BROOKES BELL JARRETT KIRMAN MARINE, SCIENTIFIC TECHMICAL CONSULTANTS & SURVEFORS 180 9004 Out pone Canyon Richards Hogg Lindley St Nicholas House Old Churchyard, Chapel Street LIVERPOOL Merseyside L28TX For the attention of Miles Duncan Dear Sirs, TMS JADE No.2 Auxiliary Engine Damage - 23rd April, 2003 Your Ref: ‘Martins Building Exchange Flags Liverpool Merseyside L2 3°G Telephone: 0151 236 0083, Facsimile: 0151236 2945 DX: DX 14218 LIVERPOOL Email: liv@brookesbell com Website: www.brookesbell.com OurRef, B042109/JRG/DB 24th November, 2004 IN ACCORDANCE with your instructions we confirm that we have examined the documents handed to us during our meeting in your office on 8th November, 2004 and provide our comments on cause as requested. 1. General Background 1.1 Aswe understand from the documentation provided the present owners/operators took over "TMS JADE" in October, 2000. It is recorded in the Hull & Machinery surveyors’ report (P-T. Asuka Bahari Nusantara, ref no.054/DS/ABN/TV/2003 dated Jakarta 9th June, 2003.) that the No.2 auxiliary engine was overhauled at that time, albeit, the surveyor states, crankshaft deflections were not measured. 1.2 The next overhaul of the engine is reported as at the end of December, 2002 when routine maintenance was carried out by the ship's engineers. [At Liverpool 0151 236 0083. Sideup 020 83000190 Tower Bridge 020 7403 2838 ‘DAVID SPENCE, a Te MALCOM DARN Be ise JUNC EARCLOUG Elim Nnwtiomr KATHE AAMIID. BS MB RD assocures ‘DAVID HURIRIDOE, [ WILAsn0¥D, meen Coe MAR A KEENOR Eats TRAYBIOND/ LLMKAS Bg Ce IHN GIBSON, nn Mae Cg “TMI MOss Stn Me D Cont. [MARTIN JONAS, DP ML FD. CPhoe {CaaS P DYSON, ngaBROOKES BELL JARRETT KIRMAN CONTINUATION 042109 13 14 15 16 24 2.2 23 TMS JADE On 27th March, 2003, investigations by the ship's engineers into excessive vibration revealed three (3 No) foundation bolts were broken on each side of the engine, There are six (6 No) bolts in total on each side. It is understood the bolts were simply replaced, no checks were carried out, and the engine continued in service. On 23rd April 2003, when the vessel was in the shipyard, a scheduled overhaul of the No.2 engine ascertained that the crankshaft main journals No.2 and No.4 were worn and the bearing shells variously scored and broken. The engine was therefore completely dismantled for full inspection and a dimensional check of the crankshaft, bedplate and all bearings. Inspections revealed that the No.2 and No.4 main bearing journals were approximately 1.0mm below original size, with the remaining five main journals approximately 0.5mm below original, Heat cracks were reported on journals No.2 and No.4 and the main bearing housings variously marked, scored and worn. It is understood that permanent repairs to the engine are still pending Comment on Cause of Defects ‘The documents provided include numerous class survey records, engine overhaul and inspection data, including calibration records, and engine component running hours. Some of the documentation is in Indonesian language and, as such, not particularly helpful ‘The Inspection Reports and Class records, relating to the October, 2000 / January, 2001 overhaul, indicate that the engine was subject to a thorough inspeetion with all major components calibrated, The Class survey report verifies that a satisfactory running and fanction test was conducted on completion of the overhaul. I condition on completion of the major overhaul and Class survey in January, 2001. is therefore reasonable to conclude that the No.2 auxiliary engine was in good running ContdBROOKES BELL JARRETT KIRMAN CONTINUATION 1B042109 24 25 2.6 27 28 29 2.10 TMS JADE, The next overhaul of the engine was between 24th and 25th December, 2002. It is ‘understood from the Chief Engineer's overhaul record dated 27th December, 2002, (in Indonesian language) that this overhaul was not as extensive as the October, 2000 / January, 2001 overhaul, It would appear that only selected units were opened up and that the main bearings were not inspected. ‘The Plan Maintenance Schedules provided for the No.2 engine somewhat confuse the issue. ‘The Schedule dated 30th November, 2002, records the last main bearing shell inspection as 26/02/02. We believe this to be a typographical error and may refer to the 2001 overhaul. The Plan Maintenance Schedule dated 28th February, 2003, i.e. - approximately two months after the 24th/25th December, 2002, overhaul - records the last main bearing shell inspection as 26/02/01. However, it also records that only 742 hours running time had elapsed since the last inspection. It would appear that the running hours for the main bearing inspection (recommended as 14,000 by the makers) has been re-started at the December overhaul, regardless of whether, or not, the bearings were inspected. During 2002 crankshaft deflections were taken on at least three occasions and the results recorded were all well within the engine makers recommended parameters. It is possible that, in view of the satisfactory deflection readings over the last 12 months, the Chief Engineer decided not to disturb the main bearings during the December, 2002 overhaul. In view of the foregoing we can reasonably conclude that the No.2 auxiliary engine was likely to be in satisfactory running condition following the December, 2002, overhaul As discussed above, when the engine was dismantled at the shipyard in April, 2003, the No.2 and No.4 main journal were reported as approximately 1.0mm below original diameter and all other main journal 0.5mm below original. (The calibration record of PT HANDI PERKASA dated 29th April, 2004, actually records the No.2 journal as 1.5mm below original.) All journals were concentric. Itis highly improbable, if not impossible, for the main journals to wear down to such an extent during operation. The main bearing shell will wear before the journal is significantly affected and the resulting increased clearance will quickly become apparent, either by poor crankshaft deflection and/or bearing failure. ContdBROOKES BELL JARRETT KIRMAN CONTINUATION 8042109 211 2.12 2.13 31 32 33 3.4 3.5 ‘TMS JADE The crankshaft must have been reconditioned and machined at some earlier date. Indeed, this fact is recorded on the Inspection reports dated 1st January, 2001 (Deflection readings) and Ist February, 2001 (Main Journal decrease readings). On both the foregoing it is annotated that the main bearings No.1, 3, 5, 6, 7 are 0.5mm under size and main bearing No.2 and 4 are 1.0mm under size. ‘The defects discovered on the engine as descri -d by both the surveyors following dismantling of the engine in April, 2004, i.e. - general deterioration of all main bearings and journals - is consistent with movement and/or vibration and could reasonably be linked to the holding down bolt failures. It is unlikely that all six bolts failed at once, however, the vibration (and movement) of the engine would increase as the bolts progressively failed. The holding down bolts would have been fitted (possibly renewed) during the October, 2000 January, 2001 overhaul, ‘The bolts should have been tested and / or 'torqued-up' during the December, 2002 overhaul and, in addition, should have been routinely checked by the crew for security during the intervening periods. Summary The No.2 auxiliary engine was subject to a major overhaul and Class survey in October, 2000 / January, 2001, and itis reasonable to conclude the engine was in good operational condition thereafter. ‘The crankshaft main journals were all machined undersize at some time prior to the October, 2000 / January, 2001 overhaul. The engine was subject to routine maintenance in December, 2002, at which time it would appear that the main bearings may not have been inspected. During the period between the foregoing overhauls the engine operated without apparent problem and the recorded crankshaft deflections were satisfactory. Excessive vibration experienced in March, 2003, wa of the holding down bolts. verified as being due to failure of 50% Contd,BROOKES BELL JARRETT KIRMAN CONTINUATION B042109 TMS JADE, 3.6 Inspection of the engine at the shipyard in April, 2003 revealed defective bearings and crankshaft journals consistent with movement and vibration of the engine, which was probably due to the failed holding down bolts. 3.7 Itis incumbent on the ship's engineer to periodically check the security of the engine holding down both in order to maintain alignment and prevent excessive movement and/or vibration of the engine. We trust the above is sufficient for your present needs. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any clarification. Yours faithfully, Crookeeel! Senet le Brookes Bell Jarrett Kirman