0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Speed-Power Performance of 95,000DWT Arctic Tanker Design

[+] Author and Article Information
H. S. Kim

 Samsung Heavy Industries, Koje-City, Koreahs-john.kim@samsung.com

M. K. Ha

 Samsung Heavy Industries, Koje-City, Korea

F. M. Williams

 NRC Institute for Ocean Technology, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada

D. Molyneux

 NRC Institute for Ocean Technology, St. John’s, Newfoundland, CanadaDavid.Molyneux@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca

H. H. Chun

 Pusan National University, Pusan, Koreachunahh@pusan.ac.kr

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 127(2), 135-140 (Oct 09, 2004) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1894406 History: Received February 26, 2004; Revised October 09, 2004

When Arctic offshore development in the 1970s first led to consideration of ice capable tankers, there was a high level of uncertainty over design requirements for both safety and ship performance, and a lack of reliable methods to evaluate design proposals. Since that time, improved understanding of the ice environment has raised the confidence of design specifications. Parallel developments have resulted in a suite of engineering tools for ship performance evaluation at the design stage. Recent development of offshore and near shore oil and gas reserves in several countries, together with economic studies of increased transportation through the Russian Arctic, led to renewed interest in ice capable tanker design. In response, Samsung Heavy Industries (SHI) applied its experience in tanker design and construction to the design of a specialized tanker with ice capability. SHI produced two prototype hull designs for further study. The performance of both hulls and of the propellers was evaluated at the Institute for Ocean Technology (IOT) in St. John’s, Newfoundland. This paper discusses the development of the design, describes the model experiments to determine performance and variations, and presents the results. It shows how physical modeling can provide insight into design features, and points out the areas where further research will have the greatest effect.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2005 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

(a) M493, Body Plan and Bow Profile; (b) M501, Body plan and bow profile

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

The flow pattern of three skeg direction types; (a) inward skeg, (b) straight skeg, (c) outward skeg

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Comparison of effective power in open water, full scale

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Model scale resistance components for M501, 63mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Model scale resistance components for M493 and M501, 63mm ice

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Propulsive efficiencies, 63mm ice (top), 30mm ice (bottom)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Propulsion ratios in ice, based on flow identity

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of power predictions in 2m level ice

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Estimates of ice resistance, 3 knots.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In