welcome to sspa - highlights · 2015. 12. 18. · using the traditional term “bunker barge”,...

Highlights.Issue 61/2015

Shipping

Propeller/MachineryHydrophone Array

Seismic/AcousticSurveying Ships Pipe Laying Vessel

Growth and Reproduction

Air-gun/SonarSource Array

Communication Predator Prey Interactions

Page 2 – 3 Page 4 – 5 Page 6 – 7

Page 8 – 9 Page 12 – 13 Page 14 – 16

ISO/TS 18683: A good starting point with challengesWhen is it possible to bunker?

Safer and higherperforming LNG bunker vesselsFocus on the new type of vessels that are coming to the market.

LNG in Kenya – introduction of LNG into East AfricaFrom fossil fuel to a fuel with a lower environmental impact.

Blue Modal Shift – Urban and Regional Waterborne TransportOngoing and initiated research and innovation projects.

A new method to identify close situations between vesselsTools and services for added efficiency and safer transport.

Shipping andunderwaterradiated noiseWhat can we do to reduce radiated noise from ships?

PAGE14 –16

PAGE10 – 11

Bringing human-centred design to the maritime worldA new, highly configurable design for a conning display.

2 Highlights 61 / 2015 – ISO/TS 18683: A good starting point with challenges

Your Maritime Solution PartnerThe ocean is a wonderful resource, a resource that directly and indirectly contributes to the increase in prosperity around the world – something that is absolutely worth nurturing and developing.

At SSPA we are very much dedicated to supporting sustainable blue growth, providing solutions and bringing novel knowledge into daily practice.

In this issue of Highlights, you will find a selection of articles describing various actions where SSPA is contributing:

• to support clients in adapting their products and services in line with new guidelines and to contribute to the safe and efficient development of infrastructure of alternative marine fuels;

• to support and coordinate partners in three countries to contribute to a more environ-mentally friendly and low-carbon transport system in the region, while also developing and enhancing the maritime transport sys-tem and encouraging the transfer of freight from road to sea;

• to increase safety by introducing a human- centred perspective, with a special interest in the design of the conning display;

• to developed a geometric method for identi-fying close situations between vessels, as well as a very fast mathematical implemen-tation of that method;

• to reduce noise from maritime shipping and seismic exploration, offering predic-tive tools and noise reduction methods to assist clients who want to achieve greener operations.

Do not hesitate to contact us with feedback, comments or questions.

We hope you enjoy issue 61 of SSPA Highlights.

Susanne AbrahamssonPresident

Highlights.ISO/TS 18683: A good starting point with challengesIn early 2015, ISO published the ISO/TS 18683 Guidelines for systems and installations for supply of LNG as fuel to ships. At present, a number of companies globally are trying to adapt their products and services in line with the guidelines and contribute to the safe and efficient development of LNG as marine fuel. SSPA and its qualified staff have supported a number of these companies in this work. In so doing, a number of challenges have been identified, specifically relating to ship-to-ship operations.

The LNG bunkering facility conceptOne very central concept of the guidelines is the definition of the LNG bunkering facility. For shore- based operations, this is a rather straightforward concept, but when it comes to ship-to-ship (STS) operations, the definition of the concept and the reality of the application of the guidelines raises some interesting challenges. Many of these chal-lenges are related to ship motions.

LNG Supply Facilities Receiving ShipLNG Bunkering Facilities

Shore-to-ship bunkering

Truck-to-ship bunkering

Ship-to-ship bunkering

Onshore supply

Offshore supply

Onshore mobile supply

The LNG bunkering facility as illustrated in ISO/TS 18683.

A typical LNG bunkering facility. Photo: Johan Gahnström.

When delivering LNG from a truck or from a fixed storage facility, it is reasonable to assume that the only significant movement that may be induced during an operation relates to the receiving vessel. In addition to this, it is also reasonable to assume that movements of the receiving vessel are limited and usually rather predictable since the vessel should be properly moored in a protected harbour or similar. This makes the definition

Johan AlgellVice President, Maritime Operations. Johan graduated with an MSc in Naval Architecture from Chalmers University of Technology

in 1997. He was also awarded an Exec. MBA in Shipping and Logistics from Copenhagen Business School in 2003. With a multifaceted career within shipping and ship design, he has, since 2006, been very active in the development of LNG as marine fuel. Among others, he was part of the Swedish representation in the ISO work group that developed the ISO/TS 18687 guidelines. He joined SSPA in September 2015.

Contact informationEmail: [email protected]

Risk assessments made by SSPA. Photo: Alexandra Bakosch.

of the LNG bunkering facility with a clear operational window in line with the guidelines rather simple.

Ship-to-Ship operationsWhen undertaking STS operations, even in a pro-tected harbour, the number of possible movements and the probability of such movements occurring during the bunkering operation increases signifi-cantly. If then moving the operation to an off shore location such as Galveston Roads, the Singapore Strait or Skaw Roads, it is inevitable that ship movements during the operation will become even harder to predict.

The guidelines clearly state that a supplier of a bunkering facility shall, among other things, include information on the criteria used for the design of the equipment and its performance in real operations. For an arm or a hose handling system used for shore-to-ship bunkering, such as at the bunkering facility, this implies that the supplier shall, among other things, include information such as the maximum geometrical window the equipment is able to handle, the maximum acceleration in any part of the system that is allowed, as well as the maximum forces on other structures such as the manifold of the receiving vessel that the equipment may generate.

The problem is that if similar equipment is mounted on a bunker vessel, this information is no longer relevant since it does not cover the movements of the bunker vessel itself and therefore does not constitute the bunkering facility concept as defined in the guidelines. Instead, you have to see the whole bunker vessel, including (but not limited to) the transfer equipment, as the bunkering facility. This raises some interesting and challenging requirements.

Under what circumstances and in

which location is it possible to perform a STS LNG

bunkering operation with an acceptable

risk level?

When is it possible to bunker?If looking on this issue from the perspective of a potential STS LNG bunker supplier or its client, the most important question is:

– Under what circumstances and in which location is it possible to perform an STS LNG bunkering operation with an acceptable risk level?

To answer this question and to fulfil the require-ments in the guidelines, information of how the vessels moves in relation to different external parameters such as wind, waves and current needs to be delivered provided by the supplier. In addition, the dynamic interaction between the vessels when alongside each other also needs to be addressed to some extent. This information can then be used by the LNG supplier when evaluating the possibility of supplying LNG at a certain location under varying weather condi-tions and towards different receiving vessels with an acceptable risk level. The complexity of this

evaluation should not be underestimated since there is an almost infinite number of possible scenarios.

SSPA has the answersWith 75 years of experience of ship design, ship movements and simulations, SSPA has a large portfolio of movement data covering all kinds of ship types, including a number of LNG bunker vessels. SSPA also has significant experience of risk assessments and simulations in relation to lightering operations in various conditions. In combination with its comprehensive knowledge of the regulatory framework, logistical challenges and risk assessments related to LNG as marine fuel, SSPA has the tools to give accurate answers to the fundamental question raised above.

ISO/TS 18683 is considered as an important document when it comes to introduce safe, efficient and aligned LNG bunkering supplies in a global context. SSPA recommend all its client to use the guideline as a starting point when developing LNG bunkering operations. At the same time SSPA is fully aware that fulfillment of the guideline is considered as a challenge by some of the players in the market. Based on our experience and knowledge of LNG bunkering and the guide line SSPA is able to over bridge these challenges and assist our clients apply them in a simple yet efficient matter.

mailto:johan.algell%40sspa.se?subject=

4 Highlights 61 / 2015 – Safer and higherperforming LNG bunker vessels

A long tradition of high performance and safety awarenessThe performance and safety demands of conven-tional large LNG carriers (LNGC) are set at a very high level, both by industry associations, such as the SIGTTO (Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators) and the general public. The formal requirements together

Safer and higher-performing LNG bunker vesselsWe have entered a new era of ship fuels. The days when HFO was the supreme fuel are over and environmental concerns, demands for sustainability and stricter legislation have led to a variety of fuels to choose from: methanol, low sulphur heavy fuel oil (LSHFO), liquefied natural gas (LNG) and a variety of mixes of MGO (marine gas oil) and MDO (marine diesel oil). That LNG is one of the realistic alternative ship fuels among the ever-growing number of different fuels has probably not escaped anyone’s attention. This article will focus on the new type of vessels that are coming to the market in increasing numbers, the LNG bunker vessel (LBV).

with a high level of health and safety awareness in the LNG business have been of great importance and the proactive safety culture within the industry has led to a very good track record when it comes to accidents and incidents.

This high standard is necessary as LNG can, if handled incorrectly, be a dangerous commo-dity with fatal and other serious consequences to

personnel and the environment. Therefore, on account of the industry’s desire to use LNG as a ship fuel, a new organisation has been established to ensure that these high standards are maintained in the LNG business: SGMF, the Society for Gas as Marine Fuel. SGMF has been formed by stakeholders in the LNG business in order to share best practices and promote safety

The STX 6500 LNG bunker vessel is under construction in South Korea. LBVs are short in length in order to be able to manoeuvre in port, and this means they will also be fairly wide in beam to be able to carry the desired amount of LNG. Finding the best compromise between cargo capacity, propulsion efficiency and manoeuvrability is the key to success. Courtesy of STX Offshore & Shipbuilding.

when using LNG as a ship fuel and thus also as a bunker fuel.

The demands on LNG handling for LNG bunker vessels will be somewhat different compared to LNGCs, but nevertheless equally strict. Another document that comes into play is the recently published ISO guidelines regarding LNG and LNG bunkering: ISO/TS 18683. To learn more about it, you can read the article “A good starting point with challenges” in this issue of SSPA Highlights.

Contradictory performance demands require attention to detail Using the traditional term “bunker barge”, which is the most common term for a smaller tanker used to refuel other vessels, is in many cases misleading. Most of these “barges” are highly sophisticated tankers designed to carry out safe

Magnus WikanderMarketing & Sales Manager, Ship Design. Magnus graduated with an MSc in Naval Architecture from Chalmers University of

Technology in 2004. Prior to joining SSPA, he has held various positions within ship design consultancy as well as Project Manager for a ship repair yard working within the main focus areas of energy efficiency, newbuilding and environmental solutions. Since joining SSPA in 2013, Magnus has held the position of Marketing & Sales Manager, Ship Design.


operations 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. With liquefied natural gas in the fuel hose, ship-to-ship bunkering is more like refuel-ling a Formula 1 racing car than the traditional ship bunkering from old bunker barges that we are used to seeing in many ports. This is especi-ally true in the case of refuelling Ro-Pax ferries with tight turnaround times, such as the Ro-Pax ferry M/S Viking Grace in Stockholm harbour.

The intended operational profile, i.e. the trading pattern, the different locations and harbours in which the LBV will operate, will decide the main dimensions and performance requirements of the LBV and will be taken into consideration when working on a new design. A vessel with a good fit to the operational profile will naturally have a larger operational window* and is thus likely to be more profitable.

Performance requirements are, however, often contradictory, such as the conflict between course- keeping performance and manoeuvrability. As there will always be trade-offs in the design stage, this is when the knowledge and experience of hull design, seakeeping and manoeuvring and propulsion design will be crucial.

As an example, the twin thruster solution, like that used in BRP’s ships, will give superior positioning and manoeuvrability in narrow areas, such as inside a busy port or while positioning next to the receiving vessel in harsh weather conditions during offshore bunkering. The pro-pulsion solution in this case will, however, often lack in course-keeping performance, especially when the vessel is designed with a full hull shape in order to carry a lot of cargo. The single skeg or twin skeg propulsion systems might offer better course keeping. Finding the best design

compromise in order to fit the operational profile is challenging and there is not a single solution, since operational profiles frequently differ.

A high-level solution partner for high-performance projectsSSPA has deep and far-reaching hydrodynamic knowledge regarding hull design and performance verification for a vast range of ships, including conventional large LNG carriers (LNGC). SSPA’s ability to predict the ship’s motions is not only crucial for assessing the performance of the ship, but it is also necessary for different kinds of operational studies and simulations, such as of ship-to-ship lightering and ships passing each other in narrow canals.

Verifying the design with a skilled partner, like SSPA, gives the future ship-owner, the shipyard or other stakeholders an independent view of the ship’s performance, its fit to the requirements and highlights any possible improvements to the design.

SSPA has broad experience of performance verification and hydrodynamic design of this new type of vessel, the LBV. Using our collective skills, we are also able to support stakeholders in the LBV business with operational studies, risk analysis and simulations.

* Operational window = a term used to measure how often and in what weather and sea conditions a LBV is able to bunker.

SSPA Marine Dynamics Laboratory – the useful tool for verifying seakeeping and manoeuvring performance. The free sailing model will ensure correct ship behaviour. Photo: Anders Mikaelsson.

The balance between course keeping and manoeuvra bility is key to success according to ship-owner BRP. BRP turned to SSPA with the goal of enhancing course-keeping performance on their two twin thruster-equipped bunker vessels, Fox Sunrise and Fox Luna. Courtesy of BRP.

mailto:magnus.wikander%40sspa.se?subject=

6 Highlights 61 / 2015 – LNG in Kenya – SSPA supports the introduction of LNG into East Africa

Kenya has a clear dependency on oil when it comes to production of electricity. The Govern-ment of Kenya has a strong environmental ambition and would prefer a more environmen-tally friendly energy source. Shifting from fossil fuel to a fuel with a lower environmental impact is positive. LNG consists of natural gas and is as such a fossil fuel, but since the emissions are lower than when using oil, the transfer to LNG can still be seen as an environmental gain for society as a whole.

Energy use in KenyaThe energy sector in Kenya is largely dominated by petroleum and electricity (mainly produced from hydro and fossil fuels), with wood fuel supplying the basic energy needs of the rural communities, the urban poor, and the informal sector: wood fuel and other biomass account for 68% of the total energy consumption (petroleum 22%, electricity 9%, others 1%). The sectors that consume energy are households, industry, public

LNG in Kenya – SSPA supports the introduction of LNG into East AfricaKenya plans to introduce gas, and SSPA Sweden AB has been given the assignment to support this introduction. Kenya currently depends on oil for its electricity production. With a low electrification rate, the Government of Kenya has clearly stated that the electrification of the country will increase, and an increased demand for energy is predicted. The energy company Great Lakes Energy Africa Ltd is planning to introduce LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) into Kenya by placing an FRSU (Floating Storage and Regasification Unit) in Mombasa. SSPA has been contracted to perform a feasibility study as one of the major decision-support documents for the introduction. The objective of the study has been to look at the technical, operational, practical, risk and safety aspects of introducing LNG, and to present recommendations for the optimal way of establishing LNG as an energy source in Kenya.

facilities, and transport. The energy sector

is a substantial part of Kenyan society. The sector provides direct and indirect employ-ment to an estimated 16,000 people.

The total population of Kenya was about 44 million people in 2013, of which the rural population was

about 75%. Kenya has about 8.7 million house-holds, according to national statistics. Of these households, almost 1 million are in Nairobi. The total number of households (urban and rural) that have access to electricity is somewhere between 15 and 25%. Only about 1% of rural households were connected in 2002. There is a clear political will in Kenya to increase electrification in the country. Vision 2030 states that all citizens

should have electricity by 2030. To meet this demand, the projected installed capacity should increase gradually from the present approx. 2,000 MW up to 19,200 MW by 2030.

Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU) In line with the Kenyan Government’s environ-mental ambition, the company Great Lakes Energy Africa Ltd is planning to introduce LNG into Kenya by using an FSRU (Floating Storage and Regasification Unit) in the Port of Mombasa for storage and regasification of the LNG.

The FSRU will be located within the Port of Mombasa, the largest port in Kenya and a regional hub for international trade. The Port of Mombasa serves East and Central Africa with imports and exports.

The proposed FSRU is a conversion of a standard LNG Carrier, and is of standard size: it has a tank storage capacity of about 160,000 m3. The FSRU is equipped with regasification, and can therefore supply either LNG or natural gas to shore. Regasification is the process of converting LNG gas from its liquid state to a gaseous state. Seawater is generally used for the regasification process, as would be the case in Mombasa. LNG or gas would be supplied from the FSRU either by pipeline or truck.

Power plantsThe national ambition of increasing electrification in Kenya includes plans to build a large number of additional power plants during the next 10 – 15 years. These power plants, in addition to existing plants, may well run on LNG if this is introduced into the country.

For the power plants that are located a long distance from the port of Mombasa, and from the FSRU, for example in the Nairobi area, fuel will be delivered to the power plant by truck. The fuel

Vision 2030, the Government of Kenya.

Port of Mombasa. Photo: Ulrika Roupé.

Ulrika RoupéProject Manager.Ulrika has an MBA in Environmental Economics and graduated from the University of Gothenburg in 1995. She joined SSPA

in 1999 where she works as project manager in environmental, development cooperation and transport development projects, both in Sweden and internationally. She mainly works with environmental projects involving transport and shipping, environmental economic analysis, risk analysis, coastal zone management, and international cooperation.


Johan AlgellVice President, Maritime Operations. Johan graduated with an M.Sc. in Naval Architecture from Chalmers University of Technology

in 1997. He was also awarded an Exec. MBA in Shipping and Logistics from Copenhagen Business School in 2003. With a multifaceted career within shipping and ship design, he has, since 2006, been very active in the development of LNG as marine fuel. Among others, he was part of the Swedish representation in the ISO work group that developed the ISO/TS 18687 guidelines. He joined SSPA in September 2015.


will be LNG, in order to minimise the volumes transported. These power plants will therefore need to develop storage tanks for LNG.

Only the power plants in the port area, the existing Kipevu power plants or future newly built plants will allow delivery of fuel via a pipeline. The delivery will consist of natural gas, and storage of LNG is therefore not needed for the power plants in the port.

Other sectorsThe primary objective of the introduction of LNG into Kenya is to use it as fuel for producing electricity. However, the environmental benefits of LNG are valid for any use: LNG used as a fuel for industrial use has the same environmental benefits as with electricity production.

The targeted sectors are those with significant levels of energy consumption, mainly tea produc-tion, or as fuel for maritime transports.

LNG as a fuel in shipping is therefore the most analysed and developed sector for LNG usage by far. There are a number of reasons why the mari-time sector is looking into LNG as a marine fuel:• ECA regulations – IMO has introduced

environmental regulations (Emission Control Areas) in some areas of the world, and are planning more ECAs. In these areas, the quan-tities of different substances allowed in marine fuels are regulated. LNG is one of the fuels that comply with these regulations.

• Environmental benefits – as the maritime industry is working hard to create a more

environmentally friendly maritime sector, and to escape its reputation of being a “dirty” shipping business, the use of LNG considerably improves the environmental performance of shipping.

• Costs – depending on the cost of LNG and the cost of oil, LNG may contribute to economic savings for the user. However, this is highly dependent on trends in fuel prices.

Possibilities and challenges for LNG in KenyaAs in most parts of the world, shifting some of the oil consumption to LNG would be of benefit for Kenya. However, a stakeholder discussion on whether this is positive or not can be expected,

since LNG is still a fossil fuel. Some negative aspects of LNG and natural gas in Kenya would be the relatively high risk of accidents on the road with truck transports of LNG, and the risk of theft and sabotage of gas pipelines. The optimal method for minimising negative impacts, used in many countries, would be to include the citizens in the process at an early stage. A sense of ownership is achieved through community and stakeholder participation, thus paving the way for better understanding, smoother imple-mentation and improved safety during operation.

Countries surrounding Kenya may potentially also be supplied by the FSRU in Mombasa, and Kenya could serve as an LNG hub for neigh-bouring countries, such as Tanzania, Seychelles, Mauritius, and Uganda.

The location of the suggested FSRU, with a risk contour marked in purple, green and blue.

Power plant in Mombasa, Kipevu II. Photo: Johan Algell.

mailto:ulrika.roupe%40sspa.se?subject=mailto:johan.algell%40sspa.se?subject=

8 Highlights 61 / 2015 – Blue Modal Shift – Urban and Regional Waterborne Transport

Blue Modal Shift – Urban and Regional Waterborne TransportMany of the systemic problems of land-based transport systems in densely populated areas can potentially be alleviated by increasing the proportion of waterborne transport. Negative external effects from land-based modes of transport, e.g. road and rail, will often not affect the costs of this type of transport. This makes the use of urban and regional waterborne transport economically unviable. Waterborne transport is energy efficient, requires relatively inexpensive infrastructure and has no apparent capacity limitations. Many older city centres are located adjacent to a body of water or along the coast. This indicates that a successful effort to shift the mode of transport from land to water could be relevant for some of the larger cities in Sweden.

Historically, regional and urban waterborne transport has not been competitive due to infrastructure overcapacity on land and the lower degree of internalising external costs of land-based transports. SSPA is at the forefront of this development through its involvement in a number of ongoing and initiated research and innovation projects.

The negative external effects of land-based transport systems are well known; emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants e.g. NOx, SOx, PM, noise and vibration, increased risk of accidents in line with the increase of vehicles in traffic and congestion. Congestion is a problem in itself, reducing both quality of life for passengers and quality of service for goods, but it also exacerbates many of the other issues mentioned above, as more and more vehicles are forced to spend more time on the roads to fulfil the same transport needs. Furthermore, the negative impact of these externalities is much more immediate and powerful in densely populated areas such as city centres and along the coast where many people and businesses are located. The economic impact of these externa-lities is not only evident in the costs associated with poorer health and environment, but also through the costs associated with an ineffective and inefficient transport system as a result of congestion.

These issues relating to quality and efficiency could potentially be managed through additional expansion of infrastructure capacity on land, the prohibitive costs and limitations of existing urban landscape notwithstanding. However, that would do little to address the long list of other issues relating to poor environmental performance and sustainability of the existing transport system. Finding ways to address the capacity issues stemming from increased demand and competition for urban and coastal land space by accomplishing a Blue Modal shift at urban and regional level may hold the key to solving both problem categories at the same time.

Blue Modal Shift With increasing competition for infrastructure capacity and land, a rapid increase in research and development is re-emerging based on the idea of a Blue Modal Shift for urban and regional transport. Many of the critical stakeholders claim that the development of purposive and innovative urban/regional waterway concepts and business models may hold the key to unlocking the vast potential of waterborne transport in order to address the sustainability challenges of modern society.

In light of the new challenges faced by a society aiming for sustainable development and growth, Blue Modal shift is a real possi bility given the development of purposive concepts and business models. There is also substantial poten-tial for increasing the already high environmental performance of waterborne transport through technical development e.g. use of renewable, clean energy, optimisation of hulls and propellers, ICT-tools for increased efficiency etc. This poten-tial should not be neglected when developing new concepts, applications and business for increasing the proportion of urban and regional waterborne transport.

The NÖKS II project In the NÖKS II project – Närsjöfart i Öresund – Kattegat – Skagerrak, SSPA coordinates a total of 21 partners in three countries. The project’s main objective is to contribute to a more environ-mentally friendly and low-carbon transport system in the region, while also developing and enhancing the maritime transport system and encouraging the transfer of freight from road to sea. This will be achieved by developing solutions, tools and techniques to improve the quality and environmental performance of shipping services through the development of cost-effective, secure, flexible and competitive short sea shipping con-cepts. The efforts in developing these concepts and the innovative application of technologies that contribute to encouraging this modal shift have been divided into three main tasks, which effectively satisfy the different needs identified

Denmark

Norway

Sweden

The NÖKS project covers flows from continental Europe and Denmark to Sweden and Norway.

With road-based transport systems, emissions, congestion, and accidents are well known issues.

Financiers:Project partners:

• SSPA Sweden AB (Lead partner)• Høgskolen i Buskerud og Vestfold

(Norwegian coordinator)

• CELOG, Aalborg Universitet (Danish coordinator)

• Kongsberg Simulation• Swedish Maritime Technology Forum • Innovatum AB• Swedish Maritime Administration • Kystverket Sørøst• Port of Aalborg Business Intelligence Aps• Royal Arctic Logistics A/S

• Arctic Group A/S• Aalborg Havn A/S• Grenland Havn IKS• Vestfold Fylkeskommune• VestAgder Fylkeskommune• Telemark Fylkeskommune• Kristiansand Havn KF• Borg Havn IKS• Larvik Havn KS• Norlines as• Maritimt Forum

and realise the potential of cross-border regional cooperation.

Volumes that are immediately available for this type of modal shift are those with a depar-ture point or destination located near the coast or those volumes that are transported along the coast by rail and road. To find the solution to this challenge, we need to both identify transport demands with a quality and price requirement close to what can feasibly be produced in a shipping context and develop adequate short sea shipping concepts that are able to meet these requirements.

The objective of NÖKS is to contribute to a development that leads to a modal shift from the comparatively more congested and more accident-prone modes of transport with lower environmental performance to shipping. This

implies the need to develop viable innovative concepts from both a technical and economic point of view and to produce a quality of services that can attract cargo volumes in competition with the faster and more flexible land based modes of transport.

The project is divided into three major tasks. The first main task focuses on developing ports. The second main task aims to develop the concept of a fine-grid, flexible and competitive distribution system adapted for short sea ship-ping and, in some cases, inland waterways. This involves developing vessel concepts and logistics solutions. In the final work package, the aim is to increase performance of the short sea shipping system by developing innovative ICT logistics concepts. The project will end in the second half of 2018.

Christian FinnsgårdProject Manager. Christian has an MSc. in Mechanical Engineering/Management, an MSc. in Business Administration and a Ph.D. in Technology

Management and Economics. He has a background in research, primarily focused on logistics, materials supply systems and assembly systems. Since joining SSPA in 2014, Christian has been the project manager for the NÖKS project, and has been involved in various projects ranging from logistics solutions for shipping, how shipping companies are affected by slowsteaming, to research in sports.

Contact informationE-mail: [email protected]

Joakim KalantariProject Manager. Joakim has an MSc. in Automation and Mechatronics and a Ph.D. in Technology Management and Economics.

He has a background in research, primarily focused on logistics and transportation system modelling, simulation, evaluation and design in relation to efficiency. Since joining SSPA in 2013, Joakim has been involved in projects ranging from logistics solutions for energy-efficient shipping to alternative fuels and system design for the modal shift.


An example of a ferry capable of transporting cars, trailers and containers, with little need for infrastructure investments in ports, and thus high flexibility. Photo courtesy of Fjord 1.

mailto:christian.finnsgard%40sspa.se?subject=mailto:joakim.kalantari%40sspa.se?subject=

10 Highlights 61 / 2015 – Bringing humancentred design to the maritime world

Things do go wrong due to bridge equipment designIn accident investigations, there are intriguing examples of bridge equipment contributing significantly to incidents. In June 2013, the ship Sirena Seaways collided with a berth in Harwich, likely because it was difficult to tell that the system was in back-up mode. The impact at 7.5 knots caused considerable damage to the hull and the collapse of the linkspan. The 207-metre cruise ship Royal Majesty ran aground due to a GPS fault while en route from Bermuda to Boston. Nils Holgersson, a 191-metre Ro-Pax ferry, hit a moored ship during a port manoeuvre, likely due to confusion resulting from operating modes. All cases were linked to design that did not focus on the human aspect.

The value of a well-designed conning displayManoeuvring a large vessel in confined areas, such as when berthing and unberthing, is a demanding and complex task. The damage caused by a vessel striking a pier, quay or any object on land can result in very high costs for vessel repairs and in many cases the claim for damages from the harbour is even higher.

According to international insurance companies, damage caused by contact with fixed or floating objects is from experience usually a result of:

Bringing human-centred design to the maritime worldSSPA presents a new, highly configurable design for a conning display in accordance with the principals of Human- centred Design as part of the recently concluded CyClaDes project. The aim of the project was to increase ship, crew, cargo and environmental safety by introducing a human-centred perspective. SSPA, with its extensive experience of manoeuvring and berthing simulations, took special interest in the design of the conning display for use on the bridge wing in these situations.

• Adverse weather conditions during berthing/unberthing

• Improper judgement on the part of the master or pilot

• Improper speed• Insufficient tug assistance and/or

machinery failure

During these situations, an often-used manoeuvring aid is the conning display, which shows informa-tion about the state of the vessel and predicted motions. If properly designed, it has the ability to increase situational awareness and counteract all four causes stated above.

Conning displays are found both in the centre console as a navigation aid and on the bridge wing as an aid for precision manoeuvring such as berthing and unberthing. The SSPA study within the CyClaDes project focused on the conning design for typical bridge wing manoeuvring situations.

The Dynamic Predictor visualises the direct effect of

wind on the vessel’s predicted motion.

Human-centred design of the conning displayThe design work followed the principals of human-centred design as described in the fact box. Involving the users at an early stage is the very key to human-centred design and was a very useful and rather effective way forward. A large part of the design inspiration came from visits and interviews with officers on a large Ro-Pax vessel, a bunker vessel and large car carrier.

The conning design was tested and evaluated in the highly configurable SSPA SEAMAN simulator. Photo: Anders Mikaelsson.

Precision manoeuvring at the bridge wing during berthing. Photo: Jim Sandkvist.

Lars MarkströmProject Manager.He graduated from Chalmers Technical University with an MSc in Mechanical Engineering and later gained a BSc

in Nautical Science. He has more than 15 years’ experience of industry R&D in the private sector. He joined SSPA in 2012 and manages research projects from multiple disciplines within the maritime domain.


Erland WilskeProject Manager.Erland graduated in 1988 (MSc in electronic engineering) from Chalmers University of Technology. After

graduation, he worked on research into optoelectronics sensors and the software development of cargo handling systems. He joined SSPA in 1994, and since then he has been involved in projects linked to the development and use of simulation tools.


Max KviblingSoftware Engineer.He studied Electronic Design at Linköping University. He is involved in several simulation projects using SSPA’s

simulation tool SEAMAN. He is also involved in research projects to develop systems for checking vessel behaviour and to create networks between different simulator centres.


calculated using the SSPA Dynamic Prediction system, which also visualises the effect of wind on vessel motion, which was a much-appreciated feature.

The modular design approach allows for rapid customisation to accommodate different needs and vessel machinery layouts.

The CyClaDes projectThe CyClaDes project’s full title is Crewcentred Design and Operations of Ships and Ship Systems and is intended to promote the impact of the human element in shipping across the design and operational lifecycle. The project is funded by the EU Seventh Framework Programme and VINNOVA, Sweden´s Innovation Agency.

Human-centred designThere are five essential processes to be taken into account for the design process relating to the standard ISO 13407:1999 and later ISO 9241210.

1. Plan the humancentred design process

2. Understand and specify the context of use

3. Specify the user and organisational requirements

4. Produce designs and prototypes

5. Carry out userbased assessment

Tasks 2 – 5 are part of an iterative process that will be repeated until a successful outcome is reached in task 5.

The final conning design was evaluated in the SSPA SEAMAN simulator in co-operation with CyClaDes project team members from Chalmers University of Technology.

Design key elementsThe users’ consensus about what information should be included or excluded was quite homogenous and allowed an uncluttered design, or a design with minimal ‘optical pollution’, as expressed by one of the pilots interviewed.

Green and red are usually used extensively for starboard and port indicators, while additional colours are used for additional information to a varying degree. Besides making many conning displays look like angry fruit salads, important information or warnings can also be hard to recognise. To achieve a calm and consistent appearance, blue was used for all graphic state indicators. This was surprisingly well accepted by the users. This meant that red was now only used for the vessel contour and warnings.

To visualise predicted motion, green is used for the vessel contours to distinguish them from the actual position in red. The prediction is

The new conning display, according to the principals of human-centred design.

mailto:lars.markstrom%40sspa.se?subject=mailto:erland.wilske%40sspa.se?subject=mailto:max.kvibling%40sspa.se?subject=

12 Highlights 61 / 2015 – A new method to identify close situations between vessels

A new method to identify close situations between vesselsAs part of the MonaLisa 2.0 project, SSPA has developed a geometric method for identifying close situations between vessels, as well as a very fast mathematical implementation of that method. The method is used for de-conflicting voyage plans in the project as well as analysing traffic from SSPA’s large AIS database.

In the MonaLisa 2.0 project, SSPA develops tools and services for added efficiency and safer transport. One of the services separates voyage plans so that they does not overlap, as an effort towards safer voyages in the planning phase. This service is centred around a method, deve-loped in this project, which compares voyage legs for one ship and determines if there is an overlap with previously checked voyages for other ships.

This text describes both the method, i.e. the rules that define a conflict, and the technical details on how this method is implemented, in the text referred to as the implementation.

Conflict candidatesThe geometric method for identifying close situations, called “conflict candidates”, acts on vessels modelled as ellipses.

Conflict candidates are defined as two vessels where:

A. The safety ellipses of each vessel overlap, both spatially and in time, while travelling on their route leg

B. The ellipses constructed from the length and beam of each vessel overlap, both spatially and in time, while travelling on the extended section of each route leg.

In order to allow room for manoeuvring, the safety ellipse is larger than the vessel dimensions, usually by a factor of four or more.

The extended section in the definition is labelled as an FTA segment, an abbreviation of “Failure to Take Action”. The FTA segment adds room for error at each waypoint, i.e. the vessel

Identified conflicts over one month of all commercial traffic in the Kattegat. Performed using the conflict candidate method developed by SSPA, based on AIS-data provided by the Swedish Maritime Administration.

SSPA AIS databaseSSPA has stored years of AIS data, both from Swedish coastal waters gathered by the Swedish Maritime Administration (SMA), and from across Europe via the crowd sourcing initiative AIS Hub. At SSPA we also have the ability to load any AIS data in NMEA format for customer specific analysis.

may miss the waypoint and continue at the same speed and course, and even then, there are no inter-secting routes for a specified amount of time.

Mathematical implementation of the methodThe benefit of modelling vessels as ellipses is that the expressions are analytical in the mathematical

sense, i.e. instead of being line segments or poly-gons they can be represented with continuous mathematical functions. As such, there are ways to simplify and derive useful results.

A basic implementation of the method would be to, for each predefined time step length, compare one ellipse against the other, point by point. This means that all points on the contour

© SSPA Sweden AB© OpenStreetMap contributors

Henrik HolmProject Manager.Henrik studied on the Masters program Complex Adaptive Systems, in the Engineering Physics Department, at Chalmers

University of Technology. Previously he has worked as Product Manager at Playscan AB and as Software Architect at Avail Intelli gence, both in Gothenburg, Sweden. Since starting at SSPA in January 2013, he has been involved in various research projects developing route optimisation and mathe matical modelling.


Peter GrundevikVice President,Head of SSPA Research.Peter received his Ph.D. in physics from the University of Gothenburg/ Chalmers University of

Technology in 1982. He then worked at Ericsson Radio Systems developing sensor techniques. In 1993 he became president of Dyning Utveckling, developing communication systems. He joined SSPA in 1997 and has worked with enavigation technologies, intermodal transport and project coordination.


of one ellipse need to be compared to all points on the contour of the other ellipse, i.e. a lot of comparisons, which takes a lot of time, especially when handling large amounts of AIS data. It also means that the step size has to be selected carefully. This introduces problems, since com-promises then have to be made.

To solve this problem, to avoid missing any conflict candidates and to retain fast computa-tional time, a numerical implementation has been developed, inspired by collision detection algorithms in computer games. The original algorithm was used as a ballistic method in first-person shooter games to identify where bullets will hit.

The implementation compares the signs and values of the roots of the equation system of two ellipses, i.e. the characteristics between the ellipses. There are a limited number of interactions that can occur between two ellipses; adjacent, overlapping in two points, three points, etc. The characteristics for these interactions are pre-calculated and then compared to the ellipses in question. If they match the pre-calculated values then there is an overlap, which means that the two vessels are in conflict, both in time and space. The fact that many values in the interactions are pre-calculated and the limited amount of comparisons is what makes this implementation very fast.

Method AnalysisThe most commonly used software at SSPA for maritime traffic risk analysis is “IWRAP Mk2” (IALA Waterway Risk Assessment Program), currently developed by GateHouse in Denmark and recommended by IALA (International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities) as the standard program. IWRAP can import AIS data files and, given that the user defines a traffic model over the area,

IWRAP can calculate the number of collision candidates.

An advantage of the developed method com-pared to IWRAP is that there is no need to define a model, the method calculates conflicts using all the given data. Another is that the developed method is time dependent, i.e. it can be used for studying ship routes separated in both time and space. IWRAP is a statistical method that calculates ship-on-ship collision frequencies time independently.

To evaluate the difference between the methods, an end-to-end comparison was made using the same input data, and then comparing the end output of both programs. Two input datasets were created in order to get two reference points in the comparison. One with all commercial traffic in the Kattegat as well as a smaller set with only the transit traffic in the area, both with a duration of one month.

The relative difference, which is frequently used when comparing risks, is almost identical. For IWRAP the relative difference between the data sets is 5.5 and for the developed method, it is 6.0.

The method will behave similarly to IWRAP with relative measurements, although some adjustments may be needed for the absolute values.

ConclusionBoth the described method and the technical implementation are important elements in the overall capabilities of AIS traffic analysis at SSPA. With constantly growing datasets – Big Data – the bar continues to be raised when it comes to high performance computing, and this method, and especially the implementation, is one step on that path, further strengthen SSPA’s position at the forefront of marine traffic and risk analysis.

Safety ellipse travelling on the route and ellipse with vessel length and beam on the FTA segment.

“The MONALISA 2.0 project contributes to a continuous improvement and development of efficient, safe and environmentally friendly maritime transport in the European Union by implementing concrete pilot actions and studies that will foster deployment of new maritime services and processes.”

FTA segment

Planned route

T = 10 T = 20 T = 30 T = 50 T = 60 T = 70

mailto:henrik.holm%40sspa.se?subject=mailto:peter.grundevik%40sspa.se?subject=

14 Highlights 61 / 2015 – Shipping and underwater radiated noise

Shipping

Propeller/MachineryHydrophone Array

Seismic/AcousticSurveying Ships Pipe Laying Vessel

Growth and Reproduction

Air-gun/SonarSource Array

Communication Predator Prey Interactions

Shipping and underwater radiated noisePollution in the ocean is not just about the dumping of harmful chemical, physical or biological substances into the sea, but also about the increased ambient noise. Ocean ambient noise results from both natural and anthropogenic (human-induced) acoustic sources. The latter are closely related to maritime shipping and seismic exploration by the oil/gas industry. Studies show that the Underwater Radiated Noise (URN) due to shipping activity has resulted in an increase of at least 20 dB of ambient noise compared to pre-industrial levels. The expected increase of vessel traffic and oil exploration in the Arctic Ocean may result in a further increase of ambient noise. It is likely that regulations on noise emissions are on the way. Faced with these changes, what can we contribute to prevent the growing noise from maritime shipping?

Sound propagation in water Noise is defined as “unwanted” sound. Sound is the rapidly varying pressure wave travelling through a medium such as air or water. A pressure wave can be decomposed into the sum of a series of sine functions with different amplitude and frequency contents using Fourier Transformation. Plotting the amplitude contents in the y-axis versus the frequency contents in the x-axis will give us a spectrum diagram representing the characteristics of a particular sound or noise signal.

Water is an excellent medium for sound propa-gation for two reasons: the sound propagates four times faster in water than in air (1484 m/s vs. 343 m/s). The low absorption rate of water

makes sound, especially low frequency sound, travel hundreds of kilometres in open sea. This is why the low frequency range of URN from a ship travelling a long distance away can still be heard.

Impact of underwater noiseA sound becomes audible when the receiver is able to perceive it over background noise. The audible range of hearing for marine fauna spans from as low as 5 Hz up to about 200 kHz. Marine mammals and fish use hearing as their primary sense and are highly dependent upon sound for navigation, communication, finding food, repro-duction and hazard detection. They are likely to be sensitive to the increase in environmental

noise. Acoustic masking occurs when the presence of one sound (noise) reduces the ability of an animal to perceive a second sound (of interest). Acoustic masking is considered to be a threat to marine fauna, especially those species that communicate on low frequencies, such as baleen whales. Therefore, an excessive high level of ambient noise in the low frequency range can have a negative impact on their population.

Ship generated noise A propeller-driven ship has a number of noise sources: the main and auxiliary engines, electric motors and the flow noise due to turbulence in the boundary layer and the wake of the hull and

Sounds in the ocean.

Da-Qing LiProject Manager.DaQing received his MSc in Naval Architecture from Huazhong University of Science and Technology in 1986 and a Ph.D. from

Chalmers University of Technology in 1994. He joined SSPA in 1997, and has been working with various projects associated with propeller/waterjet propulsion, cavitation/erosion, and shallow water problems using CFD tools and model testing. He was a member of the 26th and 27th ITTC Specialist Committee on CFD in Marine Hydrodynamics and an active participant and contributor to a number of EU projects.


Jan HallanderProject Manager.Jan graduated with an MSc in 1991 in Mechanical Engineering and received his Ph.D. in Naval Architecture from

Chalmers in 2002. He has been at SSPA since 1998. He has been involved in various research and consultancy projects in the areas of general hydromechanics, propulsion and underwater acoustic signatures, especially with phenomena related to cavitation and noise induced by the propeller.


appendages. The propeller is a dominant source, generating the highest noise level at frequencies below 200 Hz. If cavitation occurs on propeller blades, the noise level is increased further. Cavi-tation contributes to both tonal and broadband noise. The predominant noise levels associated with large vessels are in the frequency range [5–1000] Hz. Noise levels at higher frequency (above some hundreds of Hz) will normally decrease with increasing frequency. Therefore, the predominant noise in the low-frequency band will affect the ambient noise over a large ocean area. Moreover, this low-frequency band happens to overlap with the frequency band in the audible range used by some marine mammals. Concerns about the potential impact of ocean noise on marine fauna prompted the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to release a non-mandatory guideline for the reduction of underwater radi-ated noise (URN) from commercial shipping in 2014.

Tools to predict underwater radiated noiseWhile understanding various noise generation mechanisms is still an on-going area of research,

development of different methods to predict ship- generated noise during the design process becomes more important and imminent. Listed in increasing order of complexity and the physics involved, the following methods or tools are available at SSPA (more info at SSPA Highlights No. 57)

(a) Semi-Empirical method (S-E) (b) Potential flow (c) Model testing(d) Hybrid CFD method (DDES-FWH type)(e) Full scale measurement

The selection of a method depends on factors such as the objective of the investigation, which stage of the design phase, the anticipated accuracy, and eventual time constraint on delivery etc. S-E and Potential flow methods are fast tools that give a first estimate. The hybrid CFD method is the most advanced computational tool that is able to give more insight into the flow physics, but the time taken to acquire statistical data from computations is significantly longer. The time required for model testing lies in between the two methods, yet it needs some additional time for model manufacturing and test set-up. Full-scale

measurement is always a challenge due to the adverse and changeable underwater environment, the difficulty of obtaining measurement slots with merchant vessels, and the required synchro-nisation of measurement data from sensors with different modalities in different locations.

In the recently ended EU project AQUO, SSPA studied the noise spectra of a coastal tanker fitted with a controllable pitch propeller (CPP) using methods (c), (d) and (e). The three methods yielded fairly good agreement in the URN data. The cross comparison of noise spectra revealed an acceptable level of accuracy of these methods.

Design for lower noise emissionAs for naval vessels, the noise aspect now also needs to be considered at the initial design stage of commercial ships. A well-designed hull

Frequency relationships between marine animal sounds and sounds from shipping. Figure courtesy of B. Southall, NMFS/NOAA.

Example of source identification of the measured full scale noise spectra.

mailto:da-qing.li%40sspa.se?subject=mailto:jan.hallander%40sspa.se?subject=

16 Highlights 61 / 2015 – Shipping and underwater radiated noise

SSPA Highlights is published by:SSPA SWEDEN AB

Box 24001, SE- 400 22 Göteborg, Sweden.Phone: +46 31 772 90 00 Fax: +46 31 772 91 24

E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.sspa.seMH102815-01-00-A

SSPA’s vision is to be recognised as the most rewarding partner for innovative and sustainable maritime development. To always offer the latest knowledge and best practices, about 20 per cent of the company’s resources are engaged in research and development. The Swedish government founded SSPA in 1940 and in 1984 it was established as the limited company SSPA Sweden AB. The company has been owned by the Chalmers University of Technology Foundation since 1994.

SSPA offers a wide range of maritime services, including ship design, energy optimisation, finding the most effective ways to interact with other types of transportation, and conducting maritime infrastructure studies together with safety and environmental risk assessments. Our customers include shipowners, ports, shipyards, manufacturers and maritime authorities worldwide.

Our three focus areas are:

• SSPA acts as a bridge between theory and practice, research and implementation, the present and the future. The foundation is the ability to provide unbiased expertise, advice and services to our customers and other stakeholders.

• SSPA ensures sustainable development through proper risk management in close cooperation with the customer.

• SSPA has the financial, environmental, human and technological factors in mind for optimal energy efficiency.

Our head office is located in Gothenburg and we have a branch office in Stockholm.

You can also download Highlights at www.sspa.se

For references: www.sspa.se/shippingand underwaterradiatednoise

form will require less power and provide more uniform inflow to propellers, thus increasing the propulsive efficiency and reducing the under-water radiated noise caused by the uneven wake flow.

The propeller design point should be carefully selected to match the optimal efficiency with the most frequently operated speed/draft condition(s). For commercial ships it is hard to avoid cavita-tion for efficiency reasons, but cavitation can be controlled and kept to moderate levels. Moreover, propeller design needs the wake field of the ship. It is very important to supply propeller designer with a full-scale alike wake.

All these imply an increased design effort, but the result is a quieter ship with higher efficiency and lower emissions. Regardless of the technology used for noise reduction, it is essential to assess the effectiveness of the noise reduction using

model-scale measurements, CFD analysis or full- scale measurements.

Use of right operational profile Shipping noise in an area of the ocean can be decreased by management of ship traffic. The URN from an individual ship can be reduced by choosing an operational profile that gives the best URN performance. Ships fitted with fixed pitch propellers (FPP) will normally be quieter when propeller shaft speed is reduced. Thus “slow steaming” is also helpful for redu-cing URN with FPP propellers. The scenario is however quite different for ships fitted with controllable pitch propellers (CPP). When operating at reduced speeds, the normal operation of keeping the propeller at a constant RPM and decreasing the pitch setting could have nega-tive effects with regard to power consumption

Turbulent vortex structures in the wake of the propelled hull (DDES method).

and noise emissions, because a decreased pitch shifts the propeller away from its optimal efficiency point and results in cavitation on the pressure side. The study of the coastal tanker in the AQUO project confirmed this result. The solution for such ships at low speeds would be to operate with variable RPM according to a combinatory curve optimised for best URN performance.

To sum up, SSPA offers predictive tools and noise reduction methods to assist customers who want to achieve greener shipping. For more info, read our prize-winning paper at NuTTS 2015. www.sspa.se/news/sspa-rewarded-work- prediction-under-water-radiated-noise
http://www.sspa.se/shipping-and-underwater-radiated-noisehttp://www.sspa.se/shipping-and-underwater-radiated-noisehttp://www.sspa.se/news/sspa-rewarded-work-prediction-under-water-radiated-noisehttp://www.sspa.se/news/sspa-rewarded-work-prediction-under-water-radiated-noise

welcome to sspa - highlights · 2015. 12. 18. · using the traditional term “bunker barge”,...

Documents