REPORT
No. 157 S November 1971 (S 5/208-208a-208b)NEDERLANDS SCHEEPSSTUDIECENTRUM TNO
NETHERLANDS SHIP RESEARCH CENTRE TNOSHIPBUILDING DEPARTMENT LEEGHWA1ERSTAAT 5, DELFT
*
COMPUTER PROGRAMS FQR THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
OF GENERAL CARGO SHIPS
(REKENPR.OGRAMMA'S VOOR HET ONTWERPEN EN ANALYSEREN VAN VRACHTSCHEPEN)
by
IR. J. HOLTROP
(Netherlands Ship Model Bäsin)
VOORWOORD
Het ontwerpen van een schip houdt het .berekenen en toetsen in van een (vaak gróot) aantàl alternatièven. Bu gebruikmaking van de traditioñele methode, zeifs indien het aantal variabelen beperkt blijft, betekent dit een omvangrijk werk dat maar alte vaak in een karte tijd môet worden uitgeroerd.
Het is duidelijk dat de elektronische rekenautomaat een bui tengòwoón waardevol hulpmiddel kan zijn voor dit soort werk. Dit blijkt ook ùit het aantal publikaties dat handelt over corn-putertoepassingen bij het scheepsontwerp. en welke variören van oplossingen voor detáilproblemen tot volledige programma's die oak econornische berekeningen omvatten.
Voor de ontwikkeling van ecu dergeijk rekenprogramma bij bet Rekencentrum van het Nederlandsch Scheepsbouwkuñdig Proefstation werden een aantal speciale eisen opgesteld - Het moest een volledig programma zijn, waarin het
tech-nische ontwerp gekoppeld was aan economische berekeningen; empirische verhoudingen zouden zoveel mogelijk vermeden moeten worden;
- inplaats daarvan zou een ,variatie studie' toegepast moeten wordeñ, wat inhoudt dat de computer een aantal ontwerp-resultaten oplevert voor enige.systematisch gevarieerde
hoofd-afmetingen;
-- interpretatie vàn tussentijdse resultaten door de gebruiker diende te worden voorkomen, hiertoe moesten voldoende be-slissings routiñes worden ingebouwd;
- orn de rekentijd te beperken moest het iteratie systeem snel convergerend zijn;
- de nauwkeurigheid van de resultaten moçst uiteraard
vol-doende zijn.
Besloten werd orn uit te gaan van bet veelomvattende werk van Dr. C. Galiin, thans boogleraar aan de Technische Hogeschool te Deift, dut gepubliceerd was als zijn dissertatie.
Na een analyse van dit programma is, de hierboven gespeci-ficeerde eisen in gedachten houdende, ecu aanzienlijk dccl ervan gewijzigd en aangevuld, hetgeen uiteindeijk resulteerde in het rekenprogramma voor het ontwerpen van vrachtschepen dat in dit rapport beschreven wordt.
Het programma, dat bestaat uit een aantal deeiprogramma's waarvan sommige ook voor andere scheepstypen kunnen worden gebriiikt, wordt nog verder uitgebreid; het kan thans oak voor bulkcarriers en tankers worden gebruikt.
Uit bet ontwerpprogramma is oak ecu ,analyseprogranima' afgeleid dat gebrutkt kan worden voor de analyse van bestaande schepen. Een voorbeeld van de toepassing hiervan is in dit rapport
gegeven.
HEr NEDERLANDS SCHEEPSSTUDIECENTRLJM TNO
PREFACE
Designing a ship implies the calculation and examination of a
(often large) number of alternatives. Using the traditionäl
method, even if the number of variables is restricted, this means an extensive job that toO often must be carried out in a short time.
It is clear that the electronic computer can be a very valuable tool for this type of work. This is also demonstrated by the num-ber of publications covering computer applications in ship design, ranging from solutions for details to fully integrated design programs including economic calculations.
For the development of such a computer program at the Com-puter Centre of the Netherlands Ship Model Basin a numb6r of special demands was formulated:
- It should be an integrated program, coupling the technical design with economic calculations;
- empirical relations should be omitted as much as possibl; - instead a variation study, implying that the computer
gen-erates a number of design results for some systematically varied main particulars, should be employed;
- interpretatiOn of intermediate results by the operator should be avoided, for this purpose sufficient decision making rou-tines should be incorporated;
- to limit the computing time the iteration system should be a fast converging one;
- the accuracy of the rèsults should, of course, be sufficient. It was decided to start from the extensive work of Dr. C. Gailin, now professor at the Delft University of TechnolOgy, which has been published as his doctor's thesis.
After an analysis of this program, keeping in mind the demands specified above, à large part of it has been modified and extended, leading finally to the program for the design of general cargo ships that is described in this report.
The programthat consists of a number of subprograms, sorne of which can be used for other ship types, is still being extended further, at this moment it can also be used for bulkcarriers and tankers.
From the design program also an analysis program has been denved which is suitable for the analysis of existing ships An example of its use is given in this report
page
Summary.
...
71 IntrOduction - 7
2 Structure óf the programs
...
.83 Description of the design program 9
4 Description of the program for analysing ships 12 5 Economical part Of the programs
... .
. . ....
13 5.1 Simulation modél for ship-operations . 135.2 CalculatiOn of economical results . 14
6 Inputfor the programs . . . . 14
7 Examples 14
7.1 Variation study of a castel' . 14
7.2 Design calculations for a fast cargo liner -. 16
73 Analysis ofa bulkcarrier . . . 16
8 Suggestions for further development 17
Acknowledgement 17
References 17
NOMENCLATURE
AAC average anflual costs
B mòulded breadth
metacentre above centre of buoyancy
Gb block cOefficient
Cm rnidshipsection coefficient
C waterplane coefficient
CRF capital recovery factor
D. moúlded depth
D depth reqúired by volume requirements D depth requfted by freeboaM tegulations
depth according to stability calculation
F
minimum freebQard GM metacentric heightHP propulsive power
centre of buoyancy above base
centre of gravity above base L Lu,, length between perpendiculars
NPV net present value
REMUN remunerativeness. RFR required freight rate
Re Reynolds nümber
T mouldéd draught
Tm draught resiriction
V service speed
A displacemeht weight
i Introduction
The last few years significant progress has been made in the application öf electronic computers to
prelimi-nary ship design.
In many countries computer programs were devel-oped to handle the problems of integrated design. In these programs both technical and economical calculations are carried out.
The connection between ship design and economics
offers the possibility of studying the feasibility of
alter-native designs both on technical and economical
aspects.
Different types of computer programs for prelimi-nary ship design can be indicated:
i Simple straightforward programs
With these programs, which contain rough estimates for weights, power, capacities and economics, large numbers of variations can be generated.
In many cases optimization calculations are carried out to find the most ecOnomical ship.
For the determination of basic requirements as size and speed of the ship these programs can successfully be used. These programs are also quite suitable for
studying iteration systems and optimization techmques
For examples of this type of program see referen-ces [1] through 4].
2 Programs for studying ship econocs
These programs contain detailed calculations for costs and ship operations. As mOst of these programs have been developed for the analysis or prediction of economics of existing ships, only the most essentiäl technical calculations are carried out.
Good examples are two programs which are devel-oped at the Netherlands Ship Model Basin (NSMB):
- liner ship operation simulation and
- statistical determination of the economics of
tramp-ships.
3 Detailed programs for solving single technical
design problems
These programs, as e.g. resistance prediction, cargo hold volumé approximatiòn and preliminary screw
design are frequently used in ship design practice.
As both input and Output for such programs are limited, these programs are very suitable for use on terminals connected by telephone lines to a computer. the accuracy of the results is in most cases sufficient for preliminary design purposes.
4 Fully integrated detailed programs for preliminary
ship design and analysis
This type of program,. for examples see [5, 6] and [7],
can be seen as a combihation of the programs
de-scribed under 2 and 3.
The development of such programs can be described shortly as:
programs as mentioned tinder 3 are selected or
developed to form the basic material of the program;
these programs are modularly arranged as Algol procedures or subroutines;
the execution of the subroutines in the-right sequence
is organized in a main program;
- a fast converging iteration system is devèloped to attune-the design parameters to each other;
- a fairly accurate economical program as mentioned
under 2 is added to judge the design results.
At the NSMB two computer prQgrams have been
devel-oped that are intended to be of the type mentioned under 4. These programs are in the following referred to as the "design program" and the -"analysis pro-gram".
COMPUTER PROGRAMS FOR THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
OF GENERAL CARGO SHIPS
by
Ir. J. HOLTROP
Summary 'J
A description is given of two computer programs-which can be used for the preliminary design of general cargo ships. Both prOgrams contain technical and economical calculations which offers the possibility that the economics of alternative designs can be regarded
quickly.
The first program is a design program and it can be used for the determination of the most relevant particulars of a ship The second prOgram can be used for the analysis of existing ships.
The purposes for which! the programs can be used are: design program:
- Basic ship design development, including the selec-tion Of main dimensions and predicselec-tion of ship
economics.
As the processing time amounts to about 3 minutes for every design, the number of variations is practi-cally restricted, this impliès that basic requirements as size and speed are to be pre-determined.
analysis program:
- Techmcal and economical analysis of existing ships - Checking of accuracy of typical economical and
technical calculations.
Studying of consequences of alterations of ship
design parameters.
- For ships that are to be designed by means of the design program, corrections for vanous calculations
can be determined by analysing comparable ships. Both the design program and the. analysis program are
written in Algol-60 and äan be used on thç NSMB's
CDC-3300 computer.
2 StrUcture of the programs
As a starting point for further development use has been made of the work f Gallin[5, 6].
Although a good working tool for designers, several
directións for improvement could be indicated. In. Gallin's design program the determination of two basic ship dimensions, the length and the block coefficient is based upon empirical relationships:
length: L Lminimum
LIB ? (LIB)minimum
block coefficient: C,, = f (Froude number) The NSMB design program, however, works with a design routine for constañt length and block
coeffi-cient (ig 1).
The determination of the length and block coeffi-cient is carried out by generating a number of designs
with L- and Cb-values systematically varied.
By plotting the economical results the designer can
choose the most feasible ship
This can also be done automatically, by using the optimization procedure which is incorporated in the program for this purpose.
As the .stepwise iteration system which is used in Gallin's program is a slow converging one, a new iteration system has. been developed for the NSMB
design program.
and
TECHNICAL. DESIGN DATA -BASIC REQUIREMENTS -SPECIFICATiONS -RESTRICTIONS -INITIAL VALUES -INTERVENTION VALUES -DIRECTING VALUES -ENGINE CATALOGUE
CHA NGE LAND OR Cb I-BUILDINGCOST DATA -MATERIAL COSTS -LABOUR COSTS -OVERHEAD INPUT DATA DESIGN PROGRAM FOR CONSTANT L ANDCb YES -( NEXT L OR Cb
Fig. 1. Design program and econonücs for general cargo ships.
This iteration system, a directing model, can be regarded as a cybernetical system. The details of this
fast converging system will be discussed in section 3.
BUILDINGCOST DATA -MATERIAL COSTS -LABOUR COSTS -OVERHEAD TECHNICAL CALCULATIONS CARGOHOLD CAPACITIES
- WEIGHTS OF STEEL,OUTFIT AND MACHINERY - CENTRES OF GRAVITY AND STABILITY
- FREEBOARD RULES
- RESISTANCE AND PROPULSION
-CAPITAL COSTS -FIXED COSTS -ROUTE DATA -FUEL COSTS -'FREIGHT RATES -OPERATION SIMULATION
Fig. 2. Program for the analysis of existing ships.
ECONOMICAL DATA
OÑL TECHN. CALC.? Y ES
BULL DIN GCO ST C A LCÚ LA TION
JNO SIMULATION 7 ES
ISIMULATION OF
SHIP OPERATIONS
fECONOMICAL ResULTSf
INPUT DATA ECONOMICAL DATA -CAPITAL COSTS -FIXED COSTS -'ROUTE DATA -FUEL COSTS -FREIGHT RATES -OPERATION SIMULATION TECHNICAL DATA -PARTICULARS OF SHIP ANDENGINE -SPECIFICATIONS -OIRECTING VALUES J0NLYTECHN CALC? Y ES B U IL DING COST CALCULATION YES NO SIMULATION SIMULATION OF OPERATIONS ECONOMICAL RESULTS
The analysis program does not contain an iteration
system (Fig. 2).
As the particulars of the ship are input data, no
iterative determination of dimensions has to be carried out.
The structure of the analysis program can roughly be described as a design program without the iteration
loops.
In the analysis program the same technical calcula-tions are carried out as in the design program, the differences between actual and calculated ship char-acteristics are determined and, if desired, economical calculations can be made.
3 Description of the design program
By means of directives the designer indicates whether complete design and economical calculations or only
technical calculations are to be made.
As shown in the simplified flow diagram (Fig. 3), the
design process is based upon two separate iteration
systems:
- a directing model for the determination of the
trans-verse dimensions
and
- a conventional iteration system for the weight,
power and trim calculations.
IINIT1AL VALUES BDT.HP INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT I
I
I---
I TRIML.Cø IICARGO HOLD VOLUME I
STABIL î Y (B/b)5
IDIRECTING MODEL..9.D.T I
POWER CALCULATION
IENGINE CATALOGUE I
ILENGTH OF ENGINE ROOM I
WEIGHTS CENTRES OF GRAV.
WEIGHTS POWER AND TRIM
0.1< ? >NO
Fig. 3. Design program for constant length and block coeffi-dent.
The program starts with reading the technical design input data.
Before starting with the technical calculations a rough estimate is made of displacement, hold length,
engine room length, propulsive power, auxiliary power,
breadth, depth, draught, height of centre of gravity above baseline and longitudinal position of the centre
of buoyancy.
Internal arrangement
The program enters the calculation process by deter-mining the internal arrangement of the ship.
In this subprogram the number of transverse bulk-heads is determined according to Lloyd's rules; it has been made possible, however, to have additional or
fewer bulkheads.
The height of the double bottom is also determined in this subprogram. For the double bottom height the minimum according to Lloyd's rules is chosen if this results in sufficient capacity for fuel, fresh water and clean water ballast.
The double bottom height can be increased,
how-ever, by means of an input directive. In the
sub-program for the internal arrangement also the lengths of cargo holds and shaft tunnel are determined.
Fuel capacities
From the service speed, the range, the power installed and the specific fuel consumptions, the fuel capacities
and weights are calculated.
The next steps which are carried out by the computer are the calculation of the minimum freeboard, the computation of the cargo hold volume and the exe-cution of the stability subprogram.
Freeboard
The minimum freeboard is calculated according to the internationally adopted regulations of 1966, [8].
Corrections for block coefficient, depth, shear and length and height of superstructures are taken into
account.
Cargo hold volume
The cargo hold volume is approximated according to the method of Woortman and de Ranitz [9].
The vertical position of the centres of gravity of both bale- and grainspace are computèd with this
method too.
A calculation of the longitudinal position of the centre of gravity of the cargo space has been added to
this method.
FUEL CAPACITIES
lo
This latter calculation is based upon the
dimension-less cargo volume curves and the corrections for
bulk-head position used in Woortman and de Ramtz s
method.
Stability
The subprogram fòr stability considers the initial
stability Only.
Two typical conditions are discerned:
Condition 1: homogeneously ioa4ed with füel an4 fresh water on board
ConditiOn 2: hOmogeneously loaded without fuel and, fresh water.
Use is made of the basic stability equation:
B2
GM= KB+BMKG C1T±2 KG
T C,,in which the coefficients C1 and C2 are approximated
by:
C1 0.6903-0.169
- 0.l5Gm+0.25cë
C2 = 0.0O888± 0.29926 C.± O.O6335 Ç2
For the determination of the most desirable breadth -depth ratio (BiD)5 the maximum of the following
three stability criteria is used
GMCOfldIlOfl + GIvía110 2 3% breadth 2
GlWCOfldjOfl I GM1,,jnjrnnin (input datum)
2 0.5% breadth
It has been assumedthat the difference GMCOfldjt1Ofl
-GMconditlon2 equals the rise òf the centre of gravity due
to fuel consumption. The desirable breadth - depth ratio is calculated as tollows:
CB2
2 TC,, C1 T/D C'2 (BID)5GM KG/D
o (BID)5 (T/D)cb B (B/b)5 -Substitutión of Q = GM/B (B/b)3 yields: and multiplication byC1vT/D - 7/D - Q.(B/D)3 + Tcb132 0
(BID)5 (T/D)C,, 4C1 C24C2 7D
2C2\
C,, CbT/D(only the positive root in case of normal ship dimen
sions)
As T/D and KG/P are fairly constant the calculated (B/P)5 is a good approximation..
Directing model for transverse, dimensions
The results of the stability, cargo hold volume and freeboard calcuÏations are combined in the directing model. (Fig. 4 and 5). With this model improved values for the transverse dimensións are determined.
B
D
Fig. 4. Directing model for transverse dimensiOns.
Using Archimedes' law the breadth B can be ex-pressed by a hyperbolic function of the draught T:
BT
-1
LCbi.O29
(1)(4 displacement, which is constant during one ite-ration)
The depth D3 required for stability can also be
ex-pressed by a hyperbolic functiOn of T:
D3=
B 4(BID)3
L T
b 1.029 (B/D)The depth D1, necessary to comply with the freeboard
rules, can be represented by a linear function of T:
(2)
The depth D necessitated by the cargo volume
require-ments can also be expressed by a linear formula:
D
(AD) LTc'b 1.029
(4)4
In this formula (BD) is the required breadth-depth
product found by
(BD) capacity required B D.
capacity calculáted
Combined With a restriction in draught
Tm T (5)
the above-mentioned formulas (1) through (5) deter
mine one of four possible basic design cases.
By regarding the intersection points, i through 4 in Fig. 4, the computer itself selects the appropriáte design case. The four design cases are represented in
Fig. 5.
In the first case the minmium freeboard énsures sufficient cargo hold volume. Improved values for B, T and D are found by solving the set of equations
(1), (2) and (3).
In the second case the draught has to be restricted and improved values for the breadth and depth are
foünd by solving the set of equations (1), (3) and (5).
F
1'
//
/
F17
Fig. 5. Four basic design cases
dimensions).
of directing model (transverse
In the third and the fourth case the ship has to be
designed with extra freeboard; the cargo hold volUme
would be too small if the minimum freeboard would
have been applied.
By solving the set of equations (1), (2) and (4) for case three and equations (1), (4) and (5) for case four,
better values for B, T and D are found.
Propulsion
The calculation of the propulsive power is carried out in several subprograms;
- resistance calculation wake and thrust deduction - preliminary screw design
-, selection of appropriale engine from a catalogue In the p.ower calculation 3 types of propulsion systems can beconsid.ered:
- for single screw ships: low speed diesel engines with
a direct driven screw
- for single screw ships: medium speed diesel engines
with 'a reduction geariñg
- for twin screw ships: medium speed .diesel engines
with a reduction gearing
In the resistance calculation the frictional resistance is
calculated with the ITC - 1957 formula:
0.075
C (Re Reynolds number)
(log Re-2)2
For the determination of the residuary resistance Lap's
method [10] has been modified
From tank results new residuary resistance
coeffi-ciènts have been derived and corrections for the
length-breadth ratio and the position of the centte of buoy-ancy have been determined.
The wake and thrust deduction are determined by empirical formulas [11, 12, 13].
.A preliminary propeller design ïs carried out using the B-series polynomials for the thrust and torque
coefficients [14, 15].
In this subprogram for screw design several local iteration systems and optimization routines are
in-corporated.
If the screw is direct-driven by a loW speed engine, the propeller diameter is found by optimizing the propulsive efficiency; in case of a reduction gearing the number of revolutions of the screw is determined by optimizing the screw efficiency.
In the latter case the screw diameter is taken as large as possible.
çata-12
logue is illustrated for the case of the direct-driven
screw.
The different engines are assumed to have constant
torque at various rotative speeds. This implies that the
engines can be represented by triangles in the RPM-HP-diagram of Fig. 6. The working point W is dèter-mined by means of a fast converging root-finding
F P WORKING POINT IS WENGiNEN!4 IS CHOSEN
'R PM
Fig. 6. Selection of appropriate low speed engine from a
cata-logue.
method. The power calculations are terminated with a
speed prediction.
In the case of a given service speed the trial speed is predicted; reversely the service speed is predicted when the trial speed is given as an input datum.
Both for the power dalculation and the speed pre-diction different loading conditions can be regarded In the speed prediction routine, the changed hydro-dynamic circumstances of the screw and the engine
characteristics are considered.
Length of engine room
From the engine catalogue both the maiñ' dimensions of the propulsion installation and the costs of the engine are known; the first make it possible to deter-mine the length of the engine room, while the engine costs can be used in the economical part of the
pro-gram.
If the machinery, space is situated aft, both the breadth of the engine seating and the shipform are taken into account when calculating the length of the
engine room.
Weights, centres of gravity and trim
The weight of the ship is calculated in three sub-programs:
- steel weight,
- weight of outfit and equipment, - weight of madiinery.
The steel weight calculation is carried out according to Carstens' method [16].
The weights of outfit, equipment and machinery are
calculated according to the method used by Gallin [5].
In this method the weights of outfit, equipment and machinery are distributed over 44 groups.
For eaôh group the weight is expressed by one or more polynomials.
As the steel weight is distributed over 8 weight
groups, 52groups are considered. These weight groups
are used both in the centre of gravity calculation as well as in the building-cost subprogram.
The trim is calculated after the determination of
cen-tres of gravity in height and in length.
Both for trim by the stern and trim by the head limitations can be given as input data. If there is a horizontal distance between the optimum position of the centre of buoyancy and the longitudinal centre of gravity, the first step to avoid trim is to change the double bottom arrangement.
The position of the clean water ballast tanks is chosen in such a way that the centre of gravity moves in the direction of the optimum LCB. If this measure yields an insufficient result, the centre of buoyancy is moved in the direction of the centre of gravity to keep the total trim within the allowable limits.
The whole design process is repeated if the displace-ment calculated from the total Weight differs more than
5 tons from the original displacement. The process is
repeated too? if the power or the trim differs too much from the values, previously calculated.
4 Description of the program for analysing ships
The technical input data are completely different from the data used for the design program: instead of re-quirements the particulars of the ship are to be given. With these ship characteristics technical calculations are carried out If some particulars of the skip are unknoWn to the designer, the analysis program can still be used.
In this case the missing values are estimated by
empirical fòrrnulas.
Missing data can be: - form parameters, - fuel capacities, - screw characteristics.
The program starts by calculating the cargo hold volume according to the method of Woortman and de
Ranitz [9].
Except fôr the determination of the longitudinal position of the centre of gravity the calculation is the same as the cargo capacity calculation in the design progräm. The results of this computation are
com-pared with the cargo capacity input data and the
differences are printed out.
Next the weights are estimated according to the same routines as used in the design program [5, 16].
In this case too the determination of the longitudinal position of the centre of gravity is omitted.
Generally, the total weight of the ship as calculated
by the weight calculation will differ from the displace-ment.
This difference in weight can be eliminated by:
- a correction of the lightweight,
- a correction of the deadweight of the ship,
-
a corrèction that has to be applied to the block
coefficieïit.The läst case occurs when the block coefficient of the analysed ship is unknown and in that case the block
coefficient is corrected.
What correction has to be applied is given as an input directive. The weight calculation is followed by the estimation of the vertical position of the centre of
gravity.
The stability is calculated using the same formulas as in the design program.
As in the anälysis program the installed power is an
input datum, the power calculation is somewhat
different ftom the calculation method used in the
de-sign program.
After calculating the resistance of the ship the screw design is carried out.
-The optimization of the screw diameter or the num-ber of revolutions is optional in the analysis program. The difference between calculated required horse-power and actually installed horse-power, which is an input datum, is considered to be the service allowance. The formulas according to which the power calculation is carried out are the same as in the design program.
After the results are printed, economical calculations can follow.
5 Economical part of the program
The economical part of both the design and analysis program is quite the same.
-This offers the possibility that for both programs the same economical input data can be used. First the
building-costs are calculated. This cost calculation is based upon thè weight groups from the wèight
calcu-lation.
For every group the specific material costs, man-hours and labour costs are to be given as input data.
Factors for overhead and general costs are also to be provided in the input.
The capital charges are calculated for both borrowed
and own capital and are based upon annuity
For the calculation of the annuity factor the time änd the interest rate are to be given as input data.
The other fixed costs include the insurance pre-miums, maintenance and repair costs, costs for crew
wages, victualling and shipowner's overhead.
For the most commonly used insurances the
pre-miums are to be given as input data. The same method
as used by Gallin has been followed in the determina-tion of maintenance and repair costs.
In this method the repair costs increase every four years coherent with the classification surveys.
-All the above-mentioned costs are independent of the operations of the ship.
5.1 Simulatioñ model for ship-operations
The variable operating costs are determined in a
simulatiOn model. In this model the costs of fuel, fresh water, the port and canal dues and the freight revenuesare calculated. Also the cargo handling costs can b
considered.
For every harbour the quantity of the available cargo
with its stowing factor is to be provided as an input
datum.
The bunkering - loading - and discharging routine,
which is executed for every port, works as follows:
I. The quantities of heavy oil, diesel oil and lubri-cating oil needed for the voyage to the next port
are calculated.
These values are compared with the amounts of
fuel already on board.
If the necessary quantity exceeds the quantity in the
tanks, fuel oil is bunkered.
Cargo is taken on board; both in the case the re-qúired volume exceeds the cargo hold capacity
and in the case the draught would exceed the
maximum allowable draught the amount of loaded cargo is limited.
In case the ship is not yet down to her mark and the fuel tanks are not full, additional bunkering of both
heavy oil and diesel oil will be carried out if fuel prices are comparatively low.
The resulting displacement is calculated.
14
and the revenues from freight transportation are
computed.
Based upon the calculated displacement, the
hrse-power installed and the screw characteritics the sailing
speed is calculated.
For the speed calculation the same routine is used as in the speed prediction subprogram in the design
program.
In this speed determination both the horsepower and the number of revolutions of the screw are
deter-mined.
The performance of controllable pitch propellers can also be calcúlated in the speed prediction sub-program of the analysis sub-program.
Before re-entering the bunkering-loading- and dis-charging routine for the next port, the consumed
amounts of fuel are calculated..
5.2 Calculation of economical results
At the end of both the design and the analysis program economical parameters are calculated. See e.g. [21, 22,
23].
In order to combine the fixed costs and the costs of the operation, the costs and revenues as calculated in the simulation model are converted t a yearly base.
The economical parameters which are computed are:
- AAC = average annual costs fixed costs +
oper-ating costs
-- RFR = requiredfreight rate =
AAC
transported cargo per year
- PROFIT = yearly profit = revenues - AAC CRF = capital recovery factor =
revenuesyearly costs (capital charges excluded) investment
. PROFIT
- REMUN = remunerativeness =
investment
- NPV = net present válue present worth
of profit life of ship
(in this case, where no discounted cashfloW is com
PROFIT
puted, NPV can be approximated by
annuity factor
6 Input for the programs
The preparation of the input for both programs Is a
rather extensive task
However, several faciltiës exist:
- the economical input for boththe design- and the analysis program is interchangeable,
- optionally, the input data are printed, out for
ref-erence. This printing, of which examples are given for illustration in the appendix, is in the same form as the input data forms,
- not-relevant input data can be provided by the
NSMB.7 Examples
Design calculations have been made with input data derived from existing ships. First, length and block coefficient variations have been carried out for a 925 ton deadweight coaster.
Secondly, design and ecoomical calculations have been made with input data derived from the 'Ham-monja', a 9,900 ton, 21.2 knot cargo liner.
Finally, technical and economical calculations were
made with the analysis program for a 72,500 ton dead-weight bulkcarrier.
7.1 VariatiOn study of a coaster
Input data were derived from the m.s. 'Taras', a 925 ton coaster. With these chäracteristics and some addi-tional input data a length and a block coefficient variation has been made by using the design program. To measure the economical performances of the variants a simulation calculation has been carried out for every alternative design.
The principal particulars of the 'Taras' are given in
Table I.
Table I. Main particulars of the m.s. 'Taras'
The results of the length variation are given in Fig.
7 and 8.
Considering the technical parameters, Fig. 7, it will be clear that the breadth decreases when making the
ship longer.
Ships longer than 59 metres have miñimum stability,
(this can be seen from the draught curve which diverts
from T, at this length). Also the depth decreases
when makiñg the ship longer which results in a lower centre of gravity.. SQ the breadth can still decrease in this region as well. All these variants have the same cargo hold volume and in thi case the ships have
additional freeboard'. Lpp = 59.74 rn deadweight = 925 ton B 9.80m lightweight = 670 ton
T. = 3.69m
bale space = 60014 ft3D = 5.79m
power = 750 HP (metric) V = 10.75 kt RPM = 250 Cb = 0.118C = 0.83
FR. Il/TON) A.AC. tH.ht) Î L25.T .1.2.106 5.106
Fig. 8. Length variation of the m.s. 'Taras' - economical
para-theters. 4
3 The power decreases when making the ship longer.
This effect is caused not only by the decrease in breadth
but also by the increasing length, resulting in a lower
Frotidé ñufñber;
The discontinuities in the power, the lightweight,
the breadth and the depth curves are caused by the
application of an engine catalogue with discrete
values for power, engine weights and engine dimen
sions.
Regarding the economical results of the length
varia-tiòn, Fig. 8, the following tendencies can be indicated: The shape of the building cost curve is similar to the
shape df bth the power and the lightweight curve
from Fig. 7.
Also in this case the discontinuities are caused by the application of the engine catalogue with discrete values for engine prices. The curye for the average annual costs (AAC) has a
inimtim for a Ienth of
61 metres. As the AAC is mainly determined by the capital charges and the fuel costs it is clear that the AAC-rniniinum is situated between the miniia in the building cost añd the power curve.
Considering the economical criteria whih are in-fluenced by the amount of transported cargo, it can be noticed that the optimum length is somewhat greater
than 61 metres.
This is caused by the effect of lower fuel consump. tion for the longer ships Instead of fuel, cargo can be transported and thi results in higher revenues.. -For a length of .59.74 th a blOck cOefficient variation
häs been made.
DEADWEIGHT 925 TON SPEED 10.75 KNOTS
C, 0.718
CARGO CAP. 60014 CU.FT I
\
.--oUrP
--T,,6,3.69m -R. (H. 45 BUILDIÑGCOSTS - j-
---- . .---- - -3_5;7
C.RF ---REl e ._ A.A.C. -- -- - . -REMUNERATiVENESS - -10 -DEADWEIGHTE72T
925 TON/
ONT-D---
---
- -T- -- ---_1:
56 58 60 62 64 66 69 LENGTH (en) 00 0.63 0.65 067 0.69 071 0.73 CbFig. 9. Block coefficieñt variâtion of the m.5. 'Taras'
-tech-nical parameters.
54 5E 8 60 62 64 66 6
---LENGTH (n)=-W
Fig. 7. Length variation of the- m.s. 'Taras' - technical para-meters. IGHT.-WEIGHT (TON) POWER IlPm.t,) ¶000 00 00 00 00 500 00 300 12 9 7 6 ¶2 B D T (m) 10 9 e 7 5 4 BUILDING COSTS (H.fl) N.P.V. (N.E I) 3.5.10' 3.106 2.5.10' 2.106 1.5lO' .0' LIGHT-WEIGHT (TON) powER 1000 900 800 00 00 00 00 00
16
It appears that with increasing block coefficient the breadth decreases (Fig. 9). Ships with Cb greater than 0.71 have minimum stability in this region, so the breadth cannot decrease much more when making the
ship fuller.
The power curve has a minimum at Cb = 0.7. The increase of the propulsive power when Cb decreases
is caused by increasing breaçlth. The lightweight curve
is mainly determined by the breadth curve. The dis-continuities again are due to the application of the
engine catalogue.
The economical results of the block coeffidient variation are shown in Fig. 10.
Also in this case the average annual cost curve has a minimum which is situated between the minima in the power and the lightweight curve. From the Figs. 8 and 10 can be concluded that a slightly longer and
finer ship would be more profitable.
Fig. 10. Block coefficient variation of the m.s. 'Taras' - eco-nomia1 parameters.
7.2 Design calculations for a fast cargo liner
Design calculations 'were ma4e with data derived from the 'Hammonia', a 9,900 ton deadweight, 21.2
knot cargo liner [17].
The principal particulars of the 'Hammonia' are
given in Täble II.
The compùter results obtained by úsing the design program are given in Appendix A. With these results
also the complete input is given.
Table II. Màin particulars of the m.s. 'Hammoñia'.
Fairly good agreement between the actual and cal-culated values was found in this case.
7.3 Analysis of a bulkcarrier
In order to illustrate the possibilities of the analysis program, calculations were carried out with data
derived from a 72,500 ton bulkcarrier.
Although the program has not been developed to handle the specific features of bulkcarriers, these cal-culations were made to compare the results from the
building cost calculation with the published figures fOr
building costs in 'The Motor Ship' [18, 19, 20]. The result is given in Fig. il (in this diagram the rate of
exchange of 1967 is used, this implies that the effect of
the devaluation of the British pound, 14.3% has not been incotporated).
To stUdy the economics of the application' of a controllable pitch propeller, the simulation calcula-tion has been carried out for both a convencalcula-tional fixed-blade screw and a C.P. screw (Fig. 12). As the
speed of the ship in off-design conditions is higher fòr
the C P screw ship, the annual transport capacity will also be higher which results in higher revenues.
The fuel costs for the C.P. screw ship, however, are
also higher because of the possibility of runmng at full
power in all conditions.
The maximum extra investment that can be made to keep the ship with the C.P. screw competitive, with
BUlL DIN G C O STS MILLION H.FL. - 1967 --- 1966 1969 - CALCULATED BV»4ALYSIS PROS. - CALCULATED BV»4ALYSIS PROS. BV»4ALYSIS PROS. Î BUlLDING COSTS (Hf I.) NkV. (H.tL) 3.5.10' 3 I0' 2.5.10e 2.106 1.5 10' 1.106 0.5.10' R.FR. (H filiO 45 40 35 N) 13.10' AAC (H.f L) l.25IÒ' 1.2.10' !DÏNGCSTS RF.R
----t
20f CRE 15 10 REM. (porc.) R.F.RE MIJNEfiATI VENESS
O 1.15.10 1.1.10 063 065 0.67 0.69 0.71 073 Cb Lpp = 152.25 m deadweight = 9900 ton
B = 22.00m
Vsevjce 21.2 knotD = 13.15m
grainspace 751500 ft'T =
8.67m power = 18400 HP (metric) 40 30 20 ¶0References
MANDEL, P., and R. LEOPOLD, Optimization methods ap-plied to ship design. Transactions SNAME, I 966.
MURPHY, R. D., D. J. SABAT sud R. J. TAYLOR, Least cost
ship characteristic by computer techniques. Mariné Tech-nology, April 1965.
BENFORD, H., The practical application of economics to merchant ship design. Marine Technology, January 1967. SATO, S., Effect of principal dimensiöns on weight and cost of large ships. Paper presented at the New York
Metro-17 politan Section of the SNAME, February 1967.
GALLIN, C., Bestimmung der Einflüsse von Entwuth- und Reederei Kenngrossen auf die Wirtschaftlichkeit emes
Schiffes unter Emsatz elektronischer Rechenanlagen Doctor's thesis, Vienna 1967.
GALLIN, C, Entwurf wirtschaftlicher Schiffe mittels
Elek-is tronenrechner. Jahrbuch der Schiffbautechnischen Geselle schaft l967.
SCHARNOWSKI1 H. and K. PUCHSTEIN, System für die
Pro-jèkiierung von Schiffen unter weitgehender Añwendung der EDV. Seewirtschaft, Vol. 1, ño. 2 (1969).
HAM, I. VAN DER, Uitwatering en holtebepaling van
vracht-schepen bij het voorontwerp. Schip en Werf, VoI. 35, no. 20
(1968).
WOORTMAN, J. J. and F. J. DE R.Ar'lrrz, Graaninhoud en
bu-behorend zwaartepunt in het voorontwerpstadium. Schip en Werf, Vol. 34, no 9 (1967).
L, A. J. W, Diagrams for determining the resistance of smgle screw ships Publication no 118 of the NSMB Inter national Shipbüilding Progress, Vol. 1, nO. 4 (1954). HARVALD, S. A., Wake of merchant ships. Doctor's thesis. The Danich technical press, Copenhagen 1950.
AsÏRuP, N. C. and A ARI, Statistisk analyse av fremdrifts-däta fia forsøk med skipsmodeller. NTH-Trondheim. Skips-modelitankens Meddelelse no. 98, May 1967;
MiaN, J. D. VAN, Fundamentals of ship resistlnre and propulsion, part B: Propulsion. Publication no. I 32a of the
NSMB.
LA IÑ,W; P. A. VAN, J. flvAN MANEN and M. W. C.
OOSTERVELD The Wagenmgen B-screw senes Transactions
SNAME, 1969, also in: Schip en Werf, Vol. 37, no. 5 and
no. 6 (1970).
AUF'M KELLER, J., Enige aspecten bu het ontwerpen van scheepsschroeven. Schip en Werf, Vol. 33, nr. 24(1966). CARSTENS, H., Ein neues Verfa:hren zur Bestimmung des Stahlgewichts von Seeschiffen. Hansa, Vol. 104, STG-Sonderheft, November 1967.
FETZLAFF, J., A. GRÖSCFIL and H. D. ALBERS, m.s. 'H
monja. Schiff und Hafen, Vol. 17, no. 6 (1965).
British shipbuilding costs: November 1967. The Motor Ship, VOl. 48, Special Survey, November 1967.
British shipbuilding costs: September 1968. The Motor Ship
VOl. 49, Special Survey, September 1968.
British shibuiiding costs October 1969. The Motor Ship, VOI. 50, Special Survey, November 1969.
21; Goss, R. , Economic criteria for optimal ship design.
Transactions RINA, 1965.
BENFORD, H., General cargo ship, economics and design.
University of Michigan, 1962.
BENFORD, H., On the rational selection of ship size. Paper for the Pan American Congress of Naval Architecture and Marine Transportation. Rio de Janeiro, 1966.
goDo 'OWEN IPmaj 80_00 OOO 6000 5000 CR SCREW
\,,
. -7
--I
- .--' « o/
' P. SCREW FIXED BLSCR. ÇOMPARISION-NET-PRES.VAL. :4972o0o.1jI. 4904000 NfL C C o -- -68000 Nil - - - 60000 - - 80000 1g SPEED (KNOTS) 1g 15.75 '5 OISLACEMENT (TON)Fig. 12. Propeller performance of a 72,500 ton bulkcarrier.
the conventionally propelled ship, can be calculated
as the difference in NPV between the two variants. In this example the difference in investment between
the two propulsion types may nôt exceed Hfl. 4,972,000-Hfl. 4,904,000 = Hfl. 68,000 The computer results are given in Appendix B to-gether with the technical input data.
8 Suggestio for fUrther development
As these NSMB còmputer programs are suitable fór conventional cargo ships only, an obvious extension would be the development of similar programs for
other ship types.
In this connection design programs for bulkcarriers and for tankers have been developed.
In the near future also a program for containerships
will be developed.
Acknowledgement
The valuable support of ProL Dr. Ç. Gallin is
18
Appendix A
Computer results of the m.s. 'Hammonia' (Design program).
-INPUT DATA- CONTROL kAMMONIA A 21 KNOTS 10000 TON DEADWEIGHT CARGO LINER (SUH-1g65.PAG.505)
TYPE OF SHIP '(A BULKCARRIE-R IS i A CÒNVENTIONAL CARGO SHIP IS O ) O
OPTIMIZATION / VARIAI-ION (OPI-IM. IS i. VARIATION IS O ) O
ÑO Or LENGTH VARIATIONS ( Ï EXTRA LENGTH IS 1.2 EXTRA LENGTHSIS 2. ,EÏC. ) O
NO OF BLOCK COEFFICIENT VARIATIONS C I EXTRA BLOCK VARIATION IS 1 ) O
LENGTH STEP (M) VOR VARIATION IN LENGTH (GREATER THANO) 5.000
BLOCK COEFF STEP FOR VARIATION IN BLOCK COEFFICIENT (GREATER THAN O ) O 0200
OPTIMIZATION CRITERION NUMBER C SEE DESCRIPTION OR PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION ) 2
TEST OUTPUT cor TEST OutPUt IS WANTED I ' IF ÑOT O I O OA DEADWEIGHT (TON) (IF NETTO ÓEADWEIGHT IS 0.DEAOWEIGHT OUGHT TO BEGREATER O) 990O
NETIO DEADWEIGHT (IF DEADWEIGHT IS O. THIS VALUE OUGHT TO BE GREATER THAN O I O REQUIRED TOTAL GRAIN CAPACITY (CUFT),IF O THEN BALE CAP. GÉATER 114AM O 751500
REQUIRED TOTAL BALE CAPACITY (CUfT) IF O THEN GRAIN CAP GREATER THAN O O
OPERATIÑG RANGE OF THE SHIP AT SERVICE SPEED AND INDICATED DISPLACEMENT(NMLS) 6000
REQUIRED TRIAL SPEED DISPLACEÇNT CAN HE INDICATED (KI) (MAY BE 0) 0 00
REQUIRÇD SERVICE SDEED,DISPL.CAN BE INOICATE-D,(KT).ONE OF THE SPEEDS MUST BE 0 21.20
NO OF SCREWS (ONE OR TWO) 1 OB
CAPACITY OF REFPIGÊATb HOLDS (CUFT) (THIS ITEM IS INCLUDED IN HOLD CAP.) 26410
CAPACITY Of CARGO DEEPTANKS (CUFT) (THIS ITEM IS INCLUOfO IN HOLD CAP ) 51440
DRAuGHT RESTRICTION (M) (MOULflED) 8.670
LENGTH RESRICTION (M) (LENGTH BETWEEN 170 000
TYPE PROPULSION PLANT,WITH RED1,CTION GEARING 0 WITHOUT.DIRECTLY DRIVEN 1 1
SERVICE ALLOWANCE (POWER TRIAL/POWER SERVICE) SEPV ALLOWANCE NOT GREATER 1 0 850
SCREW DIAMETER RESTNIC,TION t MAX.DIAMETER / MOULDED SUMMER DRAUGHT ) 0.715
APPLICAtIOÑ OF BULBOUS SOW 1, NO BULBOUS BOW 0 1 OC
OPEN-SHELTERDEC$< SHIP (FREEBOAPD DECK IS SECOND DECK) 1. ELSE O
TWEENDECK HEIGHT MAIN OECK-SHELTEROECK(M) IF NOT AN OPEN SHELT O SHIP 0 2 900
IF NORMAL, SHEER IS APPLIED 1 IF SHEER IS NOT APPLIED O O
NO OF CONTINUOUS DECKS (INTEGER NUMBERS APPLICABLE ONLY ) 3 VALU-E FOR ARRANGING THE NUMBER OF WATERTIGHT BULKHEADS AND HOLDS (SEE DESCRIPTION) 1
IF CÓNSTRUCTION DRAUGHt IS REEBOARD DRAUGHT 1 ELSE.FREEB.DR.GREATER CONSTR.DR.O O
NO OF LONGITUDINAL BULKHEADS . 0.000
LENGTH OF FORCASTLE EXCÊE-DING 0.O9*L (EXTRA LENGTH RELATED TO SHIP LENGTH) 0.140 00
LONG POOP. (Np OF HaLOS OVER WHICH POOP EXTENDS) (NOT NEGATIVE) O.ÖO
IF POOP EXTENDS OVER AFT PEAK THEN 1 IF NOT O O
LENGTH OF- BRIDGE SUPERSTRUCTURE: MINUS LENGTH ENGINE ROOM (M) 0.00
INTERNAL AMRANGEMEMT COEFF (Nfl OF HOLDS BETWEEN E R AND AFT PEAK(O<IA<1 ACC ) 0 60
-DISTANCE AFt PERPENDICIJLAR-.AFTQEAKBULK'IEAD RELATED TOLENGTH 0.040
DISTANCE EURE PERPENÓICULARCOLLÍSSIOM BULKHEAD-RELATED O LENGTH 0.052
TWEENDECK HEIGHT IN SUPFRSTRUCfURE (M) 2 570
RATIO VOLUME SMALL DECKHOUSES-L.B.H. (NEGATIVE VALUES ACCEPTED) 0.000 0E
RATIO HATCH LENGTH-HOLO LENOTH ( BETWEEN O AND 1) 0.683 RATIO HATCH BREADTH-BREAOTH OF SHIP( BETWEEN O AND 1) 0.318
HEIGHT OF HATCH COMING OF UPPERMOST DECK ABOVE DECK (M) 0.900
sA WORKING LOAD PER DENRCK SINGLE WORKING CONDITIDN ) (TON) 7.500
SAFE WORKING LOAD HEAVY CARGO GEAR (TON),IF THERE IS NONE- ..O 80.000
NÒ OF KINOPOSTS (MASTS) IN EXCESS OF TWICE THE NO OF CARGO HOLDS O
INUT DATA CONTROL HAMMONIA A 21 KNOÏS 10000 TON DEADWEIGHT CARGO LINER (SUH-1965,PAG.SOS) COEFFICIENÍ FOR PAIJIT AND COATING
(l.2
OR 2.1 ) 2.1NUMBER OF COATINGS (GEÑERALLY 4 OP S) 41
IF THERE IS EQUIPMENT FOR ORA!" CARRIAGE 1' IF NOT O
IF VERTICAL SIDE 8AÏTEP-JS ARE FITTED 1. IF NOT O
IF HORIZONTAL SIDE BATTENS ARE FITTED l.IF NOT O O
1F A WOODEN CEILING IS ITTEO i , IF NOT O O
IF A FIBREGLASS TANKTOP CEILING IS FITTED i !IF NOT O i
CAPAIT' CLEAN WAÎERBALLAST TANkS IN ÔOUBLE BOTTOM (PERC. OF DISPLACEMNT) 0.00 0G
NUMBER OF CREW-ÑEMBEPS 46
.NUMBE 0F' PASSENGERS (MAXIMUM IS 12) 12
WEIGHT OF CREW , PASSENGERS * LUGGAGE , VICTUALS AND UTENSILS (TON) SO
CAACITY OF FRESH WATER TANKS (OOUBLE BOTTOÑ ONLY) (fON OR M3) 98.0
NUMBER OF VIÇTUALLING SPACES 3
ADDITIONAL STEEL WEIGHT NUMBER i (TON) 300.00
CENTRE OF GRAy OF ADD STEEL WEIGHT 1 ABOVE BASE LINE (RELATED TO DEPTH) 0 100
ADDITIONAL STEEL WEIGHT NUMBER 2 (TON) 0.00 0K CENTRE OF GRAy. OF ADD. STEEL WEIGHT 2 ABOVE BASE LINE (RELATED TO DEPTH)
ADOITIOÑAL MACHINERY WIGHT (foN
CENTRE OF GRAy OF ADD MACH 9EIGHT ABOVE BASE LINE (RELATED TO DEPTH)
CENTRE OF GRAV. OF ADD. MAÇH. wEIGHt FORWAPU OF AFT PERP. (RELATED TO LENGTH) CONSTRUCTION TYPE COEFFÏCIENT U. 2 OR 3 ACCEPTED ONLY) (SEE DECRIPtIONí ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION AREA (IJLL) (RELATED TO TOTAL A?EA)
ICE STRENGTHENING WEIGAT AS PERCEAITAGE OF HULL STEEL WEIGHT NUNBER OF AUXILIARY ENGINES
NUMBER OF REVOLUTIONS PER MINUTE OF AUXILIARY ENGINES
SPECIFIC HEAVY OIL COSUi4PTIOÑ MAIN EÑGINE (KG/MHP.HÔUR)
SPECIF. DIESEL OIL CÔNUMPTION MAIN ENGINE (KG/MHPHOUR) SPECIF. DIESEL oIL CONSUMPTION AUXILIARY ENGINES (KG/MHP.HOUR)
SPECIF. LÜBRIC.OIL CONSUMPTION AIÑ ENGIE (KG/MHPHOÚR) SPECIE. LUBRIC.OIL CONSUMPTION AUXILIARY ENGINES (KG/MHP.HOUR)
MAXIMUM AcCEPTED RIM BY STEM C AS PERCENTAGE 0F LENGTH ) S.00 MAXIMUM ACCEPTED TRIM BY STERN C AS PERCENTAGE OF LENGTH ) 3.00 CENTRE OF GRAV. OF REFRIGERATED SPACES FORWARD OF AFT PERP. (RELATED'TO L) 0.100
CENTRE OFGRAV. OF CARGO DEEPTANKS FORWARD 0F AFT PEPP. (RELATED TO L) 0.500
MINIMAL ACCEPTED GM (HÒMOGENEOU5Y LOADED WITÑ FUEL ON BOARD) C M ) 0.50
DEADWEIGHT RATIO FOR SERVICE SPEED (If TRIAL SPEED=O INCREAS.BY..i)-- 2.000
DEADWEIGHT RATIO FOR TRIAL SPEED (IF SERVICE SPEED=0 INCREASE BY 1) 0,800 0K
NUMBER o ENGINES ÌN APPLIED CATALOGUE 23
NUMBER 0F SCREW BLADES C 4 OR 5 1 4
INITIAL VALUE FOR NUMOER OF REVOLUTIONS PER MINUTE 0F SCREW 115 OL
iNITIAL VALUE FOR LENGTH BETWEEN PP. (M) 152.250
INITIAL VALUE FOR BLOCK COEFFICIENT 0.5645
INITIAL VALUE FOR DEADWEIGHT-DISPLACEMENT RATIO 0 590
INITIAL VALUE FOR RATIO TRIAL SPEED/SERVICE SPEED 1.050
INTERVENTION VALUE FOR BLOCK CnEFFICIENT NO INTERVENTION O O 000
INTERVENTION VALUE FOR WATEPPLNE COEFF. ,NO TNTERYENTION 0 0.720
VALUE FOR INCREASING WATERPLANE COEFF (ADDITIONAL CW) 0 000
VALUE FOR INCREASING MIDSHIP CÛEFFICIENT ,N0 MODIFICATION0 0.000. 0M
INTERVENTION VALUE FOR HEIGHT OF CENTER GIRDER (DOUBLE BOTTOM HEIGHT) (M) 1.70
INTERVENTION VALUE FOR MIDSHIP COEFFICIENT WO INTERVENTION 0 0.0000
IF RESTRICTED OUTPUT IS REQUIRED 1 .FULL OUTPUT O O - ON
0.000 o 200 0.200 2 0.050 1.600 01 3 500 0.1680 0.1630 0.1750 o.00is 0.0190 OJ
20
BA
NR.CSTS MACM
MAÑHOUR COSTS (VARIOUS) STEEL AN OUTFIT (H.FL/HOUR) - 13.50
MANHOUR COSTS (VARIOUS) MACHINERY (H.FL/P4OUR) 13.50
MANHOUR COSTS (VARIUS) - GENEPAL (H.FL/HOUR) 13.50
MANHOUR COSTS DPAWIÑG ROOM (HFL/HOUP) 13.50
MANHOUR COSTS INSTALLATION OF AIN ENGINE (H.FL/HOUR) 14.10
MANHOURS INSTALL. OF MAIN ENGINE (IF ENGINE I NOT YARD FABRICATED 0) 0
COSTS OF MAIN EÑGIÑE H.FL) (IF ENGINE IS NOT YARD FABRICATED 0) 0
COEFFICIENT FOR GENERAL MATERIhL COSTS - - - 0.027 BI
COEFFIÇIEÑT FOR VARIOUS OVERHEAD COStS 0.038
COEFFICIENT FOR MAtERIAL TPANSPÒRTTIO.N COSTS 0.005
COEFFIIENT FOP INSURANCE COSTÇ . 0.003
COEFFICIENT FOR PRÓ/ISION COSTS 0.000
NUMBER dF SHIPS TO BE BUILD - -
-FACTOR FOR PRINT OUT IN FOREIGN CURRENCY (VALUE OF H.FL IN FOREIGN CURRENCY) 1.000 BU
WEIGHT GROUP
SPEC.MÀT.COST STL. MANHOURS SIL. HîFL/TON DER TON
MANHR.CSTS
H.FL/HR
SPEC.MACH.CST H.FL/TON
ÑANHOIJRS MACH MAN
PER TOÑ Ñ.FL/KR. 1 1100.00 20.00 12.60 1470.00 46.80 14.10 2 1670.00 50.00 12.60 8900.00 17.00 14.10 3 2200.00 295.00 12.60 4370.00 80.00 .14.10 4 -3710.00 543.00 12.60 4700.00 225.00 14.10 5 1000 00 60 00 12 60 1150 00 235 00 14 10 6 1200.00 160.00 12.60 4700.00 193.00 14.10 7 5800 00 0 00 12 60 2700 00 253 00 14 10 8 2450.00 230.00 12.60 3300.00 37.00 14.10 9 2750.00 34.00 12.60 1380.00 307.00 14.10 10 23i.0.00 30500 12.60 3000.00 351.00 14.10 11 610P.00 45.00 12.60 5800.00 140.00 14.10 12 2500.00 10.00 12.60 11270.00 143.Q0 14.10 13 1200.00 0.00 12.60 505000 285.00 14.10 14 4300.00 160.00 12.60 12150.00 213.00 14.10 15 8750 00 205 00 12 60 5530 00 29 00 04 10 16 4750 00 237 00 12 60 4100 00 135 00 14 10 17 2630.00 25.00 12.60 5980.00 208o00 14.10 18 3930.00 2.00 . 12.60 6700.00 100.00 14.10 100.00 28.00 12.60 10000.00 40.00 14.10 20 - 2650;00 175.00 12.60 13000.00 221.00 14.10 21 44.00 14.50 10500.00 0.00 14.10 22 100.00 240.00 14.10 23 s0000.ob 368.00 14.10 24 33800.00 343.00 14.10 25 10.00 100.00 14.10
INPUT DATA CONTROL HAMMONIA A 21 KNOTS 10000 TON DEADWEIGHT CARGO LINER (SUH-1965 PAG SOS) RATIO INVOICED STEEL/NET STEL (GREATER THAN 1! 1.210 RATIO WEIGHT OF SECTIOÑS/STEEL WEIGHT 0.137 RATIO WEIGHT OF WELDING MATERIAL/STEEL WEIGHT 0.021 RATIO WEIGHT OF CASTINGS / STEFL WEIGHT 0 019 SPECIFIC COST PLATE MATERIAL (H.FL/TON) 430.00
PECIFIC ÇOST SECTIONS (H.F[/TON) 530.00
SPECIFIC COST WELDING MATERIAL (H.FL/TON) Ip.0O
INPUT DATA CONTROL HAMMONIA À ? KNOTS 10000 TON -DEADWEIGHT CARGO LINER (SUH-1965,PAG.505)
ORTNAME PORT WAITING CARGO STO,WGE FREIGHT SEA RIVER HEAVY OIL OÏESEL OIL LUBRIC.ÓIL CARGO- HANDLING
TIPlE TIME FAC-TOP RATE OISTANCE DISTANCE' PPICE/TON PQICE /TPN PRICE /TON' COSTS PER TON
DAYS DAYS TON COST/TON H.FL/TON NMLS NÑLS H.EL/TON H.FL lION -H.FL /TÑ H.'FL/TON
ORT 1 10.00 1.00 2ò000 60.00 120.Ò0 5000 iO 65.00 100.00 900.00 lò.00 EF 1
ORT 2 10.00 00P 5000 9000 85.00 1000 5 55.00 100.00 850.00 15.00 EF 2 ORT 3 5.00 1.ô0 O -35.00 0.00 500 10 70.00 120.00 850.00 0.00 EF 3
ORT 4 8.00 1.00 7000 75.00 85.00 3000 1 70.00- - 85.00 900.00 10.00 EF 4
ORT S .00 1.00 3000 100.00 70.00 3000 10 65.00 100.00 900.00 8.00 EF 5
ERCENTAGE BORROWED CAPITAL
INTEREST RATE FOR BORROWED CAPITAL (PERÇ.)
INTEREST RATE FOR OWN CAPITAL (PERC.)
;CRAP VALyE AS PERCENTAGE OF B,JILDIÑGCOSIS 0 OF YEARS TO DEPRECIAE THE SHIP T'O SCRAP VALUE
80.00 9.00 9.00 5.00 14.00 ÇA
fEARLY REPAIR COSTS (FIRST FOUR YEARS) (H. FL/YEAR 300000
INC) EASE- r REPAIR COSTS DUE TO CLASSIFICATION SURVEYS (H.FL/4 YEARS) 20000
;ALARY F CREW H. FL/N AÑ/M ONTH 200Ò.00
OSTS OF VICTUALLING (H.FL/MAN/DAY) 7.00
DMINISTRATIVE COSTS (OVERHEAD SHIPOWNEP) (H.FL/YEAP/TDW) 60.OÓ
AINTENAÑCE COSTS PER YEAR ANO PER L.8.D (SHIP) (H. FL/M3/YEAP I 0,00 EB
4AINTENANCE COSTS PEP YEAR AND PER HORSEOWER (MACHINERY) (H.FL,HñEAR) 0,00
4INIMUM DEADWEIGHT TONNAGE FOR INSURANCE PREMIUM DETERMINATION (TON) 5000
4AXIMUM DEADWEIGHT TONNAGE FOR INSURANCE PREMIUM DETERMINATION (TON) 15000
4AXIMUM PREMIUM HULL AND MACHINERY INSURANCE, (PERC.) 2.00
IINIMUM PREMIUM HULL AND MACHINERY INSURANCE (PERC 1.5ó
'REMIUM COLLISION. INSURANCE (PERC.) 0.10
1AIMUM PREÑIUM-'JOTAL LOSSIÑTFRÈST INSURANCE (PERC.) 1.00
4INIMUM -PREMIUM TOTAL LOSS-INTEREST INSURANCE- (PERC.) 0,50 EX
IAXIMUM PREMIUM FREIGHT REVENUE INSURANCE (PEPC.) 1.50
IINIMUM PREMIUM FREIGHT REVENUE INSURANCE (PERC.) 1.00
'REÑIUÑ LUGGAGE INSUR4NCE (PERC.) 1.50
/ALUE OF LUGGAGE PER CREW MEMBER (H .FL) 2000
'ÑEÑIUÑ PRbTECTÍON AND INDEMNITY INSURANCE (PERC.) 3.50.
ATIO GROSS TONNAGE-DEADWEIGHT TONNAGE 0.8000
JO OF DAY THE 'SHI IS OUT OF SERVICE (DAYS/YEAR) 60
UVER AND CANAL SPEED OF THE SHIP (KÑOTS) 12.00 ED
OSTS OF FRESH WATER PER TON (H.FL/TON) 2.00
;OEFFICIENT FOR ACENCY ANO COMMISION COSTS 0.0500
'ORT AÑO CANAL FEES PER GROSS TÒN PER DAY (H. FL/ TON-kEG/DAY 0.300
'ORT AND CANAL FEES A)O PILOT COSTS PER CALL (H.FL/TON-REG)
22
HAMMONIA A j KNOTS ÍÒ000 TON DEADWEIGHT CARGO LINER (SUH-I965,PAGoSO5)
DESIGN RESULTS 0F SHIP NO I
PRINCIPAL PARTICULARS
LE!4GT$B.P. 152.25 M
BREADTH MOULDED) 21.97 M
OE?TH UPPER DECK (MOULDED) 13.37 M
DEPTH MAIN DECK (MOULDED) 10 47 M
DESIGN DRAUGHT (MOULDED) 8.67 M DEADWEIGHT AT DESIGN DRAUGHT 9900 TON
PYLOAD T DESIGN DRAUGHT 8582 ION DISPLACEMENT 16935 TON LIGHTWEIGHT 7035 TON
INSTALLED HORSEPOWER 18400 HP (METRIC) REVOLUTIONS PER MINUTE (MAXIMUM) 118 RPM
SINGLE SCREW LOWSPEED ENGINE CATALOGUE NUMBER 18
FORM COEFFICIENTS (INCI. A BULBOUS BOW WITH - 88 TON DISPL.)
BLOCK COEFFICIENT 0.5675
MIDSHIP COEFFICIENT 0.9751
WATEPLANE COEFFICIENT 0.7200
PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT 0.5819
VERTICAL PRISMATIC CÖEFFICIENT 0.7881
CENTRE OF BUOYANCY FORWARD OF 1/2 L -0.1106 PERC. STABILITY AND TRIM PARTICULARS
CARGO HOLDS
ÜEFR I GERATED HOLDS
CARGO DEEPTANKS TOTAL CAACITY HEAVY OIL TANKS DIESEL OIL TANKS LUBRIC.OIL TANKS FRESH WATER TANKS
CLEAN WATERBALLAST TANKS (DOUBLE BOTTOM ONLY)
DESIGN RESULTS OF SHIP NO 1. (PART 2)
INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT
NUMBER DF CONTINUOUS DECKS 3
NUMBER OF TRANSVERSE WATERTIGHT BULKHEADS 8
NUMBER OF HOLDS 6
DISTANCE AFT PERP.-AFT PEAK BULKHEAD 6.09 M LENGTH OF TUNNEL 12.30 M
LENGTH OF ENGINE ROOM 23.48 H
LENGTH OF CARGO HOLDS 20.49 H
DISTANCE COLLISIÓÑ BULKHEAD-FORE PERP. 7.9e M
HEIGHT OF CENTER GIRDER (DOUBLE BOTTOM HEIGHT-) 1.70 H
PROPULSION PARTICULARS
SERVICE TRIAL
(DESIGN COÑDITION)
SPEED 21.20 KNOtS 22.56 KNOTS
DRAUGHT 8.67 M 7.86 M
ÔISLACEMENT 16935 TON 14955 TON DEADWEIGHT 9900 TON 7920 fON
HORSEPOWER 17940 HP(ÑETR.) 18122 HP(METR.)
REV. PERMIN. 115.05 118.00
WAKE FACTOR 23.23 PERC. 22.48 PERC. THRUST DEDUCTION lj.94 PERC. 13.49 PERC.
PROPÉJLS. EFFCY. 74.65 PERCI 76.27 PERC.
SÇREW EFFÎCIENCY 64.66 PEOC. 665 PERC.
EHP ALLOWANCE 23.25 PERC. 4.76 PERC. SHAFT FRICTION 2.00.PERC. 2.óO PERC. SCREW PAPTICULAS
PALE CAPACITY GRAIN CAPACITY
595159 C'lEI 16852 M3 673706 CUFT 19079 M3 26410 C,iFT - 748 M3 26410 CUFT 748 M3 45669 diET 1293 M3 51440 CUFT 1457 M3 667238 Ctjfl 18893 P13 751556 CUFT 2128Ò M3 1070 TON Bi TON 19 TON OB TON OR P13 261 TOÑ NUMBER OF SCREWS i NUMBER OF BLADES - 4 SCREW DIAMETER 6.20 M PITCHDIAMETER RATIO 1.03
BLADE AREA RATIO 0.60
GM HOMOGENEOUSLY LOADED WITH FUEL QN BOARD 1.03 M
GM HOMOGENEOUSLY LOADED WITHOUT FUEL 0.45 H
TOTAL TRIM BY STERN (T AFT-I FOREWARD) 0.00 M
CENTRE OF GRAVi ABOVE BASE (HOMOG.LOADED*FUEL) 8.2ö M CENTRE ÒF BUOYANCY ABOVE BASE LINE 4.77 M CAPACITIES
HAMMONIA A 21 KNOTS 10000 TON DEADWEIGHT CARGO LINER (SUH-1965,PAG.505)
SPÉCIFICATION CARGO HOLO CPACIT1ES WItH CEÑIPES OF GRAVITY
WEIGHT AND CENT. OF GRAy. STEEL AND OUTFIT
HULL
CONSTR TYPE CORP ENG.RM. LOCATION COR ICE STREÑGTHEÑING BULBOUS BOW SEATINGS
SUPERSTRUCTURE-BULWARKS EZTRA WEIGHT NOI EXTRA WEIGHT NO2 TOTAL STEEL WEIGHT ANCHOR EQUIPMENT MOORING EQUIPMENT HOLD VENTILATIÖN
PAINT
BATTENS AND CEILING STAIRS AND GANGWAY DECK ÉOVER. OUTSIDE TARPAULINS
HATCH COVERS MANHOLES AND DOORS LIFE-SAVING EQUIPMT. VICTUALLING SPACES DECK COVER. INSIDE ISOLATION NON-REFR. WINDOWS . PORTHOLES SEC. MASTS,FITTINGS CARGO-HANOL. STEEL CARGO-HANDLING OUTFo ISOLATION REFR. OUTflT (INSIDE) TOTAL OUTFIT STEEL AND OUTFIT
+ WEIGHT TON 3317.09 00 -1-7.14 52.5 39a23 36.80 435.°2 40.90 300.00 .00 4205.95 82.9j 30.92 32.80 61.76 153-73 19.10 3.31 14.17 142.q2 15.55 12.4 111,9 60.39 16.90 4.69 276 172.93 50.66 62.49 1310 1108.15 5314.30 KG M 7.57 85 6.69 6.42 1.73 1.70 18.03 13.97 I34 4.01 14.01 13.87 10.70 9.36 3.57 10.70 --17.23 18.23 14.09 10.70 18.51 14.66 1.51 9.36 18.23 13.37 24.6? 14.37 13.16 17.44 9.47 G-APP M 73.7-3 76 13 53.13 133.98 152a?5 27.78 62a70 76.13 .73. 7T.3 1.68 76.13 76.13 76.13 76.13 76o13 -30.13 30.13 86.10 76.13 25.43 30.13 30.13 30.13 30.1-3 76.13 86.10 86.10 -1523 30.13 73.13 CAD. M3 KG M G-APP - M BASIC CAPAÇITY 20534.63 7.90 84.17 SHEER -CÓRECTION .00 13.37 91.35 CAMBER CORRECTION 491.09 13.50 - 76.1 CORR.COLLISION BKHD.- 9.87 7.89 1.72 COPP.LENGTH ENGINERM. -126.-72 7.89 30.60 ÇORR.AFT PEAK BLXHD. 181.15 10.56 7.61 tÚÑNEL CORRECTION -97.11 2.90 12.24 CORR.O.BDTTOMHE IGHT -563.66 1.55 84.17
CORP. FOR HATCHES 49?.89 14.17 84.17
CORR.FOR BATTENS -53.99 7.57 84.17
CORR.BILGE KNEES -B5.85 1.99 84.17
CORR.REFR ISOLATION 217.OB 13.18 15.23
CAP.ABOVE UPPER DECK 705.31
1.ì
126.37TOTAL CAP. GRAIN 21277.91 8.59
24
HAMMONIA A 21 KNOTS 10000 tON DEADWEIGHT CARGO LINER (SUH-1965,PAG.505)
J
WEIGHT AND CENTRÉS OF GRAVITY OF tHE EMPTY HIP
BUILDING costs STEEL 5183412 BUILDING COSTS EQUIP-OUTFIT 4174517 POuDING COSTS MACHINERY 11137943 TOTAL BUILDING COSTS 25048312 CAPITAL C0SS BORR.CAPITAL.
CAPITAL COSTS OWN CAPITAL
C0PRECTIqN FOR SCRAP VALUE tOTL CAPITAL COST HULLMACH. INSURANCE
COLL IS ION INSURANCE
TOTAL-LOSS INSURANCE FREIGHT REVENUE INSURANCE LUGGAGE INSURANCE
POTECTION INDEMNITY INS.
MAINTENANCE COSTS REPAIR costs
cEW WAGES-VICTUALLING COSTS ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
TOTAL COTS INDEPoOF OPERAT. TOTAL COSTS INDEPOF OPERAT.
2485973 21'93 -42656 3064810 358712 21041 31 7T1 52812 1449 29106 o 12S714 1321530 594000 5700945 PER YEAR 18676 PER DAY WEIGHT AND CENTRES OF GRAy. MACHINERY
WEIGHT(T) KG(M) G-APPIM)
MAIN PROPULSION IÑSTALL. 810.00 6.58 30.13
PROPELLER SHAFTING 88. 3.25 12.66
PROPELLER(S) 25.86 3.25 3.10
AUXILIARY STEAM PLANT 72.05 13.37 30.13
FUEL-LUBRIC.-COOL.W-AIRSYST. 171.53 3.70 39.33
ENGINEROOM OUTFIT 77.48 9.36 30.13
WORKSHOP EQUIPMENT 31.28 11.70 30.13
BILGE- AND SAFETY INSTALL. 65.95 1.70 53.13 FIRE EXTINGUISH IÑSTALL.(CO2) 6.02 10.70 76.13 AIR AÑO SOUNDING PIPES 33.12 8.04 76.13
FRESH WATER INSTALL. 32.89 5.35 3013
AIRÇONDITIONING INSTALL. 17.53 14.37 30.13
REFR. INTALLATION 22.03 13.37 2268
CARGO OIL DEEPTANK INSTALL. lSoSI 2.58 53.13 HOLD VENTILATION 5.05 9.36 7613
ANCHOR AÑO MOORING WINCHES 22.77 14.37 114.19
CARGO HANDLING WINCHES 123.53 15.37 76.13 DAVIT AND GANGWAY WINCHES 2 14 18 51 30 13
STEERING ENGINE 12.23 11.16 .00
AUXILIARY ENGINES 42.23 5.20 3013
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT 34.72 13.37 30.13
ELECTPÏCAL CIVIL APPAR. 3.03 16.94 30o13
LIGHTING EQUIPMENT 2.01 18.94 76.13
COMMUÑICATION AND ALARM SYST. - .2 12.03 34.73
NAVIGATION APPARATUS 2.10 21.08 39.52
EXTRA WEI(HT MACH. PART .0 2.67 30.45 TOTAL MACHINERY WEIGHT 1720.29 7.48 36.18
SHIPBUILDING 5314.30 9.47 73.13
MACHINERY 1720.29 7.48 36. 1
LIGHTSHIP 70-3458 8.98 64.0
FROM PORT 1 TO PORT 2 IN BUNKERS
HEAVY OIL O TON
DIESEL OIL O TON
LU8RIC.OIL O TON
CARGO TO BE TRANSPORTED TO NEXT PORT 8725 TON A'AILABLE CARGO 20000 T')Ñ)
BUNKERERED QUANTITIES WEIGHT (T) PRICE/TON COST
EAY OIL 983 65.00 63880 DIESEL OIL 74 100.00 7431
LUBRIC. OIL 19 900.00 17085
FRESH WATER 9 2.00 98
TOTAL BUNKER COSTS 88493
CARGO HANLIÑG- COSTS 87249
AGENCY ÇOSTS 52350
PORT AND CANAL FEES 23760
REVENUE ERE IG34T TR4NSPORT 1046994
DISTANCE TO NEXT DORT sòlo NMLS
TIRE TO NEXT PORT (DAYS) 2.86 (INC.PORT AND WAITIÑG TIME) DISPLACEMENT AT THIS VOYAGE 1935 TON
SPEED - 21.20 KT
EFFECIIVE HORSEPOWER 11948 HP (RETRIC) REV. PER MINUTE 115.07
HEAVY OIL USED 7h TOÑ
DIESEL OIL USED 47 TON
LUBRIC. OIL USED- iî TOÑ
FROM PORT 2 TO PORT 3
IÑ BUNKERS
HEAVY OIL 372 TON DIESEL OIL 27 TON LUBRIC.OIL 8 TON CARGO IO BE TRANSPORTED TO
NEXT PORT: 5000 TOÑ
(AVAILABLE CARGO 5000 TON)
B).ÍNERERED QUANTITIES WEIGHt (T) PRICE/TON COST
HEAVY OIL 7 55.00 43905 DIESEL OIL 0 100.00 0
LUBRIC. OIL 11 5000 9645 FRESH WATER 49 2.00 98
TOTAL BUNKER COSTS 53647 CARGO HANDLING OSTS 75000
AGENCY COSTS 21250
PORT AND ÇANAL FEES 23760
REVENUE FREIGHT TANSPOT 425000
DISTANCE TO NEXT PORT 1005 NMLS
TIME TO NEXT PORT (DAYS) 11.89 (INC.PORT AN' WAITING TIME) DISPLACEMENT AT THIS VOYAGE 13250 TON
SPEED 22.30 KT
EFFECTIVE HORSEPOWER 18194 HP (METRIC)
REV. PER MINUTE 118.00
HEAVY OIL SED 137 TON
DIESEL OIL USED 27 TON LIJRIC. ÖIL USED 4 TOÑ
FROM PORT 3 TO PORT 4 IN BUNKERS
HEAVY OIL 933 TON DIESEL OIL O TON
LUBRIC.OIL 15 TON
CARGO TO BE TRANSPORTED TO NEXT PORT O TON
(AVAILABLE CARGO O TON)
BUNNERERED OU4NTITIES WEIGHT (T) PRICE/TON COST
HEAVY OIL 0 70.00 o
DIESEL OIL 7 120.00 85k
LUBRIC. OIL 4 850.00 3446 FRESH WATER 49 2.00 98
TOTAL BUNKER COSTS
CARGO HANDLING COSTS O
AGENCY COSTS O
PORT AND CANAL FEES 11880
REVENUE FREIGHT TRANSPORT O
DITAÑCE Tô NEXT PORT 510 NMLS
TIME TO NEXT PORT (DAYS) 6.94 (INÇ.PORT AND WAITING TIME)
DIPLACEÑENT AT THIS VOAGE 9092 TOÑ
SPEED 23.13 KT
EFFECTIVE HORSEPOWER I6+19 HP (METRIC)
REV. PER MINUTE 118.00
HEAVY OIL USED 60 TON DIESEL OIL USED 1 TON
LUBRIC. OIL USED 2 TON
26
T
AGE -7
NO OF VOYAGES PEP YEAR TRANSPORTED CARGO PER YEAR FIXED COST PER YEAR CARGO HANDLING COSTS PORI AND CAÑAL FEES HEAVY OIL BUNKE COSTS
DIESEL OIL BUNKER COSTS LUBRIC.OIL BUNKER COSTS FRESH WATER 8UNER COSTS AGEÑCY COSTS PER YEAR TOTAL COSTS PER YEAR REVENUE FREIGHT TIANSPORT
ECONOMICAL FIGURES
PROF I T
REMUNERATIVENESS CARITAL RECOVERY FACIOR REQUIRED FREIGHT RATE NET PRESENT VALUE
TON TON TON (T) PRICE/TON COSI 0 70.00 0 87 85.00 7436 2 900.00 1767 49 2.00 98 9301 70006 29750 19008 .595000 3001 NMLS
14.77 (INC.PORT AND WAITING TIME) 151Ó7 TON 21.66 KT 18169 HP (METRIC) 116.48 423 TON 32 TON 7TON (T) 140 7 49 15656 24000 10500 19008 210000 3010 NMLS 14.50 UÑC 10792 TON 22.87 KT 17Ö74 HP (METRIC) 118.00 376 TON 32 TON .7 TON .443 105ò25 TON 5700 945 1134357 431238 455747 61853 121144 2169 503986 8411439 10019726 1668287 6.66 PERC. 18.90 PERC. ¿0.09 ¡TON 13634703 PRI CE/TON 65.00 100.00 900.00 ?.00 .PORT COST 9094 o 6464 98
AND WAITING TIME)
..FROìl PORI 4 T PORT 5
IN BLiNKERS HEAVY OIL 73 DIESEL OIL LUBRIC.OIL 17 CARGO TO BE TRANSPORTED TO NEXT PORT 7000 TO
(AVAILABLE CARGO 7000 TON)
bUNKEREREO QUANTITIES WEIGHT HEAVY OIL
DIESEL OIL LUBRIC. OIL FRESH WATER
TOTAL BÚNKER COSTS.
CARGO HANDLING COSTS AGENCY COSTS PORT AND CANAL FEES REVENUE FREIGHT TRANSPOR OISTAÑCE TO NEXT PORT TIME TO NEXT PORT (DAYS) DISPLACEMENT AT THIS VOY SPEED
EFFECTIVE HORSEPOWER
REV..RR MINUTE
HEAVY QEL USED ÔIESEL OIL USED LUBRIC. OIL USED
FROM PORT 5 TO PORT I IN BUNKERS.
HEAVY OIL
DIESEL OIL LÚBRIC.OIL
CARGO,TOBE TRANSPORTED TO NEXT PORT 3000 TON (AVAILABLE CARG 3000 TON)
BUNKERERED QUANTITIES WEIGHT
HEAVY OIL DIESEL OIL LUBRIC. OIL FRESH WATER TOTAL UÑIER COSTS CARGO HANDLING COSTS ÁGEÑCY COSTS PORT AÑO CANAL FEES REVENUE FÑEIHT TRANSPORT DIStANCE TO NEXT PORT TIME TO NEXT PORT (DAYS) D1PLÄCEÑEÑT AT THIS VOYAGE SPEED
EFFECTIVE HORSEPOWER REV. PER MINUTE HEAVY OIL USED DIESEL oïL USED
LUBRIC. OIL USED
HAMMONIA A 21 KNOTS 10000 TON DEADWEIGHT CARGO LINER (5UH1965.PAG.505) YEARLY RESULTS (BASED UPON SIMULATION CALCULATIONS)
451 TON 49 TON
Computer results of a 72500 ton bulkcarrieTr (Analysis program).
INPUT. DATA CONTROL A 7250C TON OW RIJLKCARRIER (BRITISH SHIPBUILDING COSTS SEPT 1968.MOTSH
LENGTH RTWEEN PERPENDIULAS (M)
BREADTH (MOULDED) (M)
DEPTH TO UPPERMOST DECK (MOULDED) (M)
DRAUGHT (MouLDED (M)
DEADWEIGHT (TON)
SERVICE SPEED (KNOTS
GRAIN CAPACITY (CUFT) IF O THEN BALE CAPACITY GREATER THAN O
BALE CAPACITY (CUFT) IF O THEN GRAIN CAPACiTY GREATER THAN O
tECINICAL CALCULATIONS ONLY O,UILOING COSTS INCL. 1. IÑCL.SIMULATION 2
CAPACITY OF REFRIGERATED HOLDS (CUFi uNIS ITEM IS INCLUDED iN HOLD CAP.). O
CAPACITY OF CARGO OEEPTANKS (CUFT) (THIS ITEM IS INCLUDED IN HOLD CAP.) O
T'PÈ SHIP (A BULKCARRIEP IS 1 A CONVENTIONAL CARGO SHIP IS O ) i
OPEN-SHELTERDECK SH[P (FREEROAPO DECK 'IS SECOND DECK) I. ELSE o o
IF CONSTRUCTION DRAUGHT Is FREEBOARD DRAUGHT 1' ELSE,FPEEB.DR.GREATER CONSTR.DR.O O
OPERATING RANGE DF THE SHIP AT SERVICE SPEED IF UNKNOWN O (NMLS) ?0000
NO OF SCREWS (ONE OR TWO) i
TYPE PROPULSION PLANT,WITH REDuCTION GEARINÇ, fl WITHQUI,DIRECTLY DRIVEN I
IF RESTRICTED OUTPUT Is REQUIRED I FIJLL OUTPUT O O AB
INSTALLED HORSEPOWER (METRIC HP) 18200
NUMBER OF REVOLUTIOÑS PER MINUTE OF SCREW 116.0
DRAÚHT FOP SCREW DEIc,Ñ (M) 13.56
SERVIÇE SPEED FOR SCREW DESIGN (KNOTS) 15.75
NUMBER OF SCREW BLADES ( ' OP 5 )
CONTROLABLE PITCH PROPELLER..O ,CONVENTIONAL SCPEW..1 O
SCREW DIAMETER RESTRICTÌÓN (MAX.OIAMETER / MOULDED SUMMER DRAUGHT ) 0.580
OPTIMIZATION OF SCREW DIAMETER OR RPM.. ELSE . O
IF TRIAL SPEED IS CALCULATED IN SIMULATION PART î, ELSE O o
INITIAL VALUE FOR SERVICE ALLOWENCE (POWER TRIAL / POWER SERVICE) 0.85
ÑUBER OF REVOLUTIONS ER MINUTE OF AUXILIARY ENGINES 800
NUMBER OF AUXILIARY ENGINES 3
SPECIFIC HEAVY OIL CONSUMPTION MAIN ENGINE (KG/MHP.HOUR) 0.1600
sPECIE. DIESEL OÍL COÑSUMPTIOÑ MAIN ENGINE (KG/MHP.HOUR) 0.1600
SPECIE. DIESEL OIL CONSUMPTION AUXILIARY ENGINES (KG/MNP.HOUR) 0.1700
SPECÍF. LÚRIC.OiL CdNSUMPtÔN MAIÑ ENGINE ($ÇG/MHP.HOUR) o..00iS AD
SPECIE. LUBRIC.OIL CONSUMPTiON AUXILIARY ENGINES (KGÌMHP.HÖUR) O.Ò019
WATER BALLAST IN DOUBLE BOTTOM (TON OR M3) 3000
CAPACITY OF FRESH wAfER TANHS (DOUBLE POTTOM ONLY) (TON OR M3) 100.0
HEAVY ÒIL CAPAÇTY (TON) II (IF RANGE0R TOTAL BUNKER CAPACITY ARE GREATER O
DIESEL OIL CAPACITY (TON) II THAN 0. THESE TREE VALUES. MAY BE O) O
LÚNRIÇ.OIL CAPACITY (TON) II
BLOCK COEFFICIENT (ÌF ÙÑKNOWN.. ESTIMATED VALUE, SEE cARD AK) 0.8300
PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT (IF UNKNOWN.. ! 0.0000
WATERPLANE COEFFICIENT (IF UNKNOWN.. )) 0.0000
APPLIcATION OF BULBOUS BOW 1. NO BULBOUS BOW ( O
IF NORMAL SHEER IS APPLIED 1, IV SNEER IS NOT APPLIED O O
NO OF CONTINUOUS DECKS (INTEGEP NUMBERS APPLICABLE ONLY )
NUMBER OF TRANSVERSE BuLKHEADS 10
NO OF LONGITUDINAL RULKÑEADS 0.100 AF AC 242.31 32.00 1R.59 13 56 737 00 15 75 3070000 O 2 AA
