Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:26:33.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Safe Tug Operations during Ship-Assist Manoeuvres

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 February 2019

Nirman Jayarathne ,
Dev Ranmuthugala  and
Zhi Leong
Nirman Jayarathne*
Affiliation:
(University of Tasmania Australian Maritime College - National Centre for Ports and Shipping, 1 Newnham Drive Launceston, Launceston, Tasmania 7248, Australia)
Dev Ranmuthugala
Affiliation:
(University of Tasmania Australian Maritime College - National Centre for Maritime Engineering and Hydrodynamics, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia)
Zhi Leong
Affiliation:
(University of Tasmania Australian Maritime College - National Centre for Maritime Engineering and Hydrodynamics, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia)
*
(E-mail: bnjsv@utas.edu.au)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The hydrodynamic interaction effects on a tug operating in close proximity to a larger vessel can result in dangerous situations for the tug. To date most studies have focussed on the interaction effects between the vessels when they are operating in parallel, which represent only one of many practical ship-assist manoeuvres. It is therefore necessary to investigate a wide range of tug-ship combinations to obtain a detailed understanding of these effects. This paper discusses the hydrodynamic interaction effects on a tug operating at various relative positions and drift angles to a larger ship, both moving together at the same forward speed. The hydrodynamic effects were determined using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations that were validated using captive model test data. The range of manoeuvres discussed in this paper provides a comprehensive overview of the hydrodynamic interaction effects on a tug enabling tug operators to identify safe operating envelopes for their vessels.

Keywords

TugsInteractionSafety
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 72 , Issue 3 , May 2019 , pp. 813 - 831
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

CD-Adapco (2015), User Manual of StarCCM+ Version 10·02.Google Scholar
Chen, G.R. and Fang, M.C. (2001). Hydrodynamic Interactions Between Two Ships Advancing in Waves. Ocean Engineering, 28(8), 1053–1078.Google Scholar
Dand, I.W. (1975). ‘Some Aspects of Tug-Ship Interaction. In Troup, K.D. (ed.), The 4th International Tug Convention, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.Google Scholar
Falter, J. (2010). Validation of a Potential Flow Code for Computation of Ship-Ship Interaction Forces with Captive Model Test Results. Ghent University, Belgium.Google Scholar
Fonfach, J.M.A., Sutulo, S. and Soares, C.G. (2011). Numerical Study of Ship to Ship Interaction Forces on the Basis of Various Flow Models. In Pettersen, B., Berg, T.E., Eloot, K. and Vantorre, M. (eds), The 2nd International Conference on Ship Manoeuvring in Shallow and Confined Water: Ship to Ship Interaction, Trondheim, Norway, 137–146.Google Scholar
Fortson, R.M. (1974). Interaction Force Between Ships. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA.Google Scholar
Geerts, S., Vantorre, M., Eloot, K., Huijsmans, R. and Fierens, N. (2011). Interaction Forces in Tug Operation. In Pettersen, B., Berg, T.E., Eloot, K. and Vantorre, M. (eds), The 2nd International Conference on Ship Manoeuvring in Shallow and Confined Water: Ship to Ship Interaction, Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar
Hensen, H. (2003). Tug Use in Port: A Practical Guide, Nautical Institute.Google Scholar
Hensen, H., Merkelbach, D. and Wijnen, F.V. (2013). Report on Safe Tug Procedures, Dutch Safety Board, Netherlands.Google Scholar
ITTC. (2002a). CFD General Uncertainty Analysis in CFD Verification and Validation Methodology and Procedures, 7·5-03-01-01, International Towing Tank Conference.Google Scholar
ITTC. (2002b). Testing and Extrapolation Methods - Resistance Uncertainty Analysis, 7·5-02-02-02, International Towing Tank Conference.Google Scholar
Jayarathne, B.N., Leong, Z.Q. and Ranmuthugala, D. (2016). Hydrodynamic Interaction Effects on Tugs Operating within the Midship Region alongside Large Ships. 9th International Research Conference, Ratmalana, Sri Lanka. 69–76.Google Scholar
Jayarathne, B.N., Ranmuthugala, D., Leong, Z.Q. and Fei, G. (2017a). Non-Dimensionalisation of Lateral Distances Between Vessels of Dissimilar Sizes for Interaction Effect Studies. Transactions RINA: Part A1- International Journal of Maritime Engineering. 159. 343–354.Google Scholar
Jayarathne, B.N., Ranmuthugala, D., Leong, Z.Q., Fei, G. and Chai, S. (2017b). Numerical and Experimental Prediction of Hydrodynamic Interaction Effects Acting on Tugs during Ship Manoeuvres. Journal of Marine Science and Technology (Accepted for publication).Google Scholar
Jong, J.H. (2007). Ship-Assist in Fully Exposed Conditions - Joint Industry Project SAFETUG. Tugnology'07, Southampton, UK.Google Scholar
Lataire, E., Vantorre, M., Delefortrie, G. and Candries, M. (2012). Mathematical Modelling of Forces Acting on Ships During Lightering Operations. Ocean Engineering, 55, 101–111.Google Scholar
Leong, Z.Q., Ranmuthugala, D., Penesis, I. and Nguyen, H. (2014). RANS-Based CFD Prediction of the Hydrodynamic Coefficients of DARPA SUBOFF Geometry in Straight-Line and Rotating Arm Manoeuvres. Transactions RINA: Part A1- International Journal Maritime Engineering. 157. A41–A51Google Scholar
Lu, H., Yang, C. and Lohner, R. (2009). Numerical Studies of Ship-Ship Interactions in Extreme Waves. Grand Challenges in Modeling & Simulation USA. 43–55.Google Scholar
MCA. (2001). Dangers of interaction, Maritime & Coastguard Agency, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Newton, R.N. (1960). Some Notes on Interaction Effects Between Ships Close Aboard in Deep Water. First Symposium on Ship Maneuverability, Washington D. C. 264–268.Google Scholar
Reoseman, D.P. (1987). The MARAD Systematic Series of Full-Form Ship Models (1 Ed.). Jersey City, USA: The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers.Google Scholar
Simonsen, C.D., Nielsen, C.K., Otzen, J.F. and Agdrup, K. (2011). CFD Based Prediction of Ship-Ship Interaction Forces on a Tug Beside a Tanker. In Pettersen, B., Berg, T.E., Eloot, K. and Vantorre, M. (eds), The 2nd International Conference on Ship Manoeuvring in Shallow and Confined Water: Ship to Ship Interaction, Trondheim, Norway. 329–338.Google Scholar
Stern, F., Wilson, R.V., Coleman, H.W. and Peterson, E.G. (2001). Comprehensive Approach to Verification and Validation of CFD Simulations - Part 1: Methodology and Procedures. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 123, 793–802.Google Scholar
Tezdogan, T., Demirel, Y.K., Kellett, P., Khorasanchi, M., Incecik, A. and Turan, O. (2015). Full-scale unsteady RANS CFD simulations of ship behaviour and performance in head seas due to slow steaming. Ocean Engineering, 97, 186–206.Google Scholar
Tuck, E.O. and Newman, J.N. (1974). Hydrodynamic Interactions Between Ships. The 10th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Office of Naval Research- United State Coast Guard- Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA, 35–69.Google Scholar
Vantorre, M., Verzhbitskaya, E. and Laforce, E. (2002). Model Test Based Formulations of Ship-Ship Interaction Forces. Ship Technology Research, 49, 124–141.Google Scholar
White, F.M. (2003). Fluid Mechanics, Fifth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Zou, L. and Larsson, L. (2013). Numerical Predictions of Ship-to-Ship Interaction in Shallow Water. Ocean Engineering, 72, 386–402.Google Scholar