Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The longitudinal strength of a hull girder explained in Chap. 2 is the most impor-
tant aspect of the ship strength, and its deficiency may cause the total loss of the
ship. Accordingly it has been designed so carefully that very little trouble has been
reported. In the design of the longitudinal strength, the hull structure can be sim-
ply assumed to be a hull girder, and a sophisticated total system of the longitudinal
strength calculation was developed. And now reliable design methods for the longi-
tudinal strength are available.
On the other hand the transverse strength of a ship is also important. Deficiency
in the transverse strength will cause fatal damage as shown in Fig. 3.1. Both cases
shown are damage to a tanker. One is an indent of a side shell caused by the buckling
of a cross tie, and the other is bulging of the side shell construction caused by the
loss of the connection between the shell plate and the transverse ring. Even in cases
of big deformation, no crack in the shell plate was detected, except a small crack of
a so called “flying bird” happened in the latter case.
32.4 m 42.4 m
(a) 78,800 DWT tanker delivered July, 1966 (b) 84,000 DWT tanker delivered Nov, 1966
M. Mano et al., Design of Ship Hull Structures, DOI 10.1007/978-3-540-88445-3 21, 387
c Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009
388 3 Transverse Strength of Ship
The allowable stress for transverse strength is given by each classification soci-
ety together with a stress calculation method. As explained in Sect. 2.6 the load
estimation, the response calculation, and the allowable limit are always to be con-
nected together. For example an allowable stress of a classification society can be
applied only on the response calculated by the method specified by the classification
society [12].
In hereunder the following example of load estimation, the response calculation
and the allowable limit is introduced which was established in the 1970’s by the
authors when the increase in ship-size was so fast that the classification society’s
rules were not so effective.
The load is divided into two kinds, the long term and the short term. The former
is for full loaded and ballast conditions in still water, and the latter is full loaded and
ballast conditions in waves and the tank test condition.
The response is calculated by means of a three dimensional frame model and a
two dimensional FEM model. The mesh division is shown in Fig. 3.1.1(b) which
is better for the determination of the stress distribution along the face plate than
that in Fig. 3.1.1(a). Firstly the cargo tank part of the tanker is modeled into a three
dimensional frame work and the shear deformation of the wing tanks is calculated
with a draft corresponding to the trough of the wave. The model is supported at
both ends of the side shell plates and longitudinal bulkheads. The wave height is
that given by Nippon Kaiji Kyokai. Secondly a two dimensional FEM calculation is
carried out at the transverse ring where the shear deformation of the wing tank is a
maximum with the draft at that transverse ring position.
The six tankers shown in Table 3.1.1 are analyzed by the above method. These
have a transverse main and no center girder construction system. Referring to the
analyzed data, the allowable stress is decided as shown in Table 3.1.2 for each part
shown in Fig. 3.1.2. The allowable stress is the maximum value analyzed on a ship
in service without any structural trouble.