SLIDE 1
1
2
Risks Posed by Larger Vessels
- 1. Navigation
- 2. Passing other docks
- 3. Maneuvering at berth
- 4. Berthing
- 5. Mooring
- 6. (other)
Technologies for Evaluating Risks to Existing Berth Infrastructure - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Technologies for Evaluating Risks to Existing Berth Infrastructure - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Technologies for Evaluating Risks to Existing Berth Infrastructure from Larger Vessels 2019 Facilities Engineering Seminar 1 Risks Posed by Larger Vessels 1. Navigation 2. Passing other docks 3. Maneuvering at berth 4. Berthing 5. Mooring
SLIDE 2
SLIDE 3
3
Navigation
CMA CGM Ben Franklin Port of Oakland, CA Comprehensive vessel accommodation study, included maneuvering, surge effects, berthing and mooring.
Particular CMA CGM Ben Franklin Length Overall (ft) 1309 Breadth (ft) 177 Moulded Depth (ft) 99 Draft (ft) 52.5
SLIDE 4
4
Navigation
CMA CGM Ben Franklin Port of Oakland, CA Maneuvering simulations define suitable environmental conditions, pilot procedures, and data for surge analysis.
Simulations at CA Maritime Academy
SLIDE 5
5
Navigation
CMA CGM Ben Franklin Port of Oakland, CA High resolution PPU equipment provide better maneuvering guidance and accuracy than available on many vessels. Pilots required the PPUs with 2nd pilot for VLCVs over 1200’ LOA.
SLIDE 6
6
Navigation
CMA CGM Ben Franklin Port of Oakland, CA Navigation practice re- enacted after simulations. Surge effects were single greatest concern for pilots. Simulations provide accurate data for simulation of surge effects.
SLIDE 7
7
Passing Other Docks (Surge Effects)
Surge effects are nothing new…
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/titanic-near- miss-that-could-have-changed-course-of-history-30636858.html
http://www.maritimequest.com/liners/titanic_page_6.htm
SLIDE 8
8
Passing Other Docks (Surge Effects)
Surge effects are nothing new… …but good understanding of surge effects is recent. Many facilities do not have adequate consideration of surge effects.
SLIDE 9
9
Passing Other Docks (Surge Effects)
CMA CGM Ben Franklin Port of Oakland, CA Surge modeling performed using maneuvering patterns taken from full bridge. Loads imposed by passing ships can rival wind loads during storm events. Surge modeling results used to evaluate mooring risk, develop navigation guidance.
SLIDE 10
10
Passing Other Docks (Surge Effects)
CMA CGM Ben Franklin Port of Oakland, CA Mooring simulations help define risk to berth infrastructure from bypassing. Evaluates motions, downtime, fenders, bollards, mooring lines.
SLIDE 11
11
Passing Other Docks (Surge Effects)
CMA CGM Ben Franklin Port of Oakland, CA Bypassing guidance can be developed for better understanding of risks.
Safe Mooring Use Caution Potentially Unsafe
Pilot Bypassing Guidance
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 100 200 300 400 500 Passing Speed [kts] Clear Distance Between Hulls at Midships [ft]
+
SLIDE 12
CT3
Passing Other Docks (Surge Effects)
Cruise T erminal 3 Port Canaveral Surge effects simulated Port- wide for mooring design, and bunkering safety analysis.
12
SLIDE 13
13
Passing Other Docks: Bunkering
Cruise T erminal 3 Port Canaveral LNG bunker barges are relatively small → passing ship surge forces should be manageable. Surge-related challenges are mostly spatial conflicts, and development of suitable mooring arrangements.
https://www.portcanaveral.com/getattachment/About/LNG-at-Port-Canaveral/LNG-Bunkering-Info.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US
SLIDE 14
14
Maneuvering at Berth
Propulsion systems on new/larger vessels can affect berth stability CFD simulations are now routine and efficient.
FLOW3D
Azipods at 50% applied power, directed 45 deg aft Azipods at 50% applied power, directed starboard
SLIDE 15
15
Propulsion Effects and Scour Protection
CFD analysis demonstrates shortcomings in existing systems, or new efficient designs.
SLIDE 16
16
Fender Suitability for Larger Vessels
Port of Oakland Berth Infrastructure Risk Assessment Fender capacity guidelines (e.g. PIANC) are intended for new installations. Some recommendations should not necessarily be applied to evaluate risks to existing systems. Data show lower impact velocities for larger vessels.
Burkhart et al (PIANC Working Group 145) 5 10 15 20 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 Berthing Velocity [cm/s] DWT 10k TEU 14k TEU 19k TEU
SLIDE 17
17
Fender Suitability for Larger Vessels
Port of Oakland Berth Infrastructure Risk Assessment Probability of different berthing velocities can be quantified. Combined with consequences, can inform risks of utilizing existing fenders.
Berthing Velocity (cm/s)
~2.5 yr ~10 yr
SLIDE 18
18
Fender Suitability for Larger Vessels
Port of Oakland Berth Infrastructure Risk Assessment Real-world experience shows that this makes sense. Pilot procedures for VLCVs
- 2 pilots
- 4 tugs
- Daylight
- Wind/current/tide/draft restrictions
- PPU equipment
Low berthing velocities + low berthing angles = High Loads in Existing Fenders are NOT Likely
SLIDE 19
19
1193’ ship at berth during 30-knot winds
Bollard Suitability for Larger Vessels
Port of Oakland Berth Infrastructure Risk Assessment AIS data show that vessels don’t necessarily leave the dock during wind events. High bollard loads are possible, and probability should be evaluated with site-specific wind data.
Ships > 1100’ LOA at berth
SLIDE 20
50 100 150 200 250 300 10 20 30 40 50 Bollard Load (kips) Wind Speed (kts)
20
Bollard Suitability for Larger Vessels
Port of Oakland Berth Infrastructure Risk Assessment Risks to bollards are berth-specific. Not all berths need the same bollards to achieve safe mooring. Some berths with lower bollard capacities may still have lower risk.
1yr wind 10yr wind
SE Winds SE Winds
SLIDE 21
Fender and Bollard Suitability for Larger Vessels - Conclusions
21
+0.75 ▪ Risk is not only about probability, but also consequence. ▪ Risk can be quantified.
1. Define probabilities using suitable analysis. 2. Define consequences using damage evaluation. 3. Combination of these informs risk.
▪ Accommodating larger vessels may carry acceptable level of risk for existing fenders/bollards.
Consequence Probability
RISK
High Medium Low
Bollard Load Fender Load Edge Beam
SLIDE 22
Summary
22
+0.75 ▪ New, larger vessels bring new potential risks. ▪ Analysis tools can help understand/minimize risks. ▪ A prepared analysis toolkit can be deployed very quickly upon notice of imminent larger vessels.
SLIDE 23
23
Technologies for Evaluating Risks to Existing Berth Infrastructure from Larger Vessels
Scott W. Fenical, PE, D.CE, D.PE
Coastal Practice Leader T +1 (415) 773 2164 C +1 (415) 341 4669 Scott.Fenical@mottmac.com
Questions?
2019 Facilities Engineering Seminar