S.E., Bai, W., Dessi, D., et al., 2014. Loads for use in the design of ships and
offshore structures. Ocean. Eng. 78 (1), 131–174.
Iijima, K., Suzaki, Y., Fujikubo, M., 2015. Scaled model tests for the post-ultimate
strength collapse behaviour of a ship’s hull girder under whipping loads. Ships
Offshore Struct. 10 (1), 31–38.
Jasna, P., Josko, P., et al., 2014. Operation of ULCS - real life. Int. J. Nav. Archit. Ocean
Eng. 6, 1014–1023.
Liu, B., Wu, W.G., Guedes Soares, C., 2018. Ultimate strength analysis of a SWATH ship
subjected to transverse loads. Mar. Struct. 57, 105–120.
Paik, J.K., Mansour, A.E., 1995. A simple formulation for predicting the ultimate strength
of ships. J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 1, 52–62.
Paik, J.K., et al., 2005. Ultimate strength of cracked plate elements under axial
compression or tension. Thin-Walled Struct. 43, 237–272.
Paik, J.K., Seo, J.K., 2009. Nonlinear finite element method models for ultimate strength
analysis of steel stiffened-plate structures under combined biaxial compression and
lateral pressure actions—Part II: stiffened panels. Thin-Walled Struct. 47 (8),
998–1007.
Paik, J.K., Seo, J.K., 2009. Nonlinear finite element method models for ultimate strength
analysis of steel stiffened-plate structures under combined biaxial compression and
lateral pressure actions—Part I: plate elements. Thin-Walled Struct. 47 (8),
1008–1017.
Paik, J.K., Thayamballi, A.K., Pedersen, P.T., et al., 2001. Ultimate strength of ship hulls
under torsion. Ocean. Eng. 28 (8), 1097–1133.
Qi, E.R., Cui, W.C., Wan, Z., 2005. Comparative study of ultimate hull girder strength of
large double hull tankers. Mar. Struct. 18 (3), 227–249.
Saad-Eldeen, S., Garbatov, Y., Guedes Soares, C., 2011. Experimental assessment of the
ultimate strength of a box girder subjected to severe corrosion. Mar. Struct. 24 (4),
338–357.
Saad-Eldeen, S., Garbatov, Y., Guedes Soares, C., 2011. Corrosion-dependent ultimate
strength assessment of aged box girders based on experimental results. J. Ship Res.
55 (4), 289–300.
Sun, H.H., Guedes Soares, C., 2003. An experimental study of ultimate torsional strength
of a ship-type hull girder with a large deck opening. Mar. Struct. 16, 51–67.
Shi, G.J., Wang, D.Y., 2012. Ultimate strength model experiment regarding a container
ship’s hull structures. Ships Offshore Struct. 7 (2), 165–184.
Shi, G.J., Wang, D.Y., 2012. Residual ultimate strength of open box girders with cracked
damage. Ocean. Eng. 43, 90–101.
Shi, G.J., Wang, D.Y., 2012. Residual ultimate strength of cracked box girders under
torsional loading. Ocean. Eng. 43, 102–112.
Shi, X.H., Teixeira, A.P., Zhang, J., et al., 2016. Reliability analysis of a ship hull
structure under combined loads including slamming loading. Ships Offshore Struct.
11 (3), 300–315.
Seo, J.K., Song, C.H., Park, J.S., et al., 2016. Nonlinear structural behaviour and design
formulae for calculating the ultimate strength of stiffened curved plates under axial
compression. Thin-Walled Struct. 107, 1–17.
Tanaka, Y., Ogawa, H., Tatsumi, A., et al., 2015. Analysis method of ultimate hull girder
strength under combined loads. Ships Offshore Struct. 10 (5), 587–598.
Wang, C.L., Wu, J.M., Wang, D.Y., 2018. Numerical investigation of three-dimensional
hull girder ultimate strength envelope for an ultra large container ship. Ocean. Eng.
149, 23–37.
Wang, C.L., Wu, J.M., Wang, D.Y., 2019. Design similar scale model of a 10,000 TEU
container ship through combined ultimate longitudinal bending and torsion analysis.
Appl. Ocean Res. 88, 1–14.
Xu, M.C., Guedes Soares, C., 2012. Assessment of the ultimate strength of narrow
stiffened panel test specimens. Thin-Walled Struct. 55, 11–21.
Xu, M.C., Garbatov, Y., Guedes Soares, C., 2013. Ultimate strength assessment of a tanker
hull based on experimentally developed master curves. J. Mar. Sci. Appl. 12 (2),
127–139.
Xu, M.C., Guedes Soares, C., 2013. Experimental study on the collapse strength of wide
stiffened panels. Mar. Struct. 30, 33–62.
C. Wang et al. Ocean Engineering 192 (2019) 106546

Yang, B., Wang, D.Y., 2016. Dynamic buckling of stiffened plates with elastically
restrained edges under in-plane impact loading. Thin-Walled Struct. 107, 427–442.
Yang, B., Wu, J.M., Guedes Soares, C., et al., 2018. Dynamic ultimate strength of outer
bottom stiffened plates under in-plane compression and lateral pressure. Ocean. Eng.
157 (2018), 44–53.
Yang, B., Guedes Soares, C., Wang, D.Y., 2018. An empirical formulation for predicting
the dynamic ultimate strength of rectangular plates under in-plane compressive
loading. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 141, 213–222.

18