eco ship design

8/10/2019 ECO SHIP DESIGN

1/20

TECHNICAL DIVISION


2/20

1.General2.Eco MR Tanker

3.Performance comparison

4.Economic study

CONTENTS


3/20

General

What is eco ship?

Eco friendly (statutory minimum requirement)

SOx (MARPOL Annex VI)

Nox (MARPOL Annex VI)

Ballast Water (BWM Convention)

Recycling (Ship Recycling Convention)

CO2 (MARPOL Annex VI)

Economic (market demand)

Fuel efficiency improvement, how much?

Desirable economic ship?

Competitiveness of shipyard


4/20

Eco MR Tanker

Adoption of G50ME-B Engine

Stroke increased

RPM decreased

MEP(mean effective power) increased

SFOC reduced

Propeller of larger dia adopted

Propeller efficiency improved

Fuel efficiency improved by 20%

Comparison with design of 5 years ago

Comparison at same condition


5/20

Eco MR Tanker

Adoption of G Type Engine

Change of main diesel engines to achieve high efficiency

M/E Type S 50 MC S 50 MC-C S 50 ME-C S 50 ME-B G 50 ME

BOutput 9,480 kW 9,960 kW 9,960 kW 10,680 kW 10,320 kW

RPM 127 127 127 117 100

Bore 500 500 500 500 500

Stroke 1,910 2,000 2,000 2,214 2,500

Ratio of B/S 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.4 5.0

SFOC 174 g/kWh 173g/kWh 170 g/kWh 168 g/kWh 168 g/kWh

M.E.P18.0bar at127rpm

20.0bar at127rpm

20.0bar at127rpm

21.0bar at117rpm

21.0bar at100rpm

Trend

[MAN Diesel & Turbo : Engine Selection Guide & Marine Engine Program]

* Criteria : Standard point(L1) on Layout diagram for engine power and speed


6/20

Eco MR Tanker

New Development Performance Upgrade

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

12 13 14 15 16 17

Speed Power Curve

Speed in Knots

kW


7/20

Eco MR Tanker

New Development Performance Upgrade

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000

EEDIValue(g-C

O2/tonmile)

Capacity (DWT)

MR Tanker

EEDI Calculation


8/20

Eco MR Tanker

New Development - Adoption of G Type Engine

Changes to Propeller Diameter Comparison of Stern Frame Outline


9/20

Eco MR Tanker

Adoption of MAN G-ME-B Type Engine

Countermeasures against disadvantages

Increase the diameter of the intermediate shaft

Apply the heavy tuning wheel & turning wheel

Adjust the shaft bearing position & offset

Type Advantage Challenge

6S50ME-B 6G50ME-B

Can adopt a propeller with

bigger diameter at lower

speed

Increased efficiency of

propeller

1. Increased excitation force due to the

tangential torque and the moment of

inertia of propeller

The level of torsional vibration isincreased.

2. Increased propeller mass

Alignment problems


10/20

Performance comparison

Old MR tanker vs New MR tanker* assuming steaming of 240 days in a year

Old MR tanker New MR tanker

Condition Design Design

.Speed (knots) 14.0 14.0

Power w/ S.M 15%(kW)

- -

SFC (g/kw.h) - -

DFOC (ton/day) 21.6 17.7

FOC (ton/year) 5184 4248

Annual FO Cost ($) 3.11 Mil 2.55 Mil

* The price of bunker oil is assumed as 600 $/ton

Annual FO Cost comparison ($)

New MR : 2.55 Mil

Old MR : 3.07 Mil

Diff./[Year] : 0.56 Mil

Diff./[25 Year] : 14.0 Mil0.01000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.06000.0

Old MR New MR

5184.0

4248.0

Old MR

New MR


11/20


g/(tonx

N.M

)

1.341 1.350

1.392

1.000

1.100

1.200

1.300

1.400

1.500

1.600

SEALION-67K DELTA-64K(Wartsila) DELTA-64K (MAN)

g/(ton x N.M) for Designed condition

A B C


12/20


12 13 14 15 16 17

POWER(KW)

Speed in Knots

(Design draft)


13/20


12 13 14 15 16 17

POWER(KW)

Speed in Knots

(Ballast draft)


14/20


Supramax

Yard A B C

Condition Ballast Design Ballast Design Ballast Design

Speed (knot) 12 13 12 13 12 13 12 13 12 13 12 13

Power (kW) 2920 * 3800 3542 4624 3070 * 3920 3407 4433 2976 * 4005 3439 4406

SFC (g/kw.h) 176.7 175.1 175.6 173.6 176.4 174.3 175.6 173.1 162.9 161.7 162.4 161.2

DFOC (ton/day) 12.4 * 16.0 14.9 19.3 13.0 * 16.4 14.4 18.4 11.6 * 15.5 13.4 17.0

Operating Profile (%) 15 35 15 35 15 35 15 35 15 35 15 35

FOC (ton/year)446.4 1344.0 536.4 1621.2 468.0 1377.6 518.4 1545.6 417.6 1302.0 482.4 1428.0

3948.0 3909.6 3630.0

Annual FO Cost ($) 2.43 Mil 2.40 Mil 2.23 Mil

Rank 3 2 1

* The price of bunker oil is assumed as 615 $/ton

Annual FO Cost comparison ($)

Rank 3 : 2.43 Mil

Rank 1 : 2.23 Mil

Diff./[Year] : 0.20 Mil

Diff./[25 Year] : 5.0 Mil

* assuming steaming of 240 days in a year


15/20


Supramax* assuming steaming of 240 days in a year


16/20


Kamsarmax* assuming steaming of 240 days in a year


17/20

Economic study

Which decision?

Operation with 52K Bulk Carrier (2003 built)

Replace with eco ship

or

Continue with 2003 built ship

New construction price: 25 M USD2ndhand ship price (10 years old): 16 M USD

Capital cost: 9 M USD


18/20

Economic study

Assumption

1. Ship type : Supramax 52K Bulk carrier (2003 built)

2. Sea route : Indonesia taboneo -> China nansha

3. Loading cargo : coal

4. Operating day : 290 days

- voyage number 17 (17day per 1 voyage number)

- ship speed : 14.5 knots

- sailing day : 7 day

- in port day : 10 day (taboneo 6 day, nansha 4 day)

5. Freight rate (per voyage) : USD 550,000, (USD 11/ton, 50,000ton cargo)

6. Bunker cost : Singapore (2013.10.24)

- IFO380 : 613.5$, MDO : 916.5 $

7. Fuel oil consumption 2003 built ship Eco ship

Voyage 25.0 ton/day 21.1 ton/day

In port 6.0 ton/day 6.0 ton/day

Fuel consumption

(1 voyage)

144,173 $ 127,424 $

Fuel consumption(Year) 2,450,941 $ 2,166,207 $


19/20

Economic study

Net Present Value (NPV) comparison

NPV at 2023

Replace with eco ship : 45.3 M USD

Continue with 2003 built ship: 42.6 M USD

(Difference: 2.7 M USD)

NPV at 2033

Replace with eco ship : 64.7 M USD

Continue with 2003 built ship: 61.5 M USD

(Difference: 3.2 M USD)


20/20

Thank you for your attention!

eco ship design

Documents