PSV Major Project Report

DESIGN OF PLATFORM SUPPLY VESSEL WITH X-BOW
OF DWT 4150 TONNES
A PROJECT
submitted by
B.GOWRI SHANKAR S.DINESH KUMAR

(ANA13023) (ANA13018)
for the award of the degree
of
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
IN
NAVAL ARCHITECTURE & OFFSHORE ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF NAVAL ARCHITECTURE & OFFSHORE

ENGINEERING
AMET UNIVERSITY
MAY 2017
1|Page
BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project entitled “Design of Platform Supply Vessel with
X- bow” submitted by Mr. Gowri shankar & Mr. Dinesh kumar to the Dept. of Naval
Architecture & Offshore Engineering, AMET University, India for the award of degree of
Bachelor of Engineering is a bonafide record of technical work carried out by him/her
under my supervision. The contents of this project, in full or in parts, have not been
submitted to any other institute or university for the award of any degree or diploma.
….………………. ….….…………
Signature Signature
Cdr. Prashant Kumar Mr. Gopi Krishna
PROFESSOR & HOD (GUIDE)
DEPARTMENT OF NAVAL ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

ARCHITECHTURE &
OFFSHORE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF NAVAL
ARCHITECHTURE &
OFFSHORE ENGINEERING
2|Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to all those who
made this thesis possible.
I am deeply indebted to Mr. Gopi Krishna, my guide, for his valuable guidance,
encouragement and support during the thesis work. His sincerity and dedication to work
remain as source of inspiration to me.
No words can express my deep sense of gratitude for Prof. Cdr. Prashant Kumar,
Professor and The Head, Department of Ocean Engineering, for his constant
encouragement and moral support throughout the research work.
I have no words to express my gratitude to my partner S. Dinesh kumar who stood with
me throughout the project and pushed me this far.
I express my deepest gratitude towards my family for all the sacrifices borne for me and
emotional support throughout the course of my B.E. work. I express my deep sense of
gratitude to my parents and all my friends for their constant support, help and
encouragement.
B. GOWRI SHANKAR S.DINESH KUMAR

Date: 26-04-2017 Date: 26-04-2017
Place: Chennai, India Place: Chennai, India
3|Page
ABSTRACT
Keywords: Ship hull geometry, hull form modification, computer aided design,
computational fluid dynamics, resistance, wake, bulbous bow and stern bulb.
The ships are customized, capital intensive and long service life products. The design’s
performance can change with time depending upon the prevailing fuel oil prices, e.g. the
optimum speed of the ship will rise in low fuel oil price period and fall in high fuel oil
price period. Furthermore, after signing ship building contract, the shipyard’s design
office prefers a detailed performance analysis of ship resistance and propulsion model
tests aimed at resistance measurements, determination of ship speed, propeller rotational
speed and propulsion engine power for the designed ship, and the possibility of hull form
improvements. Normally, the range of ship hull modifications is limited because of the
involvement of high cost and time. However, assuming that the ship design is based upon
‘modular concept’ and/or ship is open for conversion possibilities, then the numerical
methods (i.e. computational fluid dynamics) can be used to create the alternate designs
that are more efficient in resistance and propulsive power and with minimum
modification on the overall design.
4|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.................................................................................................3
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................4
LIST OF TABELS……………………………………………………………….……....8
LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………...9
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction & Objective………........................................................................11
1.2 Literature survey………….................................................................................12
1.3 Project schedule………......................................................................................18
CHAPTER 2 PARENT SHIP ANALYSIS, MAIN DIMENSIONS, LINES PLAN

2.1 General..................................................................................................................20
2.2 Parent ship analysis...............................................................................................20
2.3 Main Dimension....................................................................................................21
2.4 Lines Plan..............................................................................................................27
CHAPTER 3 BONJEAN & HYDROSTATICS
3.1 General…………………………………………………………………………..30
3.2 Bonjean curves……………………………………………………………...…...30
3.3 Hydrostatics……………………………………………………………………...31
CHAPTER 4 RESISTANCE & POWERING
4.1 Resistance calculation…………………………………………………………..34
4.2 Powering………………………………………………………………………...39
4.3 Hull resonance…………………………………………………………………..40
4.4 Machinery selection……………………………………………………………..42
5|Page
CHAPTER 5 CAPACITY CALCULATION, GA
5.1 General………………………………………………………………………….44
5.2 Capacity calculation…………………………………………………………….44
5.3 Tank segregation………………………………………………………………..45
5.4 General arrangement plan……………………………………………………….47
CHAPTER 6 SCANTLING & STRENGTH CALCULATION
6.1 General…………………………………………………………………………50
6.2 Strength calculation……………………………………………………………..50
6.3 Scantling calculation…………………………………………………………….52
CHAPTER 7 MIDSHIP CALCULATION & SHELL EXPANSION CURVE
7.1 Midship calculation……………………………………………………………...54
7.2 Shell expansion ………………………………………………………………….56
CHAPTER 8 WEIGHT CALCULATION & TONNAGE CALCULATION
8.1 General…………………………………………………………………………...59
8.2 Tonnage calculation ……………………………………………………………..59
8.3 Weight calculation……………………………………………………………….60
CHAPTER 9 STABILITY & FREEBOARD CALCULATION
9.1 General…………………………………………………………………………..63
9.2 Freeboard calculation…………………………………………………………....63
9.3 Stability calculation...…………………………………………………………....65
CHAPTER 10 EQUIPMENT NUMBER & TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
10.1 General…………………………………………………………………………...68
10.2 Equipment number……………………………………………………………….68
10.3 Technical specification...………………………………………………………...70
6|Page
CHAPTER 11 SPECIALIZATION TOPIC
11.1 General……...........................................................................................................73
11.2 Specialization topic……………………..………………………………………..74
CHAPTER 12 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

12.1 Summary...........................................................................................................79
12.2 Conclusions.......................................................................................................80
12.3 Future Scope of work……................................................................................80
REFERENCES.................................................................................................................81
7|Page
LIST OF TABELS
TABLE NO. CONTENTS PAGE NO.
1 Based upon research paper 24
2 Comparison of main dimensions 25
3 Preliminary calculation 26
4 Resistance calculation 33
5 Powering calculation 39
6 Capacity calculation 44
7 Tank segregation 45
8 Strength calculation 49
9 Scantling calculation 51
10 Section modulus given to the ship 54
11 Shell expansion 55
12 Tonnage calculation 58
13 Weight calculation 59
14 Freeboard calculation 63
15 Equipment number 66
16 Equipments 66
17 Comparison X bow & Convential bow 75
8|Page
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO CONTENT PAGE NO.
1 Conventional bow and - bow 13
2 Tank test for X bow 14
3 Speed loss in waves 16
3 Statistical data for oil fields 17
4 North sea 18
5 Research paper graph 26
7 Model created in maxsurf 37
8 Resistance values 38
9 Speed vs power graph 39
10 Fuel consumption 71
9|Page
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
10 | P a g e
1.1 INTRODUCTION & OBJECTIVE:
The OSVs (offshore supply vessels) are used in general to supply services for all
kinds of platforms and offshore rigs, transporting wet drilling fluids, acids and
chemicals and dry bulk in addition to deck cargo. The vessels’ hull and propulsion
engine capacities kept increasing gradually as drilling and production activity moved
into deeper waters. In order to offer a safe and efficient anchor handling operation in
deep water conditions in excess of 2000 meters, various design changes were
necessary.
OSVs are generally wide beamed in comparison with conventional cargo vessels.
They are usually constructed as a flat cargo deck aft positioned on top of a collection
of cargo tanks surrounding the machinery spaces. The accommodation is forward
surmounted by a wheelhouse designed for excellent all round visibility. These vessels
have duplicate navigational controls at both the forward and aft ends that on modern
vessels are ergonomically designed. Most of the vessels are extremely maneuverable.
FEATURES OF PSV:
• One or more of the following design and operating features can generally be
expected for OSVs.
• Large and open aft deck for cargo, equipment, anchors handling and towing
operations.
• Stern roll for anchor handling
• Wheel house all - round visibility (have forward & aft control)
• Some OSVs equipped with A-frame to reduce the tension of wire.
• High engine power for towing operations.
• High maneuverability, particularly at low speed or static operation. (Bow and
stern thrusters).
• Propeller types (fixed or variable pitch with Kort nozzle, Voith Schnieder, Azimth
and Azipod propeller)
• Storage of consumables for offshore exploration and production activities: such as
drilling fluids, bulk mud and cement, water, fuel, chemicals, etc.
• Some OSVs are equipped with big fire pump with monitors for external
firefighting system.
• Now Dynamic Positioning (DP) system is very important for all types of OSVs.
11 | P a g e
CARGO CARRIED BY PSV:
• Deck Cargo
• Fuel Oil
• fresh Water
• Brine
• Drill Water
• Cement
• Slop
• LFL (Low flashpoint Liquid)
• Mud
1.2 LITERATURE SURVEY

A bow is the forward most part of the ship’s hull which helps in reducing the
resistance as the ship cuts through the waves. The type of bow design used
depends on the characteristics of the vessel, area of operation, and purpose of the
ship.
X Bow Hull Design vs Conventional Hull Design:
Conventional Hull Design:
In a conventional bow design, the farthest point of the bow is at the extreme front
(topmost part) of the vessel and it then tapers down, pushing the start of the bow
backwards at the waterline. As the shape of the conventional bow is less sharp, a
certain amount of energy is used to push the ship forward and this considerably
slows down the speed of the vessel.
X -bow:
X -bow is a unique bow design which was introduced by the Ulstein Group of
Norway in 2006. X-bow is a “backward sloping bow” or an inverted ship bow
design which is used for increasing the fuel efficiency and safety of the vessel at
sea.
PRINCIPAL CHARACTERISTICS:
– A novel hull shape with a redistributed fore ship volume and

substantially reduced flare
– A raised fore ship, which normally incorporates accommodation
12 | P a g e
OPTIMISED HULL SHAPE:
The shape of the hull has been optimized with a view to high top speeds, low
resistance and reduced fuel consumption. Great emphasis has been placed on the
crew’s safety and comfort.
F
i
g
Fig 1: X-bow vs conventional bow
X-BOW BENEFITS:
An X-BOW vessel is characterized by its slender hull water line and a smoother
volume distribution in the fore ship. The many benefits of the X-BOW hull line
design have been documented through tank tests performed by recognized
maritime institutions and feedback from the owners and users of vessels with X-
BOW
EFFICIENCY AND ENVIRONMENT:

- Significantly more energy
-efficient shape in waves
- Higher transit speed
- Reduced power consumption
- Improved fuel efficiency
- Reduced emissions
- Increased operational time
- Increased schedule-keeping
SAFETY AND COMFORT:

- Elimination of slamming and bow impact
- Soft entry in waves
- Less spray
- Low acceleration levels
- Reduced vibration levels
- Increased comfort and available crew rest time
- Safer workplace due to smoother motions and protection provided by hull
13 | P a g e
TANK TEST FOR X-BOW:
The photo below shows the comparison of X-BOW hull (left) and bulbous bow
(right) in the same conditions.
Fig 2: Tank test for X-bow
The following list of results is a summary of the model tests carried out on
offshore vessels. The tests have been performed at model testing facilities in
several countries.
Calm water
• Waterline lengthening bulb included in bow shape
• Lower angles of entry
• Allows large draught variations as compared to gooseneck bulbous bows
• Improved initial stability
Waves
• No slamming loads – less vibrations
• Less pitching due to earlier volume introduction in waves
• Waterlines extending to full hull height will split wave energy rather than crush
the waves and create spray
• Lower acceleration levels
• Lower pitch response due to volume is not translated into loss of speed
• Lower speed loss – this effect increases with increasing wave height
• Gentle displacer
14 | P a g e
SPEED LOSS IN WAVES
The table below shows the attainable speed and the speed loss in waves for a
container vessel with the X-BOW hull line design compared to an equivalent vessel
with a conventional bow. The performed tests indicate that the X-BOW hull line
design offers a significant speed advantage in sea states most probable on a North
Atlantic trade route, where waves are expected to be above 2.5 meters 74% of the
time. The X-BOW has an average improvement in speed loss of 19% in the 2.5-10.0
meter wave height range.
Fig3: speed loss in waves
CONCLUSION FROM MODEL TESTING:

• The X‐BOW has benefits over a conventional, bulbous bow, especially where it
concerns comfort.
• This is due to the fact that there is no bow impact in terms of slamming,
acceleration levels are lower.
• Also, vibration levels will be lower and the sustained speed is higher, but more
importantly the short duration of speed loss due to bow wave impact is not there.
This gives high level of confidence to the captain to sail at higher speeds where a
captain on a vessel with a conventional bow would reduce speed.
• Regarding stability characteristics, the X‐BOW is also beneficial.
15 | P a g e
• LOCATION:
Fig 4: Statistics data for oil fields
16 | P a g e
NORTH SEA
Fig 5: North Sea
Ship Range : Langewag Port , Norway to Grane Oil field
Distance : 160 Nautical Miles
17 | P a g e
1.3 PROJECT SCHEDULE
S.NO TITLES DATE
1 Literature survey 24/12/2016
2 Parent ship analysis 28/12/2016
3 Main dimension 06/01/2017
4 Preliminary calculation 15/01/2017
5 SAC & Lines plan 30/01/2017
6 Bonjean curves 01/02/2017
7 Hydrostatics calculation 05/02/2017
8 Resistance & Powering 10/02/2017
9 Capacity calculation 15/02/2017
10 General arrangement plan 20/02/2017
11 Scantling calculation 27/02/2017
12 Mid-ship section calculation 05/03/2017
13 Shell expansion plan 10/03/2017
14 Weight calculation 15/03/2017
15 Strength calculation 20/03/2017
16 Stability calculation 25/03/2017
17 Freeboard calculation 30/03/2017
18 Tonnage calculation 05/04/2017
19 Equipment number 15/04/2017
20 Technical specification 20/04/2017
18 | P a g e
CHAPTER – 2
PARENT SHIP ANALYSIS, MAIN DIMENSIONS,

LINES PLAN
19 | P a g e
2.1 GENERAL:
At the beginning of the new millennium, ULSTEIN started a design innovation

project challenging traditional solutions and conventions. Drawing on decades of ship
design experience, a new bow concept slowly emerged on paper. By introducing a
larger and smoother volume distribution in the fore ship, which allows for
submersion, combined with a sharper bow shape, the typical challenges of
conventional bow shapes were solved.
OWNER’S REQUIREMENT:
Type of vessel : Platform supply vessel
Dead weight : 4,150 tonnes
Speed : 15.5 knots
Area of service : North Sea
2.2 PARENT SHIP ANALYSIS:
S. No. Ship Name IMO No. DWT LOA LBP Breadth Depth Draft Speed GT NT
(Tonnes) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (Knots) (m^3) (m^3)
1 Blue Power (NAO Power) 9651890 4000 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.711 16.2 3644 1304
2 Blue storm 9722510 4065 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.706 15.6 3636 1295
3 Blue Viking (NAO VIKING) 9722522 4065 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.706 15.6 3636 1295
4 Blue King 9732216 4065 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.706 15.8 3636 1295
5 Blue Queen 9732204 4065 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.706 15.8 3636 1295
6 Vos Pasion 9709130 4138 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.7 15 3638 1295
7 Blue Gardian (NAO GUARDIAN) 9665114 4200 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.7 15.8 3636 1267
8 Blue Prosper (NAO PROSPER) 9613707 4242 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.699 16.23 3644 1304
9 Blue Fighter (NAO FIGHTER) 9613692 4200 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.699 15.85 3644 1304
10 Blue protector (NAO PROTECTOR) 9665126 4200 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.7 15.8 3636 1267
11 Blue Thunder (NAO THUNDER) 9665102 4200 83.4 76.5 18 8 6.7 15.8 3639 1267
13 Rem Mist 9521667 4400 88.8 82 19 8 6.614 15.4 4157 1432
14 Rem Hrist 9521655 4400 88.8 82 19 8 6.614 15.4 4157 1432
12 Sea Swan (NAO STORM) 9656682 4700 88.409 82.003 18.985 8 6.664 15.5 4007 1533
15 Sea Swift 9656694 4700 88.8 81.97 18.993 8.004 6.664 15.5 4007 1533
20 | P a g e
2.2 MAIN DIMENSION:
We considered the calculation of main dimensions by two ways
1. Graphical method
2. Based on a research paper
1.GRAPHICAL METHOD:
We have calculated the main dimensions based on the graphical

method for our dead weight (4150t).
Dwt v LOA
90 y = 0.0096x + 43.9829
89 R² = 0.7528
88
87 LOA :83.82m
LOA
86 DWT V LOA
85
84 Linear (DWT V
83 LOA)
82
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
Dwt v LBP
83
y = 0.010055x + 35.304500
82 R² = 0.766656
81
80
DWT V LBP LBP : 76.8 m
LBP
79
78
Linear (DWT V
77
LBP)
76
75
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
21 | P a g e
Dwt v Breadth
19.2
y = 0.001817x +
19 10.558176
18.8 R² = 0.763404
BREADTH
18.6
18.4 DWT V B
BREADTH :18.03m
18.2
18 Linear (DWT V
17.8 B)
17.6
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
Dwt v Draft
y = -0.000100x +
6.72 7.108678
6.7 R² = 0.453856
6.68
DRAFT
6.66 DWT v T
DRAFT :6.69m
6.64
Linear (DWT v
6.62 T)
6.6
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
Dwt v Depth
8.005 y = 0.000003x +
7.988703
8.004 R² = 0.333869
8.003
DEPTH
8.002 DWT v D
8.001 DEPTH :8m

Linear (DWT v
8 D)
7.999
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
22 | P a g e
Dwt v L/B
4.34
y = 0.000123x +
4.32 3.746211
R² = 0.777101
4.3
L/B :4.26
L/B
4.28
Series1
4.26
Linear (Series1)
4.24
4.22
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
Dwt v B/T
2.9
y = 0.000313x +
2.85 1.402619
R² = 0.723236
2.8
DWT v B/T B/T :2.7
B/T
2.75
2.7
Linear (DWT v
2.65 B/T)
2.6
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
Dwt v L/D
10.4 y = 0.001253x +
10.2 4.427524
R² = 0.765229
10
DWT v L/D
L/D
9.8 L/D :9.63

9.6
Linear (DWT v
9.4 L/D)
9.2
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
23 | P a g e
Dwt v B/D
2.4 y = 0.000226x +
2.38 1.323123
2.36 R² = 0.761583
2.34
2.32 DWT v B/D
B/D
2.3 B/D :2.26

2.28
Linear (DWT v
2.26 B/D)
2.24
2.22
3500 4000 4500 5000
DWT
2.BASED UPON RESEARCH PAPER:
This research paper is based on
Preliminary estimation of the Principal Dimensions of Offshore

Supply Vessel based on updated statistics by Mohamed Walid Ahmed,
Ahmed Naguib and Elsayed H. Hegzy.
This formula is applicable for OSVs with 800 ≤ DWT ≤ 5000 tones.
DIMENSIONS FORMULAE VALUES
LBP (m) 6.5316 (DWT) ^0.2975 77.87
BREADTH (m) 1.719 (DWT) ^0.2903 19.3
DEPTH (m) 0.856 (DWT) ^0.271 8.18
DRAFT (m) 0.6927 (DWT) ^0.274 6.79
Table 1: Based upon research paper
24 | P a g e
Fig 5: Research paper graph
COMPARISON:
DIMENSIONS GRAPHICAL METHOD BASED ON RESEARCH

PAPER
(meter)
(meter)
LOA (m) 83.8 84.9
LBP (m) 76.8 77.87
BREADTH (m) 18 19.3
DEPTH (m) 8 8.18
DRAFT (m) 6.7 6.79
L/B 4.26 4.03
B/T 2.7 2.84
L/D 9.63 9.52
B/D 2.26 2.36
Table 2: Comparison of main dimensions
• We chose the main dimensions based on research paper.

25 | P a g e
PRELIMINARY CALCULATION:
The preliminary calculations are done based on the existing

empirical formula and the following particulars are calculated.
PARTICULARS FORMULAE VALUES
LOA LBP/91.7% 84.9m
LWL 107.3% ∗ LBP 83.6m
Block coefficient 𝐶𝐵 = C − 1.68Fn 0.6
Volume of displacement ∇ = CB ∗ L ∗ B ∗ T 6573.1m3
Displacement ∆= ∇∗ρ 6737.4tonnes
Mid ship coefficient C𝑀 = 0.977 + 0.085 (𝐶𝐵 – 0.60) 0.98
Midship area A𝑀= C𝑀 ∗ B ∗ T 128.05m2
Prismatic coefficient 𝐶𝑃 = 𝐶𝐵 /𝐶𝑀 0.61
Water plane area coefficient 𝐶𝑊𝑃 = (1 + 2 𝐶𝐵 /3) 0.73
Vertical Prismatic coefficient 𝐶𝑉𝑃 = 𝐶𝐵 /𝐶𝑊𝑃 0.82
Vertical center of Buoyancy KB = (0.90 – 0.36 C𝑀 ) ∗ T 3.72m
Longitudinal center of Buoyancy LCB = −1.35 + 19.4 𝐶𝑃 -1.6m
Table 3: Preliminary calculation
26 | P a g e
2.3 SAC & LINES PLAN:
We created the lines plan based upon sectional area curve method. From
SAC we got the body plan by matching each station area and the
respective orthogonal views are drawn and faired. Then the faired offset is
taken.
27 | P a g e
ST. / WL WL 0 WL A WL B WL C WL D WL E WL F WL G WL H DWL WL J WL K
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.1242 9.4508 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
0.25 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.7394 6.9888 9.6249 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
0.5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.2429 8.5530 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
0.75 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1966 2.4575 6.5217 9.4843 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1315 2.7128 4.8142 8.2882 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
1.5 0.0000 0.0000 2.6400 5.3166 7.1528 8.7244 9.6166 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
2 0.0000 3.0995 6.9192 8.5157 9.2010 9.6245 9.6450 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
2.5 0.0000 7.2851 8.9952 9.3352 9.5569 9.6350 9.6450 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
3 2.6602 8.8341 9.3710 9.5088 9.6177 9.6350 9.6450 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
3.5 4.9158 9.0439 9.4244 9.5615 9.6157 9.6350 9.6450 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
4 5.8140 9.0600 9.4340 9.5710 9.6200 9.6350 9.6450 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
4.5 5.8140 9.0600 9.4340 9.5710 9.6200 9.6350 9.6450 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
5 5.5170 8.9065 9.3763 9.5319 9.5769 9.5976 9.6300 9.6470 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
5.5 4.1470 7.9852 8.8373 9.2313 9.4194 9.5197 9.5746 9.6060 9.6380 9.6500 9.6500 9.6500
6 2.3010 6.6577 7.9224 8.5935 9.0201 9.3029 9.4541 9.5542 9.6090 9.6152 9.6251 9.6500
6.5 0.7220 5.0094 6.6886 7.743 8.3562 8.7311 8.968 9.1036 9.2127 9.2421 9.2804 9.3496
7 0.3220 3.2239 5.262 6.5321 7.3443 7.8308 8.1059 8.2746 8.3928 8.4237 8.4677 8.5438
7.5 0.0000 2.0628 3.6979 5.0037 5.9209 6.5487 6.9372 7.1774 7.3276 7.3593 7.4073 7.4824
8 0.0000 1.2573 2.4105 3.4408 4.3158 4.9883 5.4775 5.834 6.1002 6.1657 6.2843 6.4349
8.5 0.0000 0.6551 1.3681 2.0861 2.7835 3.4097 3.9138 4.3266 4.6426 4.7163 4.8454 5.0173
9 0.0000 0.3261 0.7239 1.1126 1.5052 1.9064 2.304 2.6943 3.0767 3.1818 3.3835 3.6361
9.25 0.0000 0.1261 0.4253 0.7274 1.0328 1.342 1.6548 1.9744 2.3027 2.3919 2.5698 2.8143
FAIRED OFFSET:
9.5 0.0000 0.0000 0.1417 0.3781 0.6227 0.8676 1.1063 1.3349 1.5519 1.6149 1.7467 1.9531
9.75 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0194 0.1904 0.3587 0.5210 0.6718 0.7967 0.8369 0.9210 1.0688
10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0109 0.0000
28 | P a g e
CHAPTER 3
BONJEAN CURVES, HYDROSTATICS
29 | P a g e
3.1 GENERAL:
By having the Faired offset of 20 waterline of equal spacing , We

found each waterline area at each station and drawn the Bonjean curves in Autocadd.In
anticipation of the vessel’s floating at various waterlines in the course of its service,it is
usual to calculate the trim advance , total displacement and certain other properties of the
vessels form up to each of a number of arbitrarily selected and parallel waterlines.These
waterlines are plotted in the diagram known as the curves of Hydrostatic properties of the
vessel’s form or simply as the displacement and other curves.
3.2
BONJEAN CURVES
30 | P a g e
3.3 HYDROSTATICS CALCULATION:
By having the faired offset of 10 waterline of equal spacing

, We found Hydrostatics characteristics for each Waterline and drawn the Hydrostatics
curves in Autocadd.
HYDROSTATIC PARTICULAR FOR EACH WATERLINE

No. of WL 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00
WL Spacing 0.82 1.64 2.45 3.27 4.09 4.91 5.73 6.54 7.36 8.18
Particulars Unit WL A WL B WL C WL D WL E WL F WL G WL H WL J WL K
650.06 790.70 895.66 976.09 1053.29 1131.64 1232.48 1325.47 1338.49 1345.93
13.71 28.90 44.47 60.17 75.94 91.73 107.52 123.30 139.09 154.88
25544.55 31520.78 35827.07 39028.93 41590.80 43576.36 45204.15 46379.79 47047.98 47568.26
m 39.30 39.86 40.00 39.98 39.49 38.51 36.68 34.99 35.15 35.34
m 2.5 2 1.8 1.81 2.3 3.286 5.1 6.8 6.64 6.45
1098452.38 1406710.80 1634007.71 1808400.08 1943817.70 2045033.44 2124082.91 2186388.80 2232830.40 2269623.41
13302.99 17812.82 21308.51 24198.52 26801.60 29148.29 32119.80 36666.48 37252.09 37466.07
94658.17 150152.75 200896.14 247828.80 301535.49 367025.53 466114.74 563498.44 579089.51 588452.70
421.46 1009.40 1702.43 2468.82 3299.49 4192.44 5156.26 6208.92 7299.64 8397.65
tonnes 432.00 1034.64 1744.99 2530.54 3381.98 4297.26 5285.16 6364.15 7482.13 8607.59
194.79 924.03 2347.11 4545.78 7607.80 11629.56 16759.77 23223.07 30807.52 39340.62
16327.55 39749.77 67404.85 98076.74 131099.15 165961.88 202296.57 239788.78 278016.41 316720.42
m 224.59 148.75 118.01 100.38 91.39 87.54 90.40 90.76 79.33 70.07
m 31.56 17.65 12.52 9.80 8.12 6.95 6.23 5.91 5.10 4.46
KB m 0.46 0.92 1.38 1.84 2.31 2.77 3.25 3.74 4.22 4.68
m 32.03 18.56 13.90 11.64 10.43 9.73 9.48 9.65 9.32 9.15
m 225.06 149.67 119.38 102.22 93.69 90.32 93.65 94.50 83.55 74.76
TPC tonnes 6.66 8.10 9.18 10.00 10.80 11.60 12.63 13.59 13.72 13.80
m 38.74 39.38 39.59 39.73 39.73 39.59 39.23 38.62 38.09 37.72
m 3.05 2.41 2.20 2.07 2.06 2.21 2.56 3.17 3.71 4.08
tonnes 12.46 19.76 26.44 32.62 39.69 48.31 61.35 74.17 76.23 77.46
- 0.47 0.51 0.53 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.59 0.61 0.64
- 0.59 0.65 0.69 0.71 0.73 0.74 0.77 0.82 0.83 0.83
- 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.98
- 0.51 0.54 0.56 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.57 0.60 0.63 0.65
SCALE RATIO : (For the hydrostatic curves)
BML , KML = 1: 20
BMT , KMT = 1: 2
MAFT = 1: 2500
IL= 1: 150000
IT= 1: 2000
31 | P a g e
HYDROSTATICS CURVES:
32 | P a g e
CHAPTER 4
RESISTANCE & POWERING CALCULATION
33 | P a g e
4.1 RESISTANCE CALCULATION:
We used Holtrop Menon method to find the resistance. In order to

consider the effect of X- bow we done the resistance in maxsurf, (i.e) we created the
model in maxsurf and found the resistance using holtrop and menon method, fung
method and slender body method.
Particulars needed to find the resistance.
V 15.5 knots
1.188
LR 36.411 m
LCB -3.6 m
T/L 0.081237551
L/B 4.330502598
B/L 0.230920079
T/B 0.351799426
L/T 12.30957834
Δ1/3 19.71994636
AT 13.881 m2
TF/L 0.081237551
ρ 1.025 t/m3
76.1523728
d -0.9
L/LR 2.295624949
Fn 0.278439845
Table 4: Resistance calculation
COMPONENTS OF FORMULAE VALUES

FRICTIONAL
RESISTANCE
Coefficient of 0.075/(log Rn-2)2 0.001647

Frictional resistance
Wetted surface area L(2T+B)*SQRT(CM)[0.453+0.4425CB-0.2862CM- 2014.0051

0.003467(B/T)+0.3696CWP]+2.38ABT/CB
C14 1+0.011*Cstern 1.11
1+k1 0.93+0.487118C14(B/L)1.06(T/L)0.46(L/LR)0.121(L3/∇)0.36(1- 1.289

CP)-0.604247
34 | P a g e
Frictional resistance CF*(1/2)𝜌SV2 108.046 KN

APPENDAGES
RESISTANCE
(1+k2)eq 𝜀(1 + 𝐾 2)SAPP/ 𝜀SAPP 5
Sapp 100.7002
APPENDAGES 0.5𝜌V2SAPP(1+K2)eq 27.01149

RESISTANCE

WAVE MAKING
RESISTANCE
C1 2223105C73.79(T/B)1.079(90-ie)-1.375 8.79
C7 B/L 0.231
IE 1+89exp{-(L/B)0.808(1-CWP)0.304(100Δ/L3)0.16}(1-CP- 24
0.0225LCB)0.63(LR/B)0.345
C2 EXP(-1.89SQRT(C3)) 1
C5 1-0.8AT/(BTCM) 0.913
λ 1.446CP-0.03L/B 0.7581
M1 0.0140407L/T-1.75254∇1/3/L -2.676
C16 8.07981CP-13.8673CP2+6.984388CP3 1.35
M2 C15 CP2 EXP(-0.1FN-2) -0.176
WAVE MAKING C1C2C5∇𝜌gexp{m1FND+m2cos(λ1FN-2)} 132.723

RESISTANCE
35 | P a g e
IMMERSED FORMULAE VALUES
TRANSOM
RESISTANCE
FnT V/SQRT(2GaT/(B+BCWP)) 2.88
C6 0.2(1-0.2Fnt) 0.0847
IMMERSED 0.5𝜌v2ATC6 38.29

TRANSOM
RESISTANCE
MODEL SHIP CO- FORMULAE VALUES

RELATION
RESISTANCE
CA 0.006(L+100)-0.16- 0.000556
0.00205+0.003SQRT(L/7.5)CB4C2(0.04-C4)
C4 0.04 0.04
C2 EXP(-1.89SQRT(C3)) 1
MODEL SHIP CO- 1/2 𝜌v2SCA 36.4685

RELATION
RESISTANCE
36 | P a g e
MODEL CREATED IN MAXSURF SOFTWARE:
Fig 6: model created in maxsurf
37 | P a g e
Fig 8: Resistance values – Maxsurf result
From the Maxsurf ,
Total resistance RT : 321.29 kN (Holtrop Menon Method)

38 | P a g e
4.2 POWERING:
Total Resistance RT = RF(1+K1)+RAPP+RW+RB+RTR+RA 321.29 kN

(From MAXSURF)
Effective Power PE = RT*V 2561.7 kW
QPC 0.7
Delivered Power PD = PE/QPC 3659.6 kW
Sea Margin SM = (1+0.18) * PD 4318.3 kW
Electrical Losses EL = (1+0.08) * Sea Margin 4663.8 kW
Maximum Continous MCR = 85% of Electrical Losses 5486.8 kW

Rating
Each Genset MCR MCR/2 2743.4 kW
Table 5: Powering calculation
Power required for two Genset : 5486.8 kW (Each Genset : 2743.4 kW)
Tunnel Thruster : 1200 kW
Retractable Thruster : 880 kW
Total Power required : 6774.8 kW
Therefore , to fulfil the above requirements we selected two Rolls Royce Genset
(Model - B32:40L8A)
Genset Specification :
MCR 4000 kW
SPEED 750 rpm
SFC 184 g/kWh
SLOC 0.8 g/kWh
WEIGHT 73672 kg
Fig 9 : Genset arrangement
39 | P a g e
Fig 10: Power vs speed graph – (From Maxsurf)
4.3 HULL RESONANCE:
hull resonance
added mass
Δsi 14468.4
vertical vibrations
-5 5
Nv2 124.079 cpm 117.875 130.283
Nv3 248.159 cpm 235.751 260.567
Nv4 372.238 cpm 353.626 390.85
Nv5 496.317 cpm 471.501 521.133
horizontal vibrations
-5 5
Nh2 212.558 cpm 201.93 223.186
Nh3 425.116 cpm 403.861 446.372
Nh4 637.674 cpm 605.791 669.558
Nh5 850.233 cpm 807.721 892.744
selected rpm 800-1200

40 | P a g e
3 blade 4 blade
rpm no. of blade rpm rpm no.of blade rpm
100 3 300 100 4 400
200 3 600 200 4 800
300 3 900 300 4 1200
400 3 1200 400 4 1600
500 3 1500 500 4 2000
600 3 1800 600 4 2400
700 3 2100 700 4 2800
800 3 2400 800 4 3200
900 3 2700 900 4 3600
1000 3 3000 1000 4 4000
1100 3 3300 1100 4 4400
1200 3 3600 1200 4 4800
41 | P a g e
4.4 MACHINERY SELECTION:
GENSET
Genset type B32:40L

MCR 4000 kW
SPEED 750 rpm
SFC 184 g/kWh
SLOC 0.8 g/kWh
WEIGHT 73672 kg
AZIMUTHAL THRUSTER
NOS 2
TYPE AZP120
POWER 3500 KW
SPEED 1200 rpm
DRY Wt 45 t
PROP. DIAMETER 3300 mm
RETRACTABLE THRUSTER
NOS 1
TYPE ULE1201
POWER 880 KW
SPEED 1000 rpm
DRY Wt 21 t
TUNNEL THRUSTER
NOS 1
TYPE 2000CP
POWER 1200 KW
SPEED 1480 rpm
TIP SPED 32.8 m/s
42 | P a g e
CHAPTER 5
CAPACITY CALCULATION &
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT PLAN
43 | P a g e
5.1 GENERAL:
The capacity calculation is done with the help of parent ship analysis. The
amount of cargo that the vessel can carry and supply to the oil fields is calculated and the
respective general arrangement plan is done. The cement and mud tanks are taken for
special considerations because of its shape. LFL tanks are surrounded with void spaces
because of its nature (i.e) due to low flash points it can burst easily.
5.2 CAPACITY CALCULATION:
S.NO TANKS FOR FORCARGO DENSITY CAPACITY

OWNUSE t/
1 Fresh Water 0.4878 1032.51 1 1033
2 Ballast / Drill water - 1676.1 1.025 1676.1
3 Fuel Oil 9.01 1464.99 0.86 1474
4 Lubricant Oil 0.0365 39.06 0.92 39.1
5 Miscellaneous 2.64 18.16 1 20.8
6 Hydraulic Oil - 3.8 0.92 3.8
7 Cement - 254 2.4 254
8 Mud - 1307 2.8 1307
9 Sludge - 12.4 1 12.4
10 Brine - 1307 2.5 1307
11 LFL - 153 1.2 153
12 Base Oil - 259 0.83 259
13 Slop - 511 1 511
Table 6: Capacity calculation
44 | P a g e
5.3 TANK SEGREGATION:
TANK NO. VOLUME TYPE OF TANK WEIGHT

tonnes
1 102.2 WB/DW 104.74
2 111.8 FW 111.7
3 111.9 FW 111.8
4 89.7 FW 89.6
5 89.7 FW 89.6
6 76.9 WB/DW 78.8
7 57.6 WB/DW 59
8 57.6 WB/DW 59
9 60.8 WB/DW 62.3
10 60.7 WB/DW 62.2
11 83.5 WB/DW 85.5
12 83.5 WB/DW 85.5
13 72.5 WB/DW 74.2
14 72.5 WB/DW 74.2
15 94.4 WB/DW 96.7
16 94.4 WB/DW 96.7
17 74.3 WB/DW 76.1
18 74.3 WB/DW 76.1
19 89.9 WB/DW 92.1
20 89.9 WB/DW 92.1
21 88.3 FW 88.3
22 88.3 FW 88.3
23 27 WB/DW 27.6
24 27 WB/DW 27.6
25 61.5 FW 61.4
26 61.5 FW 61.4
27 23.1 WB/DW 23.6
28 23.1 WB/DW 23.6
29 77.7 FO 66.8
30 62.6 FO 53.8
31 82.2 FO 70.6
32 82.2 FO 70.6
33 163.8 FO/MUD/BRINE 140.868 458.64 409.5
34 163.8 FO/MUD/BRINE 140.868 458.64 409.5
35 163.8 FO/MUD/BRINE 140.868 458.64 409.5
36 163.8 FO/MUD/BRINE 140.868 458.64 409.5
37 163.8 FO/MUD/BRINE 140.868 458.64 409.5
38 163.8 FO/MUD/BRINE 140.868 458.64 409.5
39 163.8 SLOP/MUD/BRINE 163.8 458.64 409.5
40 163.8 SLOP/MUD/BRINE 163.8 458.64 409.5
45 | P a g e
41 129.9 BASE OIL/ FO 111.7
42 129.7 BASE OIL/ FO 111.5
43 36.6 LFL 43.9
44 36.6 LFL 43.9
45 40.3 LFL 48.3
46 40.3 LFL 48.3
47 125.2 FW 125.2
48 205.7 FW 205.6
49 63.7 CEMENT 152.8
50 63.7 CEMENT 152.8
51 63.7 CEMENT 152.8
52 63.7 CEMENT 152.8
53 42.9 VOID
54 3.9 HO 3.5
55 14.2 FO 12.2
56 14.2 FO 12.5
57 17.6 FO 15.1
58 17.6 FO 15.1
59 8 FO 6.8
60 41.6 FO 35.7
61 1.6 FO 1.4
62 8.9 MIS 8.8
63 4 MIS 3.9
64 8 SLUDGE 7.9
65 8 MIS 7.9
66 4.5 SLUDGE 4.4
67 9.1 LO 8.4
68 4.8 LO 4.4
69 5 LO 4.5
70 6.1 LO 5.6
71 8 LO 7.3
72 6.1 LO 5.6
73 16 VOID
74 16 VOID
75 20.2 VOID
Table 7: Tank segregation
WB / DW – Water Ballast / Drill water FW – Fresh Water
LFL – Low Flashpoint Liquid FO / LO – Fuel Oil / Lube Oil
MIS – Miscellaneous HO – Hydraulic Oil

46 | P a g e
5.4 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT PLAN:
FRAME SPACING:
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT (IRS, Pt.3, Ch.10.)
1. COLLISION BULKHEAD
Xc max = 0.05*L - XR +3. (m) 5.745 m
Xc min = 0.05*L - XR. (m) 2.745 m
XR = min (0.5*G ; 0.015*L ; 3) 1.5
G = Distance from FP to extreme length of bulb. 3m
2. AFT PEAK BULKHEAD
Refer - part.3, ch.10, sect.2.
2. TRANSVERSE FRAMING - ST
ST = 450 + 2L 619.8 mm
3. LONGITUDINAL FRAMING - SL
SL = 550 + 2L 719.8 mm
THICKNESS - t
t =600mm, In b/w aft peak and 0.2 L from FP.
t =700mm, In b/w collision bkh and 0.2 L from FP.
47 | P a g e
48 | P a g e
CHAPTER 6
SCANTLING & STRENGTH CALCULATION
49 | P a g e
6.1 GENERAL:
First the longitudinal strength calculation is done from the DNV rule book based
on still water and wave bending moment. Then the corresponding required section
modulus is calculated. Then the material to be used (i.e) grade of steel used is fixed. Then
the scantling calculation is done based on the plate thickness formulae given in the DNV
rule book.
6.2 STRENGTH CALCULATION:
STEEL PROPERTIES - ORDINARY HULL STRUCTURAL STEEL
2
MINIMUM YIELD STESS 235 N/mm
2
TENSILE STRENGTH 400 to 490 N/mm
2
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY - E 206000 N/mm
MATERIAL FACTOR - K 1
GRADE -A ( STEEL PROPERTIES)
2
YIELD STESS 240 N/mm
2
TENSILE STRENGTH 410 N/mm
THICKNESS 20 to 40 mm
Table 8: Strength calculation
STILL WATER BENDING MOMENT
Particulars Formulae Values
fsw 1 for 0.3L< X < 0.7L 1
Cw 0.0856L 7.3
HOG fsw (171* Cw* L2 *B(CB+.7)*10-3- Mw'h) 109492.1 KN-m
MSW SAG -0.85*fsw (171* Cw* L2 *B(CB+.7)*10-3-Mw's) -2836702.7 KN-m
50 | P a g e
WAVE BENDING MOMENT
FT TLC/TSC not less than 0.5 2.54
FM 1 for 0.4L< X < 0.65L 1
Fnl’h 1 1
Fnl’s 0.58(CB-0.7/CB) 1.26
FVIB 1.10 for B<28m 1.1
FP 1 1
HOG 0.19*fnl*fm*fp*Cw*L2 *B*CB 115254.8 m3
MSW SAG -0.19*fnl*fm*fp*Cw*L2 *B*CB -144836.9 m3
TOTAL BENDING MOMENT
MT HOG MS+ MW 224746.85 KN-m
SAG MS+ MW -2981539..5 KN-m
SECTION MODULUS
Z MS+ MW/σ 1.28 m3
51 | P a g e
6.3 SCANTLING CALCULATION:
Type Formulae Thickness
Actual Available
(mm) (mm)
Keel plate t > 2mm that required for 14 14

the adjacent bottom plating.
Bottom plate t = (to +0.04*L)*√K + tc 10.4 12
Inner bottom plate t = (to +0.03*L)*√K + tc 9.55 10
Bilge plate t = (to +0.03*L)*√K + tc 9.55 10
Side shell plate t = (5 + c *L)*√K + tc 10.4 12
Sheer strake plate t = + 30% of side shell 13.51 14

plating
Deck plate t = ( to + 0.02*L)*√k +tc 9.7 10
Tween deck plate t = ( to + 0.02*L)*√k +tc 9.2 10
Center girder t = (0.008*d + 4)*√K 4.065 4
Side girder t = (0.008*d + 1)*√K 1.065 1
Bulkhead t = (5 + c*L)* √k + tc 8.7 10
Super Lower t = (5 +0.01*L1 ) √k 5.85 6

structure tier
Upper t = (5 +0.01*L1 ) √k 4.85 6

tier
Table 9: Scantling calculation
52 | P a g e
CHAPTER 7
MID SHIP CALCULATION & SHELL EXPANSION CURVE
53 | P a g e
ITEMS SIZE WIDTH DEPTH QTY AREA h AREA*h AREA*h2 MOI (bd3/12)
2 3 4 4
units mm m m m m m m m
keel plating 1200*14 1.2 0.014 2 0.0336 -0.007 -0.0002352 1.6464E-06 5.488E-07
Bottom plating 5000*12 5 0.012 2 0.12 -0.006 -0.00072 0.00000432 0.00000144
Bilge plating 4500*12 4.5 0.012 2 0.108 0.615 0.06642 0.0408483 0.000001296
Inner bottom plating 9200*10 9.2 0.01 2 0.184 0.985 0.18124 0.1785214 1.53333E-06
Main deck plating 9650*10 9.65 0.01 2 0.193 8.185 1.579705 12.92988543 1.60833E-06
side shell plating 12*4500 0.012 4.5 2 0.108 4.43 0.47844 2.1194892 0.18225
sheer strake plating 14*1500 0.014 1.5 2 0.042 7.43 0.31206 2.3186058 0.007875
Centre girder 4*980 0.004 0.98 1 0.00392 0.49 0.0019208 0.000941192 0.000313731
side girder 2*980 0.002 0.98 6 0.01176 0.49 0.0057624 0.002823576 0.000941192
Bottom longitudinal 10*200 0.01 0.2 18 0.0432 0.1158 0.00500256 0.000579296 0.00012
Inner bottom longitudinal 10*200 0.01 0.2 26 0.0624 0.8642 0.05392608 0.046602918 0.000173333
Main deck longitudinal 10*200 0.01 0.2 30 0.072 8.0642 0.5806224 4.682255158 0.0002
Bilge longitudinal 1 10*200 0.01 0.2 2 0.0048 0.45 0.00216 0.000972 1.33333E-05
MIDSHIP CALCULATION:
Bilge longitudinal 4 10*200 0.01 0.2 2 0.0048 0.133 0.0006384 8.49072E-05 1.33333E-05
Side longitudinal 1 200*10 0.2 0.01 2 0.0048 5.9258 0.02844384 0.168552507 3.33333E-08
54 | P a g e
summation 1.02508 54.7932 3.37520164 22.81917208 0.191933182
7.1
SECTION MODULUS GIVEN TO THE SHIP:
Particulars Formulae Value Units
Y'KEEL ∑Area/ ∑Area*h 3.3 m
Y'DECK Depth- Y'KEEL 4.9 m
IBL ∑area*h^2+∑MOI 23 m4
INA IBL-∑Area* Y'KEEL^2 11.9 m4
Z'KEEL(available) Y'KEEL / INA 3.6 m3
Z'DECK Y'DECK / INA 2.4 m3
σ 175/K 175 KN/m2
Z(actual) 1.28 m3
Table 10: Section modulus given to the ship
MIDSHIP CALCULATION:
55 | P a g e
7.2 SHELL EXPANSION PLAN:
Station Girth Keel Bottom Bilge Side Sheer

Length Plate Plate Plate Shell Strake
Plate Plate
(from (from (from
base) keel) bottom (from (from
plate) bilge sheer
plate) strake)
0 11.036 1.2 4.09 4.5 - 1.25
0.25 11.36 1.2 4.27 4.5 - 1.39
0.5 11.59 1.2 4.27 4.5 0.12 1.5
0.75 11.56 1.2 4.22 4.5 0.14 1.5
1 11.75 1.2 4.42 4.5 0.14 1.5
1.25 12.15 1.2 4.59 4.5 0.35 1.5
1.5 12.61 1.2 4.78 4.5 0.62 1.5
2 16.58 1.2 5 4.5 1.38 1.5
2.5 14.94 1.2 5 4.5 2.74 1.5
3 15.97 1.2 4.27 4.5 4.5 1.5
3.5 16.49 1.2 4.79 4.5 4.5 1.5
4 16.71 1.2 5 4.5 4.5 1.5
4.5 16.73 1.2 5 4.5 4.5 1.5
5 16.733 1.2 5 4.5 4.5 1.5
5.5 16.59 1.2 4.89 4.5 4.5 1.5
6 15.98 1.2 4.28 4.5 4.5 1.5
6.5 15.23 1.2 3.53 4.5 4.5 1.5
7 14.38 0.722 3.16 4.5 4.5 1.5
7.5 13.33 0.322 2.5 4.5 4.5 1.5
56 | P a g e
8 12.09 - 1.59 4.5 4.5 1.5
8.5 10.87 - 0.34 4.5 4.5 1.5
9 9.76 - - 3.76 4.5 1.5
9.5 8.82 - - 2.82 4.5 1.5
9.75 8.21 - - 2.21 4.5 1.5
10 7.32 - - 1.32 4.5 1.5
10.25 5.92 - - - 4.42 1.5
10.5 1.16 - - - - 1.15
Table 11: Shell expansion
SHELL EXPANSION CURVE:
57 | P a g e
CHAPTER 8
TONNAGE AND WEIGHT CALCULATION
58 | P a g e
8.1 GENERAL:
The tonnage calculation is done based upon the Ship design and efficiency
by Robert & Taggart. First we calculated the total enclosed volume of the ship as Gross
tonnage and the net cargo we going to carry as Net tonnage.
8.2 TONNAGE CALCULATION:
GROSS TONNAGE
Enclosed Hull Volume VH=Δ(1.25D/d-0.115) 9379 m3
Super Structure Volume L*B*D 4716 m3
Total Enclosed Volume V=VH+ VS 14095 m3
K1 0.2+0.02LOG10V 0.28
Gross Tonnage K1 V 3988 m3
NET TONNAGE
Cargo Volume 4853 m3
K2 0.2+0.02LOG10V 0.27
K3 1.25(GT+10000/10000) 1.75
Net Tonnage K1 V 1640 m3
TONNAGE
GROSS TONNAGE 3988 m3
NET TONNAGE 1640 m3
Table 12: Tonnage calculation
59 | P a g e
8.3 WEIGHT CALCULATION:
WEIGHT UNIT AREA VOLUME COEFFICIENT WEIGHT

GROUP TON/UNIT (TONNES)
Hull Volume - 9379 0.13 1219

structure
Super Volume - 4716 0.06 283

structure
Interior Area 673.5 - 0.15 123

outfitting
Ship Volume - 5180.3 0.005 34

outfitting
Machinery - - - - 800
Reserve 5%
LIGHT WEIGHT 2582.2
∆ 6737 tonnes
LIGHT WEIGHT 2582 tonnes
DEAD WEIGHT 4152 tonnes
Table 13: Weight calculation
60 | P a g e
WEIGHT CURVE:
61 | P a g e
CHAPTER 9
STABILITY AND FREEBOARD CALCULATION
62 | P a g e
9.1 GENERAL
The freeboard calculation is done based upon the DNV rule book. The
corrections for freeboard with CB, Super structure, depth, minimum bow height is
calculated. Then the stability calculation is done with KN curves for all the waterlines
and for all the angles of hell from 5* to 85*.
9.2 FREEBOARD CALCULATION:
Moulded depth 8.18 m
Deck plate thickness 0.01 m
Total depth 8.19 m
ACCORDING TO ICLL REGULATION -3
Free board length Free board length at 85% 78.59 m

mld depth mini 96% LWL
from stem to the axis of
rudder stock on a water
line.
Depth 85% mld depth. 6.9 m
Block coefficient 0.59
CORRECTION FOR CB.
Free board depth From table for type A free 828 mm

board according toICLL
1966.
Corrected freeboard Fnew=(FD 770.72mm

*(CB+0.68))/1.36).
63 | P a g e
CORRECTION FOR DEPTH
R 163.73
Corrected freeboard F=(D-L/15)R 414.24 mm
CORRECTION FOR SUPER STRUCTURE
F For length >85 m -860 mm
Effective length of 0.34*L. 26.6

superstructure.
% of deduction. 23.8
Corrected freeboard -206.4 mm
CORRECTION FOR MINIMUM BOW HEIGHT
Awf waterplane area forward of 560.8 m2

L/2 in m2
Cwf Awf / FL * B 0.37
Minimum bow height is According to regulation 39 6306.5 mm

achieved
Table 14: Freeboard calculation
REQUIRED FREEBOARD = 978.5mm
AVAILABLE FREEBOARD = 1400mm
DIFFERENCE = 421.4mm
64 | P a g e
9.3 STABILITY CALCULATION:
KN CURVES:
KN value displac 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
wlA 431.9982 3.1053 4.6024 5.2722 5.6572 5.9245 6.1451 6.3506 6.5291 6.5297 6.4315 6.2602 6.0508 5.8026 5.5172 5.214 4.8948 4.5436
wlB 1034.639 1.8387 3.2951 4.4088 5.0729 5.5252 5.8802 6.1873 6.3367 6.3412 6.2685 6.1299 5.9519 5.7322 5.4714 5.1874 4.8823 4.5402
wlC 1744.986 1.3243 2.4706 3.5959 4.4818 5.122 5.6131 5.9488 6.097 6.1314 6.0954 5.9946 5.8506 5.6608 5.4251 5.1607 4.8699 4.5367
wlD 2530.538 1.0651 2.0066 3.0088 3.9311 4.7182 5.3049 5.6423 5.8261 5.9064 5.9146 5.8555 5.7474 5.5886 5.3785 5.134 4.8574 4.5333
wlE 3381.981 0.9186 1.7344 2.6304 3.5028 4.3231 4.9088 5.293 5.5337 5.6701 5.7277 5.7132 5.6425 5.5155 5.3316 5.1071 4.8448 4.5298
wlF 4297.256 0.8328 1.5704 2.3934 3.1985 3.9 4.4734 4.9167 5.226 5.4252 5.5362 5.5681 5.5364 5.4417 5.2843 5.0801 4.8323 4.5264
wlG 5285.162 0.7811 1.4709 2.2461 2.8972 3.4942 4.0433 4.5297 4.9076 5.1736 5.3407 5.421 5.4289 5.3674 5.2369 5.053 4.8198 4.5229
wlH 6364.148 0.7522 1.4127 2.0513 2.5903 3.1283 3.6503 4.1526 4.5853 4.917 5.142 5.2718 5.3204 5.2925 5.1891 5.0258 4.8071 4.5195
wlJ 7482.128 0.7356 1.2571 1.802 2.2971 2.8053 3.304 3.8034 4.2687 4.6583 4.9407 5.1211 5.211 5.217 5.1411 4.9986 4.7945 4.5159
wl K 8607.594 0.5174 1.0242 1.5201 2.0058 2.4837 2.8858 3.4431 3.9556 4.4274 4.7611 4.9783 5.0934 5.1168 5.0565 4.8838 4.7083 4.4307
KN CURVES
7
5
6
10
5 15
20
4
DRAFT
25
3
30
2 35
40
1
45
0 50
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
55
DISPLACEMENT
65 | P a g e
GZ CURVE:
To find the initial GM values from the GZ curve we need to draw a perpendicular
line at 57.3° (i.e 1 radian) and a tangent is drawn to the curve from 0, the meeting of these
two lines gives the GM value at Y- axis.
KG= 5.3m (initial)
KB= 3.9m (From hydrostatics)
BMT=4.43m (From hydrostatics)
GM= KB + BM - KG
GM= 3.9+ 4.43 – 5.3
GM = 3.07m
GZ
1.5
0.5
GZ
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
-0.5
-1
66 | P a g e
CHAPTER 10
EQUIPMENT NUMBER & TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
67 | P a g e
10.1 GENERAL
The equipment number calculation is done based upon DNV rule book.
The equipment number for our respective vessel is calculated. Then the corresponding
deck equipments are recorded as given in the rule book. Then the technical specifications
of the ship are given.
10.2 EQUIPMENT NUMBER:
EQUIPMENT NUMBER
Δ moulded displacement, [t], 6736.5

to the summer load water
line
H effective height, [m], from 169

the summer load waterline
to the top of the uppermost
deckhouse
A area [m2] in profile view of 463.9

the hull, superstructures
and houses above the
summer load waterline,
which is within the Rule
length of the vessel.
Houses of breadth less than
B/4 are to be disregarded.
K K = 1.00 for vessels of 1

Unrestricted Service.
ENc ENc = Δ2/3 + 2BH + 0.1A 6974
EN EN = K.ENc 6974
Table 15: Equipment number
As per given table, for EN = 6900 & ≤ 7400
Equipment letter : D
68 | P a g e
Stockless bower anchor
Number 2 Nos
Mass per anchor 21500 Kg
Stud-link chain cables for bower anchors
Total length 770 m
Diameter & CC2 127-254 mm

grade
CC3 114-228
Towline
Minimum length 300 m
Minimum breaking 1471 kN

strength
Mooring line
Number 10 Nos
Length of each rope 200 m
Minimum breaking 726 kN

strength
Table 16: Equipments
69 | P a g e
10.3 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION:
TANK CAPACITIES
Fuel oil :1474 m3

Fresh water :1033 m3
Ballast water / Drill water :1676 m3
Mud (sp. gr.2,8 t/m3) :1307 m3
Brine (sp. gr.2,5 t/m3) :1307 m3
Cement (4 tanks) :254 m3
LFL* (4 tanks) :153 m3
Base oil :259 m3
Sludge :12.4m3
Slop :512m3
Manoeuvering/Positioning
• Dynamic Positioning System DnV
AUTR, IMO Class II.
Position reference systems:
two DGPS, RADius 1000
CyScan Mk4
MACHINERY & PROPULSION EQUIPMENT
MAIN ENGINE
Genset type : Rolls Royce B32:40L
MCR :4000KW
Speed :750rpm
SFC :184 g/KWh
SLOC :0.8g/KWh
Weight :73672 kg
AZIMUTHAL THRUSTER
Nos :2
Type : AZP120
Power : 3500KW
Speed :1200rpm
Dry weight :45t
Propeller diameter :3300mm
RETRACTABLE THRUSTER
70 | P a g e
Nos :1
Type : ULE1201
Power : 880KW
Speed :1000rpm
Dry weight :18t
TUNNEL THRUSTER
Nos :1
Type :2000CP
Power : 1200KW
Speed :1480rpm
Tip speed :32.8m/sec
71 | P a g e
CHAPTER 11
SPECIALIZATION
72 | P a g e
11.1 GENERAL:
FUEL CONSUMPTION
An independent maritime institution has performed a comparison study between a short

sea container vessel with X-BOW hull line design and an equivalent container vessel
with a conventional bow under expected service conditions. With a design speed of 18
knots, the difference in fuel consumption is shown in the chart below. Results show 7-
16% fuel reduction, depending on ship speed and sea state.
Table 11 : Fuel consumption
73 | P a g e
We now prove it numerically,

FRICTIONAL
RESISTANCE
Coefficient of 0.075/(log Rn-2)2 0.001645

Frictional resistance
Wetted surface area L(2T+B)*SQRT(CM)[0.453+0.4425CB-0.2862CM- 2189.44

0.003467(B/T)+0.3696CWP]+2.38ABT/CB
C14 1+0.011*Cstern 1.11
1+k1 0.93+0.487118C14(B/L)1.06(T/L)0.46(L/LR)0.121(L3/∇)0.36(1- 1.35

CP)-0.604247
Frictional resistance CF*(1/2)𝜌SV2 117.46 KN

APPENDAGES
RESISTANCE
(1+k2)eq 𝜀(1 + 𝐾 2)SAPP/ 𝜀SAPP 5
Sapp 109.472
APPENDAGES 0.5𝜌V2SAPP(1+K2)eq 29.36

RESISTANCE
COMPONENTS FORMULAE VALUES

OF WAVE
MAKING
RESISTANCE
C1 2223105C73.79(T/B)1.079(90-ie)-1.375 8.79
C7 B/L 0.231
IE 1+89exp{-(L/B)0.808(1-CWP)0.304(100Δ/L3)0.16}(1-CP- 36
74 | P a g e
0.0225LCB)0.63(LR/B)0.345
C2 EXP(-1.89SQRT(C3)) 1
C5 1-0.8AT/(BTCM) 0.913
λ 1.446CP-0.03L/B 0.7581
M1 0.0140407L/T-1.75254∇1/3/L -2.572
C16 8.07981CP-13.8673CP2+6.984388CP3 1.22
M2 C15 CP2 EXP(-0.1FN-2) -0.25
WAVE C1C2C5∇𝜌gexp{m1FND+m2cos(λ1FN-2)} 196.26

MAKING
RESISTANCE
WAVE BREAKING FORMULAE VALUES

RESISTANCE
Abt Area of bulbous bow 9.6
Hb Height of bulbous bow 3.6
Atrans Area of transverse section 13.9
C3 0.56ABT1.5/{BT(0.31SQRT(ABT)+TF- 0.03
hB)
Pb 0.56SQRT(ABT)/(TF-1.5hB) 1.21
Fni V/SQRT(g(TF-hB- 1.38

0.25sqrt(ABT))+0.15V2))
WAVE BREAKING 0.11EXP(-3PB2)Fni3ABT1.5𝜌g/(1+Fni2) 3.89

RESISTANCE
75 | P a g e
IMMERSED TRANSOM FORMULAE VALUES
RESISTANCE
FnT V/SQRT(2GaT/(B+BCWP)) 2.93
C6 0.2(1-0.2Fnt) 0.083
IMMERSED TRANSOM 0.5𝜌v2ATC6 37.52

RESISTANCE
MODEL SHIP CO- FORMULAE VALUES

RELATION
RESISTANCE
CA 0.006(L+100)-0.16- 0.000556
4
0.00205+0.003SQRT(L/7.5)CB C2(0.04-
C4 )
C4 0.04 0.04
C2 EXP(-1.89SQRT(C3)) 1
MODEL SHIP CO- 1/2 𝜌v2SCA 36.4685

RELATION
RESISTANCE
TOTAL RF(1+K1)+RAPP+RW+RB+RTR+RA 465KN

RESISTANCE
PE RT*V 3707KW
PD PE/QPC 5296KW
SEA PD +18% OF PD 6250KW

MARGIN
ELECTRICAL SEA MARGIN+8% OF SEA MARGIN 6750KW

LOSSES
MCR 85% OF ELECTRICAL LOSES 7941KW
76 | P a g e
EACH MCR/2 3970KW
GENSET
MCR
SELECTION OF MAIN ENGINE:
MAIN ENGINE
Genset type B33:45L9A

MCR 5400 KW
SPEED 750 rpm
SFC 175 g/KWh
SLOC 0.5 g/KWh
WEIGHT 82900 kg
COMPARISON:
PARTICULARS X-BOW CONVENTIONAL UNITS

BOW
Total Resistance 321 465 kN
MCR (Required) 3783 5010 kW
MCR (Installed) 4000 5400 kW
SFC 184 175 g/kWh
SLOC 0.8 0.5 g/kWh
Fuel Consumption 10 12.4 tonnes

per voyage
Table 17: Comparison X bow vs Conventional bow
Thus, the amount of fuel oil we can save for each voyage by using X-Bow is 2.4 t.
77 | P a g e
CHAPTER 12
SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
78 | P a g e
12.1 SUMMARY:
The entire project covers basic calculations and drawing associated with the Preliminary
design of Platform supply vessel of 4150 DWT. The design started with a literature
survey collecting all data of ships having a close range of dead weight. These data’s serve
as a reference during the evaluation of main dimensions. Next stage was to evaluate the
main dimensions; this was done with the help of research paper and parent ship analysis.
Once the main dimensions were determined the next step was to perform dead weight
check.
Then the next step was to generate the lines plan. The sectional area curve was then used
to generate the lines plan, giving the three orthogonal views of the ship. This lines plan
was faired to generate the faired offset table.
Next stage of design was to perform a hydrostatic calculation to find all the hydrostatic
particulars at different waterlines. This calculation was done manually using excel
spreadsheets. Once the calculations were done with, they were used to plot the
hydrostatic curves. Next step was to perform resistance and powering calculations to fix a
suitable gen-set for the ship. To select the propeller, hull resonance calculations is done.
The next stage was to prepare a general arrangement plan satisfying the capacity
requirements. The capacity calculations were done manually referring to empirical
formulas for calculations. All the requirements for the general arrangement drawing were
adopted from the DNV rule book.
The scantlings of various structural members were found referring to DNV rule book.
The next step was to do the tonnage calculation, freeboard calculation. All the
calculations are performed manually and results are recorded. Then the shell expansion
curve is plotted.
Then the stability calculations are done. KN curves are plotted manually for all the
waterlines from 0* to 90*. The equipment number calculation is done and based on the
rule book the deck equipment’s needed for the ship are noted. Then the strength
calculations are done based on rule book.
As the last stage of the design the technical specifications were fixed for the vessel.
Then the specialization topic done is using X-bow how much fuel oil we can save at each
voyage is manipulated numerically. First, we calculated the resistance for both X- bow
and conventional bow of same dimensions. Then, comparing the results the amount of
fuel oil saved at each voyage by the ship is noted.
79 | P a g e
12.2 CONCLUSION:
Hence, the initial design of a Platform supply vessel is successfully completed.

According to the requirements, standards and regulations followed as per classification
societies.
Type of ship Platform supply vessel

Dead weight 4150T
Range 160Nm
Speed 15.5 knots
The designed vessel compiles with the rules and regulation, in order to sail safe and
efficient throughout its life time.
The completed initial design of a 4150 DWT PLATFORM SUPPLY VESSEL is now
ready for next level of detailed design and outfitting design.
12.3 FUTURE SCOPE OF WORK:
As the concept of X-bow is growing wide at rapid rate, this design has a good scope in
near future. The ulstien company designing this kind of bows gives excellent solution in
the North Sea region as the sea conditions prevailing there is worse.Now these type of
Bow is developed in other types of ship also due to its advantage.
80 | P a g e
REFERENCES:
• Principals of Naval architecture
• Basic ship theory (Rawson & Tupper)
• Ship design (Watson)
• Ship construction (D.J. Eyers)
• Ship design & construction (Robert Taggart)
• DNV rule book
• Ship stability for Masters and Mates (Derrett and Barras)
• Ship design for efficiency & economy (Schneekluth)
• An approximate power prediction method (J.Holtrop & G.G.Menon)
• Preliminary estimation of the Principal dimensions of offshore supply

vessel BASED on updated statistics. (MOHAMED WALID AHMED, AHMED
NAGUIB, ELSAYED H. HEGZY)
• Ulstein group
• Platform Supply Vessel, px121
81 | P a g e

PSV Major Project Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PSV Major Project Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DESIGN OF PLATFORM SUPPLY VESSEL WITH X-BOW

OF DWT 4150 TONNES

B.GOWRI SHANKAR S.DINESH KUMAR

for the award of the degree

DEPARTMENT OF NAVAL ARCHITECTURE & OFFSHORE

Cdr. Prashant Kumar Mr. Gopi Krishna

PROFESSOR & HOD (GUIDE)

DEPARTMENT OF NAVAL ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

B. GOWRI SHANKAR S.DINESH KUMAR

CHAPTER 2 PARENT SHIP ANALYSIS, MAIN DIMENSIONS, LINES PLAN

CHAPTER 3 BONJEAN & HYDROSTATICS

3.2 Bonjean curves……………………………………………………………...…...30

CHAPTER 4 RESISTANCE & POWERING

4.1 Resistance calculation…………………………………………………………..34

4.3 Hull resonance…………………………………………………………………..40

4.4 Machinery selection……………………………………………………………..42

5.2 Capacity calculation…………………………………………………………….44

5.3 Tank segregation………………………………………………………………..45

5.4 General arrangement plan……………………………………………………….47

CHAPTER 6 SCANTLING & STRENGTH CALCULATION

6.2 Strength calculation……………………………………………………………..50

6.3 Scantling calculation…………………………………………………………….52

CHAPTER 7 MIDSHIP CALCULATION & SHELL EXPANSION CURVE

7.1 Midship calculation……………………………………………………………...54

7.2 Shell expansion ………………………………………………………………….56

CHAPTER 8 WEIGHT CALCULATION & TONNAGE CALCULATION

8.2 Tonnage calculation ……………………………………………………………..59

8.3 Weight calculation……………………………………………………………….60

CHAPTER 9 STABILITY & FREEBOARD CALCULATION

9.2 Freeboard calculation…………………………………………………………....63

9.3 Stability calculation...…………………………………………………………....65

CHAPTER 10 EQUIPMENT NUMBER & TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION

10.2 Equipment number……………………………………………………………….68

10.3 Technical specification...………………………………………………………...70

CHAPTER 12 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

TABLE NO. CONTENTS PAGE NO.

1 Based upon research paper 24

2 Comparison of main dimensions 25

10 Section modulus given to the ship 54

17 Comparison X bow & Convential bow 75

FIGURE NO CONTENT PAGE NO.

1 Conventional bow and - bow 13

2 Tank test for X bow 14

3 Speed loss in waves 16

3 Statistical data for oil fields 17

5 Research paper graph 26

7 Model created in maxsurf 37

9 Speed vs power graph 39

1.2 LITERATURE SURVEY

X Bow Hull Design vs Conventional Hull Design:

Conventional Hull Design:

– A novel hull shape with a redistributed fore ship volume and

EFFICIENCY AND ENVIRONMENT:

SAFETY AND COMFORT:

Fig 2: Tank test for X-bow

Fig3: speed loss in waves

CONCLUSION FROM MODEL TESTING:

Fig 4: Statistics data for oil fields

Fig 5: North Sea

Ship Range : Langewag Port , Norway to Grane Oil field

Distance : 160 Nautical Miles

S.NO TITLES DATE