Ruud Habing - Masters Thesis

D ELFT, U NIVERSITY OF T ECHNOLOGY
M ASTER OF S CIENCE T HESIS

O FFSHORE AND D REDGING E NGINEERING
R OLL DAMPING TO IMPROVE THE

OPERATIONAL LIMITS OF EXISTING BARGE
SHAPED VESSELS
R. H ABING
M AY, 2016
Committee:
Prof. Dr. Ir. R.H.M. H UIJSMANS
Dr. Ir. A. R OMEIJN
Ir. K. V ISSER
Ir. J.G.C.C. J ACOBS (supervisor Boskalis)
S UMMARY
Roll motion damping has been an important issue since mankind started building
ships. Naval architects have always tried to reduce the roll motion as much as pos-
sible for comfort, structural strength and operational limits. In this thesis the effects
of using ballast water as active or passive roll damping system are investigated. The
goal is to improve the motion behavior of barge shaped vessels owned by Boskalis,
such as the Taklift 6. These vessels are used extensively on the North Sea. The roll
behavior in waves is quite critical for the operational limits, so being able to reduce
those motions with a damping system could improve the workability. The North
Sea is a region where the most common wave frequency and the eigenfrequency of
most barge shaped vessels owned by Boskalis are very close to each other, which
may cause severe roll motion even with relative low waves.
In this thesis the vessel ’Taklift 6’ has been simulated with an active and passive
damping system. The time domain simulations have been performed using the
software ’OrcaFlex’, while the damping system is programmed as an extension to
OrcaFlex in the programming language Python.
Both the active and passive system show improvement in motion behavior; the spec-
tral density for the roll motion decreases. As a result the operational limits and thus
the workability of the vessel can be increased. The increase in operational limits is
not very significant though. The increase in operational limit is theoretically inter-
esting, but in reality the improvement is probably not significant enough to make an
actual difference in workability. The active system performs only slightly better than
the passive system in some simulated cases, and performs worse in other cases. This
might be an optimization error as the controller has only been tuned manually. The
advantage of an active system would be to be able to compensate for small motions
and to be able to respond earlier to vessel motions, but a passive system might be
a better fit, as it damps the roll behavior while the complexity of a passive system
is simpler compared to an active system and no external power is required. Within
the passive system, the motion of the mass could be limited by using air valves on
top of each tank to create a semi-passive system. The semi-passive system is not
researched within this thesis report.
Further model tests should be performed to test the best setup for a damping sys-
tem. The location and space required might be an issue on some vessels and the
I
effect of different location for the damping system should be researched. Overall a
damping system can give a reduction for the roll motion of barge shaped vessels,
but the inprovement in operational limts is not significant. Further research into the
design and costs aspects is required to make a decision whether a damping system
would be beneficial to use in barge shaped vessels. The damping controller should
also be improved to optimize the damping behavior and include sloshing effects in
the simulations.
II
III
CONTENTS
C ONTENTS
Summary I
List of figures V
List of tables VI
Nomenclature VII
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Ship axes definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Active & passive damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 Research aims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.5 Definition of workability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2 Literature study 8
3 Modeling 20
3.1 Vessel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2 Damping specifications and assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3 OrcaFlex model setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.4 Mathematical formulation of the model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.5 Head between tanks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4 Simulation set-up 37
4.1 General Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.2 Simulation time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.3 Wave height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.4 Time domain simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5 Results & Analysis 40

5.1 Decay tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.2 Regular waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.3 Irregular waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
IV
CONTENTS
6 Damping system design requirements 55

6.1 Power requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.2 Types of pumps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
6.3 Required space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
7 Conclusions 62
8 Recommendations 64
References 66
Appendix: A Taklift 6 69
Appendix: B OrcaFlex 74
V
LIST OF FIGURES
L IST OF F IGURES
1.1 The car carrier "Baltic Ace" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.2 Boskalis heavy lift vessel "Taklift 4" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Baltic Ace sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Axes definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.5 Anti-roll tanks, cross section of the vessel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 Schematical overview of the side and top view of a barge (top) and a
ship (bottom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2 Bilgekeel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 U-tube roll tank schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4 Definition of geometry and tank dimensions: free-surface anti-roll tank
(top) and U-tube anti-roll tank (bottom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1 Smit Taklift 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.2 Screenshot of the vessel in OrcaFlex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3 Single point mass connected with winches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.4 Passive damping (left) and active damping (right). In the passive damp-
ing figure the single point mass (m) is free to move in y-direction, only
the springs (k) and dampers (c) restrict the motion. In the active figure
the position of the mass is controlled by a function depending on the
roll speed, angle and acceleration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.5 Anti roll tank system schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.6 Python schematics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.7 Active damping with winch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.8 Winch schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.9 Schematic process of steps to be taken during the OrcaFlex simulation 28
3.10 Anti roll tank schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.11 Roll tank schematic at an angle where the ballast mass is still mostly
on the left side of the vessel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.12 Head between tanks for different roll angles and cog location of the
ballast mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
3.13 Moody diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.1 Decay test, 2% ballast mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
VI
LIST OF FIGURES
5.2 Decay test, 5% ballast mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

5.3 Decay test, 10% ballast mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.4 Regular wave test, 2% ballast mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.5 Regular wave test, 5% ballast mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.6 JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, 2% ballast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.11 Roll angle JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, 5% ballast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.12 JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, 10% ballast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.13 JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 9s, 10% ballast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.14 Roll angle JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, 10% ballast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.15 JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, no damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.16 JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, passive damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.17 JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, active damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.20 JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, passive mass location and vessel roll angle . 52
5.21 JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, active mass location and vessel roll angle . . 52
6.1 Timetrace for the head difference between the tanks, 2% of the dis-
placement as damping mass, Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.5 Timetrace for the required power, 2% of the displacement as damping
mass, Hs 1.5m, Tz 9s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
mass, Hs 1.5m, Tz 9s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
mass, Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
mass, Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
A.1 Taklift 6 roll force RAOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
B.1 OrcaFlex interface example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
VII
LIST OF FIGURES
B.2 OrcaFlex schematics for the usage of an external function . . . . . . . . 76

B.3 OrcaFlex simulation model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
B.4 OrcaFlex mass damping model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
B.5 External function usage in orcaflex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
B.6 External function usage - input script . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
VIII
LIST OF TABLES
L IST OF TABLES
2.1 Motion compensation/damping methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.2 Chronological overview of literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3 Chronological overview of literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1 Table of ballast mass used in simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

5.2 Damping coefficients for the decay test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
A.1 Force RAOs for the Taklift 6, heading 90 degrees with respect to the vessel 72
IX
LIST OF TABLES
N OMENCLATURE
Symbol Explanation
Ap , At Area of the reservoir duct
b Friction coefficient of resistance
B Width
CG (ship) center of mass of a vessel
d1 Linear roll damping coefficient
D Depth
g Gravitational acceleration, (assumed 9.81 m/s2 )
GM Distance from center of gravity to the metacenter of a vessel
H Equilibrium water height in tank
hc Control horizon
dd Duct diameter
hf Friction head
hm Head caused by sharp corners, valves, etc.
hp Pump head
Hs Significant wave height
I Moment of inertia
In Identity matrix with dimension n
k1 Restoring moment and coefficient
K wave Wave moment acting of the vessel roll
L Length
L duct Length of the duct
L z,duct Position of duct of U-tube tank with respect to ship center of gravity
M Moment
∇ Displacement
P, P w Pump pressure
ρ Mass density
RAO Response Amplitude Operator
t Time is seconds
τ Tank angle, defined by the water height in one tank divided by two compared
to the equilibrium position
T Draft
X
LIST OF TABLES
Symbol Explanation
Tp , Tz Significant wave period
φ Vessel roll angle
φφ−K , φτ−K Phase of ship roll and tank angle with respect to the wave moment
φ̇ Roll speed
φ̈ Roll acceleration
ωe Encounter frequency
ωs Vessel roll natural frequency
ωt Fluid motion in tank natural frequency
γ Height difference betwee water level in the tanks
v,V1 ,V2 Speed
wd Length duct
wr Tank width
z1 , z2 Height difference between the tanks water level with respect to the global axis
XI
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1 I NTRODUCTION
The damping of vessel motions in water has been a hot topic since the first ships.
Both for the operational limits, structural integrity and the comfort of the crew the
motions of the vessel in waves have always been of importance. Especially roll mo-
tions are undesirable for most ships and shipbuilders have always been looking for
ways to reduce these motions. The offshore industry is no different. With the in-
stallation and removal of many offshore objects, such as platforms, pipelines and
wind mills, low (roll) angles and accelerations are required. Within Boskalis/SMIT,
the offshore operations include installing and removal of platforms, wreck removal,
installation of bridges and other lifting operations. To perform these operations, the
environmental conditions are important for the operational limits and thus worka-
bility. If the operational limits could be increased by installing an anti-roll device,
the number of days per year a vessel can be used could be increased.
The workability can be determined from the operational limits of the vessel and the
conditions in a specific area. Waves transfer energy to a vessel which results in (har-
monic) motions of the vessel. A way to decrease the motions of the ship is to absorb
the wave energy with a system on board of the vessel. With sufficient damping, the
operational limits of a vessel could be improved. In general, damping or compen-
sation can be divided into two parts: active, semi-passive and passive. The passive
part consists of systems such as bilge keels, flat plate keels and anti-roll tanks. In ac-
tive systems a mass is actively moved in the vessel, such as water in tanks or a large
weight in the hull. Using fins or propulsion to damp the motions is also an active
method. Semi-passive damping included systems where fluid is restricted to flow
by valves of any kind, but no pumps or actuators to move the (fluid) mass. A more
complete overview of methods is given in the literature research chapter.
1
1.1 Problem statement
Motions due to waves and wind have an important impact on the operational lim-
its of barges and sheerlegs during transports and operations. Especially for off-
shore crane vessels damping the (roll) motions can increase operational limits sig-
nificantly.
With relative simple adaptions to the ballast system or deck systems the motion re-
sponse could be altered. Research into the possibilities of active/passive damping
can result into a cost effective way of improving workability without having to re-
design or buy a new ship.
Active roll/pitch damping is almost never able to compensate the motions com-
pletely, but only reduces the motions and accelerations to a certain limit depending
on the amount of used ballast and the specifics of the used system. The principle is
based upon the phase lag between the motion of the vessel and the motion of the
fluid in the tanks. If this phase lag is 90 degrees with respect to the roll angle of the
vessel, the fluid (mass) could damp the motion of the vessel significantly. To reduce
motions completely, damping is not sufficient. The ballast has to be shifted in the
vessel to compensate for the motions, but this requires a far large mass to damp the
motions.
Existing diffraction software such as DELFRAC or MOSES is not capable of calculat-

ing the motion response of a vessel including the effect of the (active/passive) bal-
last motion damping. It is possible to model free flooding tanks, but it is very hard
to tune these to the correct values and they give little flexibility in the modeling of
u-tube tanks or tanks above the water line of a vessel.
To model the active and passive damping, the dynamic motion analysis software
"OrcaFlex" is used to simulate the motion of the vessel in combination with the
damping system. OrcaFlex is capable of importing RAOs (Response Operator Am-
plitude) from DELFRAC or MOSES and to use these values in a time-domain simula-
tion. Moreover, the effect of mooring has to be considered. When a vessel is moored,
the motion characteristics change. If a solution can be found to quickly incorporate
the effect of mooring in the motion response calculation with active roll damping,
the operational limits can be estimated more accurately. With these calculations the
damping system can be adjusted accordingly to obtain the best motion response.
OrcaFlex is capable of including the mooring system, pipelines, e.g., so being able to
include damping systems to extend the functionality of the program.
2
1.1.1 The Baltic Ace project
The problem as described in the previous section originates from salvage projects
like the removal of the "Baltic Ace". The "Baltic Ace" was a car carrier that sank in
the North Sea on 5 December 2012 after a collision with a container ship. Boskalis
Offshore has been granted with the operation to remove the Baltic Ace as the ship
is sunk in a busy shipping lane where the water depth is only about 35 meter. The
accident happened approximately 80 kilometers from the coast near the the port of
Rotterdam. After the oil and other environmental threatening fluids were removed
the engineering for the removal of the ship began.
Figure 1.1: The car carrier "Baltic Ace"
The Baltic Ace is cut in several sections using sawing wires. These sections are re-
moved one by one using the Taklift 4 heavy lift vessel. The contents of the car carrier,
over a thousand cars, also have to be removed from the sea floor. The North Sea is
a particularly hazardous area with relatively high short waves and wind speeds. As
the barges and sheerlegs (figure: 1.2) used by Boskalis do not thrive well in the short
waves of the North Sea, the project can only be executed during summer.
3
Figure 1.2: Boskalis heavy lift vessel "Taklift 4"
Only with a relative low wave heights the roll motion of the Taklift 4 is acceptable for
the lifting operations. The sections will be loaded onto a barge and transported to
the harbor. The barges used for the transportation have a natural roll period which is
close to the peak period of the JONSWAP (Joint North Sea Wave Project) spectra, and
thus the influence of the wave height is important for the operational limits.
Figure 1.3: Baltic Ace sections
This project has been the inspiration to start a thesis on improving the operational
limits by using active or passive roll stabilization. If the operational window of the
lifting process can be increased, the work can be accomplished sooner and the project
would not be restricted to just a few months during summer.
4
1.2 Ship axes definition
For this entire report the following axes system is used, see figure 1.4.
Figure 1.4: Axes definition
1.3 Active & passive damping
The fleet of Boskalis Offshore (SMIT), consists mainly out of barge shaped vessels,
such as the Smit Barges and the Taklifts. Several damping methods can be consid-
ered for these vessels, but the focus of this report will be on the damping of the mo-
tions using ballast tanks and the ballast water inside. Containerized systems would
also be possible. Systems such as fins need forward speed to be effective. As most
offshore vessels and barges do not move or move slowly during operation, fins will
not be effective. Another effective system which can be used to damp the motions is
azimuthing thrusters. Thrusters can counter the moment of the waves, but the they
are rarely installed on barges due to costs and complexity.
Other fixed systems such as bilge keels could be installed, but the effect of bilge keels
is expected to be small as the shape of a barge is already rectangular. The extra
added mass due to the bilge keels on barges is relatively small compared to "nor-
mal" rounded hull shapes.
A containerized system on deck or using the internal ballast tanks for motion damp-
ing would be most appropriate for barges and sheerlegs. In general three types
of anti-roll tanks are used, see figure 1.5. The free surface and u-tube tank also
be placed on deck instead of using the ballast tanks. Other systems such as using
azipods to compensate for the roll motion are relatively expensive and complicated
compared to anti-roll tanks. Another issue is that most barges/sheerlegs do not
have their own propulsion or a limited propulsion system. Internal systems such as
pendulums and weights on a rail have some disadvantages: moving a relative large
weight inside the hull could be dangerous, it decreases loading capacity because of
the fixed weight, is not easily adjustable to the current loading on the vessel.
5
(a) Free flooding tanks (b) U-tube tanks (c) Free-surface tanks
Figure 1.5: Anti-roll tanks, cross section of the vessel
The U-tube tanks and free-surface tanks require a relatively small amount of space
below deck. Free flooding tanks require relative low space, as they can be built in the
side of the vessel. For the best results, and not only to damp the motion but also to
compensate, a U-tube tank with an active system would probably be the most effec-
tive solution. A containerized damping system is possible as well, as deck space is
not always an issue for offshore projects. The focus of this project will be to deter-
mine the effectiveness of several damping systems.
1.4 Research aims
The main topic of this thesis is focused on the influence of (fluid) mass displacement
in a vessel. The mass can be either on deck or in the tanks. The goal of this thesis is
not to develop a new theory to predict the motion response of a ship using active/-
passive roll damping, but to find the most appropriate (mathematical) solution to
incorporate active/passive (fluid) mass damping in a simulation model. The aim is
to develop a method to compare the operational limits of a vessel with and without
active/passive damping.
By creating a (mathematical) solution which can be incorporated in existing soft-

ware such as OrcaFlex, determining the operational limits and thus workability for
a vessel can be calculated more accurately. Also, during the design fase, the use of
such a model could lead to simple changes of the vessel which may increase the
operational limits.
1.5 Definition of workability
Workability can be defined as:
Workability is a result of the operational limits. If the wind, wave or cur-

rent conditions exceed the operational limits, the operation can not be
executed. Workability is the percentage of time per period - for instance
a year - that the operation can be done within the operational limits.
The operational limit is dependent on the situation, size and type of the vessel. If the
(roll) motions can be predicted accurately, a system which damps or compensates
for the motions can be implemented to improve the workability.
6
The limit for barges and sheerlegs depends on the operational state. In general, the
operational state can be divided in two parts:
• Transport (sailing or being towed)
• Work is being done from the vessel at location
Sheerlegs have lower allowance for the sea state compared to normal barges as the
motions of the barge will be amplified to the top of the crane and load, a damping
system might be extra benificial for sheerlegs compared to regular barges.
7
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE STUDY
2 L ITERATURE STUDY
Prediction and damping of motions have always been an difficult task for naval ar-
chitects. The motions of a vessel are important for the transverse forces and accel-
erations and can be the one of the most important factors for the workability of the
vessel. All angular degrees of freedom (roll, pitch and yaw) are undesirable for any
vessel, but roll is considered as the critical factor because it has relative small damp-
ing and severe roll might lead to capsizing. In conventional shaped vessels the roll
motions can cause severe discomfort for the passengers and crew and may also lead
to structural problems due to sloshing, e.g. liquid cargo such as LNG.
Several methods have been developed to damp the roll motions of vessels in the
last thousands of years, with more or less success. The simplest and probably old-
est method used by the Greek is using flat plate keels on their vessels. More recent
roll damping methods are fin stabilizers, rudder stabilizers, gyroscopic stabilizers,
active/passive anti-roll tanks, azimuthing propellers and Voith Schneider propul-
sion. Each of these methods has a different level of complexity, effectiveness and
price.
The challenge is to develop a reliable and effective method to damp the (roll) mo-
tions and improve the operational limits of a barge shaped vessel. Especially if the
parameters of the system can be calculated, a system could be converted to another
vessel. In table 2.1 below a short list of possible damping devices is given:
Solid mass Water mass

- Wheel/gyroscope - Fins & rudder
- Pendulum - U-tube tank
- Moving mass on tracks - Free-surface tank
- Free-flooding tank
- Bilge keels
- Propulsion (Voith e.a.)
Table 2.1: Motion compensation/damping methods
Most damping devices have been researched before, on the next page an overview of
some relevant literature is given ordered chronologically. This chapter will summa-
rize the most relevant literature for damping devices and sloshing research.
8
Chronological overview of literature
Year Title Reference

1974 Development of a technical practice for roll stabilization system se- [1]
lection
1980 Stabiliteit van drijvende lichamen. Anti-slingertanks. [2]
1981 Prediction of ship roll damping - state of the art [3]
1990 A survey of ship motion reduction devices [4]
1999 On providing a reaction for efficient wave energy absorption by [5]
floating devices
1999 Roll stabilization by anti-roll passive tanks [6]
2001 Anti-roll tank simulations with a volume of fluid based Navier- [7]
Stokes solver
2001 Stability Investigation of a Pontoon Barge in Wave Basin [8]
2001 Design of passive anti-roll tanks for roll stabilization in the nonlin- [9]
ear range
2004 Modeling and analysis of ship roll tank stimulator systems [10]
2006 Adaptive ship roll mitigation by using a U-tube tank [10]
2009 Anti roll tanks in pure car and trucks carries [11]
2009 Control of ship roll using passive and active anti-roll tanks [12]
2009 Stabilization of Parametric Roll Resonance with Active U-Tanks via [13]
Lyapunov Control Design
2010 Contemporary Ideas on Ship Stability and Capsizing in Waves [14]
2011 Ship roll damping control [15]
2010 U-tube Tank Damping System for Ship Roll Motion Using Adaptive [16]
Phase Shift Control
2012 Performance analysis Of U Tube Tank For Roll Stabilization [17]
2012 Study on Heel Stabilization for Cruise Ship by using Active Fin and [18]
Anti-Rolling Tank
2013 Robust Stabilization of Ship Roll by Convex Optimization [19]
... This table continues on the next page ...
Table 2.2: Chronological overview of literature
9
Year Title Reference

2014 Analysis of U-type anti-roll tank using urans, sensitivity and valida- [20]
tion
2014 Mathematical modeling of free-flooding anti-roll tanks [21]
A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional [22]
Cargo Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation
Analysis of warschip roll stabilisation by controlled anti-roll tanks [23]
with the aid of digital simulation
Considerations for bilge keel force models in potential flow simula- [24]
tions of ship maneuvering in waves
On the roll damping of an FPSO with riser balcony and bilge keels [25]
On Wave Prediction for Ship Roll Stabilization [26]
Ships roll stabilization by anti-roll active tanks [27]
Table 2.3: Chronological overview of literature
10
Barge versus Ship
Most literature about active or passive roll damping is written for ships. Very few
papers have been written about damping the motion of a barge. Below in figure 2.1
overview the typical differences between a barge and a ship are visible. The aspect
ratio between length and width is much lower for a barge. The same difference be-
tween aspect ratio of width and depth. This means that the motions have a different
period and amplitude compared to a conventional ship hull.
Most research on using active/passive ballast to damp the motions of a vessel are
focused on ships. Barges have not been reviewed that often. In most occasions, the
costs of a barge are to low to invest in a motion damping system. Another reason
is the absence of an engine room on the barge with a sufficient amount of engine
power.
Figure 2.1: Schematical overview of the side and top view of a barge (top) and a ship (bottom).
Another application of a barge is a "sheerleg", which is basically a barge with a fixed

crane. The motions of such a "sheerleg" are very important for any lifting operation.
If the motions can be reduced by using an active/passive ballast system, the costs
may be worth the investment.
Bilge keels
Bilge keels (as shown in figure 2.2) have been introduced in the mid-19th century.
Since the introduction, bilge keels remain an important appendage to the hull to in-
crease the added mass and reduce the severity of roll motions of a ship in waves (e.g.
Froude, 1865; Bryan, 1900; Martin, 1958; Kato, 1965). The use of bilge keels is a pas-
sive method to mitigate roll motion and it has become common for ships. Despite
the importance of bilge keels, models are often simplified particularly in fast nu-
merical simulations using potential flow methods (cf. Beck & Reed, 2001). Because
of this, bilge keels are not necessarily accurate in heavy sea conditions. In heavy
seas, the bilge keels are important for reducing the likelihood of large roll motions.
[24]
11
Figure 2.2: Bilgekeel
Bilge keels are very effective for increasing the damping coefficient and increasing
the added mass for (roll) motion . By applying bilge keels to a vessel the wetted hull
surface area and thus resistance only slightly increases, while the roll motion may
be significantly damped. The bilge keels can effectively increase the roll period of
a vessel and damp the amplitude of the roll motions. Despite the effectiveness of
bilge keels, they can not be adjusted to a certain sea state (e.g. period of waves).
Bilge keels can be very effective, but it mainly depends on the spectrum of the waves
a ship encounters and the natural roll speed of the vessel.
Passive tank (roll) damping
Passive anti-roll tanks have been studied and used for a long time. The implementa-
tion - if calculated correctly - can have significant influence on the motions of the
vessel. Within the shipbuilding industry, quite a lot information is known about
the effect of passive anti-roll tanks. One brief overview about anti-roll tanks can be
found in "Stabiliteit van drijvende lichamen - anti-slingertanks ([2]). In the report is
stated that a passive tank system is based on the principle of bore: the transport of
water from one side of the vessel/tank to the other with a certain phase delay with
respect to the vessel motions. This results in a moment and force opposite to the
motions of the vessel. The report stated some conclusions and recommendations:
• The best location for the tank(s) is at the centerline midships, as high as pos-
sible above the center of rotation.
• The width of the tanks should be a big as possible
• When calculating the roll period of the ship the altered metacentre due to the
free fluid surface has to be taken into account
• The behaviour of the tank is in principle not linear, but the movement can be
approximated linearly
12
Figure 2.3: U-tube roll tank schematic
K.S. Youssef et al. [9] investigated the design of passive U-tube tanks. By using the
Large Amplitude Motion Program ’LAMP’, which is a three dimensional time do-
main simulation of the motion of ships in waves they solved the coupled motion
equations. The unstabilized and stabilized roll motions of a ship with forward speed
and beam waves have been analyzed. The performance of passive anti-roll tanks
was investigated in the nonlinear range of roll motion. The equation of motion of
the tank liquid is coupled with the 6-DOF equations of motion of the ship.
According to the report, a well-tuned tank can be very effective in reducing roll mo-
tions. The authors found a 90% reduction in the nonlinear range roll motion, while
a 95% reduction was obtained in the linear wave regime. A passive tank tuned in
the linear range can also be effective in reducing the roll motion in the nonlinear
range.
T. Phairoh and J.K. Huang [28] described an U-tube tank damping system for roll
motion using adaptive phase shift control. Passive U-tube tanks work well for a spe-
cific roll period of a vessel. If any of those parameters are altered, for instace due to
loading the vessel, the parameters change and the U-tube tank will not work optimal
anymore. To adjust the U-tube tank to the current ship parameters the system has
to be altered. In the study an adaptive controller is investigated to adjust the phase
shift of water motion in the U-tube tank to be 90 degrees with respect to the ship roll
motion.
In figure 2.3 on the right a schematic overview is shown of the system used in this in-
vestigation. The movement of the water is modeled linearly, as given in the formulas
below:
1 1
I φ̈ + b t φ̇ + W G M φ − ρL 2 A t (H + L z )τ̈ − ρg A T L 2 τ = K w ave (2.1)
2 2
¶ 2
At L
µ
1 1
ρ A t 2H + L τ̈ + b A 2t (2H + L)L 2 τ̇ + ρ A t g L 2 τ
Ap 4 2 2
1 1 1
− ρL 2 A t (L z + H )φ̈ − ρ A t g L 2 φ = L A t ∆P (2.2)
2 2 2
Where φ is ship roll angle, τ is the water slope in the tank, A t and A p are the area of
the tank reservoir, b is the friction coefficient of resistance between the fluid and the
13
tank, L is the duct length, L z is the distance between the center of the duct and the
center of gravity of the ship in vertical direction, H is the equilibrium water height
in the tanks, I the inertia.
From equation 2.1 the moment generated by the water in the tanks can be calcu-
lated, see equation 2.3. The first term is the result of the water acceleration in the
tank, the second part is the results of gravitational forces.
1 1
M = ρL 2 A t (H + L z )τ̈ + ρg A t L 2 τ (2.3)
2 2
Ahmed et al. [6] studied the effects of passive roll stabilization both theoretically and
with experiments. Their conclusions and recommendations were:
• There is an optimal value for the tank damping. Each tank should be equipped
with damping devices or vortex generators to control the fluid motion.
• A compromise should be made between the space occupied by the tank and
the maximum tank angle to avoid tank stall. A mass ratio of about 3.5% seems
to work well.
• It is recommended to place the tank at or above the ship CG to obtain low

roll-response amplitudes.
• A careful design of the tank facilitates its tuning. A well-tuned, well-designed

tank can be very effective in reducing roll motions. A reduction of 67% is
achieved in the present study.
They also recommended further study to address the non-linear effects in the tank
and ship motions and to use compressed air chamber to control the system bet-
ter.
Active fin roll compensation
The use of active fin roll stabilization system is regularly found on passenger and
naval ships. For passenger ships the roll motion are important to prevent the pas-
sengers from getting seasick. On naval warships, the roll stability is important for
the weapon systems.
In an active fin roll stabilization system, one or more sets of fins generate roll mo-
ments which oppose the wave excitation roll moments in response to the command
of a control system [1]. The roll motions are reduced by the resulting dissipation of
energy.
Anti-roll fins are effective if the ship is at design speed. Their effectiveness is reduced
with reduced speed since the fin moment is a function of the ship speed. At zero
speed the fins have only a small contribution to the passive damping of the ship,
all damping will be contributed by the hull. The fin angle is controlled by a system
14
which reacts depending on roll motions, velocity, acceleration. The fin is rotated by a
hydraulic system which in most cases can change the fin angle in two seconds or less
[1]. The fin system may consist of a simple fin or a fin with a trailing edge flap. Fin
and tank systems can be combined for best motion compensation at all speeds.For
combined fin and tank systems it will be desirable to maximize the fin area and tank
volume, while the GM is still within the boundaries and the ship displacement is not
increased excessively.
The major impacts of an active fin roll stabilization system on the ship design are
the added space and weight required for the fin control and activation system. Be-
cause of the large space required, fin installations on naval vessels are generally not
retractable. There is also a small increase required in the installed power and en-
durance fuel to overcome the added resistance of the fins.
Given the above explanation, fins are not very usable on relative slow moving barges
which have no forward speed during operation. The installation of fins may also be
relative expensive compared to the total costs of the barge.
Active tank roll compensation/damping
Marzouk and Nayfeh [12] studied the uncontrolled six-degrees-of-freedom motion

of a cargo ship in rough seas for several wave heading angles. They found that the in-
vestigated ship experiences large roll motions for some heading angles, particularly
45°(stern quartering seas), 90°(beam seas), and 180°(head seas). These three head-
ings were used to investigate the performance of anti-roll tanks. The considered
system was composed of three U-tubes equipped with pumps. The ship motion was
simulated in the time domain.
The report states that active systems outperforms passive systems. The first conclu-
sion is that active systems achieve better roll reduction than passive systems hav-
ing the same mass. Secondly, the same roll reduction can be obtained with an ac-
tive anti-roll tank system that is smaller (in terms of mass and volume) than a pas-
sive system. Their last conclusion was that the performance of an active system
is less sensitive to their natural frequencies than passive systems. Sidenote is that
the capital and running costs of active systems are higher that those of passive sys-
tems.
Eugene et al. [1] investigated the selection of a practical stabilization system. They
stated:
"It is possible to use feedback control systems in tank systems in a fash-

ion similar to the control systems used in active-fin stabilization. These
systems are invariably the U tank configuration. The motion of the ship
is sensed, this information is processed and some feature of the tank
system is changed accordingly. Depending on what action is taken it
is possible to define two different types of active tank systems. First, if
15
the action is such to prevent (or permit) flow between the wing tanks by
closing (or opening) valves in the air crossover, then the system is com-
monly called semi-active or controlled passive. Second, if the action is
such that energy is put into (or extracted from) the tank fluid, then it is
called a fully-active tank system, usually referred to simply as an active
tank system."
Tchongchai et al. [10] researched adaptive ship roll mitigation by using an U-tube
tank. They considered an active flume tank consisting of two water reservoirs con-
nected by a bow thruster inside a duct. The system can of course also be used as a
passive system if the thruster is turned off. In the paper, four different control strate-
gies are considered:
• a propotional-derivatie controller (PD): The U-tube tank water height and wa-
ter velocity are feedback signals and the controller is tuned so that the U-tube
tank behaves as an optimal passive damper.
• a linear quadratic regulator (LQR):
• a generalized predictive control (GPC): this is a time domain method that uses
a mathematical model to describe the input-output relationship of the system
and to design the controller minimizing a desired cost function. When the
ship is loading or unloading, the center of gravity and inertia changes, so an
adaptive control is needed. Chen et al. [29] created a system identification
system which can identify a state-space model from input and output data.
• a deadbeat predictive control (DPC):
Sellers and Martin [30] made a comparison of several anti-roll systems, where all
kinds of system were researched such as bilge keels, passive tanks, active fins and
rudder roll stabilization. They evaluated the effectiveness of a tank system for several
frequencies. The average weight of a passive system was stated to be 1 to 2% of the
vessel displacement and a reduction of 40 to 60% in the roll angle was found. They
concluded that a passive system is effective over all speed ranges.
Bell and Walker [31] investigated active and passive tank systems to stabilize vessel
motions. The active system they used has a propeller and motor with several con-
trol valves installed in a tank on the centerline midships of the vessel. The motor
drives the propellor to move the water mass to a specific location based upon sev-
eral sensors in the vessel. The results of the passive system (so without the propellor
running) are also reported. The paper concluded that the active system has much
better results compared to the passive system, also because of the passive system
has to be tuned to match the eigenfrequency of the vessel.
16
Prediction of motions of a barge
Downie et al. [32] investigated the effect of vortex shedding on the coupled roll re-
sponse of bodies in waves. They compared the results of a theoretical approach
to predict the roll damping with experimental results. The report states that the
motions of a sharp-edged rectangular body floating freely in regular waves can be
reasonably well predicted in all three degrees of freedom by using an theoretical
method. The results state that the non-linearity in the responses is largely due to
vortex shedding from the body surface, if the motions are not too extreme.
Active heave compensation
For sheerlegs or other lifting operations, active heave compensation is used to com-
pensate for the motions of the vessel. With the active heave compensation only the
pitch or heave motions can be compensated. It is not possible to compensate for the
roll motions. The heave system available may not work fast enough to compensate
for the motion of a lifting vessel. Especially for the main lifting hooks of the cranes,
active heave compensation is too slow to compensate for the motion. Therefore a
motion damping system which compensates for roll and pitch motions might be
more efficient.
Sloshing
Sloshing is the effect caused by a free fluid

surface in tanks. The water (or other liquid)
can move freely within the tanks, resulting in
forces, which may result in the amplification of
the (roll) motions and can lead to instability of
the vessel. Especially LNG carriers experience
this problem, the liquid cargo can induce large
forces on the hull and can cause stability and
structural issues. The anti-roll tank (see pas-
sive damping) is using this effect to damp the
roll motions of the vessel. If the fluid in the
tanks moves with a phase lag compared to the
roll motion of the vessel itself, the fluid will ex- Figure 2.4: Definition of geometry
ert a moment countering the roll motion. Gen- and tank dimensions: free-surface
erally, the sloshing motion in the tanks is very anti-roll tank (top) and U-tube anti-
non-linear. roll tank (bottom).
van Daalen et al. [33] made a report on anti-roll

tank simulations comparing computer simulations to experimental data. The nu-
17
merical computations were done on a volume of fluid with a Navier-Stokes solver.

Both free-surface anti-roll tanks and U-tube anti-roll tanks were considered. Calcu-
lated and measured results for the local wave heights, the sway force and roll mo-
ment are presented for both regular and irregular tank motions. A simple but effec-
tive simulation model for the active control of U-tube anti-roll tanks is introduced.
Finally, the fully nonlinear time-domain coupling of the ship motion and the tank
water motion is established.
Y. Kim [34] researched vessels with liquid cargo. In his research, he used to Large
Amplitude Motion Program (LAMP) to simulate the vessel motions. The test models
were equipped with rectangular passive anti-roll tanks. In his tests, he used a VLCC
(Very Large Crude Carrier) model. He considered only roll motion, as this is creat-
ing the highest roll motions. If the system is modelled correctly, the passive system
will damping the roll motion at the eigenfrequency significantly. A phase difference
of 180 degrees should be avoided, as this will increase the roll motions instead of
damping the motions. For regular waves the simulations resulted in a significant
drop in roll motions, especially around the eigenfrequency. But he stated:
However, the slosh-induced moment varies with a nonlinear manner.

Furthermore, in the random ocean, an ART does not guarantee the dra-
matic reduction as seen in this report.
Determination of requirements for ship motions performance
To determine whether a motion damping system should be installed on a (new) ves-

sel, and to determine which system is the most suitable, the following factors are
relevant:
• The level of effectiveness in terms of the characteristics of the vessel’s motions

which the vessel is required to attain
• The comparative levels of effectiveness between the unstabilized vessel and

the vessel with any of the motion damping systems installed
• The impact of installing each of the systems on the vessel or the impact on the
design of a new vessel
To identify the elements of motion which may affect the ships stability and ability to
perform the required tasks it is necessary to conduct a survey of the vessel(s) systems
and operations. For studies of vessel performance all motions and damping systems
should be considered. However, the information which can be developed will mostly
consist of data with limited data related to - for instance - roll only. The reports of
crew such as "At roll angles greater than .. degrees, the operation is difficult to carry
out" are related to the combined motions of the vessel. Therefore it can be hard to
determine the boundaries for motions around one axle (for instance roll) only.
18
As this report focuses on barge and sheerlegs, the operational motion limits are con-
siderably different from conventional shaped vessels. The freeboard of a barge is
relative low and the shape is more or less rectangular. Most barges do not have their
own propulsion system; they are towed to the destination.
For the fleet of Boskalis/SMIT (mostly barges) the most appropriate method of damp-
ing motions is the active/passive tank damping. Systems such as fins need forward
speed to be effective, and as most barges do not move or move slowly during oper-
ation, these would not be effective. The effect of bilge keels would probably not be
very large, as the shape of a barge is already so that the added mass is relatively large
compared to "normal" rounded hull shapes. Another solution would be to provide
the vessels with propulsion, such as thrusters, to compensate for the vessel motions.
For barges/sheerlegs this system is probably too expensive, but needs further inves-
tigation.
A containerized system on deck or using the internal ballast tanks for motion damp-
ing would probably be most appropriate for barges and sheerlegs. As such, this grad-
uation project will focus on investigating and comparing the available methods for
active and passive motion damping using water.
19
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
3 M ODELING
The modeling is a big part of this research topic. For a start, an existing sheerleg will
be chosen to simulate the (active) roll damping. This chapter contains detailed in-
formation on the modeling steps and the method to recreate the model if necessary.
For the simulations, the tanks are assumed to be half full, so the the damping mass
can be completely on one side of the vessel if needed. The height of the water in the
tanks can be altered, which results in less mass used for damping the vessel motions.
This can be easily adjusted in the model.
3.1 Vessel
The selected vessel for the simulations is one of the sheerlegs owned by Boskalis:
Taklift 6. All relevant information was already available for this sheerleg, including
RAOs and frequency specific damping information. An illustration of the Taklift 6 is
given below in figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1: Smit Taklift 6
20
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
The specifics of the vessel are:
• Vessel name: Taklift 6
• Length: 72.56m
• Width: 30.50m
• Depth: 5.5m
• Draft in used load case: 3.24m
• Minimum draft: 2.50m
• Maximum draft: 4.00m
• Displacement (at a draft of 3.24m): 7000mt
• B/T ratio: 9.4 (for 3.24m draft)
• L/B ratio: 2.8 (for 3.24m draft)
• L/T ratio: 22.6 (for 3.24m draft)
The general arrangement can be found on page 69. The force RAOs for a heading of
90 degrees with respect to the vessel can be found on page 71. Other headings are
not considered in this report, as the 90 degree wave heading will result in the highest
roll response of the vessel. For use in actual applications, further investigation has
to be done to determine the response and efficiency of the damping system.
This vessel is mostly used at the specified draft. The simulations are done for this
particular draft. If the draft would be inscreased the damping of the vessel itself
increases and so would the roll period. The effect of the damping system will reduces
if the mass of the system is kept the same. When reducing the depth of the vessel,
the natural roll period will become shorter.
3.2 Damping specifications and assumptions
3.2.1 Passive damping
For a passive system the only limitations are the amount of fluid, the diameter of the
duct between the tanks and the size of the tanks. The passive system can be modeled
in OrcaFlex with the help of a script in python. It is possible to model a mass in
OrcaFlex or to fill a tank partially, but it is not possible to connect multiple tanks via
a duct. As is shown in figure 3.2 on the right, the system can be modeled as four
elements which prevent the mass to move in other directions than the transverse
direction. The fourth element is hidden to show the setup. The entire system is fixed
to the vessel. The mass element in OrcaFlex cannot be restricted in the transverse
direction as such an element does not have a contact area on the front or back side.
21
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
To prevent the mass element from "falling" of the vessel, two winches are installed
(blue lines in the figure) which prevent the mass from moving beyond the physical
limits of the sheerleg.
For the system, some assumptions and restrictions have to be made before the sim-
ulations to keep the results realistic. A very fast movement of the ballast mass is not
possible due to the duct, and if the duct size becomes too large (the duct is not com-
pletely filled with water), the instability will get worse due to the free surface.
3.2.2 Active damping
The active damping of the vessel is modeled the same way as the passive damping,
the difference is the way the mass is controlled. For passive damping, this only de-
pends on the inertia of the mass, the roll angle of the vessel and the head difference
between the ballast tanks. For active damping, the location is based upon both the
roll acceleration, speed and angle of the vessel. If modeled correctly, these three
parameters give a desired position for the mass to damp the motions. During the
simulation, the mass will be moved to the desired position, which will change for
every time step. This way the mass can also be used to compensate for very slow
motions, and also to damp the ship for bigger motions. Another advantage is the
ability to change the behavior of the system depending on the load case. The system
can be altered easily for a change in ballast or load conditions.
Similar to the passive system, some assumptions and restrictions have to be made
before the simulations to keep the active damping results realistic. A very fast move-
ment of the ballast mass is not possible due to pump limitations and the head differ-
ence has to be taken into account. This report does not focus on the requirements of
the pumps and valves, but assumes reasonable values for the pump specifications.
The head difference is plotted in the results chapter alongside with an analysis of the
power that would be required for this operation.
3.2.3 Assumptions
For the model, some assumptions and simplifications have to be made:
• The motion of the liquid mass is simplified to a single point mass moving in
y-direction with respect to the ship
• The slosing effects of a liquid mass are not taken into account
• The point mass follows a specific trajectory:
– Passive system: free to move in y-direction taking into account the tank
boundaries
– Active system: movement defined by a prescribed function as a function

of roll and time, taking into account physical and tank boundaries
22
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
• The formula used in the damping system are only based on the roll motions of
the vessel, all other degrees of freedom are neglected. The ship is able to move
in all six degrees of freedom.
3.3 OrcaFlex model setup
The vessel has been modeled using OrcaFlex, see attachment B on page 74 for more
information about the software. OrcaFlex enables an engineer to quickly model and
simulate a vessel in the time domain using input data from diffraction software such
as DELFRAC or ANSYS AQWA. The RAOs and frequency dependent damping ma-
trices have been inserted into the OrcaFlex model. For verification of the OrcaFlex
software, see appendix B of the MSc thesis written by M. Tiehatten [35].
Figure 3.2: Screenshot of the vessel in OrcaFlex
Figure 3.3: Single point mass connected with winches
In figure 3.3 the modeling setup for the mass is given. The mass is modeled as a
cylindrical element with the desired mass. The movement of the mass is controlled
by two "winches" on both ends of the mass. These winches are controlled by the
Python script, for both the passive and active method. For the reference simulations,
the winches are set to allow no movement at all.
23
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
OrcaFlex simulates the motions of a vessel in the time domain. The active/passive
damping can not be simulated directly in OrcaFlex, but via an external function.
In this external function it is possible to describe the motion of the damping mass,
either actively or passively. In the function several parameters have to be incorpo-
rated, such as: pump capacity, amount of (fluid) mass and location of the mass. The
simplified system is given schematically in figure 3.4.
Figure 3.4: Passive damping (left) and active damping (right). In the passive damping figure
the single point mass (m) is free to move in y-direction, only the springs (k) and dampers (c)
restrict the motion. In the active figure the position of the mass is controlled by a function
depending on the roll speed, angle and acceleration
This system can be programmed as an external function in OrcaFlex. Later on, the
system could be expanded to include the effects of sloshing and the non-linear move-
ment of the ballast water. Also, the system can be expanded to include the effects of
pitch motions. For this thesis, the focus is on damping the motions with beam waves
only without including sloshing effects.
The results of the simulation in OrcaFlex give an insight in the improvement in oper-
ational limits compared to the ship without active/passive damping. The results in
time domain can be converted to results in frequency domain, for a better overview
of the eigenfrequencies and intensity.
Although the ballast water is considered as a mass in a single point, the trajectory of
the ballast water is important. If a u-tube tank system is considered, the motion of
the water is limited by the duct in between the tanks on both sides of the vessel. The
possible acceleration is depending the location of the ballast water, and in the sim-
ulation these characteristics have to be taken into account. For a system with a free
surface the trajectory of the mass is more linear than a u-tube tank system.
Both active and passive motion damping system operate on the principle that a mass
- either a fluid or a solid mass - moves from one position to another. In the case of
tank system, the mass is considered a fluid. In figure 3.5 a schematic drawing of the
tank system is given. The tanks are located on the side of the vessel, similar to the
setup on a typical barge or sheerleg.
The tanks are connected with ducts. Depending whether the system is active or pas-
sive, the pipes may be outfitted with pumps, duct propellers and valves. In this re-
port, the fluid (water) is simplified to a point mass which moves due to a controlled
24
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
Figure 3.5: Anti roll tank system schematic
system (active damping) or is free to move around (passive damping).
In figure B.2 and 3.6 on the next pages an overview is given of the process in Or-
caFlex and in the Python script during the simulation. Data can be altered using the
Python connector for OrcaFlex for each timestep during the simulation. This is very
convenient, as the controller can be programmed separately in python and can be
integrated in the model. The controller can be seen as a "black box", where data
from the vessel is input and a response is calculated to move the ballast to the best
position. For now only linear response is considered, but the system could be easily
be extended to a non-linear system which is a lot harder to implement in frequency
domain only.
25
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
Input data from OrcaFlex
Roll angle,
speed and
acceleration
Current ballast Calculate

mass position desired position
In what direction should

the ballast mass be moved?
Physical limits of Yes

the ballast mass Limit speed and acceleration
reached?
No
Yes
Hull boundaries
almost reached
No
Yes
Desired position
Slow mass down
almost reached
No
Move the mass
New mass position,

speed and
acceleration
Figure 3.6: Python schematics
26
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
Figure 3.6 gives a rough schematic overview of the python functions and process.
For every timestep the python script is called to controlled the speed of the winch
connected to the ballast mass. The python script can be used both for passive and
active damping, as the function to calculate the desired position of the mass can be
altered to meet the used damping method. The physical limits for the movement of
the ballast mass have to be set in the script, such as:
• Maximum speed
• Maximum acceleration
• Hull boundaries - maximum location with respect to the centerline of the ves-
sel
The maximum acceleration and speed limits can be altered during the simulation,
to match the pump characteristics under a specific roll angle or to incorporate the
inertia and sloshing of the ballast mass. For this report the sloshing of the ballast
mass will not be incorporated. This report focuses on the usage of a passive/active
mass to damping the vessel motions and sloshing is outside the scope of this topic.
The influence of sloshing might be significant depending on the geometry of the
ballast tanks and vessel shape, so further research should be done about the slosh-
ing effects. For this research, the sloshing effects are neglected. The system will be
simulated for several values to see which parameters will give the best damping re-
sult. The passive simulations and those without any damping will give a reference
to determine the efficiency of the active system.
Figure 3.7: Active damping with winch
In OrcaFlex, two winches are modeled to control the position of the ballast mass
in transverse direction. The script calculates the desired position of the mass with
respect to the roll angle, speed and acceleration of the vessel. The difference be-
tween the current location and the desired position is calculated and the mass will
be moved in the direction of the desired position. The script limits the mass to a
maximum speed and acceleration, which can be determined with the head differ-
ence between the water in the tanks, the size and roughness of the duct between the
tanks. This setup simplifies the free flowing surface in two tanks connected by a duct
27
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
to a single point mass which can only move transverse to the vessel. The advantage
is that this mass can be controlled easily. The downside is that the effects of sloshing
have to be incorporated in the script, which will not be done in this report. Another
restriction the height of the center of gravity of the mass with respect to the z-axis
of the vessel. In the model, the mass is always at the same height with respect to
the vessel, in reality, the center of gravity of the mass would also move up and down
depending on the height of the fluid in the tanks on the sides of the vessel.
Figure 3.8: Winch schematic
In figure 3.9 an schematic overview is given of the process during the simulation in
OrcaFlex. This process will be repeated for every timestep of the simulation.
The desired position for the ballast mass is depending on the roll variables. For this
report the parameters for the controller are determined by trail and error for the
Taklift 6. For other vessels these parameters have to be determined again for the
best damping results. The process could be optimized or automated to speed up
the process of modeling an active ballast system, but this is not considered in this
report.
Figure 3.9: Schematic process of steps to be taken during the OrcaFlex simulation
28
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
3.3.1 Variables
The control system used some variables to move the system. For this controller cho-
sen is use only a P-controller, so the "I" and "D" variables are set to zero. For fur-
ther research the integrational and derivative variables would be interesting to opti-
mize the solution, but for this research the focus lays upon the effect of ballast mass
damping and not on optimizing a controller to the best result as this would require
a lot more mathematics.
3.4 Mathematical formulation of the model
In figure 3.10 a schematic overview is given of a anti roll tank system. If one would
want to be able to control the roll motion, the model must be able to take into ac-
count the possibility of greater roll angles and some control system to move the wa-
ter in the tanks must be developed. In figure 3.10 the dimensions of the system are
given. In the duct a pump in installed which generates pressure P w . C is the point
around which the ship rolls. The variable γ gives the height difference between the
water levels in the tanks. The tanks and ducts are assumed to have a constant cross
section A t and A d . the y-axis is a spatial dimension which runs in the middle of the
tanks and duct. If assumed that the water will not move from in x-direction (length
Figure 3.10: Anti roll tank schematic
axis of the vessel), the Euler equation can be simplified to:

∂v v ∂P
ρt + ρ t v = ρ t Fe − (3.1)
∂t y ∂y
Where F e is the external force per unit of mass and ρ t is the density of the fluid in
the tank. The fluid current and friction in the corners between the tanks and the
duct are assumed zero. This assumption is based on the argument that the behavior
of the fluid at the connection between the tanks and duct are not relevant for this
report, only the height of the fluid in the tanks is interesting for this report. Equation
3.1 can be simplified to:
dv dP
ρt = ρ t Fe − (3.2)
dt dy
29
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
Figure 3.11: Roll tank schematic at an angle where the ballast mass is still mostly on the left
side of the vessel
The velocity of the fluid (water) in the tanks and at any location is given by:
dγ
2 γ̇
v t ank = , (3.3)
dt 2
A t ank v t A t γ̇
v= = (3.4)
A 2A
Where A is equal to A t in the tanks and equal to A d in the ducts. The external force
F e per unit of mass consists of the following parts:
• Acceleration due to gravity in the direction of y: −g cos(φ1 )
• Acceleration due to roll acceleration of the vessel: −r φ̈ sin(φ2 )
• Friction in the tanks and ducts: −q friction,1 Av −q friction,2 A 2 |v|v, where q friction,1
and q friction,2 are parameters that have to be assumed from literature, as given
in [36].
1
(
P w in the duct
• Force by the duct pump: YP = ρ t w
0 in the tanks
If the above is substituted in equation 3.2:
ρt At ρ t q friction,1 A t ρ t q friction,2 A 2t J 3 dP
ρt γ̈ + γ̇ + |γ̇|γ̇ + ρ t g cos(φ1 ) + ρ t r φ̈ sin(φ2 ) = ρ t YP −
2A 2 4 dy
(3.5)
If the above equation 3.5 is integrated over y, this results in:
ρt At J1 ρt At J2 ρ t q friction,2 A 2t
γ̈ + γ̇ + |γ̇|γ̇ + ρ t g J 4 + ρ t φ̈J 5 (3.6)
2 2 4
= P water + P starboard water − P port side water (3.7)
30
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
Where:
Z w/2
dy 1 1 0 1 h t +γ/2 w 2h t
Z Z Z
J1 , = d yd + d ys + d yp = +
tank A A d −w/2 A t −h t +γ/2 At 0 Ad At
Z Z w/2 Z 0 Z h t +γ/2
J2 , q friction d y = q friction,duct d y d + q friction,tank d y s + q friction,tank d yp
tank −w/2 −h t +γ/2 0
= w q friction,duct + 2h t q friction,tank
Z Z w/2 Z 0 Z h t +γ/2
J3 , q friction,2 d y = q friction,2 d y d + q friction,2 d y s + q friction,2
tank −w/2 −h t +γ/2 0
= w q friction,2 + 2h t q friction,2
Z Z w/2 Z 0 Z h t +γ/2
J4 , cos(φ1 )d y = sin(φ)d y d − cos(φ)d y s +
tank −w/2 −h t +γ/2 0
= w sin(φ) + γ cos(φ)
Z Z w/2 w
Z 0 w
Z h t +γ/2
J5 , r sin(φ2 )d y = r d d yd + d ys +
tank −w/2 2 −h t +γ/2 2 0
= w(r d + h t )
The difference in pressure between the port and starboard side is given by:
Pa = Ps − Pp
If equation 3.7 is multiplied by A t /2 and simplified, this results in:
m γ γ̈ + d γ |γ̇|γ̇ + k γ φγ + f φ (φ, φ̈) = u (3.8)
With:
w At
µ ¶
1
mγ , At ρt + ht
2 21A d
1 2 ¡ ¢ 1
d γ (γ̇) , A t ρ t w q friction,1 + 2h t q friction,1 + A 2t ρ t g w q friction,2 + 2h t q friction,2 |γ̇|
¡ ¢
4 8
1
k γ (φ) , A r ρ t g cos(φ)
2
1 1
M φ (φ, φ̈) , ρ t g w sin(φ) + A t ρ t w(r d + h r )φ̈
2 2
1
u, A t (P a + P w )
2
The motion of the vessel has an influence on the fluid in the tank, but the other way
round also has an influence: the tank influences the vessels motion. The force as a
result of the motion in the tank can be split up into two parts:
• Mass of the tank fluid (gravitational force):
w ρ t w A t (h t + r d )
− m t v˙t − r d m d v˙d = − γ̈
2 2
31
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
• Acceleration of the fluid in the tank:

w ρt g w At
− ρt g At γ = − γ
2 2
The water in the tanks only moves relatively to the tanks walls. Due to the motion of
the ship (roll), an extra component has to be added to take the angular acceleration
of the vessel into account:
Z w/2 Z 0
M angular = − g ρ t A d r d sin(φ)d y − g ρ t A t (r d + y) sin(φ)d y (3.9)
−w/2 −h t +γ/2
Z h r +γ/2
− g ρt A t (r d − y) sin(φ)d y
0
Ad
µ ¶
= − g ρ t A t 2r d h t − h t2 − r d w sin(φ) (3.10)
At
And the inertia of the fluid mass has to be taken into account:
Z
M inertia = −I t φ̈ = r 2 dV
tank
Where the value of I t is depending on the volume of the water in the tanks and thus
a function of γ. So the combined tank induced moment as a result of the motions
is:
ρ t w A t (h t + r d ) ρt g w At Ad
µ µ ¶ ¶
2
M total = − γ̈ − γ − g ρ t A t 2r d h t − h t + r d w sin(φ) − I t φ̈
2{z } | 2{z } | At |{z}
| {z } inertia
gravitation acceleration vessel induced
(3.11)
= −c 1 γ̈ − c 2 γ̇ − c 3 γ − I t φ̈ (3.12)
With the free body diagram the equation of motion can be defined:
φ φ̇
· ¸ · ¸
x, ,v,
γ γ̇
ẋ = v (3.13)
m v̇ + c(v)v + k(x, t ) = F u (3.14)
This system can be solved using software such as Matlab or any other programming
language. For this thesis, the simulation will be run in OrcaFlex. As OrcaFlex already
solves this equation internally, there is no need to solve the equation analytically.
Though it is necessary to show the process, if one would be interested to solve this
problem analytically outside a program such as OrcaFlex.
32
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
3.5 Head between tanks
Due to the roll motion of the vessel the ballast mass will move within the vessel. For
both the passive and the active simulation, the head difference between the tanks is
of importance. The "head" between the tanks is defined as the difference in height
between the water height in the tank on one side of the vessel and the height in the
other tank. The difference in height is calculated with respect to the global axes, as
the gravitational acceleration is always pointed in negative z-direction in the global
axes system.
For passive damping, the head difference between the tanks determines the possible
acceleration of the mass. The larger the head, the bigger the acceleration of the mass.
The acceleration of the mass can be controlled by using air valves on top of each
tank. By closing these valves (partially) a vacuum is created in one tank which limits
the acceleration of the water mass.
For active damping, the head difference is needed to be able to calculate the power
required by the pump to move the mass. The pump should be able to accelerate the
mass with a certain value, and the difference in head might require a lot of power for
some phase differences between the mass and roll angle of the vessel. In the results
chapter the head between the tanks is further analyzed.
In figure 3.12 below a graph is given for the head difference between the tanks at
certain roll angles and locations of the mass, see figure 3.11 for reference. As can be
seen in the figure, the head distribution is almost linear up to a certain angle. This
is caused due to the rectangular tanks. The head difference has an influence on the
velocity of the mass moving from one side of the vessel to the other, and also has
an influence on the required power to move the mass. A higher head value requires
more power to move the same amount of mass in comparison with a lower head
value.
For the passive simulation, the center of gravity is calculated for each timestep de-
pending on the current roll angle. The calculated center of gravity is the position
where the ballast mass moves to. Depending on head difference between the tanks,
the mass moves at different speeds.
The steady flow equation between the left and right tanks can be written as:
p 1 V12 p 2 V22
Ã !
X
+ + z1 = + + z2 + h f + hm − h p (3.15)
ρg 2g ρg 2g
33
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
Figure 3.12: Head between tanks for different roll angles and cog location of the ballast mass
Where:
V1 = V2 = flow speed
p 1 = p 2 = pressure in the tanks
h p = 0 = head increase across the pump
h f = friction head
h m = head causes by sharp corners, valves, etc
z 1 , z 2 = head in each of the tanks
The equation can be rewritten as:
V2 fL X
µ ¶
X
h p = z2 − z1 + h f + hm = z2 − z1 + + K (3.16)
2g d
P
Where K is the sum of the loss coefficients: 1.0 for a sharp exit and 0.5 for a sharp
P
entrance [37], so K = 1.5. The flow speed can be calculated using the equations
below.
Q
V=
A
The pipe friction factor can be calculated using the Reynolds number:
Vd
Re d = (3.17)
ν
With ² (rough cast iron) the relative roughness can be calculated. f is determined
from the moody diagram, see figure 3.13:
34
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
Figure 3.13: Moody diagram
The energy equation for a fluid can be summarized as the velocity, pressure and
elevation energy:
ρv 12 ρv 22
p1 + + ρg h 1 = p 2 + + ρg h 2 + p loss (3.18)
2 2
With:
p = pressure in fluid (Pa)

p loss = pressure loss (Pa)
v = flow velocity (m/s)
h = elevation (m)
The required pump head can be determined:
V2 L
µ ¶µ ¶
hp = z + f +K (3.19)
2g d
Where:
λ = friction coefficient
L = length of the duct (m)
d = hydraulic diameter, same as diameter for circular duct (m)
With the pump head calculated, the required power for the pump can be deter-
mined:
ρgQh p
P=
µ
35
CHAPTER 3. MODELING
Where:
µ = pump efficiency
g = gravitional acceleration
In reality the water itself will already move due to the roll motions which may result
in lower required power. The power required by the pump can be determined with
the time trace from the head difference during the simulation. The location of the
mass can be directly related to the head difference. In combination with the speed
of the damping mass and the roll location of the vessel, the required power can be
calculated for the simulation.
36
CHAPTER 4. SIMULATION SET-UP
4 S IMULATION SET- UP
This chapter will discuss and elaborate the tests performed by the model described
in chapter 3. First, the general considerations for all tests are discussed and each test
is explained separately.
The effect of active and passive damping on the system will be investigated by per-
forming time domain simulations in OrcaFlex. For more information about Or-
caFlex, see page 74.
4.1 General Considerations
This section will discuss issues concerning all simulations, such as simulation time,
step size, wave period and wave height. Before considering any waves or wave spec-
tra, it must be noted that all waves have a heading of 90 degrees with respect to the
vessel (beam waves), as this is the situation where waves have the most effect on
the motion behavior of the vessel. Other wave directions or wave spreading are not
considered in this report.
4.2 Simulation time
The simulation time is important for the for the accuracy and calculation time of the
test. For the decay tests, only the first 200 seconds are relevant, after that period the
remaining roll speed and angle of the vessel are insignificant. For the other simu-
lations a simulations time of three hours is used to get a probability of 99% that all
waves have passed. This also complies with for instance the DNV rules.
4.3 Wave height
A wave height of 1.5 meter has been chosen for all the simulations. Above this wave
height, operations perform by Boskalis will halt until the weather has improved.
Testing the system for higher wave height might be theoretically interesting, but as
37
the operations on sea never continue with wave height above 1.5 meter, they are
initially not simulated in this report.
4.4 Time domain simulations
To test and verify the model created in OrcaFlex/Python, several simulations have to
be performed. The goal of these tests is to verify the setup and secondly to analyze
the improvement in motion response of the vessel. Chosen is to do time domain
simulation instead of frequency domain simulations, as the integration of OrcaFlex
with a damping system is time domain based and Boskalis will use this software for
upcoming projects. A frequency domain approach would also be possible an will
give the same results, but as Boskalis would like to use this software in upcoming
projects, a time domain approach is chosen.
4.4.1 Decay test
The simplest way to test the active/passive system is to give the vessel an initial heel
angle without any waves, and check if the system is damping the motions compared
to the undamped vessel. The decay test is also a good method to verify the response
of the damping system, as strange behaviour can be easily detected. For the decay
test, an initial heel of 15 degrees is given to the vessel. No waves are present during
the simulation. The result gives a good indication of the behavior of the undamped
and damped system.
• Regular Airy waves: H s = 1.5m and T p = 9s
• Regular Airy waves: H s = 1.5m and T p = 12s
4.4.2 Regular wave response
The simulation is done to analyze the vessel motions in regular waves. The chosen
regular wave is a simple Airy wave, with a wave height of 1.5 meter. The simulations
will be done for several wave frequencies, to analyze the influence of the active and
passive damping system for each of those frequencies. The wave height will be kept
constant. For each wave height, the mass used in the ballast system will be varied
from 1% to 10% of the vessel displacement.
4.4.3 Irregular wave reponse
For the irregular wave spectra the following setup has been chosen:
• Irregular JONSWAP spectrum: H s = 1.5m and T z = 7s
38
• Irregular JONSWAP spectrum: H s = 1.5m and T z = 9s
The above items represent the sea states in which the ship will roll the most, as the
period of the waves is close to the eigenfrequency of the vessel. For each of the wave
spectra, the mass of the ballast system will be varied from 1% to 10% of the vessel
displacement. The simulation duration will be 10800 seconds, to comply with the
regulations of DNV for time domain simulations. After three hours, 99% of the wave
components will have past the vessel and thus a conclusion about the motion be-
havior can be made.
39
CHAPTER 5. RESULTS & ANALYSIS
5 R ESULTS & A NALYSIS
As stated in the simulation set-up, several tests with different amounts of ballast
mass are tested. The displacement of the vessel without any ballast mass is 7351
metric tonnes. In table 5.1 below a list of the ballast weights and percentages is
given.
Ballast mass [mt] Total displacement [mt] Percentage [%]

157 7508 2
236 7587 3
314 7665 4
393 7744 5
471 7822 6
550 7901 7
628 7979 8
707 8058 9
785 8136 10
Table 5.1: Table of ballast mass used in simulations
5.1 Decay tests
At first the response of the vessel is tested with an initial heel of 15 degrees, no waves
and a ballast mass of 2%, see figure 5.1 below. The response is as expected. The green
line represents the vessels undamped roll motion. As can be seen in the figure both
the active and passive damping system damp the roll motion quite considerably.
The active damping is a bit more effective in damping the decay motion, but only
slightly. With some further tuning both the active and passive system should be able
to have an even better effect, as the focus has been on proving the concept and not
on developing a sophisticated controller.
Due to the relative small ballast mass, only 2% of the displacement, the natural roll
frequency remains almost the same. The active system is only slighty more effective
as a result of the response to the roll acceleration: the active system damps the mo-
40
Figure 5.1: Decay test, 2% ballast mass
tion when the vessel starts to roll, and the passive system starts to damp just after
the first response. This small lag in the passive system results in the active system
being somewhat more effective for this setup. By altering both the passive and active
system parameters, the damping effect might be even more effective.
For a larger mass, 5% of the vessel displacement, the damping increases which can
be seen in figure 5.2. The system is still stable and after about 40 seconds, the system
is more or less stable around zero roll angle. When doing the same decay test with a
ballast mass of 10% of the vessel displacement, the system becomes unstable. In the
first phase the damping is effective, but at small roll angles the relative large ballast
mass results in an overshoot and the roll angle is showing some unwanted behavior
around 30 seconds, see figure 5.3. The main problem is the passive system. The free
flowing surface and a relative large mass results in an unwanted response. The active
41
system works slightly better, as this system only responds to the roll acceleration and
confines the ballast mass to the center of the ship at small roll angles.
Up until 6% of the displacement as ballast mass the system behaves normally. Above
this amount of ballast mass, the system starts to have several small peaks in the spec-
tral density graph. The mass becomes too large with respect to the vessel displace-
ment and other non-linear effect occur. So for the passive damping, a ballast mass
above 6% of the vessel displacement is considered unwanted. The amount of mass
used as ballast is too large to be changed during operation. Otherwise it would be
effective to optimize the amount of mass with respect to the current motions.
The main reason is that the active system responds to the roll accelerations and will
limit the mass from moving freely as in the passive system. Despite the smooth
graph, the difference between 6% and 10% of the displacement as ballast is marginal.
The extra mass does not result in extra damping. In a decay test, the vessels roll
motion is quickly damped and the extra mass does not result in an even shorter
damping time. For a decay test with active ballasting, a mass above 6% of the vessel
displacement is not necessary.
The damping coefficients are listed in the table below:
Damping mass (% of displacement) Active damping passive damping no damping

2% 0.63 0.66 0.70
5% 0.48 0.52 0.71
10% 0.45 0.45 0.72
Table 5.2: Damping coefficients for the decay test
The results seem logical and no strange behavior is witnessed. For the verification of
42
the damping system, both the active and passive results comply with the expected
motion behavior of such a system.
5.2 Regular waves
For the regular wave test, regular Airy waves are tested with the following parame-
ters: T p = 9s and H s = 1.5m. This is close to the eigenfrequency of the vessel. Above
a wave height of 1.5 meter the vessels never set sail and stay in port to wait for better
weather, that is why this wave height has been selected. In figure 5.4 the response
of the vessel is shown for a ballast mass of 2% of the vessel displacement. As can be
seen, both the active and the passive system reduce the maximum roll angle. The
active system performs slightly better, but the tuning of the passive system can be
improved for better results.
Figure 5.4: Regular wave test, 2% ballast mass
Figure 5.5: Regular wave test, 5% ballast mass
43
Comparing 2% and 5% of ballast mass the damping increases significantly. In regular

waves, an increase in the amount of mass directly leads to more damping of the
eigenfrequency peak.Due to the regular waves, the system is stable and no unwanted
behavior occurs due to a higher percentage of ballast mass. A higher percentage of
mass used as ballast has other effects on the stability of the vessel, so one can not the
increase the ballast mass indefinitely. The maximum is probably somewhere around
10% of the displacement, as the GM value at zero roll angle becomes negative for
larger amounts of ballast water.
As can be seen, the amount of damping goes towards a limit. For higher amounts of
ballast mass, the mass itself has an influence on the eigenfrequencies of the vessel.
Because the active damping system responds to roll acceleration and not to roll an-
gle, the system is only capable of damping up to a certain amount. To remove all roll
motions, the active system should be adjusted to react to roll angle and roll speed as
well. But this requires a far larger mass compared to what is required for damping
the vessel which is not realistic.
A higher amount of mass increases the damping, but to a certain limit. The damping
is less effective compared to the active system due to the response of the damping
system; The passive system needs an initial roll angle before any damping occurs,
the active system responds to roll acceleration and does not require a roll angle to
be able to damping the vessel motions.
The regular wave simulations gives acceptable results. The damping behavior is logi-
cal; with tuning the system could probably be improved, but that is outside the scope
of this thesis.
5.3 Irregular waves
For the irregular waves two simulation runs have been executed:
• JONSWAP: H s = 1.5m, T z = 9s, T p = 12s
• JONSWAP: H s = 1.5m, T z = 7s, T p = 9s
Chosen is to use the wave height limit for the current vessel as a parameter for the
simulation. If the simulations prove that the response can be damped significantly,
the operational wave height limit can be increased.
At first the response of the vessel is analyzed for a ballast mass of 2% with respect to
the vessel displacement, see figure 5.6 below. The roll motion of the vessel is damped
significantly for both the active and passive system. The peak of the eigenfrequency
remains at the same frequency due to a relative small amount of mass. No other
peaks are visible in the spectrum, so the damping in irregular waves behaves as ex-
pected. The passive damping decreases the spectral density, but the active is slightly
more effective due to the earlier response to roll acceleration of the vessel.
44
In figure 5.8 the roll angle is shown for t = 0..500s, to show the decrease in roll angle.
The green line represents the undamped vessel, with the ballast mass fixed in the
middle of the vessel. The red and blue line represent the passive and active damping
results. Both the damping methods show improvements.
Figure 5.6: JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, 2% ballast
So although the density spectrum shows improvement, the absolute maximum re-
mains almost the same. The probability of occurrence of a roll angle above the oper-
ational limits decreases as is visible in the spectral density graph, see figure 5.6. The
difference between a period T z = 7s and T z = 9s is visible in figure 5.6 and 5.7. As
a period T z = 7s is closer to the eigenfrequency of the vessel the intensity is higher
and as a result the relative damping higher compared to the damping at T z = 9s. As
can be seen in both graphs, there is only a slight difference in the amount of damp-
ing by the passive and active system. Both systems damp the motions, but as the
passive system does not require any power or pumps the system is less complicated
and power demanding.
45
If the ballast mass is increased to 5% of the displacement of the vessel, the spectral
density graphs shows a lower intensity for both the passive and active system, see
figure 5.9 and 5.10. No strange behavior is witnessed and the active system shows
slightly better damping results, but only for the simulation with T z = 7s. As the ac-
tive system only responds to roll acceleration, the damping is about the same as the
passive system. As long as the phase lag of the damping mass is π2 behind the roll
motion of the vessel, the maximum damping will occur. The active system might be
improved to be able to respond better to roll motion, but the increase in damping
might be minimal.
46
In figure 5.11 the roll angle is shown for t = 0..500s, to show the decrease in roll angle.
Both the damping methods show good improvements. The absolute maxima over a
longer period of time for the simulation with T z = 7s are still relatively close to each
other for each of the damping methods:
• No damping: maximum roll angle = 5.00 degrees
• Passive damping: maximum roll angle = 4.15 degrees
• Active damping: maximum roll angle = 3.89 degrees
So a ballast mass of 5% of the water displacement has a higher impact on the damp-
ing of the vessel, which is logical. No strange or unwanted behavior is witnessed,
so using 5% of the displacement for ballast does not influence the stability of the
system.
Figure 5.11: Roll angle JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, 5% ballast
47
A ballast mass of 10% of the displacement results in the following spectral density
graph, see figure 5.12 and figure 5.14. Despite the results are good and the spec-
tral density has decreased in comparison with 2% of 5% ballast, the mass becomes
too large in reality. Ten percent of the water displacement of the vessel is equal to a
weight of 785 tonnes of water, which is unrealistic. For the passive system it might
be possible, but the active system would just require too much power to move all of
that water from one side of the vessel to the other side within 10 seconds to match
the eigenfrequency. The spectral density plot shows that the active damping system
does not work correctly. The density is higher than the passive system as a result
of the way the active system is programmed. The acceleration of the mass is deter-
mined based upon roll acceleration only, but some correction needs to be in place
to prevent an overshoot. The active system responds and the ballast mass is moved
further than required due to the timestep and the programmed script. To improve
this behavior, the controller should be tuned further. But as using 10% of the dis-
48
placement for roll damping is already unrealistic due to power requirements, there
is no point to improve the active control system to prevent this behavior from hap-
pening.
Figure 5.14: Roll angle JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, 10% ballast
The behavior as described above is also visible in figure 5.14. The ballast mass is
moved too far and this results in an overshoot and the roll angle of the vessel is not
damped, but enhanced for certain waves and roll conditions. The blue line in the
graphs shows this behavior clearly.
To show the improvements with more ballast mass, three graphs are plotted. As
comparison, the simulation where no damping is applied is plotted in figure 5.15.
The spectral density of the non damped vessel for each of the ballast weights is about
the same, which is logical as the ballast mass is fixed to the vessel.
Figure 5.15: JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, no damping
For the simulations where the vessel is passively damped, the results are plotted in
figure 5.16. As expected, more mass decreases the spectral density. The peak of
49
the eigenfrequency shifts slightly to the left, so the natural roll period of the vessel
increases.
Figure 5.16: JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, passive damping
The active system, plotted in figure 5.17, shows the results for the active damping
system. As stated earlier, for higher ballast mass the active system does not perform
very well due to step size and controller issues. But as the amount of mass that has to
be moved for the active system is unrealistic anyway, no further tuning is applied to
the active control system. The spectral density graph shows good result for the active
system for ballast mass below 5% in comparison with the passive system.
Figure 5.17: JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, active damping
50
The location of the mass with respect to the center of the vessel is shown in fig-
ure 5.18. As can be seen, the active reponds faster to ship motion which results in
larger movement of the ballast mass. The vessel has a width of 30 meter, so a ballast
movement of only a few meters is not much. The graph is also interesting for the
estimation of the power, as the relative short distance the mass moves requires less
acceleration from the pumps.
In figure 5.20 and 5.21 a part of the timetrace of the roll angle and the movement of
the ballast mass is shown. The ballast mass has a phase lag with respect to the roll
angle of the vessel, as expected.
In figures 5.22, 5.23, 5.24 and 5.25 below the phase difference between the damping
mass and the roll motion of the schip is visualized. The plots show the phase differ-
ence for both active and passive damping, and for the JONSWAP wave spectra with
H s = 1.5m and T z = 7s or T z = 9s.
Figure 5.23 and 5.22 show the phase difference between the roll angle of the vessel
and the location of the ballast mass for a JONSWAP wave with H s = 1.5s and T p = 7s.
As can seen in both figures, the damping mass has a phase lag with respect to the
51
Figure 5.20: JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, passive mass location and vessel roll angle
Figure 5.21: JONSWAP Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s, active mass location and vessel roll angle
roll angle. For the best damping, this phase difference should be 90 degrees. For
the passive figure, the phase lag is about 2 seconds, which is about 72 degrees phase
lag. For the optimal solution, the mass damping coefficient should be altered to
archieve the maximum damping. The above is also the case for the active damping
results.
52
53
54
CHAPTER 6. DAMPING SYSTEM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
6 D AMPING SYSTEM DESIGN REQUIRE -

MENTS
6.1 Power requirements
Although the effect of ballast water is considered as a mass in a single point, the
pump characteristics are of influence to the entire system. The possible acceleration
is depending on the force the pump or pumps can provide, and in the simulation
these characteristics have to be taken into account. The pump used for the system
can be determined in two ways:
• Use the existing pumps on board, but these will probably limit the improve-
ment into workability due to relative slow movement of water
• Determine which pump will have the most influence on the operational limit
and use these, while taking into account the costs of the pumps vs the gain in
operational limits
To use active damping, the pumps should be capable of moving the mass with at
least the speed of the eigenfrequency of the vessel. For most Smit vessels, the roll
period is between 7 and 10 seconds or a bit higher if fully loaded ( f ≈ 0.1H z). During
the simulations, the movement of the mass used for damping the vessel is recorded
and can be plotted. In figure 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 the timetrace for the head between
the tanks is shown for the simulations where 2 and 5% percent of the displacement
is used as damping mass respectively. The figures plot about 200 seconds of the
simulation. This way the graph is easier to interpret and the minima and maxima do
not change if more of the simulation is plotted.
55
Figure 6.1: Timetrace for the head difference between the tanks, 2% of the displacement as
damping mass, Hs 1.5m, Tz 7s
56
As can be seen in the figures, the head difference between the tanks rarely exceeds 2
meters without including the loss due to the ducts. For the passive damping system,
with the head difference the acceleration of the mass can be calculated. For the
active system, the pump power can be calculated from these graphs. For the passive
system, the head between the tanks visualizes the force behind the movement of the
damping mass.
The hull is roughly divided into four segments, see appendix B. If 2% of the displace-
ment is used and considering a draft of 3.24m, the required mass flow rate can be
determined for the case where 2% of the displacement is used as damping mass.
The system has to be able to move the mass at the natural frequency, so the about
ten seconds.
ρ = 1025 kg /m 3
m = 157 mt ≈ 153 m 3
153
ṁ = = 15.3m 3 /s
10
The required power to move this amount of water can be determined, assuming the
circular duct between the tanks is 2m 2 . The cross-sectional area of the duct can be
altered to the desired value, the calculation below only gives an indication of the
power. For the passive system, the speed of the damping mass (water) can be con-
trolled by using air valves on top of the tanks. This is better compared to a valve in
the duct, as water is almost incompressible and the forces might damage the valves.
Air valves create a gradually increasing low pressure on side and a high pressure on
57
the other side, which results in lower structural stresses in the system.
d = 2m 2
d2 · π
A= = 3.14m 2
4
Q
V = = 4.87m/s
A
² = 0.26 · 10−3 (cast iron)
²
= 0.0001
d
ν = 0.0011
L d uc t = 22.50m
K = 1.5 (sum of the resistance coefficients: sharp entrance and exit)
V ·d
Re d = = 8859.2 (turbulent)
ν
f = 0.0122 (from Moody diagram)
z = 2m (max head difference)
µ 2¶ µ
V L
¶
hp = z + · f · + K = 3.98m (pump head)
2·g d
µ = 0.6 (assumed pump efficiency)
ρgQh p
P= = 1021kW
µ
The calculated power is just an quick estimation, but good enough to get an idea of
the scale of the required power. The costs of installing an engine and the pumps ca-
pable of moving this amount of mass might not be worth the investment. A passive
system might be more suitable, as the complexity is lower and no engine power is
required.
In the figures below, the power is plotted corresponding to figures 6.3, 6.4,6.1 and
6.2. As can be seen, the power changes along an average of about 400 kW for each
of the graphs. The increase in damping mass does not seen to have much influence
on the required power. The direction of the required power is not included in these
graphs, when the head is negative, the required power is zero.
58
Figure 6.5: Timetrace for the required power, 2% of the displacement as damping mass, Hs
1.5m, Tz 9s
1.5m, Tz 9s
1.5m, Tz 7s
6.2 Types of pumps
The most common used pomps aboard these kind of vessels are centrifugal pumps
used for ballasting. The main problem with these pumps is that they have a relative
59
1.5m, Tz 7s
low mass flow and it i s not possible to reverse the direction very fast. The most
common pumps available are:
• Gear pump
• Screw pump
• Plunger pump
• Radial flow pump
• Axial flow pump
For the application of an active ballast system normal pumps are not sufficient.
These pumps are too slow and do not have the capacity to move 2% of the vessel
displacement within 10 seconds, which is about the natural frequency of the used
vessel. For the active ballast system aboard a vessel a very large pump is required
which is also capable of changing the thrust direction very fast. For the active ballast
system a thruster in a duct would probably be the best solution. The thruster can
be equipped with a controllable pitch propeller, so the direction of the thrust can be
changed without having to stop and reverse a pump or propeller.
The required power which has been calculated in the beginning of this chapter could
be installed in the vessel. Despite the fact that these kind of vessels mostly do not
have much own propulsion power, there is enough space available below deck for a
large engine room.
6.3 Required space
If 2% of the vessel displacement is used as ballast, 157mt of water is used for damp-
ing the motion. To give an idea of the amount of water, the size of the the tank and
the size of a containerized system is given below:
60
• Containerized system: A standard 40 feet container can hold about 68mt of

water. To be able to move the water back and forth the tanks on each side
should be half filled, so this kind of system would require about 3 standard 40
feet containers on each side of the vessel with a duct connecting the tanks in
between.
• If the system is placed in the tanks: the width of the tanks in the Taklift 6 is
7.5 meters. The height of these tanks is about 5 meter, which results in a tank
length of about 4.3 meter. This is not a lot of space if compared to the overall
ballast capacity. The best would be to use the tanks in the middle of the vessel,
as these only counter the roll motion and no linked moment around other axes
is initiated.
61
CHAPTER 7. CONCLUSIONS
7 C ONCLUSIONS
Both damping systems have an influence on the motion behavior of the vessel. In
the results chapter the active system reduces the motions of the vessel for a ballast
mass up to 5% of the displacement of the vessel, above that percentage the control
system used to control the mass is too rough, causing the ballast to overshoot the
desired position resulting in a roll moment bigger than the desired roll moment to
damp the roll motion. The passive system performs as expected taking into account
that only linear movement is included and no sloshing effects are taken into consid-
eration.
The system is damps roll motion both for regular and irregular waves. The active
system shows a slightly faster response to roll acceleration of the vessel compared
to the passive system which needs an initial roll angle to be able to damp the mo-
tions. The active system should theoretically work, but in reality the power required
to move the damping mass might be too large. For this reason the active system is
not a practical solution, the passive system is more suitable. Another benefit is the
structural fatigue of the vessel and crane. Due to the decreased response of the ves-
sel to the wave, especially around the eigenfrequency, the fatigue life of the vessel
and crane structure can be increased.
If 2% of the vessel displacement (about 150 tonnes of water) would be used as bal-
last mass the increase in operation limits using the modeled damping system the
JONSWAP spectrum parameter H s can only be increased from 1.5 to about 1.8 me-
ter. This is relative small increase considering the amount of mass used and will not
directly lead to an increase in workability. A higher amount of damping mass could
lead to instability of the system and might limit the ballast capacity. For this thesis
and as result to present to Boskalis the improvement is probably too small for the
investment. If a system has to be chosen, the passive system is more suitable. The
complicated setup and required power for an active system is probably not worth
the investment, but this should be further researched. The active system also re-
quires significant changes to the vessel such as extra engines and pumps, while a
passive system only requires a duct to connect the ballast tanks and optionally some
air valves to control the flow speed. In this thesis the differences between the ac-
tive and the passive system were insignificant, but it is hard to say whether this is
the result of not further optimizing the damping mass controller or the system it-
62
CHAPTER 7. CONCLUSIONS
self.
Installing a damping system on a vessel will have an influence on the behavior, es-
pecially for roll motion. The spectral density for the roll motions will decrease and
thus the operational limit could be increased, but using 2% of the displacement as
ballast mass only gives a slight theoretical increase in operational limits. In reality,
the workability would probably not increase much. Using higher percentages of the
water displacement as damping mass may introduce other difficulties like sloshing
and not being able to ballast the vessel properly. The implementation of a damping
system has to be researched further to see if improvement of the controller would
result in a higher workability.
The power required for an active ballast system is probably too large with respect to
the power installed on the vessel and due to the complexity of the active system a
passive system is more suitable. A passive system can be installed without to much
alterations to the vessel. A further study should be carried out to investigate the
design aspects and costs of installing such a system on a actual vessel.
63
CHAPTER 8. RECOMMENDATIONS
8 R ECOMMENDATIONS
Model experiments
• Barges and sheerlegs have a relatively high GM with respect to conventional

shaped vessels. Due to the high GM value, the roll period of a barge shaped
vessel is relatively short and the damping might be less effective compared
to normal ships. The effect of having a damping system installed on a barge
shaped vessel should be further investigated and model tests should be done
to verify the motion behavior.
• The best way to test the system is to do model tests. In a further stage of this
investation or in another thesis the system should be tested in a model basin,
to see whether the simulations prove to be correct. Modeling the vessel would
be quite easy, as the shape of the barge and sheerlegs is very basic.
Simulation improvements
• The ballast water is modeled as a single point mass which can only move in the
transverse direction with respect to the ship. In reality, the center of gravity of
the mass would also move in the vertical direction and some sloshing effects
would occur. To improve the simulations, these effects should be included.
• For the simulation only beam waves are considered, for a more realistic simu-
lation waves from several directions should be modeled and tested.
• Several locations for the mass have to be tested, at the moment the ballast
mass is located in the middle of the ship in length direction, but this might not
be possible in reality. Other locations for the ballast mass should be tested as
well.
64
CHAPTER 8. RECOMMENDATIONS
Controller tuning
• The parameters for the controller have been determined by trial and error dur-
ing the simulations. This process can be optimized by analyzing and compar-
ing data of the used and other vessels. It is possible to write an algorithm to
estimate the parameters, but this is outside the scope of this project. Methods
like Ziegler-Nichols could improve the controller behavior as well as dedicated
software packages for PID optimization.
• Further research can be done to improve the passive system to incorporate

semi-active valves. With these valves the ballast water can be kept at a specific
side of the vessel, to reduce the effects of sloshing. These valves could also be
used to change the damping mass velocity to adjust the damping system to
different loading conditions.
Location of the damping mass
If the system is installed on the deck, as a containerized system, it can be used by

other vessels. This would enable Boskalis to use the damping system whenever
needed, and not limit the system to specifics vessels. A benefit of installing the sys-
tem on deck is not losing any ballast capacity. The downside is the loss of deck space
and thus storage capacity, see also the required space chapter. This thesis did not fo-
cus on the actual design of such a system, further research is required to determine
the design specifications.
65
REFERENCES
R EFERENCES
[1] E. R. Miller, J. J. Slager, and W. C. Webster, “Development of a technical prac-

tice for roll stabilization system selection,” tech. rep., Naval Ship Engineering
Center, 1974.
[2] G. Bourguignon, “Stabiliteit van drijvende lichamen - anti-slingertanks,” tech.

rep., Vakgroep Waterbouwkunde, Civiele Techniek, Technische Universiteit
Delft, 1980.
[3] Y. Himeno, “Prediction of ship roll damping - state of the art,” tech. rep., Naval
Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, 1981.
[4] T. Smith and W. Thomas, “A survey of ship motion reduction devices,” tech. rep.,
David Taylor Research Center.
[5] On providing a reaction for efficient wave energy absorption by floating devices.
Elsevier, 1999.
[6] A. F. A. Gawad, S. A. Ragab, A. H. Nayfeh, and D. T. Mook, “Roll stabilization by

anti-roll passive tanks,” Ocean Engineering, 2001.
[7] E. van Daalen, K. Kleefsman, J. Gerrits, H. Luth, and A. Veldman, “Anti-roll

tank simulations with a volume of fluid based navier-stokes solver,” tech. rep.,
MARIN, University of Groningen.
[8] E. T. Huang, “Stability investigation of a pontoon barge in wave basin,” in Pro-

ceedings of the eleventh international offshore and polar engineering conference.
[9] K. S. Youssef, S. A. Ragab, A. H. Nayfeh, and D. T. Mook, “Design of passive anti-

roll tanks for roll stabilization in the non-linear range,” tech. rep., Virginia Poly-
technic Institute and State University, USA, 2001.
[10] T. Phairoh and J.-K. Huang, “Adaptive ship roll mitigation by using a u-tube
tank,” in Ocean Engineering.
[11] B. Winden, “Anti roll tanks in pure car and truck carriers,” Master’s thesis, KTH
Centre for naval architecture, Stockholm, 2009.
66
REFERENCES
[12] O. A. Marzouk and A. H. Nayfeh, “Control of ship roll using passive and active
anti-roll tanks,” tech. rep., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
2008.
[13] C. Holden, R. Galeazzi, T. I. Fossen, and T. Perez, “Stabilization of paramet-

ric roll resonance with active u-tanks via lyapunov control design,” tech. rep.,
Queensland University of Technology, 2009.
[14] Contemporary Ideas on Ship Stability and Capsizing in Waves. Springer, 2010.
[15] T. Perez and M. Blanke, “Ship roll damping control,” in Annual Reviews in Con-
trol.
[16] T. Phairoh and J.-K. Huang, “U-tube tank damping system for ship roll motion
using adaptive phase shift control,” Journal of communication and computer,
2010.
[17] R. R. A.V., V. A. Subramanian, and R. A.S., “Performance analysis of u-tube tank

for roll stabilization,” International journal of innovative research and develop-
ment, 2012.
[18] J.-H. Kim and Y. Kim, “Study on heel stabilization for cruise ship by using active
fin and anti-rolling tank,”
[19] L. Yu, J. Wang, Q. Li, and W. Zhou, “Robust stabilization of ship roll by convex
optimization,” in Proceedings of the 32nd Chinese control conference.
[20] M. Kerkvliet, G. Vaz, N. Carette, and M. Gunsing, “Analysis of u-type anti-roll

tank using urans. sensitivity and validation,” 2014.
[21] M. van Slooten, “Modeling of free flooding anti-roll tanks,” Master’s thesis,
2014.
[22] Y. Kawahara, K. Maekawa, and Y. Ikeda, “A simple prediction formula of roll

damping of conventional cargo ships on the basis of ikeda’s method and its
limitation,” in Proceedings of the 10 th International Conference on Stability of
Ships and Ocean Vehicles.
[23] G. Roberts and T. Barboza, “Analysis of warschip roll stabilisation by controlled

anti-roll tanks with the aid of digital simulation,” tech. rep., Royal Navy Engi-
neering College, UK.
[24] A. R. Christopher Bassler, Ronald Miller, “Considerations for bilge keel force
models in potential flow simulations of ship maneuvering in waves,” in Pro-
ceedings of the twelfth international ship stability.
[25] R. van ’t Veer and F. Fathi, “On the roll damping of an fpso with riser balcony
and bilge keels,” tech. rep., Royal institution of naval architects, Netherlands.
67
REFERENCES
[26] N. W. J. Benstead and B. E. Bishop, “On wave prediction for ship roll stabi-
lization,” tech. rep., University College of London and United States Naval
Academy.
[27] M. Haro, R. Ferreiro, and F. Velasco, “Ships roll stabilization by anti-roll active
tanks,” tech. rep., University of Cadiz.
[28] T. Pairoh and J.-K. Huang, “U-tube tank damping system for ship roll motion
using adaptive phase shift control,” Journal of Cummunication and Computer,
2011.
[29] C. Chen, J. Huang, M. Phan, and J. Juang, “Integrated system identification and
state estimation for control of flexible space structures,” Journal of Guidance,
Control and Dynamics, 1992.
[30] F. Sellers and J. Martin, “Selection and evaluation of ship roll stabilization sys-
tems,” Marine technology, 1992.
[31] J. Bell and W. Walker, “Activated and passive controlled fluid tank system for
ship stabilization,” The society of naval architects and marine engineerins trans-
actions, 1966.
[32] J. Fluid Mechanics, ch. Effect of vortex shedding on the coupled roll response of
bodies in waves. 1988.
[33] E. van Daalen, K. Kleefsman, J. Gerrits, H. Luth, and A. Veldman, “Anti-roll tank
simulations with a volume of fluid (vof ) based navier-stokes solver,” tech. rep.,
MARIN.
[34] Y. Kim, “Coupled analysis of ship motions and sloshing flows,” tech. rep., Amer-
ican bureau of shipping, research department, 2004.
[35] M. Tiehatten, “Dp assisted mooring of diving support vessel,” Master’s thesis,
TUDelft, 2011.
[36] C. Holden, R. Galeazzi, T. I. Fossen, and T. Perez, “Stabilization of parametric

roll resonance with active u-tanks via lyapunov control design,”
[37] Fluid Mechanics. McGraw - Hill, 2009.
68
APPENDIX: A. TAKLIFT 6
A TAKLIFT 6
On the first page the general layout of the Taklift 6 is given. The force RAO matrix
for the Taklift 6 with a heading of 90 degrees (beam waves) is given in table A.1.
69
REMARKS:
Principle dimensions
TOP OF WHEEL HOUSE
Length o.a. : 72,56 m
Length Moulded : 72,00 m
Breadth o.a. : 30,50 m
Breadth Moulded : 30,00 m
WHEEL HOUSE Draught min. : 2,50 m
Draught max. : 4,00 m
Depth : 5,50 m
YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION 1975

UP
UP DN
CONSTRUCTION YARD : H.D.W.-KIEL
DN
CLASSIFICATION : G.L. 100 A5 1W LIFTING
SHIP. MC AUT.
CALL SIGN : 9V5979
WINCH PLATFORM
EL. + 13.950 TOP OF WHEEL HOUSE
EL. + 11.000 WHEEL HOUSE
EL. + 7.200 WINCH PLATFORM
Boskalis
Boskalis
EL.+ 0.0 MAIN DECK (O.K. DECK)
TWEEN DECK
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
C C
L L
AFT VIEW PROFILE FRONT VIEW
NO WELDING
UP
DN DN DN
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 UP 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
UP
PAINT
STORE
UP
MAIN DECK
FUEL TK.
Z3 22-07-14 ATER AS BUILT, BOSKALIS NORM GVEH PHH PKOR
Z2 xx-xx-xx HvH AS BUILT, UPDATED GVe VKo PKo

BALL. TK. BALL. TK. BALL. TK. STORE ROOM BALL. TANK
Z1 09-FEB-10 PNo AS BUILT, UPDATED GVe VKo PKo

FUEL TK.
Z 02-11-98 ABr AS BUILT GVe TBo HHo

UP
B 17-07-98 ABr FOR CLIENT’S APPROVAL GVe TBo HHo
PROV.
WASH.RM. 8 P A 25-10-96 HvH FOR INTERNAL REVIEW GVe HvdH CBe
THRUSTER RM. FREEZER
L.DRY UP STORE
CONF. Rev Date Drawn Description Chkd P.Appr E.Appr Client Date
UP MESS/
CONTR.RM. GALLEY 8 P RM.
PROV. RECR. RM.
COOLER Subject
UP
ENGINE RM. ST. UP
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
2P
Project
UP
BALL. TK. PUMP RM. HOSP.
STORE
TAKLIFT 6
WORKSHOP 2P 2P 2P 2P CAPT.
2P
UP UP Client
2P STORE
2P 2P 2P 2P
THRUSTER RM. CH.ENG.
2P
2P BOSKALIS OFFSHORE MARINE SERVICES
UP
POTABL. W.TK.
BoskalisOFFSHORE ENGINEERING CAD-drwg not to be
changed manually
BALL. TK.
DEPARTMENT
BALL. TK. BALL. TK. STORE ROOM BALL. TANK
P.O.Box 43, 3350 AA Papendrecht
POTABL. W.TK. Orig. Size A0
E-mail: info@boskalis.nl
All information and data on this drawing are property of Offshore Engineering Department
No part from that may be disclosed, copied, duplicated or in any other way made use of
without written consent or used other than on terms agreed in writing.
TWEEN DECK
Scale Drawing No Sheet
1:200 TL 6 - 01 1 of 1
Surge Sway Heave Roll Pitch Yaw
Ampl [kN.m/m]
Ampl [kN.m/m]
Ampl [kN.m/m]
Ampl [kN/m]
Ampl [kN/m]
Ampl [kN/m]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Period [s]
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2.094395 0.4778 359.7 1436 70.25 282.5 114 5883 72.09 2047 121.4 1458 254
2.111995 1.629 41.96 1474 58.75 244 102.9 5704 60.07 1751 110.2 1522 245.6
2.129893 2.824 50.24 1494 47.4 203.3 86.57 5497 47.18 1450 93.64 1544 237.4
2.148098 3.811 55.06 1497 35.95 174.4 62.16 5310 33.3 1240 69.41 1523 229.2
2.166616 4.508 58.59 1487 24.19 175.7 32.04 5188 18.59 1239 39.89 1461 220.5
2.185456 4.914 61.57 1468 11.93 211.7 6.046 5161 3.487 1469 14.32 1364 210.7
2.204626 5.054 64.78 1447 359 268.7 348.1 5239 348.5 1830 356.4 1246 199
2.224136 4.946 69.29 1435 345.6 331.1 335.5 5410 334.3 2228 343.8 1130 184.7
2.243995 4.599 76.4 1438 331.7 390.5 325.9 5643 321.1 2601 334.3 1048 167.1
2.264211 4.053 87.89 1460 317.9 441.7 317.9 5891 309.1 2914 326.4 1037 147.5
2.284795 3.469 106.3 1499 304.4 481.2 310.5 6108 298.2 3141 319.3 1105 129.1
2.305756 3.186 133.2 1551 291.4 506.9 303.3 6263 288 3272 312.3 1218 113.8
2.327106 3.534 162.3 1612 279.2 518 295.8 6335 278.3 3309 305.1 1346 101.1
2.348854 4.431 184.3 1673 267.6 515.5 287.5 6315 268.8 3262 297.2 1473 90.32
2.371013 5.548 198.8 1729 256.6 501.8 278.2 6206 259.3 3145 288.5 1591 80.98
2.393594 6.629 208.6 1776 246 480.9 267.4 6019 249.6 2974 278.5 1690 72.89
2.41661 7.528 215.6 1811 235.6 458.4 254.6 5776 239.4 2780 266.5 1755 65.69
2.440072 8.198 221 1832 225.4 441.8 239.6 5503 228.5 2613 252.2 1780 58.9
2.463994 8.611 225.9 1840 215.2 439.9 222.9 5228 216.8 2530 235.8 1764 52.17
2.48839 8.71 231.1 1838 204.7 458.7 205.6 4984 204.2 2568 218.5 1710 45.3
2.513274 8.457 237.1 1830 193.9 499.3 189.4 4810 190.8 2733 201.9 1616 37.88
2.538661 7.869 244.5 1823 182.9 557 175 4734 177.1 3005 187.2 1493 29.26
2.564565 7.029 254.7 1822 171.6 625.5 162.6 4760 163.7 3344 174.7 1362 18.61
2.591004 6.105 269.6 1830 160.1 698.5 151.9 4862 151.1 3699 164.2 1256 5.59
2.617994 5.435 291.5 1847 148.6 770.6 142.3 5008 139.6 4027 155 1198 351.1
2.645552 5.501 318.7 1876 137.3 838 133.5 5164 129.2 4307 146.6 1181 336.6
2.673696 6.505 343.4 1917 126.1 898 125.1 5300 119.9 4538 138.5 1192 322.4
2.702445 8.135 0.737 1967 115.3 949.1 117 5387 111.5 4728 130.6 1233 308.4
2.73182 10 11.94 2023 104.9 990.5 109 5406 103.8 4874 122.9 1316 295.4
2.76184 11.88 19.09 2080 95 1022 100.9 5348 96.7 4960 115.4 1436 284.5
2.792527 13.68 23.7 2136 85.41 1043 92.46 5212 89.92 4968 107.8 1565 276
2.823904 15.39 26.84 2186 76.14 1056 83.64 5002 83.39 4903 99.64 1672 269.3
2.855993 16.95 29.4 2230 67.12 1063 74.24 4723 77 4796 90.56 1746 263.6
2.888821 18.2 31.99 2264 58.28 1070 64.19 4382 70.66 4697 80.42 1789 258.3
2.922412 18.93 34.71 2290 49.5 1083 53.54 3988 64.2 4650 69.46 1804 253.4
2.956793 18.94 37.3 2308 40.72 1105 42.47 3554 57.4 4671 58.15 1788 248.8
2.991993 18.23 39.42 2323 31.9 1140 31.23 3102 49.97 4758 46.85 1736 244.4
3.028041 16.88 40.77 2335 23.05 1190 20.08 2655 41.59 4910 35.8 1647 239.6
3.064968 15.01 41.19 2345 14.2 1254 9.244 2235 31.9 5123 25.27 1533 233.8
3.102808 12.74 40.57 2355 5.313 1331 358.9 1862 20.54 5379 15.45 1419 226.7
3.141593 10.12 38.52 2366 356.4 1419 349 1556 7.227 5654 6.389 1325 218.5
3.18136 7.198 33.46 2381 347.4 1515 339.7 1331 352.3 5921 357.9 1253 210.3
3.222146 4.205 17.98 2403 338.4 1617 330.9 1182 337.3 6169 349.9 1184 202.5
3.263992 2.59 320.5 2435 329.5 1723 322.5 1080 324.4 6403 342 1100 194.6
3.30694 4.727 271.1 2475 320.8 1830 314.6 984.2 315 6639 334.3 1003 185.2
3.351032 7.937 257.4 2520 312.3 1936 306.9 868.5 309.9 6881 326.9 924.8 173
3.396316 11.13 251.5 2568 304.1 2041 299.5 730.1 310.8 7113 320.1 902.4 158.9
3.442841 14.2 247.2 2616 296.2 2140 292.3 600.9 321.5 7301 313.7 945.2 145.9
3.490659 17.26 243.4 2665 288.4 2234 285.3 571.8 344.8 7408 307.6 1024 136.3
3.539823 20.47 240.1 2714 280.8 2320 278.3 741.6 7.882 7416 301.4 1102 129.8
3.590392 23.88 237.5 2762 273.5 2400 271.2 1088 19.43 7342 294.7 1157 125.2
3.642426 27.36 236 2808 266.3 2478 264.1 1555 23.16 7241 287.3 1184 121.5
3.695991 30.61 235.3 2851 259.3 2555 256.9 2113 23.12 7178 279.2 1188 117.9
71
Surge Sway Heave Roll Pitch Yaw
Ampl [kN.m/m]
Ampl [kN.m/m]
Ampl [kN.m/m]
Ampl [kN/m]
Ampl [kN/m]
Ampl [kN/m]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Phase [deg]
Period [s]
3.751155 33.34 235.2 2892 252.4 2634 249.7 2752 21.26 7194 270.7 1178 114.4
3.807991 35.34 235.1 2929 245.7 2716 242.5 3465 18.46 7288 262.3 1158 111.1
3.866576 36.55 234.8 2964 239.1 2801 235.3 4247 15.17 7435 254.3 1127 108.1
3.926991 37.07 233.8 2996 232.7 2890 228.1 5093 11.64 7605 246.7 1081 105.3
3.989324 37.11 232 3024 226.4 2981 221 5999 8.002 7778 239.4 1018 102.4
4.053668 36.91 229.2 3047 220.2 3076 213.9 6955 4.341 7943 232.4 942.1 98.76
4.120122 36.72 225.7 3063 214.1 3176 206.9 7952 0.6944 8104 225.4 864.6 93.8
4.18879 36.67 221.7 3075 208 3283 199.8 8976 357.1 8270 218.6 800.3 87.28
4.259787 36.84 217.3 3084 201.9 3398 192.8 1.00E+004 353.4 8449 211.9 762.2 79.79
4.333231 37.18 212.9 3095 195.8 3522 185.9 1.11E+004 349.8 8636 205.4 752.3 72.72
4.409253 37.65 208.5 3111 189.8 3657 179.1 1.21E+004 346 8826 199.1 759.4 67.35
4.48799 38.22 204 3133 183.8 3801 172.5 1.32E+004 342.2 9008 193 766.1 64.02
4.569589 38.91 199.6 3161 178 3956 165.9 1.43E+004 338.3 9181 187.1 757.8 62.19
4.654211 39.76 195.2 3191 172.4 4123 159.5 1.54E+004 334.3 9345 181.3 728.2 60.94
4.742027 40.82 190.9 3221 167 4301 153.2 1.65E+004 330.5 9503 175.6 679.2 59.21
4.833219 42.09 186.9 3248 161.9 4491 147.1 1.77E+004 326.7 9658 170 620 55.92
4.927988 43.53 183.2 3270 156.8 4693 141.2 1.88E+004 323.1 9803 164.6 565 50.19
5.026548 45.06 180 3289 151.9 4906 135.5 2.00E+004 319.6 9929 159.4 531.1 41.91
5.129131 46.55 177.2 3304 147.1 5128 130 2.11E+004 316.3 1.00E+004 154.3 531.1 32.53
5.235988 47.91 174.7 3320 142.3 5360 124.6 2.22E+004 312.9 1.01E+004 149.3 566.6 24.51
5.347392 49.05 172.5 3339 137.7 5599 119.5 2.33E+004 309.7 1.01E+004 144.3 627.5 19.42
5.463639 49.97 170.5 3361 133.2 5847 114.4 2.44E+004 306.4 1.00E+004 139.1 700.4 17.31
5.585054 50.68 168.4 3387 128.8 6104 109.6 2.54E+004 303.2 9949 133.5 774.4 17.54
5.711987 51.28 166.3 3415 124.7 6370 104.9 2.64E+004 300 9890 127.5 842.7 19.39
5.844824 51.87 164.1 3444 120.8 6645 100.3 2.74E+004 296.9 9876 121.3 901.3 22.33
5.983986 52.54 161.9 3471 117.2 6928 95.96 2.84E+004 293.9 9935 114.7 948.3 25.98
6.129937 53.37 159.7 3494 113.8 7217 91.77 2.94E+004 291.1 1.01E+004 108.2 982.8 30.1
6.283185 54.41 157.8 3511 110.7 7512 87.76 3.04E+004 288.4 1.03E+004 101.9 1005 34.48
6.444293 55.63 156.1 3522 107.8 7807 83.92 3.14E+004 285.9 1.06E+004 95.85 1015 39.01
6.613879 56.99 154.9 3525 105.1 8102 80.25 3.22E+004 283.6 1.10E+004 90.26 1013 43.58
6.792633 58.39 154.2 3521 102.7 8392 76.74 3.31E+004 281.4 1.14E+004 85.12 1001 48.1
6.981317 59.7 154 3509 100.4 8672 73.37 3.38E+004 279.4 1.19E+004 80.39 980.5 52.51
7.180783 60.8 154.3 3489 98.31 8940 70.11 3.44E+004 277.6 1.23E+004 76.03 951.5 56.76
7.391983 61.55 155.2 3460 96.43 9191 66.95 3.50E+004 276 1.27E+004 71.97 916.1 60.8
7.615982 61.85 156.5 3423 94.77 9424 63.83 3.54E+004 274.5 1.31E+004 68.12 875.4 64.6
7.853982 61.61 158.1 3376 93.32 9636 60.73 3.57E+004 273.2 1.34E+004 64.42 830.8 68.13
8.107336 60.77 160.1 3318 92.09 9830 57.6 3.59E+004 272 1.37E+004 60.78 783.5 71.38
8.37758 59.32 162.2 3249 91.08 1.00E+004 54.41 3.59E+004 271.1 1.40E+004 57.15 734.6 74.33
8.666462 57.3 164.5 3167 90.28 1.02E+004 51.14 3.57E+004 270.3 1.42E+004 53.49 685.1 76.97
8.975979 54.76 166.9 3073 89.67 1.04E+004 47.77 3.54E+004 269.7 1.45E+004 49.76 635.9 79.31
9.308423 51.8 169.2 2965 89.24 1.05E+004 44.3 3.49E+004 269.3 1.48E+004 45.96 587.6 81.34
9.666439 48.52 171.4 2846 88.96 1.08E+004 40.76 3.41E+004 269 1.51E+004 42.12 540.9 83.08
10.053096 45.03 173.4 2715 88.82 1.10E+004 37.17 3.32E+004 268.9 1.54E+004 38.26 496.2 84.54
10.471976 41.43 175.3 2574 88.78 1.13E+004 33.58 3.21E+004 268.8 1.58E+004 34.43 453.8 85.74
10.927279 37.81 177 2426 88.81 1.16E+004 30.03 3.08E+004 268.8 1.62E+004 30.67 414 86.72
11.423973 34.25 178.4 2272 88.91 1.19E+004 26.56 2.94E+004 268.9 1.68E+004 27.03 376.8 87.49
11.967972 30.81 179.6 2117 89.03 1.23E+004 23.23 2.79E+004 269 1.73E+004 23.56 342.3 88.11
12.566371 27.54 180.5 1961 89.17 1.28E+004 20.08 2.63E+004 269.2 1.80E+004 20.3 310.3 88.58
13.227759 24.48 181.2 1809 89.31 1.33E+004 17.15 2.47E+004 269.3 1.87E+004 17.3 281 88.94
13.962634 21.64 181.6 1662 89.44 1.39E+004 14.49 2.30E+004 269.4 1.95E+004 14.58 254.1 89.21
14.783965 19.02 181.9 1521 89.55 1.45E+004 12.1 2.14E+004 269.6 2.04E+004 12.16 229.6 89.41
15.707963 16.63 182 1388 89.65 1.51E+004 10.01 1.98E+004 269.7 2.12E+004 10.04 207.2 89.57
16.755161 14.46 181.9 1262 89.73 1.57E+004 8.208 1.82E+004 269.7 2.21E+004 8.227 186.8 89.68
17.951958 12.47 181.8 1145 89.79 1.64E+004 6.672 1.67E+004 269.8 2.30E+004 6.683 168.2 89.76
19.332878 10.67 181.6 1035 89.84 1.70E+004 5.38 1.53E+004 269.8 2.39E+004 5.386 151.2 89.82
20.943951 9.04 181.4 932.7 89.88 1.76E+004 4.3 1.39E+004 269.9 2.47E+004 4.303 135.5 89.87
22.847947 7.561 181.2 836.1 89.91 1.82E+004 3.404 1.26E+004 269.9 2.55E+004 3.405 120.9 89.9
25.132741 6.228 181 745 89.93 1.88E+004 2.662 1.14E+004 269.9 2.63E+004 2.663 107.4 89.93
27.925268 5.033 180.8 658.7 89.95 1.93E+004 2.052 1.01E+004 269.9 2.70E+004 2.052 94.68 89.94
31.415927 3.97 180.7 576.4 89.96 1.98E+004 1.551 8912 270 2.77E+004 1.551 82.66 89.96
35.903916 3.036 180.5 497.5 89.97 2.02E+004 1.142 7741 270 2.82E+004 1.142 71.22 89.98
41.887902 2.23 180.4 421.5 89.98 2.06E+004 0.8116 6594 270 2.88E+004 0.8116 60.25 89.98
50.265482 1.548 180.3 347.8 89.99 2.09E+004 0.5481 5466 270 2.92E+004 0.5482 49.66 89.98
62.831853 0.9907 180.2 276.1 89.99 2.12E+004 0.3431 4355 270 2.96E+004 0.3431 39.38 90
83.775804 0.5572 180.1 205.8 90 2.14E+004 0.1897 3256 270 2.99E+004 0.1897 29.34 89.98
125.663706 0.2485 180 136.6 90 2.16E+004 0.08334 2166 270 3.01E+004 0.08334 19.47 90.02
251.327412 0.06218 180 68.14 90 2.17E+004 0.0207 1081 270 3.03E+004 0.0207 9.706 90.01
Table A.1: Force RAOs for the Taklift 6, heading 90 degrees with respect to the vessel
72
Figure A.1: Taklift 6 roll force RAOs
73
APPENDIX: B. ORCAFLEX
B O RCA F LEX
OrcaFlex is a software package provided by Orcina. OrcaFlex is simulation software

for motion analysis in the time domain. As Orcina states on their website:
"OrcaFlex is the world’s leading package for the dynamic analysis of off-
shore marine systems, renowned for its breadth of technical capability
and user friendliness. OrcaFlex also has the unique capability in its class
to be used as a library, allowing a host of automation possibilities and
ready integration into 3rd party software."
Figure B.1: OrcaFlex interface example
Orcaflex can use RAOs from other software packages as input. The motions of var-
ious objects can be simulated, such as lines, links, winches, shapes, buoys and ves-
sels. Each of the simulated objects can move freely or relative to another object. Due
to the extensive modeling possibilities, OrcaFlex given a fast method to do time do-
main simulations for any kind of vessel/platform including mooring lines e.a. For
modeling a simple vessel, the RAO values from software like DELFRAC or MOSES
are input. OrcaFlex simulates the motions of a vessel in the time domain. The ac-
tive/passive damping can not be simulated directly in OrcaFlex, but via an external
function. In this external function it is possible to describe the motion of the damp-
ing mass, either active or passive. For the environmental conditions, several options
74
are available:
• Current (constant or variable)
• Wind (constant or variable defined by spectrum)
• Waves (regular or irregular as defined by a spectrum such as JONSWAP)
• Water depth
More specifics and details on the program OrcFlex can be found on the web pages
listed below:
• http://www.orcina.com/SoftwareProducts/OrcaFlex/Features/OrcaFlexFeatures.pdf
• http://www.orcina.com/index.php
OrcaFlex has the capability to integrate python or C code directly into the model.
This enables the analysis of system which cannot be simulated directly. For example
passive/active ballast systems can be written in Python and integrated into the ship
and be simulated in the time-domain.
On the next page in figure B.2 an overview is given of the external function process in
OrcaFlex. The scheme shows in which order calculations are performed and which
variables and parameters can be read and/or altered during the simulation.
75
Orcaflex - external function process
Set initial values

Initialize
Initialize function classes
Load all initial parameters from OrcaFlex
Register Return a python array of the results registration

results data from previous simulation if applicable
Read current model variables, e.g. speed, rol angle, etc.

Calculate
Calculate value depending on model parameters
Return calculate value (info.Value)
Track
Track a data item with an external function
calculation
Run for
each time
Log result Store data necessary for the calculation loop
step
Derive
result
Store the current state in the simulation file,

Store state
so it can be used again when reopening the model
Finalize Close all remaining open files and free memory
Figure B.2: OrcaFlex schematics for the usage of an external function
76
Implementation of damping system in OrcaFlex
The damping system, both active and passive, are modeled as a single point mass
within OrcaFlex. The mass is physically included in the model, so all forces and
moment due to the mass are transferred to the vessel. Because of the mass being
modeled in OrcaFlex, not only as an external force but also as an actual element,
the damping mass is also included in the "no damping" situation despite it does not
move.
Figure B.3: OrcaFlex simulation model
Figure B.4: OrcaFlex mass damping model
77
OrcaFlex calculation method
The equation of motion OrcaFlex is solved during simulation is given in the OrcaFlex
Manual:
M (p, a) +C (p, v) + K (p) = F (p, v, t ) (B.1)
Where:
• M (p, a): system inertia load
• C (p, v): system damping load
• K (p): system stiffness load
• F (p, v, t ): external load
• p, v, a: position, velocity and acceleration
• t : time
OrcaFlex has two dynamic integration schemes:
• Explicit: this solution method is using the Euler method with a constant time
step. The initial position are calculated from the static equilibrium. Included
forces and moment can be: weight, buoyancy, hydrodynamic and aerody-
namic drag, added mass effects, tension and shear, bending and torque, seabed
reaction and friction, contact forces with other objects and forces applied by
winches and links. The time step required for a stable integration is in gen-
eral very short. OrcaFlex tries to optimize the timestep between accuracy and
simulation duration.
• Implicit: OrcaFlex uses the "Generalised-α integration schema as described

by Chung and Hulbert. All the forces and moment are calculated with the
same method as in the explicit solution, but the equation of motion is solved
at the end of each timestep. As a result of the calculation at the end of the
timestep, the variables p,v and a are not known and a iterative solution method
is required. The implicit solution method requires thus more computational
time compared to an explicit time step. However, for longer time steps the
implicit method is more stable, which results in faster simulation time.
78
Python controller & OrcaFlex integration
OrcaFlex allows controlling of centain object by using an external function. This

enables an engineer to input own script that extend the functionality of OrcaFlex.
For instance a winch can be controlled using an external function written in Python.
The script will be called for everytime step and allows setting the winch speed or
tension based on the location or motions of a vessel during the simulation.
Figures B.5 and B.6 show screenshots of the external function input in orcaflex.
Figure B.5: External function usage in orcaflex
Figure B.6: External function usage - input script
79

Ruud Habing - Masters Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Ruud Habing - Masters Thesis

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

Ruud Habing - Masters Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

D ELFT, U NIVERSITY OF T ECHNOLOGY

M ASTER OF S CIENCE T HESIS

R OLL DAMPING TO IMPROVE THE

5 Results & Analysis 40

6 Damping system design requirements 55

1.1 The car carrier "Baltic Ace" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3.1 Smit Taklift 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

5.1 Decay test, 2% ballast mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

5.2 Decay test, 5% ballast mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

A.1 Taklift 6 roll force RAOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

B.1 OrcaFlex interface example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

B.2 OrcaFlex schematics for the usage of an external function . . . . . . . . 76

2.1 Motion compensation/damping methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

5.1 Table of ballast mass used in simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

1.1 Problem statement

Existing diffraction software such as DELFRAC or MOSES is not capable of calculat-

1.1.1 The Baltic Ace project

Figure 1.1: The car carrier "Baltic Ace"

Figure 1.2: Boskalis heavy lift vessel "Taklift 4"

Figure 1.3: Baltic Ace sections

1.2 Ship axes definition

Figure 1.4: Axes definition

1.3 Active & passive damping

Figure 1.5: Anti-roll tanks, cross section of the vessel

1.4 Research aims

By creating a (mathematical) solution which can be incorporated in existing soft-

1.5 Definition of workability

Workability can be defined as:

Workability is a result of the operational limits. If the wind, wave or cur-

• Transport (sailing or being towed)

• Work is being done from the vessel at location

Solid mass Water mass

Table 2.1: Motion compensation/damping methods

Chronological overview of literature

Year Title Reference

... This table continues on the next page ...

Table 2.2: Chronological overview of literature

Year Title Reference

Table 2.3: Chronological overview of literature

Barge versus Ship

Another application of a barge is a "sheerleg", which is basically a barge with a fixed

Figure 2.2: Bilgekeel

Passive tank (roll) damping

• The width of the tanks should be a big as possible

Figure 2.3: U-tube roll tank schematic

• It is recommended to place the tank at or above the ship CG to obtain low

• A careful design of the tank facilitates its tuning. A well-tuned, well-designed

Active fin roll compensation

Active tank roll compensation/damping

Marzouk and Nayfeh [12] studied the uncontrolled six-degrees-of-freedom motion

"It is possible to use feedback control systems in tank systems in a fash-

• a linear quadratic regulator (LQR):

• a deadbeat predictive control (DPC):

Prediction of motions of a barge

Active heave compensation

Sloshing is the effect caused by a free fluid

van Daalen et al. [33] made a report on anti-roll