Dry Docs (Pianc)

P IANC REPORT
on
DRY DOCKS
FOREWORD decision being made on the o\·erall design philosophy con
sidered in Chapter 3.
During the l8th Meeting held on 8th October 1984 in

C lrap.t:u S sets out notes in a similar way to Chapter
Brussels, the PIANC Council decided that the mandate of
4 on rnrious types of Dry Dock walls.
the Commission for the Study of Locks, Dry Docks and .
Shiplifts be given to a new commission. Jn matters con

Clrap.t:u 6 deals with dewatering of Dry Docks in a
cerning Dry Docks the new commission would function
general way.
within the framework of the Permanent Technical Com
mittee No. II and the date fixed for the receipt of the Clrap.t:u 7 deals with filling of Dry Docks.
report on Dry Docks was to be not later than the end of
1987. Clrap.t:u g describes the factors affecting the choice

of Dock Gates and is followed by a description of the
It was proposed in June 1985 that Mr G.P. Martin,
main choices a\·ailable, together with their ad\·antages and
Senior Partner of T.F. Burns & Partners, Consulting Engin
disad\·antage�.
eers in the United Kingdom, should be appointed General
Reporter on the subject of Dry Docks. The proposal was

Clrap.t:u 9 describes some of the major items of Dry
duly ratified by the Permanent International Commission.
Dock equipment.
The Appendix 'A' is preceded by a simple statistical

1. CONTENTS OF REPORT
analysis of dock floor and gate designs.
The report is concerned with the planning and design
of dry docks and a study of modern trends. In this respect 2. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSO
I N
an attempt has been made to record information about
docks built since 1950, the results of which are shown in

The members of the new commission as related to
the Appendix 'A'. The list is unfortunately not complete,
Dry Docks are a follows :
but nevertheless indicates general statistical information.
PRESIDENT :
Clrap.t:u 1 consists of definitions of dimensions and
Professor R . KUHN, Dr. -Ing . ,
size of docks in order to achiern standardisation of infor
Rhein-Main-Donau A . G . ,
mation. Prokurist i. r. ,
Munich , F.R. Germany
Clrap.t:u 2 is concerned with the planning of Dry
GENERAL REPORTER :
Docks, including their size, siting and arrangement of
Mr G . P . MARTIN, BSc FICE,
facilities, serdces and equipment.
Senior Partner, T . F . Burns and Partner s ,
Consulting Engineers,
Clrap.t:u 3 deals with the choice of o\·erall structural l1nited llingdom
design of a Dry Dock, the final decision ha\·ing a profound
SECRETARY :
effect on constructional costs of the project.
Mr A. LEFEBVRE,
Clrap.t:u 4 sets out notes on the design of Yarious
Engineer of Highways Departmen t ,
Ministry of Public Works ,
types of Dry Dock floors that may be adopJed following a Brussels , Bel.giua
P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

MEMBERS Mr F . A . VAN TOL,
Ministry of Transport, Public Works,
AUSTRIA The Hague
Mr W. ROEHLE1 Dip l . Ing. ,
Mr. F . C . DE WEGER, B . I .
Director, Osterreichischen Donaukraftwerke A . G . ,
Consulting Engineer,
Wien
Rorterdam
BELGIOM
POLA!ID
Mr. P. LAGROU,
Professor MAZURKIEW!CZ,
Director General of Central Supply Office,
University of Gdansk
Ministry of Public Works,
Brussels
PORTUGAL
Mr C. ROTHILDE, Mr D . PINTO DA SILVA,
Engineer in Chief-Director, Engenheire Chefe de Divisao CPE,
Administration of Waterways, Porto
Brussels
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GEl!MAHY
Mr J . SEIVERT, Mr H . D. CLASMEIER, Dip l . Ing.
Inspector General, Niedersachsisches Hafenamt,
Administration of Waterways, Emden
Brussels
CAR&DA Mr D . P . BERTLIN, M .Eng FICE,

Mr D . J . GORMLEY, Redhill
Marine Works and Transportation Division,
Engineering & Architecture Parks, Mr P . LACEY, FICE,
Ottawa Ove Arup & Partners,
London
FRARCE
Mr MONADIER, u.s.A.
Chief Engineer of Highways Department,
Mr J . DAVIS,
Compiegne
Consulting Engineer,
Washington D . C .
ITALY
Mr G . DELLA LUNA, Mr . YACHNIS, D . S c .
Ingegnere Direttore, Chief Engineer, Department o f the Navy,
Canale Milano-Cremona-Po, Facilities Engineering Command,
Cremona Alexandria, Virginia
REI'BERLARDS
u.s.s.R.
Mr VAN DER HORST, M.Sc.
Senior Engineer, Professor V .M. SELEZNEV,
B.v. Aannemingsbedrijf NBM, River Fleet Ministry,
The Hague Leningrad .
2 P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

C O N T E N TS
1. GENERAL 4.14 Loading on dry dock floor
1.1 Introduction 4.15 Structural analysis of dry dock floor
l.2 Terminology and assessment of dock size

5. DESIGN OF DRY DOCK WALLS
1.3 Entrance width
5.1 Introduction
1.4 Dock barrel width
5.2 Mass concrete dry dock walls
l.5 Effective length of dry dock
5.3 Reinforced concrete dry dock walls
l.6 Effective depth of dry dock
5.4 Sheet piled dry dock walls
5.5 Caissons formfog dry dock walls
2. PLANNING OF DRY DOCKS
5.6 Dry docks without walls
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Clearances between ship and dry dock
6. DE WATERING OF DRY DOCKS
2.3 Dock size
6.1 Introduction
2.4 Level of dry dock cope
6.2 Dewatering time for a dry dock
2.5 Depth of dry dock
6.3 Location of pumphouse
2.6 Siting of dry docks
6.4 Dry dock main dewatering pumps
2.7 Subsoil conditions
6.5 Dry dock drainage pumps
2.8 Navigational approach
6.6 Design of dry dock pumphouse
2.9 Anchorages and quays
2.10 Availability of services 7. FILLING OF DRY DOCK
2. ll Prevailing wind 7.1 Introduction
2.12 Tidal flow, currents and waves 7.2 Filling time for a dry dock
2.13 Position with respect to buildings, workshops, etc. 7.3 Types of filling valves used
2.14 Arrangement at dry dock copes
8. DRY DOCK GATES
2.15 Access to dry dock floor
8.1 Introduction
2.16 Area surrounding dry dock
8.2 Width of entrance
3. OVERALL STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF DRY DOCK 8.3 Head of water to be retained
3.1 Introduction 8.4 Speed of operation
3.2 The influence of the location 8.5 Cost of operation
3.3 The influence of the available space and execution 8.6 Ability to open against a head
time 8.7 Depth available outside dock
3.4 The influence of soil condition and groundwater situ 8.8 Parking space availability
ation 8.9 Ease of maintenance
3.5. Making a decision 8.10 Labour force required to operate gate
3.6 Possible dock structures 8.11 Provision of power
3.7 Overall structural design method 8.12 Access across top of gate
3.8 Factor of safety of dry dock against flotation 8.13 Methods of construction
3.9 Structural analysis by finite element method 8.14 Free floating gate (ship type caisson)
3.10 Analysis in seismic areas 8.15 Hinged floating gate

8.16 Sliding caisson gate
4. DESIGN OF DRY DOCK FLOORS 8.17 Mitre gate
4-.l Introduction 8.18 Flap gate
4.2 Gravity dry dock floors 8.19 Strutted flap gate
4.3 Under-drained dry dock floors 8.20 Cantilever flap gate
4.4 Tied dry dock floors 8.21 Other gate designs
4.5 Dry dock floors bearing directly on the ground

9. DRY DOCK EQUIPMENT
lt.6 Dry dock floors supported on piling
9.1 Keel and Bilge Blocks
4.7 Ground improvement
9.2 Dock Arms
4.8 Dock floors constructed under water
9.3 Shiphauling systems
4.9 Longitudinal slope of dry dock floor
4.10 Drainage of dry dock floor APPENDICES
4.11 Cleaning of dry dock floor A World dry docks built since 1950
4.12 Services on dry dock floor B Structural analysis of gravity dry docks by the Finite
4.13 Joints in dry dock floor Element Method
P.IAN.C. - A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 3

Dock Arm
Dock
( Neap tides )
quoins
Depth of dock
Clause 1.6 Width of Barrel
Clause 1.4
Dock sill
Dock floor
DOCK NO PROJECTING ALTARS
Width of entrance
Cl ause 1. 3 Altars
Width of Barrel
Cl ause 1.4
Dock sill
Dock floor
• �-· . 1
DRY DOCK PROJECTING ALTARS
Width of entrance
Clause 1.3
D
Clause 1.4
Dock sill
Dock floor
DRY DOCK STEPPED ALTARS
Width of entrance
Clause 1.3
Width of Barrel
Clause 1.4
Dock sill
DRY DOCK WITH TRAPEZOIDAL GATE
Figs 1.3, 1.4, 1 . 6 - Diagrammatic cross section of dry docks showing defined dimensions
4 P.l.A.N.C. • A.1.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

1. GENERAL Appendix A. An attempt has been made to standardise the
method of measurement of the leading d imensions in
accordance with the ,·arious definitions gi\·en below. The
1.1. INTRODUCTION
estimated capacity of the dry dock in terms of the dead
weight tonnage (dwt) of the largest tanker or bulk carrier
This is a 'state of the art' report concerned with the
that can be accommodated has not been giYen since i t is
planning and design of dry docks and is restricted to the
felt that this may be misleading for this purpose. HoweYer,
engineering aspects of their construction and operation. No
it is recognised that dry dock owners often refer .to this
detailed consideration is gi\·en to Electrical Systems, Fire
figure for commercial adYertising purposes and is useful as
Protection, Cranes, Railroad tracks, Capstans etc. Floating
a general guide.
docks are not included in this report. Other structures and
installations which are inrnh·ed with the functions of
1.3. ENTRANCE. WIDTH
launching ships or remo\·ing ships from the water, such as
mechanical lift docks (sometimes referred to as shiplifts),

The entrance width is defined as the clear distance
marine railways and slipways, are also excluded from this
between the permanent dock fenders or structure at the
report.
dock entrance. Some dock entrances are trapezoidal in
elerntion and are often cur,·ed at the junction of the side
t.2. TERMINOLOGY AND ASSESSMENT OF DOCK SIZE wall and sill. In this case the entrance width is defined as
the distance between the bottoms of the battered sides at
The leading dimensions and brief construction details the tangent points of the cur\·es if this is less than the
of worldwide dry docks built since 1950 are gh·en in distance between permanent fenders.
Dock
-
Gate
Depth if Depth if
keel block s keel blocks
below sill above sill
Clause 1.6 Clause 1.6
DRY DOCK WITH LEVEL
Effect�".'._e length (with ste ed end w all
O utline �- �'.2�- __
Clause 1.5
-- - - --
/
Dock Dock cope (u s u ally level)

-
Gate I
I
I Depth at Depth at
.....
.... entrance head
,---""" ,
I : Al Clause 1.6
Slope often conforms Cla use
l_;:-J_\ll
c. •
- - - - - ��t_h_ ..sbip_ - - -
Slope down us u ally about 1:300
DRY DOCK WITH SLOPING
Figs 1. 5 and 1. 6
Diagrammatic longitudinal sections of dry docks showing defined dimensions
P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - No 63 5

l.IJ. DOCK BARREL WIDTH of 1.8 m is recommended if this type of equipment is to
be adopted. Sonar domes and other protuberances below the
The dry dock barrel width is defined as the maximum fore part of the keel of modem warships often require
clear distance between the faces of the ·dock walls or higller blocks or alternatively pits in the dock floor of
altars at or above keel block leYel. The dry dock barrel sufficient dimensions to facilitate remo\'al.
width is normally greater than the width of the dry dock
The width at the dock entrance will normally control
entrance.
the maximum beam of ship able to enter the dock. Due
allowance must be made for the clearance required which
I.5. EFFECTIVE LENGTH OF DRY DOCK will yary according to wind and tidal conditions, ship hand
ling facilities aYailable and type of ship to be docked.
The length of a dry dock js defined as the minimum
It is normal when planning new dry docks to allow
horizontal distance measured on the centre line of the
about 1 m clearance on each side of the maximum width
dock between the face of the head wall or the furthest
ship to be docked. This may be reduced to about 0.5 m
projecting fender thereon and the furthest internally pro
clearance if horizontal wheel fenders are proYided to ease
jecting part or fender of the dock gate. If the head wall
the ship into the dock. I t should be noted that when a
is . stepped, the length should be measured to the Yertical
ship enters a dry dock the rnlume of water displaced by
face of the step at keel block leYel. It should be noted
the ship flows out of the dock through the clearance gaps
that some dock gates are supported by internal inclined
between the ship and the entrance walls and sill and too
struts which may restrict the effective length of the dock
tight a clearance is therefore undesirable. The speed of
and measurement should then be taken to the appropriate
approach is an important factor in this respect.
point on the strutting system.
The width of the dock barrel is nor m ally greater than
that of the dock entrance. The extra width is required as
1.6. EFFECTIVE DEPTH OF DRY DOCK
working space to carry out work on the side of the ship,
possibly using dock arms in more modern installations. In
The depth of a dry dock is defined as the depth of
older docks the dock walls were generally constructed as a
water measured to the sill or keel block at the entrance,
series of steps or altars which gave economy of construc
whichever is the higher at mean high water neaps.
tion, facilitated the positioning of side shores (or struts) to
keep the ship vertical and suited the more flared sides of
the ships. Modern docks are generally provided with \"ertical
2. PLANNING OF DRY DOCKS
walls to suit the vertical sides of modern ships and
because side shores are now rarely required.
2.1. INTRODUCTION
The clearance in the dock barrel at the sides of a
ship should not normally be less than 1. 5 m or 2.5 m if
Dry docks ln the world haYe widely different dimen
dock arms are used and some authorities recommend
sions due to the large number of factors influencing the
between 3 m and 6 m on each side. Additional clearances
choice of size, type and operation. Dry docks can be
may be required for certain types of ships for the remoYal
di\"ided into two broad categories, namely shipbuilding and
of stabilizers although many stabilizers are now being de
ship repair docks, but some docks are used for both. The
signed to be removed internally. The remO\·aJ of tail shafts
requirements of the dry dock owner, dock size, siting,
often requires an extra length of dock and due allowance
ground conditions and environmental conditions will all ha\·e
should be made for this process.
a great effect on the planning of a dry dock. An increas
ing number of dry docks are co\·ered which are used for
both shipbuilding and shiprepair. 2.3. DOCK SIZE
2.2. CLEARANCES BETWEEN SHIP AND DRY DOCK The size of a new dry dock will generally be im·esti
gated at the preliminary planning stage when initial feasi
The clearances for working space will need to be bility studies are carried out. Such studies would include a
assessed in relation to the maximum size o f vessel to be comparison of the effects of increased dock size and con
docked when deciding the leading dimensions of a dry dock. struction cost with the likely increased re\·enue accruing
from handling bigger ships. The investment strategy may
The clearance under a ship will normally be go\·erned
also need to take account of national policy, for example,
by the height of the keel blocks, and it is often considered
a desire to be able to maintain the biggest ships in the
desirable that personnel can walk upright under the ship. In
national fleet.
general, the height of blocks is a matter for the indh·idual
yard and the techniques used for repair and construction. Some of the largest dry docks in the world were
The recent use of mechanical equipment on wheeled sized on the basis of an anticipated increase in ship size,
vehicles to clean and paint the underside of ships has which it was considered might rise to J,000,000 dwt. It now
required higher clearances and a minimum keel block height appears unlikely that ships of this size will eYer be. built.
6 P.!AN.C. A.LP.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

! dnt Jf\n\ pill" l.AJ;iS,S(H l:IM
1t.U_-U h"'Jth,. 1�00
A TYPICAL SH\PBUlLDlNG DR.Y [)OCK
FIG.·Z·J(o..)
10
HE l80A LANG l0,00 HDll 2,52
. . . . . . .
: . . . . . . . .
_A_ TYPICAL REPA.IR. 'DR.'( t>OCI".

FIG 2.·I (b)
P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1988 N° 63 7

\ I
: i
11
__ [ :'·:·;----- · ··•
I !
.J .L
I I IJ 11[; IJ IJ
JS.SOm• M.S.L.
2 OVERHEAD
I SOI
TOTAL LIFTING
I SOI
SI
CAPACITY 200 I
E
OOCKSHEO 150 •SO m
0
E
� �
N
HEATING
ASSEMBLING ARE A
WORKSHOPS
3.SOm•M.S.L :=;;��
fF
COMMISSIONING QUAY �ts
="'="'="'=c; �� L.O��
Om•M.S.l�
.
=::§:� -
: !
I_
r,=�=====<--
M.H.W 0.9m• : E ORYOOCK 1l.5·30•t0 m :
- :;:_ :'.::l �- --.- -- -- ----+<
...';';rn:;'.'.�.;:;;:.;:;m - -H-- -H-----1+--· -+- 5? - --·---- Jiil._-1-
1 :
\ ;
...... __ ______,__ _______________ ...... '
6.00m-M.S.L
7.00m-H.S.L
Fig, 2. 1 ( c ) - Covered docks
8 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63

Dock
Arm
Min. clearance 2.5m

Min. clearance
if dock arms used
l.5m if no dock
arms
Bilge
Bilge Keel blocks
blocks blocks
Min. clearance
l.8m if mechanical
cleaning equipment
used
Fig. 2.2 - Cross section showing minimum clearances
Stern Section Completed Ship
Closed
Main Dock
-----
Gate
Open
Intermediate
Gate
Fig. 2.3 - Shipbuilding dock with intermediate gate
Dry docks may be designed to accommodate more area for the remainder of the ship to be added, is a very
than one vessel at a time. Some are divided by an inter efficient use of dock space. The intermediate gate in such
mediate gate to convert the dock into a shipbullding dock a dock can be sited in various positions to permit
and a secondary shipbuilding area so that stern sections of variations in the sizes of completed ships and stern
ships can be assembled simultaneously. Assembly of the sections. The construction of each ship has to be
stern section may take twice as Jong as construction of programmed so that each section of the dock can be
the rest of the ship and its prefabrication in the smaller flooded at the appropriate time for launching completed
secondary area and subsequent transfer to t!ie main dock ships.
P.J .A.N.C. - A.l. P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 9

2.1+. LEVEL OF DRY DOCK COPE Repair docks may be used by damaged ships which
may haYe some compartments flooded and· be out of normal
The level of the cope should be assessed taking into docking trim. It may be possible to reduce this effect by
account the following : floodiQg appropriate compartments to balance the ship but
damaged ships may nevertheless require a depth of water
(a) The highest water le,·el likely to be attained outside
over the sill greater than would be required under normal
the dock entrance taking into account tidal levels,
docking conditions.
surge and wa,·e action.
(b) The highest water level ·likely to be attained in the It is difficult to predict the likely frequency of visits
dock. In some cases it may be desirable to raise the by damaged ships to a dry dock and the additional depth
water Je,·el in the dock higher than the water Je,·el required. It is thus a matter of commercial judgment as to
outside. In this case th� gate would need to be designed the economic Yiability of pro\·iding additional depth. It
for re,·erse head capability. should be noted that the additional capital cost of proYiding
additional depth may vary depending on the type of design
(c) The provision of external sen-ices and possible open
adopted.
galleries near the dock cope and the necessity or
otherwise for them to remain in the dry when the
dock is filled. 2.6. SITING OF DRY DOCKS
(d) The pro\·ision of rails for dock arms or ship leading

equipment below cope le\·el which normally should The siting of a new dry dock within an existing ship
remain in the dry. yard is often determined by the constraints imposed by the
(e) The general Je,·el of the ground surrounding the dock existing layout and aYailability of land and water frontage.
and the ad,·antage of maintaining the cope level similar The siting of· a dry dock in a new shipyard is more likely
to the ground level. to be affected by other factors and may in itself be a
major factor in determining the choice of site for the
2.5. DEPTH OF DRY DOCK whole shipyard. The siting of shipyards is outside the scope
of this report.
The depth of water o\·er the sill will, in most cases,
control the draft of the ship able to enter the dock. It
2.7. SUBSOIL CON DITIONS
may be possible to accommodate ships of greater draft by
timing docking and undocking operations at or near spring
The soil type and strength will greatly influence the
tides.
choice of dock structure which, in turn, will influence the
In considering depth, due account should be taken of
construction method and time as well as the cost. It is
the longitudinal inclination of the dock floor and/or keel
therefore essential that an accurate sun·ey of the subsoil
blocks as this could in some cases be limiting. In general,
conditions for the chosen site or sites should be available
unloaded ships will ha,·e a deeper draft at the stern due
so that the dry dock can be positioned to best advantage.
to the weight of the engines and other machinery. If a
The presence of rock at floor Je,·el may lead to a
longitudinally inclined floor is prodded, it is normal to
very economic floor design and w hilst exca\·ation in rock
slope the floor up from the gate end of the dock which
for the dock barrel may be expensive, no temporary works
then suits docking 'bow first', assists drainage, and gives
to support the sides of the exca\'ation are required and it
economy of construction towards the head of the dock. It
may be possible simply to provide dressed rock walls,
should be noted that there may be operational factors in
thereby eliminating the cost of concrete walls. The possi
farnur of 'stern first' docking and it would then be normal
billty of horizontal fissures in rock containing water under
to pro,·ide a horizontal floor. This solution has the advan
pressure should be considered. The danger may be elimin
tage that the stern of the ship may be closer to the
ated by draining, grouting, or anchoring.
centre of the shipyard, thereby reducing the time for
transporting material and personnel to the part of the ship The presence of suitable imperYious substrata at dock
requiring most work to be carried out. floor le\·eJ or at a leYel into which a cut-off can be
formed may lead to a drained floor design being adopted.
Consideration may also need to be giYen to the inter
The cost of pumping water from under a dock floor of
relationship between the depth of the dry dock, the draught
this type to preYent the build up of hydrostatic pressure is
of the ship, the time taken to position the ship over the
normally cheaper than the provision of a gra,·ity or tied
blocks, the height and rate of fall o f the tide and the
down structure even though it will be necessary t o continue
characteristics of the dock gate. The dock gate should
pumping throughout the life of the dock. If the water
normally be closed and water pumped out of the dock to
carrying layers (aquefers) · cannot
the de be closed off,
seat the ship on the blocks before the tide level drops to .
watering of the em·ironment by the necessary drainage may
produce re\·erse head conditions across the dock gate. In
be of deciding importance.
areas of high tidal range consideration may need to b e
given t o designing the gate for rernrse head conditions t o An adequate depth of water at the dock entrance and
overcome this problem. associated quays is clearly essential finally, but due con-
10 P.l.A.N.C. · A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

Dock
Dry Dock Cope Gate
Original Ground Line
_ ________ -----
r Dry Dockfloor __
Dock Sill
Remove by
Dredging
Fig. 2.7 - Longitudinal section of dry dock showing temporary eofferdam
sideration should be given to the necessity of providing fitting out quay. Modern practice generally dlt:tates that at
temporary cofferdams during construction which are cheaper least two repair/fitting out quays should be provided for
to form in shallow water. Dredging will normally be re- each dry dock. Sufficient depth of water will be required
quired to remove bunded cofferdams (dykes) and the at all states of the tide at anchorages and quays.
dredging can then be extended to form the necessary
depths for the dock entrance without great extra expense. 2.10. AVAILABILITY OF SERVICES
However, dredging in rock is extremely expensive and time
consuming and should be minimized by suitable positioning The availability and routing of electric p ower, fresh
of the dock and other structures. water and other services should be considered when the
The final position of the dock is normally a matter position of the dry dock within the shipyard is determined.
of compromise and judgment and the necessity of an
accurate subsoil investigation by qualified specialists 2.11. PREVAILING WIND
together with land and bathymetric surveys cannot be over
e mphasized. The wind direction is generally a minor factor in the
choice of the position of dry docks due to the importance
2.8. NA VIGA TION AL APPROACH of the other factors involved. However, the centre line of
a dry dock should be aligned as close as possible to the
Dry docks should be sited to provide an easy navi direction of the prevailing wind. This greatly assists the
gational approach, if possible. At building docks ships will docking operation since manoeuvring large ships in an un
generally only be required to leave the dry docks. This loaded condition in a cross wind even with tug assistance
may be before completion of the ship's engines and i t is very difficult. This is more relevant to shiprepair docks
would then b e necessary to manoeuvre the ship from the where ships may be expected to enter and leave the dock
dock to the fitting out berth using only tugs. At repair more frequently than shipbuilding docks.
docks ships will be required to approach to and depart

from the dry dock. It should be borne in mind that vessels 2.12. TIDAL FLOW, CURRENTS AN D W AVES
at these times, although usually under control of tugs, m a y
have n o power from t h e ship' s engines. Lead-in structures Consideration should be given to the effect of tidal
such as jetties or dolphins may be required. in some lo streams if the dock is to be located on an exposed c oast
cations. or on a tidal river. Docking and undocking is generally
carried out near high water but the tidal streams before
and after high water should be checked to confirm that
2.9. ANCHORAGES AND QUAYS
there is sufficient time for the docking operations to be
carried out before an unacceptable velocity develops.
A sheltered anchorage and/or mooring facility should
be provided as there ·may be a delay between the arrival Currents resulting from river flow do not normally
time of the ship and the time of docking. Docking is affect the operation of a dry dock except by modifying
usually carried out at slack water usually near high tide. the effect of the tidal conditions. The possibility of sil
Work may be required to be carried out afloat before or tation or scouring at the dock entrance and its effect on
after docking and this should normally be carried out at a the dock gate and gate recess may need to be considered.
P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 11

Main ho1sl
Slewing
radius: m 80
Flap;
gate'.
:!. Bollards Dredged lo - 9-0 m MSL :
� Arch lenders (-7·4 m COJ
n Cyhndncal fenders
Pump \
qi Wheel fenders chamber '
c Capstans
a F1lhn9 valves
Scale of melres
'* Lighting lowers
II 10 I winch
J_
I
10 m gauge and
roadway
Collector trench
3·6 m
- 9·0 m dredged level

Scaic ol meires Sub-floor drainage
system
Fig. 2.9 ( a ) - A typical repair dry dock with two associated quays
12 P.1.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63

t. Bollards
Overall length ol dock 301 70 m
111J Capstan
�i: l19htrng lower

.. Cyhndrtcal !ender
• Arch fender
� Filling valve
!'. Crane Jacking and
anchorage points
• Access tower position
Jetting Keel block heigh! 1 ·8 m

discharge pipe
Soulh quay
Control
room
Substation Substation ,
,,
Dredged 10
- 9 -0 MSL (- 7..C CO) 1
Hau1tng-1n
winch
Winch conlrol
tower
-.!11!1'. -· -·-·-·-·
Dredged 10 - 9-0 MSL (- 7·4 COi
�o�
I-:::J
� 70
/I
60 50
Slewing radius
I"p�·-·-t
27
�
-·-·
- -·
l --
r:
;:,
-> 52 m clear width
•
ol dock
l I
,--L- ----- - - --...1-.,
: Travelling :
1 dock arms 1
I
• Hauhng-in·track
+1·2 mMHWS ·-t::�rfr..d!:...,"r;;,!!�' services walkway

--.- ±00 m MSL
- 9·8 m at head
,,..r-
- 1 ·2-5 mMLWS --------'
Scale ol metres Sub-floor drainage system

.____,
0 10
Fig. 2.9 (b) - A typical repair dry dock
P.l.A.N.C. - A.!.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - No 63 13

Currents in the sea are unlikely to have a great (e) Bollards.
direct effect on a dry dock which is normally within the (f) Fairleads for capstans and bollards.
protection of a harbour, but consideration may need to be (g) Fendering.
given to anchorages associated with operation of a dry (h) Access steps, possibly with access hatches (or man
dock. "1oles) .
(j) Handrails, possibly removable type.
In cases where a current in the sea or river is con
(k) Services of all types, complete with connection points
sistent and parallel to the shoreline it may be advantageous
including :
to orient the dry dock in a slanted position.
{i) electrical pick up to dock cranes, and dock arms
The effect of waves is not normally of great import
(ii) electricity supply to power points, ship and
ance except with respect to the dock gate and mooring
dock lighting and lighting generally
conditions at associated quays and achorages.
(iii) ballast water main
(iv) drinking water main
2.1 3. POSITION WITH RESPECT TO BUILDINGS, WORK (v) fire water main
SHOPS, ETC. (vi) oxygen and acetylene supplies
(vii) high pressure water facility
In a new shipyard the position of buildings and work (viii) compressed air main
shops can normally be arranged to suit the chosen position (ix) steam main
of the dry dock. In existing shipyards, it may be advisable (x) drainage
to move existing buildings so that a new dry dock can be (xi) sewage oil waste
positioned to best advantage.
The service galleries may be of open or closed con
struction depending upon the climatic conditions or local
2.14. ARRANGEMENT AT DRY DOCK COPES
rules governing such structures. If the gallery is closed, an
open walkway may be of great advantage, the level of
Modem dry docks are generally provided with vertical
which should be higher than the highest water level that
or near vertical walls and the arrangement at the top of
can occur inside the dock, or, alternatively, the walkway
the dock wall or dock cope will be influenced by a number
should be protected by a wall. In the case of a closed
of factors. The following features may need to be accom
gallery, both pipes and cables may be contained therein
modated and incorporated into the overall structural
except oxygen and gas pipes which should always be in the
arrangement :
open.
(a) Crane rails - for jib cranes on the side of the dock
and/or goliath cranes spanning across the dock and, Doors may be provided between the closed gallery and
sometimes, the ships assembly area. the open walkway for security and/or weather protection
(b) Ship hauling-in track. purposes. Arrangements must be such that pipes, hoses and
(c) Track for dock arms. cables may be Jed to the dock floor or t o the ship's deck
(d) Capstans, possibly with snatch blocks. without interference to the dockside cranes or dock arms.
The provision of dock arms will greatly

influence the shape of the dock wall coping.
Handrail
Dockside For covered dry docks additional con
Crane Rai 1 sideration must be given to the arrangement
\ of columns to support the building structure.
In order to avoid an excessive span for the
roof of the building, the columns are usually
placed only a small distance behind the
E1ectrical dock cope. This arrangement is often ac
Services
ceptable since cranage is usually provided
Duct
by Electric Overhead Cranes spanning across
the dock and running on longitudinal crane
guides supported by the columns.
Services to
Dock Floor 2.15. ACCESS TO DRY DOCK FLOOR
Access to and from the dock flqor

may be by staircase, ladder, elevator or
ramp. Cranes are generally used for hand
Fig. 2.14 (a) - Typical arrangement of dry dock cope ling materials.
14 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 N° 63

LI!_,
I hondrail
2 cable inlet
3 ckcuic: connection
-1 brid,&ing sl.:i.b 1500 x �00 x 250 mm
S h:.Hch SOO x �OCX> mm
6 mastic joint filler
7 inlet bush
8 cable :a:nd pipe cuhen
9 !>en ice Slllcry
10 \lOoJcn fender 2�0 "' :<00 mm
II �a1crstop
11 columns XIO • �00 mm •n .i.1 m Clrs
Ll anchor 80 mm dia. ai JO m �trs
i li)S
..:.. _25 50 --· �p5__
I .
;_QL:
;, . ..
F ig. 2.14 (b) - Typical arrangement of dry dock cope and wall
Access steps are often provided at the four corners centres. These are generally of galvanised steel and may
of the dock for personnel access between the cope level require frequent maintenance.
and dock floor. Additional steps may be provided in wall

Access steps are usually arranged so that free access
recesses at intervals along the dock walls for very long
to service galleries and tunnels is not possible. Entry to
docks. Access steps are generally situated on the face of
these areas is generally via a locked door, hatch or man
the dock wall or in recesses where the general arrangement
hole.
of the dock permits. It is recommended that fibreglass
staircases should be considered. Alternatively, they may be Lifts are not normally provided in modern dry docks
positioned in tunnels behind the dock wall but in this case due to the difficulty in maintaining them in operation in
provision needs to be made for removing silt and other the very aggressive conditions.
debris.
Ramps have been provided at many of the dry docks
Suitable access for stretcher carrying wounded from
constructed recently for vehicular access to the dock floor.
the dock floor is required by some authorities.
Ramps are usually provided at the head of the dock. Ramps
Ladders are provided for emergency access only and typically have a slope of 1:10 with transition curves, are
are recessed into the walls of the dock at about 25 m about 5 m wide and are flooded with the dock. The centre
P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63 15

-4��
. ��·
�-=2�50' --��-
I hauling carriage track

2 crane rail
3 electric-cable pipe
4 bollard 0.15 MN
5 safety ladder
6 3 x 5 compressed air pipes
7 ballast-water valve
S steering board for movable bilge
blocks
9 electricity cables
10 propane main
11 oxygen main
12 drinking-water main
13 COfI!pressed-air main
14 sea-water main
15 fluorescent tubes
16 electric-cable pipe
17. air escape·of the drainage system
----
250 18 lighting of ship's side
19 timber fender
1 20 handrail
21 eyehook 0.15 MN
Fig, 2.14 (c) - Typical arrangement of dry dock cope showing services in open
16 P.1.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988

11 WALL COPE
II
\I
.................... --
.... _ ..,-
.......
,,....,,,.
\�.._::'.!
-
I I
I
I
I I
I I
.------J I
I I
I
I I
'
�
l I
I I
I I
I I
F'IG. 2.14-d) -TYPICAL PIPE AND CABLE CROSSINGS

• I
FIG. 2.14-e) WALKWAY CLEARANCES
P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63 17

.. . .. . . -· .
12"
SWITCH BOX
2" OXYGEN
2" PROPANE
£=-- �
6" COMPRESSED AIR
6" DRINKING WATER
6" FIRE FIGHTING
SERVICES IN OPEN SUBWAY

BALL VALVE
HAULING IN CARRIAGE
Fig. 2.14(;f')
18 P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 6 3

Fig. 2.15 (a) - Typical stairs to dock floor
··--·-L---·--·----·- ______ _JQQ.,JL______________________

'
... :pJj
. 11 I '1 I
;'.
•
I : l1 I
'
·1
1:1.
u
I�i l� 1�\ !u1 1u\ luJ
;I i1
73. S.57 = 71..21 ; 5 19 ,,.1.0
Fig. 2.15 (b) - Typical ramp to dock floor
section of the ramp often takes the form of a tunnel vehicular access and, in the older shipyards where space
whereas the top and bottom sections are unroofed. Ramps was at a premium, by workshops. In modern shipbuilding
are used for transporting to the dock floor, materials of yards considerable space is required adjacent to the dry
all types, dock cleaning equipment, truck mounted hoists, dock for prefabricated ship sections to be offloaded prior
etc. to their incorporation in the ship. This area may be covered
by a large goliath (or Gantry) crane which also straddles

Advantage may be taken of the ramp during construc
the dock. Jib cranes may also be used to position pre
tion of the dock for access to the dock floor by the civil
fabricated sections in the ship sometimes working in
contractor' s plant.
tandem.
Ramps have also been added to existing dry docks to
Ship repair docks require less storage space at the
improve efficiency and reduce the work load on the dock
sides of the dry docks. Where two repair docks are built
cranes.
near to each other they may be situated close together so
that one crane running on rails between the docks may

2.16 AREA SURROUNDING DRY DOCK
serve both docks.
The area immediately surrounding a dry dock is often The areas surrounding a dry dock are usually paved
used for short term storage of ship parts or sections, either with concrete interlocking blockwork or asphalt to
P.l.A.N.C. • A.LP.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63 19

I
i
i
i
i
t
I
t
I
t
i
ir=====---
i
i
i
i
i
•
k
Fig 3. 2( a)
20 P.1.A.N.C. A.l.P.C. N . - BULLETIN 1988 - N°63

lam
__ ,-.'T_)
FIG. 3.2-b) •
P.1.A.N.C . • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 21

-llq. 35.0 l8.0 ."f'q. 120 ·I
1 3
... --""' -:;:
____ ... -..,.,:.=-:.:: =-----:.-:�!'
�-.......
.f·� 10.0 l� 1.8.0 .f·�.10.0

I
9
,,__ -+--·
�-1 8=.0�1�· ��2��0 __ ��· -��- -�� -�---t--"-'--�
9
1
1 coff erdam 6 cellular cofferdam

2 sheet wall 7 coral sediments
3 existing ground surface 8 diabase fill
4 dewatering 9 coral
5 excavation slope 10 diabase
Fig. 3.2 (o)
22 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BU LLETIN 1 988 - No 63

\ \
\
I
�
8
1�
i: " �\
·,1
\i
_,,.t.!?.
"
!iu ..
·•
::
+ I\
I\
11
l\
\1
11
L---
8 �
+ -+- +
FIG. 3.2-d) - LocatioL h·.n:.. docks in a ship yard.
��- /1L ..
,,,,,,
,,
f!".ll!\
�.,.,.,.,,
, '/'/'/
• •1•1 •1•1•i'l'I'
\tl'''f'/ 'l'l'l'i' 'I'\'\'
1•1•1•\1111'1'1'1'\'1' \J\
:'
:'- � ..-.- •
�
-:::::=:: -
• -
�· �
'l•t•1 l
,,,,,,,,.1 1 ----
0 · �
- · - - •
-
- - .. __.::::-:;- ---:-=
.
· ·-
·-
·-· - ·- -· """' ; ·-
_,.,;;; ·-· ...-
· ·-
I
�--·- - I
/...-- .......
'
I
I
__ l __
-- - --·
r------- �dY�-� D
-
I
I
L_ - - - - -�-1-.ll.J'i;.;.,;;;..;.;.:;,;;,;.;i,i,;;....""'-'-'""'"'=-'"""""'-'-.._--'-...,..._"'-'-'='
I
\.,
Ill V £ R t A 0 US

accept the heavy vehicle and
plant loads to which they will
be subjected.
3. OVERALL STRUCTURAL
DESIGN OF ORY DOCK
I
3.1 . INTRODUCTION
dock
The
will
dimensions
be determined
of the
by l
phase
the requirements of the ship
yard and by some of the
physical conditions, such as
tidal heights and range.
The type of dock struc
ture may be influenced by :
the location in relation to
the waterfront
- the available space
the execution time
- the soil conditions
- the groundwater situation
the loads of ships, cranes,
etc.
the economic evaluation,
3.2. THE INFLUENCE OF THE

LOCATION
The location in respect
to the waterfront will lead to phase 3

different building pits, which
will in their turn lead to dif
ferent types of structure.
The building pit can be
- in land
closed of.f from the water
front by a cofferdam
- surrounded by dikes
surrounded by structural
elements, such as a cellular phase 4
cofferdam formed of straight
web steel sheet piling.
When the pit is ·surrounded
by dikes and major dredging
must be executed it is, for
example, easy to make a
ground improvement which
could widen the choice of
structural possibilities. Figure
3.2 (a) gives an example of a

building pit surrounded by dikes
for a double dock.
Building pits in themselves phase 5

are already large and im- Fig. 3 , 3 - Construction phases of a dry dock
24 P.LA.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988

PHASE OF AVAILABLE DATA SUB-DIVISIONS OF THE STUDY
STUDY
0
Inventory and
Boring logs
Cone penetrations
r--
Geological profile
v
-w
Interpreta- Literature
tion of
r---.
Existing data Permeabilities i..-
Geo-hydrological
Geographic situation profile
Boundary conditions - !"'---.. I
w
......
Bay
River . .
Calculation model "'- I
&..--"'
0
Investigation No infiltration
------
�___L� �
-
------
Only infiltration
of the from river from river
Extreme
Situations . \V w
Dewatering capacity De.watering capacity
Drawdowns Drawdowns
-
.....
0
Provisional
Data existing winninBS
Original potentials 'I/
Design I Most like l y situation !
of the
w
Dewateiing
\ '7
I
Dewatering capacity
Drawdowns
tge :L1..n.mn;;u
'7
Report:
Technical description
CV
Conclusions
w
Conclusions
H7
I
I 'f
CV Additional tests l
�
Additional
Investi-
gations
l
I I
Pumping tests Borings
Organization �
1::!S
C0
Decisions
w
Decisions about building pit .......,
.._ I
and drainage dock
.
Fig. 3,4 ( a ) - Dewatering - Schematic summary of the study
portant maritime civil engineering
structures. Sometimes it is p0ssible to
incorporate substantial parts of the pit f 300

as permanent features. Figures 3.2 (b )
N
and (c) give an example of using the E
u
ring of circular sheetpiling as quay .....
"'
walls. -" 200 1---·---..;.....---'
�
w
u
3.3. THE INFLUENCE OF THE AY AIL z
ABLE SPACE AND EXECUTION �
"' 1001----�!-:;.L-.:;
TIME Vl
w
a:
w
It may happen . that there is not z
0
enough space i n the shipyard to make u
2 3 4 5 6
a building pit with slopes. Making the l\g / cm2 -
dock walls of the sheetpile type can Graph �hawing 1hc rdf!tionship bc:tween cone rc,ist ancc, local friction and �oil type:
then bring about the solution. This
kind of narrowed building pit can also
be dictated by a limited execution
time. Figure 3.3 gives an example of

the execution of a dock between
sheet piling.
C O N E B E A R I N G C A P A C I T Y ( k g tc m2 1 F R I C T I O N R AT I 0 { 0/o) S O I L
0 100 200 300 0 2 4 6 B l N T E R P ( TATION
3.4. THE INFLUENCE OF SOIL CON- 0
DITION AND GROUNDWATER
SITUATION :r
....
0..
w
The most i mportant items influ
0 0
z
< :r
encing the type of dock structure are ,_
"'
the quality of the soil and the ground 3::
:z:
a:
<(
water situation. Sufficient data about w w
..I "'
these items must be known to answer u z
w
the i mportant questions : .... 20 !-----+----+---< 0
w
w
Can the dock be built in the dry or ...
:z:
must it be constructed totally or Or
Z<
partially under water ? <( ..I
..,, u
- Can a drainage dock be provided or SAN

must the uplift be compensated by
�
.
anchoring or gravity ? >- 0
< z
The designer will make an inven ..J <
u "'
tory of the existing data about the >- ,...
0 w
subsoil before proceeding. In any case z >-
< <(
"' _J
he must have sufficient insight of the u
quality and continuity of the different
layers. The designer will study the

1--.:'.'.=:t::::.:::=l:====::l::===--l s oFT CLAY
w
z
L
dewatering possibilities more or less
0
along the scheme as given in figure C L A Y · S AN O I-
"'
M I X T U R ( A N.0 w
3.4 (a ) . SIlTS l:
0 ..J
Sometimes it is clear from the S O F T R O CK
beginning what type of structure for a llr;uh• nf :\ pc-nr!rati<>n lt« I prdnrmrcl hr Pmf,.smr Srhmrrlm;mn
certain situation is the best. Further
investigation will then be done to

Fig. 3 . 4 ( b )
confirm the assumptions.
In many cases however, a decision on the structural data, is to draw a geological profile of the site. Extra
type can only be taken after a thorough and extensive borings and penetration tests may have to be made to
study. The first thing to do after studying the available have more information about the continuity of the different
26 P.l.A.N.C. A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 N° 63

o • 0 .. • • . ..
..
-- -
- -------
coarse G and
-
. ...... _ _ _ _ _ -
- /
JC
u
/
,/'
G<'.01.(X;CAl l'ROFllE
..
lt<Gf!UOIOIU.t. SECTIC>l
x
11 - 11
•
-s
-.- I
. . ©.
I
(j)
I
©
I ,/ .
0·
I
· ©
I
�<D
9>(<)<�,<0>&'95�99.S�
j__
,H• i.. H .
j ·
30m ·
·
>..
2500 m'ldcy
1 10o-2soom cqui!..r .
:
·
I . . c
. • . .
•
.
;m�rvious bO:�
RECH ARGE SOURC E S :

Q) Rtehcr9t' from rivtr
(D R.chor9" throu;ih oquifrr

{D R e t hO!'Qt from infitlrc lion
© R H horQ• from Boy of Gcfon�k

Geohydrol ogicol model
0 20
Fig. 3 . 4 ( o )
P.l.A.N.C. A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 27

t · ell \,,.;4
I
:• �·-c: ""'
l')}<>
'°' �t..<7'· P -:;() 1"'3;'hc - • Y'
'-""- 1 �.- .�' .. "'""
, 5pacing 1 5rr! .
----- · - - _w·
35.CXlm
CllOSS S£CTI0!4 l - I
....
..
·s.._
""--.L·_ ··�
·__,.--1"·- �w . .
I
CROSS SECTION 2 - 2
!- -- - - - - ·-· LT - --------<
!_,o
I
.0__ .._.,. .• --· .... ......_ .CiQ___ -+---5G_ ---t
.
I
I Rl
I BI R2
1 Comparison of models. I nfluence of boundary conditions.
Fig. 3 . 4 { d )
OUAY WALLS WITH P R E PAKT FLOOR CELLULAR S T R U C T U R E WITH P REPAKT FLOOR
9UILOIMO Prt 7W • 'W!O[
f!NIStUHG \U(R TQ
flHiStllHG
DfU,ttO.Q[ O.PH11NO� 'ht( 0-RY
l.ll[A 1Q t1:
�A.Sf Jk l1'1t OAY tJ..Sl

,..
IN
h--..--c-"""""r"<--.-
1111111111111111
rot.
PLASln: F'Oll.., llllllllllll1ill
CONClitlC WITH GR>.VH Wlltt GRAVtl F�U
P R C PAKl t;ONCRtt£..- ._PL;.. S 11C
�PR [ PAl<l Fill
lMICKM( S S )$• Al CONCRr'J( Wilt' GllAV(l rlLl fLOOR lHICXHESS. H - " At Wl!H GR.&Y[L fltL
TklCJ<ktSS lt·r J.:J COHCRr:lE Wilti fH.l OF' l[AD StJ.G$ :zs· AI C0t<CR£1£ WllH: f tLt or l [J. 0 SlAGS
flOOR PR(PAKT P R t PAKT (0HCRt:1£
flOOR Pfi:(PAi<T FLOOR lHICf(.N(SS PR CPAKT
C O NC R ETE CAIS S O N S WITH P R EPAKT FLOOR C O NC RE T E CAIS S O N S
SIJlt.OING Pff 750' DR: 710' Pn U o'

,.. .
W}0£ SUll O!NG WlO[
F'lNIS�ING U.YER 10 EE
l .l.Y£R ...CASl ,,.. lHE. ORY
C A S'f IN l�£ oi:n .1.so Uk(
WAllS A N O 'J#ISHtNG
]_0 m
T°R.P.
O R £0Glt¥:G
,..
F'll. l
.:r
�· ·1SAND
��
i po£P••t coi<•m l1 1 t ! 1 1 '.Ill

111111tl11111111 l
fOt� �ITH ca�AVE\. 141.. ,_nooA ANO w�u.s OfSIGN:(t>
f11.l o r t £ AD SLAGS.., AS CON CRt 'ft r ".tSSOhS
P'<.ASl K::; J"ENSlON BARS
JG ,t..T C O NC R t l t WllH GR.tv(l rn.1

ltil(�N(SS 1l' •l nu. or u: ... o S l J. G $
HOOR 1HICXN(SS P f<EPAKl
HOOR fiR(PAKl t O N C R ( T (. WITH
Cons t r u c ti ons cons i d e r e d i n the wet .
GRAVITY TYPE OF DOCK DOCK WITH T E N S I O N ANCHO R S
. . eun.OINC PIT UO' WlD[ ,., ,ButLO I HG PIT 'l7 0 ' WIO� .
,..t x C AUTtow LNE
Lson. tKPRCVEHENf
C o n s t r uctions c onsi d e r e d in the dry.
P R E PAKT FLOOR WITH WALLS CAST IN T H E DRY DOCK WITH T E N S I O N AND C O M PR E S SION PILES
A.S C H O$E N
... . .... If....... _ . GUllOINO ..u OR 5J<l' WlOt . .... ....
Pr!
..
WA.US
C.15.l lH 1H£
( ' J_O
ANO F'IH!StUWG lA'r(R
OR\'
1111111111111111
lHICKN£SS ll" 141. fREP•J<1 CO�CAt:lt WITH GRAV(I. Ffll f\,OOR 1tUCKH£SS to• A! R[IHFORC[D t:O.,:C-R£Tt
tH1C••irss n· 14 PRt,4KI CO•CAtlE Wr!H fill or U:•D SLAGS tttW:.ttHtSS 10' JJ U�t1£RWAl'£R CONCR(lt
fLOl)ft
HOOR FLOOR
Fig. 3 . 5 ( a ) - Constructions considered partly in the wet and partly in the dry
/
! Af=
6
��t::::,,...,..��/ IF
I dredged >lope 6 st one filling
2 �lling i culvert for electrical St:rvia:s
3 canh fill 8 kvel keel block strip
4 reinforced c.onae!e topping placed in 9 piped �crviccs
the dry JO sub�station
5 grout inlru,(ion conctclc placed under l I crane beam and trnHey channel
water
c.
d. e. f.
a caisson floated over prepared bed e floor grouted, over-height of front wall
sunk by water ballast of caisson demolished, backfill
b caisson filled with soil by conveyor continued from land
c partial backfill behind caisson by barge f floor topping laid, crane track piles and
d floor stone placed, further backfill and beam constructed
subway construction started
� n
11
II 3
\
�--·r
II Ii
11 •
11 "
11 I "
11I
1, II .i 11 n
II 1 ii "
II Ii tl
11
,, /I tl
"
4 n
"
"
9
- 10 50 � 1 1 20
10 I
- 1700 " 18.00
F'IG . 3 - 5-b )
working platform on floating oil 5 gr6uting pipe driven through stone by 9 top or ungrouted stone
drums light compressed a i r hammer 10 shoe for driving
2 grouting point 6 floating service platform travels. IJ grouting comp leted
3 lengths of grouting pipes removed as forward approx. 3 m in every 12 h 12 next area to be grouted
pipes are l ifted 7 pipe to be extracted 13 parallelogram area being grouted
4 grout supply line 8 top of grout intrusion concrete 14 pipe lifted immediately after grouti n g
just clear of grout
layers. It is recommended to limit the number of borings 4 an d 5 ) o r whether an o\·erall treatment must first b e
to a\·oid making too many holes in watertight layers. I t is adopted.
known that penetration tests can give information about
the soil type. If done with the Dutch penetration cone

3.8. FACTOR OF SAFETY OF DRY DOCK AGAINST
with adhesion-jacket the ratio between local friction and
FLOTATION
cone penetration will be constant for a certain soil type
(sec figure 3.4 (b)) .

Dry docks designed as gra\"ity or anchored structures
By indicating the aquifer and the boundary condi tions must have an adequate safety margin against flotation. The
and by adding rnlues for permeability and transmissivity calculations should assume the highest possible leYel for
the geological profile will be developed into a geohy the ground water and the lowest expected density for con
drological model. See fi gures 3.4 (c) and (d) as examples. crete with no ship or other loading on the dock floor. It
i s also usual when comparing the downward weight of the

Usually a pumping test is an i m portant part of the
dock with the ground water uplift forces to introduce a
investigation. It gi\·es information about the aquifer coef
factor of safety which is often taken 1. i.
ficients ( transmissibility and storage coefficients) . With
measuring after stopping information can be obtained about The upward load calculated to be resisted by pre
the water flow direction. stressed ground anchors or anchored piles is usually in
creased by a factor greater than that for gra\·ity docks

The end result will be a reliable schematization of
and a figure of the order of 1.3 is often used in the
the site, with which the different dewatering and drainage
design of each anchor, sui table allowances having been
systems can be calculated.
made for corrosion · and creep etc.
During the inrnstigation the designer will obtain infor
It should be also noted that the design should take
mation about the consequences of dewatering for the en
account of any local regulations which m ight apply to such
,-i ronment. These consequences can lead to situations where
structures.
dcwatering, although technically possible, is not allowed or
only to a l i mited degree. An alternatiYe approach to safety of graYity and
anchored docks has been recently suggested. The prin c i ple
is to ensure that the downward weight or applied load of

3.5. MAKING A DECISION
the structure is in excess of the hydrostatic uplift by an
amount proportional to the area of the structure and not

Now, haying sufficient information about the soil and
as a factor of the loads i m·olved. This surcharge weight or
the groundwater situation the designer can list the ,-arlous
load has been suggested as 600 kg per square metre of
structural possibilities and compare them technically and
dock structure.
economically.
Sec figure 3.5 (a) for a comparison and a choice. In

3.9. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS BY FINITE ELEMENT
this case it was only allowed to lower the groundwater
METHOD
le,·cJ around the dock by a few metres. As a closing off
of the water carrying layers was not possible and bringing whole
Structural analysis of the dry dock structure
the water back into the ground by way of infiltration
may be undertaken by computer using the finite elei:nent
wells did not work well in the related soil type, the dock
method. Care must be taken to include appropriate para
had to be l;luilt partly under water.
meters and the results should be ,-erified by experienced
F i gure 3.5 (b ) gives an example where the building pit engineers in this field. Appendi x ' B' consists of a technical
could not be pumped dry and where the dock floor had to paper describing the process i nvoked.
be built under water.
3.10. ANALYSIS IN SEISMIC AREAS
3.6. POSSIBLE DOCK STRUCTURES

The finite element method may assist in consideration
of seismic loads since such loading can Yery easily be

The following pages show a procedure for de\·elopment
incorporated in the computer model and the subsequent
of possible basic dock structures starting from an indication
deflection and other effects noted. A range of loading
of the soil type or types and the geological and hydro
cases with seismic loads added should be considered.
geological cond itions appertaining.
4. DESIGN OF DRY DOCK FLOORS

3.7. OVERALL STRUCTURAL DESIGN METHOD.
Ha\'ing made the decision as to the basic dock struc 4.1. INTRODUCTION
ture to be proYided, consideration must be gi\·en to the
method of design of the structure and whether it can be Dock floors are now almost im·ariably constructed of
treated in its separate parts i.e. floor and walls (chapters concrete. There are three main types of dock floor
P.l.A.N.C. A.l.P.C.N . BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 31

D EWATEl\ING
mm.DING PIT
SOIL 1•11ss1111.1•. TYPES Of CONSTRUCTION

IND ICAT ION CEOLOGICAL JlYDRO-CEOLOG lCAL' (llUILDING !'ITS Ill l'ARENTUESIS)
Y/N l:l(Al\ UlG CJ\l'AC11'Y
CASE SUl!l:'ICIENT I NOT SUfi'ICIENT
I. Dock bedded in :
l . l Closed rock Impervious Y Y D l ( B l ) D2 ( 1l2 )

l .2 Cons o l id ated clay Impervious Y Y D l (B l )
l .J l'ervious rock Moderate
pcrmc:i.b i l i ty Y Y D 4 ( ll l )
llii:;h
permeab i l i ty \--�I Y N A l ( B l ) AL I (D3)
1 .4 Rock w i th w a t e r
c<lrrying s l i ts .
Pos s ib i l i ty to c l o se? :
--��- Y N > Excessive
permeab i l i ty N N GWI CW3 ( ll5 ) GW5 ( 1l7 )
2. or
nhova :
ffi>-<
2.l C l o s e d rock Impervi o u s y y D l D J ( ll l , B I O )
2.2 Cons o l id a ted c l ay Ilnpc1·vious ll' N y DL I ( BJ )
2.J rci:viou:; rock Moderate y y DJ D 4 ( B 1 , B I O)

pcrmca b i l i t y .YN y D L l ( llJ )
�
lligh
perme a bi l i ty y N A l A2 ( 1l l , B l 0 ) AL l (BJ , ll4 )
2.4 Rock wi th wnter
carrying s l i t s .
l'o s s i b i l i t y t o c l o s e ? :
y N ;>- Exces s i v e
permeabil i ty
@--4 N N G W l GWJ(ll5) Gw5 (B7 )
3. Dock i n wntcr lncGcd

s:11Hiy dcposi ts
(homogeneous or w i t h
sma l l enclosure s ) :
:s
Bearing capacity
s u f f i ci en t :
3. 1. I
®------7
S i l ty Low
permeab i l i t y l I Y Y D5 ( 1l9) DLJ ( ll l 6)
If ll i s too high J. 1 .2 Medi um Hoder a t e
for cut off or permcabil i t y 12 � Y N A J ( l!9 ) A5 A6 A7 ( D9 , ll l 0 )
Car i n f l uence of AL2 ( Il i 6 ) AL4 AL5 AL6 ( l! l 6 , ll l 7 )
lower lnycr on J. I .J Coarse l::x ccssivc
<lock s true t ur e permeab i l i ty IJ N N /\Wl ( ll l 5 ) Gli2 Gll4 ( ll6) GW7.( 1l l 5)
then
J.2 Bearing capacity
no t s u f f i c i en t :
Improving p o s s i bl e ? :
y N )
�- If drainage dock ·
pos s ib l e :
a<l<l supporting p i l e s Low
tension and
permeabil i ty
� y y D l l ( ll9 ) DL8 ( U l u·
suppor t ing p i l e s Moderate

permeabi l i ty
@----- y N 118 ( !!9 , ll ! O)
AL5 /\L6(JJ l 6 , ll l 7
Excess ive � l":>)
permeab i l i ty
� N N AWl (ll l 5)
Fig. 3 . 6 ( a ) - Dewatering building pit

The indication N also comprises the situation where dewatering is technically possible, but not allowe d ,
i . e . expected damage to enviroment.
* N is open dewatering - see building pit B17
·
D EW/\T E RING
l'lltl DING PIT Dll/\TN/\Gl> DOCK .
��
SO IL
I ND IC/\T l ON
��
GEO LOG IC/\L m'.DRO-C!WLOG IC/\L'
+-��-+-��-+��1 --'--'-i
. �
·· · · · · � Y/N
ll
Sl LE l"Yl'ES 01' CONST!tUCTION
ILDING PITS IN P/\RENTllllSIS)
11111\lt INC C1\l'AC ITY
CASE SUl'l!ICIENT NOT SUFTICltNT
4. Dock in water l oi;&ed Clay layers

snndy deposits closed and wi th
al ternated with low perm.
clay layer s .
4.1 llcnrinr. capac i ty

s u f f i cient
4 . l . l Hor. s t r a t i f i c a t i o n D i f f ci·encc y y D & ( ll 1 4 ) DL4 ( ll l J) D l 2 ( ll l 4 ) DL9 ( ll 1 J)
with many t h i n be tween N y DL4 ( Il l 7 ) DL9 ( 11 1 7 )
clay l ayer._
s_ hor. nnd ver t . y N /\6 A 7 /\S(ll9 ) A8 ( U9 ) ALG ( B I G)
pcnncnbi l i ty /\LS /\LG ( ll l &)
4 , l , 2 One cl;il h;!'.cr:

o Cluy bycr wi th Sand layer I:
bo t tom low enough - modcr;:itc
to ;:ivoid upli£ t pcrmc;:ibi l i ty @-- Y y D7 D 3 ( 1l l 0) DL5(1ll 7 , ll l !)) DI 1 ( 1110) DLS(lll 7 , .
- excessive t3 1t/)
permeabi l i ty
®-- <tNN y
N
DL5 ( 1l l 7 )
/\Wl ( ll l 5 )
DLB ( l H7 )
AWi ( 11) 5 )
o llot tom cl;:iy layer Sand layer 2:
too high t o avoid
�
upl i f t fo r : - mod .. perm. y y D 7 DB ( ll l l ) DL5 ( 1l l 6) D I l ( ll l 1 ) DLB ( ll l 6)
- buildinc p i t alone hich perm. I
N N AW! ( B I S ) AW! ( ll 1 5)
- drain;:ir;c dock - h ir;ll perm. 2
- mod. perm.
� y
y
y
N
D9 ( 1l l l ) DL6 ( ll l 8)
115 /\6 /\7 /\8 ( 3 1 1 )
/\L4 /\LS AL6 ( B l 8 )
D l l ( ll l l ) DL8 ( ll 1 8 )
A8 ( n l I )
/\LS AL6 ( B l 8 )
4 . 1 , 3 More clay l ayers :

o Bottom upper clay
layer too hii;b;
Cut off to lower
clay layers :
possible -- 1 ------;o... ®- Y Y D ! O ( ll l l ) DL7 (1ll 8 ) D l 2 ( ll l l ) DL9 ( ll 1 8)
------- imposs i b l e
4.2 llc adni; capacity

rio t ::> u f f i c i cn t :
c;:
Improvinr; possibl e ? :
y
usa richt c o l umn o f

N _,.._)
t
pos s ible con:.;t:ructions -i-------1--1--.,_---�
N , ll . If a <lrainai;e dock is
possibla we can add
supporting p i l es in the
case of i n s u f f i c i e n t
bearing. capaci ty ;
(solutions :
D I ! , D l 2 1 DLB, DL9)
!Jut it can be more NOT
economical to use sUn'lCIENT SUl'FlClliNT
tens ion-supporting p i l es llE/\l\ING llEARING
and n o t to use the C/\P/\CITY CAP/\CITY
Y for dra inage .
F ig. 3 . 6 (b) - Dewatering building p it

The indication N also comp rises the situation where dewate ring is technically poss ible , but not allowe d ,
i.e . expected damage to enviroment .
* N is open dewater ing - see building p it B17
P.J.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 33

D• •
DRAINAGE-DOCKS · DL • •
l imited bu ilding pit
vertical drains
_,·; .�. �;�·. :·�:��:�·�:� .�...: ,

.-:f'-::qP�� t='?°-?i ;�L
. "' .
�, .. ' '· �
� .:.< � . �
34 P.1.A.N.C . • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988

ANCHORED DOCKS AL • •
re.inforce.d concrete -
under-wate.r concre te. --+
0 :y �
. f}/
...
.
.
·�· ..::.
· .....
.. ._._
•.•_"""...,....,.-i....,..., .... -', .
,�)0.·:.: �� .
.
• \ " 4
·"
• " (.. .. ..·

. �
. '· ' . .
8 -.-,--_-!-.-.- t,
'\.
-
.
•
..
' .,
F ig 3.6 (DJ

G• • GRAVITY DOCKS GW • •
.....ro--c-�-- e ( .
.. .. ...
. .
M�:' � � l'' < : x

��
..
� .....
.
..
. • • -
,.
..
• •
• ,
.
*�I ,.
'
.....
t •� •
'
·� ' t •• • 1" i .
. �1... •.�11!"..��:·.'�
-
.' .. �.::·: ..
. ..
.
i:' ,. . ;, �°':..
• • .. C' • f
t • ,• r ..•
• I
....
•
�. , ': � �· .
. "
Fig . 3.6(E)
36 P .1 .A.N.C. A . l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

B• • BUILDING PIT B• •
BI
B3 B4
:��fl\��h'·��\i,�\�t�:'.'
l imi ted build ing pit
B7
("\
r - - -o if·�-:-
.-.-
. �
I
- - - - -l
BIS
P.1.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 37

(�
��
·'D
I
__ -.e� -- -
ANCHORED DOCK
anchor-p i l e s
---·�--··-- - )� --·
_____ .
DRAINAGE DOCK
HHWS. �
� _gl.JL
H W
DOCK WITH
\
TENS ION-SUPPORT I
PILES
Fig. 3 . 6 (g) - Considered constructions for a dock

From the study for a certain building dock about the structural shape, resulted the possibilities as shown above .
In the tender the contractors were asked to price the bills of quantities for all possibilities.
The d ifference in cost appeared to be small.
As the client wished a rigid floor without settlements , the construction with the dock with tension-supporting
piles was chosen.
38 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988

depending on the method used to
counteract the effects of buoyancy
when the dock is empty, i.e. gravity
design, under-drained design (fully re

a.
l i eved or partially relieved) and anchored
design. These are discussed in paragraphs
l:f.2 to It.It.
There are two main methods of
carrying the concentrated loading from
ships, i.e. bearing directly on the ground
or s upported on piling. These are dis
cussed in paragraphs l:f.5 to 4.6. In some

cases it may be possible to improve the
b.
ground and this is d iscussed in paragraph
l:f.7 .
l:f.2. GRAVITY DRY DOCK FLOORS
Traditionally most dry docks were
of gravity design with the floor and

a drainage: layer and c:olketin£ pires
dock walls having sufficient mass to b drainarc pipes in the drainacc hf)·c:r
c draina,gc: pipe in rhe dock f\oor slab
J cont"rclc blocls O.� O.S m a.I
overcome the upwards pressure of the
0.3
0.6 m Cln
k x
ground water acting on the underside

c. 2 macadam J6 lo 64 mm
of the dock f loor with the dry dock 3 F�"d 0 to 64 mm
4 conc1clc pipe } m tdia. I -= 80 mm
5 P\'C pi;< 90 x S.3 m m
empty. This was acceptable at the end
6 PVC p i pe 315 x 9.2 mm
of the l 9th century when docks were
7 pa\'cl 3 to 6 m m
not wider than about 20 m and heavy i P V C pi)'< 400 mm
9 PVC ripe: 200 mm
altarcd walls were provided. Before the m >1oe1 srid
J1 m�:c.ad;am l6 10 � mm
advent of reinforced concrete, brick arch
1:2 tfl\'cl 0 10 64 mm
and stone block floors were provided 13 .shin£it 2 to & mm
both for structural strength and mass,
and dock floors were often about 4 m

thick.
Modern dry docks are often much

1
wider and although reinforced concrete /
floors
between
can
the
be
walls
designed
to
to
assist
span across
resistance
/l]j � . :
..... 2
: ·: ·: -----
to uplift, a thick floor is usually also
required. Under-drained or tied floors
are therefore to be preferred if ground

-2
_J
l s:ttdrovc:r
conditions permit, but several dry docks
2 uav•l
3 PVC pipe 200 mm dia
]_
have been built in recent years using . · • •
4 JOCktt
gravity design. S gavel
6 �nd
Modern designs of gravity docks
often provide a wide floor slab which
extends
viding
past
heels
the
to
dock walls, thus pro
the walls. The backfill

S?I I
Ill 1 1\\ll !lll
behind the dock walls bears on the
heels at each side of the dock and this
additional mass can be used to help
resist the uplift water pressure. . . .
4.3. UN DER-DRAINED DRY DOCK
FLOORS
Under-drained dock floors have been
provided to· more than half of the dry Fig. 4 . 3 ( a) - Details of under-drained dock floors
P.l.A.N.C. - A. l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 39

� (E'
1200 3010
t lOt&
4,ii
UOtl
r
'
---- ----
11\
layer
i�v
: sheet p i les ��
11
- sand layer
!• The two sand layers are connec ted by ver t i ca l sand drains because !i
l: the b o t tom of the upper c l ay layer is too high to avoid up l i f t by !!
:l the water pressure under that layer . ::
�hzzv_zzzzl777_2ZZ727ZZ?Zzmzz:zz7zt?zzL
• relie fvalves �
�·
-· --0
�
H'
...
f l ow d i re c t i on in the f i l te r
reliefval ve
inspection channel
Fig. 4 . 3 ( b ) - Drainage system

is maintained under the fle<;>r to
prevent any drying out of the soils
involving shrinkage which has the
added advantage of further reducing
the quantity of water to be pumped.
lf the dock is designed to be divided
into compartments by means of an
intermediate gate, it is essential that
the drainage system be separated
from the normal dewatering of the
dock.
If the dock floor has a con
siderable longitudinal slope the drain
age system may have to be divided
into sections to ensure that the
filter layer remains charged with
water.
If the dock is to be flooded
for an extensive period it is possible

Fig. 4 . 3 ( c ) - Drainage system for floor with longitudinal slope
to cease underfloor pum pfng but this
I Perforated drain tubes
should be restarted well before sub
II Collecting and inspection channels
III overflows sequently dewatering the dock in
IV Discharge channels
order to prevent uplift conditions
v Non return flap
VI Transport channel in sill developing.
VII Pumproom
VIII Air vents
It is essential to introduce
simple fail-safe pressure relief valves

docks built during the last 40 years. This type of floor has into the system to prevent an unexpected pressure devel
generally been found to be the most economic where ground oping under the floor. These are sometimes provided by
conditions permit the ground water below the dock floor to heavy manhole covers being introduced in the underfl oor
be pumped away so that no uplift pressure develops. culverts which then lift if an underside pressure develops
and allow discharge into the dock.

In order to collect and pump away the under-floor
ground water, a drainage layer of no-fines concrete (i.e. It is important to recognise that in some ground con
porous concrete) or gravel is usually provided immediately ditions under-drained floors cannot be permitted. A perma
below the dock floor with a series of porous pipes and nent lowering of the water table can sometimes cause
drainage culverts to lead the water to a sump in the consolidation of clays and silts with the result that unac
pumphouse. Pumping is usually arranged to be intermittent ceptable settlements of surrounding buildings, roads and
with the pump commencing operation when the sump fills other structures are produced. It is also possible that the
up and cutting out when the sump has been emptied. water supply of the district can be affected either b y a
Pumping is required to be carried out throughout the life reduction in the yield of wells or by enforced contamination
of the dry dock. Regular monitoring of the pumped water by sea water.
should be, carried out to confirm that no fine grained
In some highly sensitive areas even temporary ground
material is being extracted from the soil.
water lowering cannot be undertaken and special , measures
Under-drained floors are generally designed to be of construction may be necessary. These may consist of
much thinner than gravity floors since a large mass to forming a complete cut off surrounding the site by sheet
resist uplift is not required and the floor may be sized piling or diaphragm walling or alternatively by constructing
from structural considerations only. On a sound rock foun the dock structure unqer water. Piezometers are rec
dation, the floor thickness may be reduced to less than ommended to be installed in fully or partially relieved dry
0.5 m thick. docks to ensure that pressure relief is being maintained.
It is normally preferable for the underfloor drainage
system to remain in operation whether the dock is flooded 4.4. ANCHORED DRY DOCK FLOORS
or empty. The underfloor pumping system i s thus indepen
dent of the main. dock pumping system and should be Anchored dock floors may be provided, if su itable
designed accordingly. If the principle of continuous pumping ground conditions permit, in conditions where an under
is adopted there will be a minimum of ground water drained floor is not feasible for the reasons discussed
movement and the ground water regime will be as stable above, or due to high ground permeability. In this type of
as possible. lt is also preferable that a small static head floor the uplift forces resulting from the upward pressure
P.l.A.N.C. · A.1.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 41

CROSS SECTION
pre.ssur e val ve
do ck f"lcer
• u mp
SOLUTION A
Three separated compartments under
the dockfloor, with three sumps �
No drai nage under the dock sections
3 2 1 which arc f i l l ed w i th water .

main gate
intermedi a t e got c s
Q s OLUTION B No s e parations under the dock.floor .

rcrmanent d r ainage: under the dock
sections which arc f i l led with water.
3 2 1
main gotc
"'- i n \ crmedia\c gates
I
I
II lI s ON C
Three scp-ar<Jlcd compartments under
the dockfloor. There i s only one
sump. The discharge channels f rom
2 1
the three compar tu,cnts arc separated.
3 main g o t c
Only i n emergency cases when a
f i l l ed sections i s l eaking very much ,
' '
"'- i n t ermediate
the valve in the d i scharse channel
gotes
i s closed to scpar:itc the concerned
compa rtmc:o t .
d iame ter of perforation i n d�ains i s 2 mm
I�
-t---it!lt+l-H-+---+t!-l-t+-l·--1-7-'"]J_--- ":'°
H·+·+-t-H J- � -�
I �
.
\
.... � ":- ; l � \J
\ IN1"-n""'t¥An LA"i'C.fl
Fig. 4 . 3 ( d ) - Drainage system with separated compartments

of the ground water on the underside of the dock floor limited to 100 N/mm2 , ln-situ piles with enlarged toes
are resisted by piles or ties anchored at depth below the produce a satisfactory solution in suitable soil conditions.
dock floor. This solution, if appropriate, is likely to be

Many Yariations of anchors for dry dock floors ha\'e
considerably cheaper than an alternative gravity floor,
been used which take into account particular ground con
particularly for large docks.
dit ions. Steel ties anchored into rock at some distance
Anchors may be of many different types including below the floor girn a positi\'e solution and can readily be
steel strand or bar attached to anchor blocks or grouted tested. Drilled and grouted anchors ha\·e been successfully
steel H piles, or reinforced concrete piles. In the case of used but precautions against corrosion must be taken.
anchor piles, the tension forces may be transmitted via
friction from the piles to the adjacent ground.

4.5. DRY DOCK FLOORS BEARING DIRECTLY ON THE
G reat care must be taken with the design of anchored GROUND
floors and in particular with ties themseh'es.
Most dry docks bear directly on the underlying ground

There is considerable structural ad\·antage in the use
and the dock floor is designed to spread the concentrated
of prestressed ties by which the floor is held down on the
loads from the ship to the ground. Gravity floors will
ground with a force greater than that due to the upward
almost certainly be sufficiently strong to spread the load
water pressure. With this arrangement the movement of
of the ship to the ground and many of the thinner floors
the floor under varying conditions i.e. dock full, dock
associated with under-drained or anchored designs may also
empty etc, is negligible and the stress in the prestressing
be sufficiently strong · if the ground cond i t i ons are good.
ties remains virtually constant.
High tensile steel in the form of strands or cables

4.6. DRY DOCK FLOORS SUPPORTED ON PILING
are often used and special precautions must be taken to
satisfy the design conditions, particularly since unbonded

' If the strata i m m ediately below dock floor leYel are
(free slidi ng) tendons are normally required to produce and
not suitable to support the concentrated loads from a ship
maintain the necessary prestressing forces. Stress corrosion
then piling may be pro\·ided. This may b e under the whole
of the high tensile steel is a seri ous risk and measures
of the dock including the walls or merely under areas of
must be taken to aYoid this phenomenon. It is now gener
high load at the centre of the dock. W hen tension piles
ally accepted that the stress in the steel under these
ha\·e been used they may also be used to support down
onerous conditions should be limited to considerably below
ward loads. I f these are not sufficient, extra piles should
that commonly used for prestressing. 50 % of the yield
be proYided which may be of different length to the tension
stress is considered by some authorities to be a safe stress
piles. Underdrained floors may also require bearing piles i n
for most steels in order to aYoid stress corrosion but an
some ground conditions.
even lower stress may be recommended in some cases
depending upon the method of manufacture of the steel. It
should be appreci ated that the stress corrosion is most 4.7. GROUND IMPROVEMENT
likely to be hydrogen embrittlement which is initiated by
free hydrogen as a .by-product of ordinary electro chemical Poor ground conditions may be i mproved by rnrious
corrosion. It follows that measures to arnid ordinary cor methods and have been successfully used, although in some
'
rosion should be of the highest order. High tensile steel cases it tends to be both expensive and time consuming.
rods (st 52} are considered by some authorities as preferable Ground i mpro\·ement may b e carried out by replacing
to cables but sim ilar precautions against corrosion are weak o r compressible soil by a granular material which can
essential. be well consolidated by rolling or vibration. The granular
material will then ham the dual function of spreading the

Steel ' H' piles or q:inforced concrete piles may be
ship loads and acting as a drainage layer for a pressure
used as ties in suitable ground conditions but it must be
relie\·ed floor.
recognised that unless special design arrangements are
made, the piles will be subject to tension and compression Where the dock is to be constructed in reclaimed
alternately during their life. When the dock is filled, the land and dykes are required around the building pit, the
uplift water pressure will be counterbalanced and the piles weak soil may be excavated and used for the temporary
will be supporting the mass of the dock structure and thus construction of the dykes. Good granular soil can then be
be i n compression. This re\"ersal of stress can, i n some soil used for the area under the floor without great extra cost
conditions, cause a breakdown of the adhesion or friction im·oked.
between the pile and the ground with resulting failure of

Grout injection may be used to strengthen the u nder
the floor. Tests to reproduce these conditions should be
lying soils provided that they are of a suitable nature to
carried out on the piles prior to incorporation i n the final
accept the grout. This process will ha\·e the additional
dock construction.
adYantage that the permeability will be reduced and that
Where in-situ reinforced concrete piles are used with the rnlume of underground water ultimately to be pumped
mild steel (St 37) the design stress in the steel should be for a drainage dock will be reduced. The life performance
P.1.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63 43

of chemical grouts should be confirmed before use. and a trans,·erse channel or cukert is provided t o link the
.
other channel to the pumphouse sump. This transverse
Vibratory compaction may be used in some soils in
channel is often located adjacent to the dock sill.
cluding the introduction of stone or sand i:iiles.
Timber or concrete displacement piles are sometimes

4. 1 1. CLEANING OF DRY DOCK FLOOR
used to consolidate and generally strengthen the ground
without using the piles for direct bearing. Such a design

Large quantities of debris may accumulate on the
can be used satisfactorily combined with an under floor
dock floor due t o shotblasting and ship c leaning operations.
drainage system.
Some of the s m aller debris may be washed into the pump
house sump although this is not desirable since it ma)•

4.8. DOCK FLOORS CONSTRU�TED UNDER WATER
cause damage to the dewatering pumps. Screens are usually
e mployed to prevent larger debris from entering the pump

I t may be necessary to construct the dock floor under
house.
water particularly if it is not possible to dewater the site
Debris may be cleared from the dock using small
due to high permeability of the underlying ground or the
rubber tyred dozers. These may enter the dock by the
.danger of lowering the water table surrounding the building
ramp or be placed in the dock by crane. Debris may be
pit is too high.
placed in special skips by the dozer for remoYal from the
dock by lorry or crane.

4.9. LONGITUDINAL SLOPE OF DRY DOCK FLOOR
t+.12. SE&V!CES ON DRY DOCK FLOOR

Dry docks used for shipbuilding are normally con
structed without longitudinal slope since it is easier to

Services are not normally pro\·ided on the dock floor
construct a ship if the keel is horizontal. Ship repair docks
since they are likely to interfere with the placing of the
are often proYided with a longitudinal fall of about l :300
keel and bilge blocks. Manholes for under floor drainage
towards the dock entrance to facilitate drainage of the
may be required and very heavy duty flush cm·ers are
dock during dewatering. This inclination is generally in line
usually prO\'ided and located away from the centre line of
with a Yessel being of deeper draft at the stern and
the dock so that interference with the blocks is minimized.
entering a dock bow first.
Provision of seryices to the dock floor is usually
achieved using flexible pipes and cables connected into

/t.10. DRAINAGE OF DRY DOCK FLOOR suitable points in the sen·ices gallery situated in the dock
walls at high level. These may be positioned and remoyed
Drainage of the dock floor i s desirable so that water as required. If ser\'ices are required at dock floor leYel
from rainfall, ship cleaning and water discharged from the they are generally located in recesses in the dock walls.
ship may be remo,·ed. It also assists in remo,·ing water
from the dock when dewatering is almost complete.

4 . 1 3. JOINTS I N DRY DOCK FLOOR
Drainage is usually by falls in the dock floor to
drainage channels at the perimeter of the dock. ConYen Joints may be required in the dock floor to provide
tional surface water drainage using gulleys drained by pipes hinges as part of the o\·erall structural design of the dock.
in the dock floor is i mpracticable since a system of this Joints may also be required to cater for expansion and
type would block up with debris from shotblasting and shrinkage. Construction joints will also be required. Joints
shipcleaning processes. may be provided with water bars, joggles, dowel bars and
sealers, as approprla te.
Drainage mar be by longitudinal fall only usually from
the head towards the dock entrance but with n o lateral or Expansion joints are rarely used in dry dock floors
cross fall. One of the adrnntages of haying no cross fall since the t emperature of the floor slab tends to be
is that, for flat bottomed ships, bilge blocks need not to goYerned by the temperature of the underlying ground
be altered in height when adjusting their position laterally water, which is generally fairly constant.
to suit different ship sizes.

Shrinkage joints are often pro\·ided in floors concreted
Cross falls may alternath'ely be provided in the dock in the dry to reduce the effect of the shrinkage as the
floor to assist drainage and in this case, it is normal to floor hardens. It ls normal to cast the floors i n alternate
proYide a fall from the centre of the dock towards the bays or to lea\·e shrinkage gaps.
dock walls where a longitudinal drainage channel is pro

It is modern practice to proYide water bars at j oints
Yided. Some docks are provided with both longitudinal and
in the floors of dry docks, particularly if the floor is
cross . falls.
underdrained. If the floor ·foundation is directly on rock,
Longitudinal drainage channels are often provided at water bars may sometimes be omitted. Reinforcement is
the edge of the dock floor adjacent to the dock walls. usually continued through construction joints. The concrete
One channel discharges direct into a sump in the pumphouse sides of a construction or shrinkage joint is either mechan-
44 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

ically roughened prior to casting the adjacent or infill sec for the construction of . drilling rigs, floating dry docks,
tion, or alternatiYely joggled joints pro\·ided. floating cranes etc. In these cases it may be preferable to
e\·oke a set of line loads and point loads to be considered
4. 1 4. LOADING ON DRY DOCK FLOOR at any position on the dock floor.
The loading from other sources such as mobile cranes,

Loading on the dock .floor can be di\·ided into three scaffolding and materials, is generally small compared with
categories as follows the bilge block loading. Jacking loads ·may be considerable
(i) Upward reaction from the ground and ground water and of the same order as the bilge block loads.
pressure. L oading transmitted from the dock walls

should also be considered. 4 . 1 5. STRUCT.URAL AN ALYSIS .OF DRY DOCK FLOOR
(ii) Loading from water in the dock with the dock full of
water, As noted in 3.7 structural analysis of the dock floor
is sometimes initially carried out in conjunction with the
(iii) Loading from the ship or ships including tank testing
design of the dock walls and other elements of the dock.
loads and isolated loads from jacking etc.
Notwithstanding this, a separate and detailed design of the
Loading from (i) and ( i i) abo\·e can be estimated floor is almost always required. The loading parameters and
fairly simply depending on the ground conditions and the alternatiYe loading conditions are applied as appropriate.
general arrangement of the dock. The loading from the The design of the dock floor is usually carried out to
ship or ships cannot be determined with any precision, Dry elastic principles. The floor slabs may need to be designed
docks will normally be required to accommodate a large as slabs on elastic foundations, the modulus of elasticity of
range of different sized ships up to the limits of the dock the underlying strata being used to calculate the bending
dimensions. Ships will normally be in a ' light' condition moments and shear forces in the floor slab. In docks with
but this wi1l not always be the case, particularly for thin floors subjected to a hea\·y keel block l oading, the
repair docks where damaged ships may be docked. floor is sometimes thickened at the centre of the d.ock to
increase · load spread and reduce reinforcement quantities.
The procedure normally followed is first to assess the
docking weight of the biggest ship that can be accommo In dew of the uncertainty attached to the loading
dated in the dock by reference to Lloyds or other lists and ground parameters it is not always appropriate to
gi\·ing \·essel statistics. The proportion of load carried by carry out the designs to great accuracy and simple hand
the keel block and bilge blocks respectiYely must then be calculations may be preferred initially and then checked by
estimated. For flat bottomed ships such as tankers it is computer finally.
of ten assumed that 50 % of the mass of the ship is sup
ported by the keel blocks and 50 % by the bilge blocks.
5. DESIGN OF DRY DOCK WALLS
For ships with finer li nes a greater proportion of the mass
of the ship will be carried on the keel blocks. Raking
shores may be used instead of bilge blocks, particularly for 5 . 1 . INTRODUCTION
warships, and in this case the whole mass of the ship will
be carried on the keel blocks. The aYerage loading on the Dry dock walls are usually designed in conjunction
keel blocks · is thus assessed and is usuall�· expressed in with the dock floor. In addition to the loads transmitted
tonnes per metre run. through the dock floor, the dock walls are designed for a
\'ariety of loadings and load combinations, including earth
Loading at the ends of a ship, particularly at the
pressure and surcharge, ground water pressure, seawater
stern, may be higher than the a\·erage loading and these
pressure from inside the dock and loading from equipment
sections of the dock are often designed for a keel block
and fittings including quay cranes, mobile cranes, ship
loading 50 % higher than the a,·erage loading. The effect
hauling gear, dock arms, bollards, shores, strong points and
of sew loading due to Yessels being docked out of trim
sen·ices. In some locations it is necessary to consider
may also need to be considered.
earthquake loading which should conform with the local
Bilge blocks are usually arranged in rows parallel with regulations in force for retaining walls. Layout of the dock
the keel blocks. The rows may be positioned anywhere walls is co-ordinated with the serYices gallery required at
from close to the dock wall to close to the keel blocks. the cope. There are many different types o f dry dock
Bilge blocks are usually designed to carry 50 % of the walls as outlined hereafter.
mass of the ship but in some circumstances the loading
may be higher. Bilge blocks may be widely spaced l ongi
5.2. MASS CONCRETE DOCK WALLS
tudinally and indh·idual blocks may therefore carry a
similar load to the keel blocks.
Dry dock walls prior to the first part of the 20th
In shipbuilding docks, it is common for ships to be century were generally of massive construction, usually
built off centre. In wide docks two or more vessels may with stepped altars on the front face. This wall profile
be constructed side by side. The dock may also be used was conYenient for supporting horizontal shores to the sides
P.!.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 45

C an t i l ever
/ __ Anchorages
Dock F l oor Dock F l oor
Fig. 5 . 3 - Alternative dock wall construction i n reinforced concrete
of ships and at the same time followed the line of thrust ha\'e been constructed with reinforced concrete walls. Re
from the earth pressure. The back of the wall was also inforced concrete walls \·ary greatlr in their arrangement.
sometimes stepped to economize in material. Mass concrete The following types are the most common :
may still be used economically for wall construction in (a} L shape

some circumstances although It is not common in modern
(b ) inYerted T shape
practice. The weight and thickness of the wall is primarilr
(c) counterfort.
designed to resist the o\·erturning moments due to horizon
Where ground conditions permit, walls may be tied
tal earth and ground water pressure. The economy can be
down to increase their resistance to oYerturning.
shown if the weight of the wall can be arranged t o be
added to the floor weight to resist the upward ground
water pressure on the whole dock. 5.4. SHEET PILED DRY DOCK WALLS
5.3. REINFORCED CONCRETE DRY DOCK WALLS Steel sheet piling has been successfully used for drr
dock walls although they are less common than reinforced
About 50 % of the dry docks built since about 1950 concrete walls. The following factors must be taken into
r
T i e Ro d s
Anchorage
Stee l Sheet
P i l i ng
Dry Doc k
Fl oor
Underf l oo r
U n d e rf l o or
Dr a i n a g e
Dr a i n a g e
L ay e r w i t h
C u l vert
Por o u s D ra i n s
Fig. 5 , q (a) • Sheet piled dry d ock wall ( with drained dock floor)
46 P.l.A.N.C. • A . l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

1:r.o
I
- 255 IY.>5
-·-·4---=-+-------'-'"'------+-��--t---�r-
335 255 175
M
rod
�· , root i...,
sh u t pHin9 : dou bt• PSp SOO s lrng t h • 21.00 m.

with inltrmedi>!a pilu PZ 1' s l•ngth = l7,00 m.
s t u l qu�l i t y : St. Sp. S min. yield t r u s = 3600 kgt/cm.2
slop1 o5 "!.
" pul l ing •r•

reinforced
concre t e
I I
:: ( t or s. t t 1 l pHt i )
!. '
Fig. 5 . 4 ( b } - Sheet piled dry dock wall with floor on tension-supporting piles
P.l.'A.N.C. - AJ.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 47

account in the design :
per,·ious ground where it may be easier to exca\"ate the
i} An allowance in the thickness of steel proYided should
complete area of the dock by dredger rather than attempt
be made for corrosion or adequate protection of the
to dewater the ground to construct the dock in the dr}'•
steel be giYen. The amount of corrosion is found to
\·ary considerably with different soils and the type of

5.6. DRY DOCKS WITHOUT WALLS
protection should be carefully considered for the par
ticular conditions existing. Cathodic protection is not

Dry docks ha\·e been constructed with sloping sides
normally considered appropriate.
i nstead of con\"entional walls. This type of construction
i i) The abi lity of steel sheet piles to carry high Yertical
may be particularly appropriate to dry docks for the con
loads from cranes or from stanchions in co\·ered docks
struction of drilling rigs.
should be considered.
i i i) The clutches of some sheet piling sections allow water
penetration and consideration must be gi\·en to caulking 6. DEWATERING OF DRY DOCKS
or welding up the clutches exposed in the dock barrel.
Sheet pil ing may be required as part of the temporary

6.1. INTRODUCTION
works for the excarntion of a dry dock, particularly where

The arrangements for dewatering a drr dock are
the space for construction is restricted. In this case it
crucial to its efficient operation and consultations with the
may be economical to incorporate the piling in the perma
dock owner concerning its future usage are essential before
nent works.
the design of the dewatering system is undertaken.
Sheet piling is also used where a cut-off is required
into an impen·ious layer below dock f loor le\·el so that an

6.2. DEW A TERING TIME FOR A DRY DOCK
under drained floor can be pro\·ided with a reduced quantity
of water to be pumped.
The dewatering time for a dry dock is normally
Sheet piling may also be used with great ad\·antage if
specifie d as being the time taken to empty the dock from
a ground water cut off is required to make possible an
high water {spring t ides) without a ship in dock.
efficient under-drained dock. I n this case the piling forming
Docks used for shiprepairing normally require fast
the dock walls may be extended downwards and terminate
in an i mpen·i ous layer some distance below the dock floor,

pumping and the time specified is usuall y between l t and
4 hours.
thus reducing the quantity of water to be continuously
pumped. Docks used for shipbuilding ca11 normally accept a
longer time and may rangE: between 4 and 12 hours or

Facing of the steel piling in concrete has been used
e\·en longer i n some special instances.
to increase the structural strength of the wall and to im
proYe the aesthetic effect. Shiprepairing docks often require one ship to Jeaye
and another to enter during a high tide period and it may
be necessary to ensure that the water in the dock is

5.5. CAISSONS FORMING DRY DOCK WALLS
maintained below the sea level after the gate i s closed to
aYoid a reverse head on the gate. Fast pumping may be

Floating caissons may be used for constructing the
essential in these conditions.
walls of dry docks which are to be constructed in land
reclaimed from the sea. Caissons mar also be used i n ,·ery On the other hand, having floated a new ship out of
a shipbuilding dock there may be an acceptable delay
before work is started on a further ship in the dock and
the pumping time is thus not critical. In some cases
ad,·antage may be taken of a falling tide to reduce the

Water Level amount of pumping to be undertaken.
6.3. LOCATION OF P U M PHOUSE

C ai sson Sunk
on Rock Bed Pumphouses are usually located near the dock entrance
for a number of reasons.
Ad,·antage can be taken of any longitudinal fall of
the dock floor which, when provided, is normally towards

Underv1ater/
Concrete F.lo.Qr. ... ..... (�
the dock gate. Location near the dock entrance normally
results in the shortest discharge culYert system with cost
and efficiency ad\·antages. The control of the gate and the
pumping which are related to each other can b e housed in
Fig. 5.5 close proxi mity with obYious ad\"antages.
48 P.l.A.N.C. - A.J.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988

In some instances
pumphouses have been
placed centrally in the dock
t:
where. the floor i s horizon
tal and the discharge cul
\'erts can be short, but
these conditions are rare
and central pumphouses are
not normally recommended.
In the case of double
or twin docks the pum p
house may normally be
located between the en
trances. In some dockyards,
notably na\·al yards, a s ingle

�- pumphouse is used for mul
t i pl e docks. In such cases
the cukert S}'Stems are
complex i n \'Oh'i ng a num ber
of expensi\·e sluice vah·es.
6.1/.. DRY DOCK MAIN DE

W A TERING PUMPS
Dry dock main de
watering pumps may ha\·e
horizontal or ,·ertical
spindles. Horizontal spindle
pumps are usually centrifu
gal and haYe advantage in
easy maintenance but due
to space requi rements and

o�C!!
- ...&:li
: -tii!�a=�======j'ioo.,.,...
- extra ci\'il engineering costs
they are not commonly
used in modern installations.
Vertical spindle pumps
are normally axial or m i xed
flow and haYe great advan
tage in that the motors
can be positioned high in
the pumphouse and gener
ally the pumping installation
with these pumps takes up
less space in the pum p
house.
The final selection
may be decided on cost
considerations with the
pump manufacturer choosing
the pump design to suit
the specification prov ided
by the user.
The number of main
pumps used normally ranges
between two and fh·e.
Single pumps are rarely
used since a breakdown
will put the dock out of

F ig, 6 . 4 - Pumphouses using syphonio d ischarge action.
P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 49

Pumps are usual!�· arranged to be able to start when be such that the equipment contained therein can be easily
the water leYel in the dock is low and each should be installed, operated and maintained.
able to generate sufficient head to prime the syphon

Provision for increase in required capacity should be
(where syphonic discharge is incorporated).
considered such as the possible installation of extra pumps
Pumps are commonly designed to cut out i n sequence
if the duty of the dock was to be changed say from ship
as the water level in the dock falls and the rate of flow
building to shiprepair. A change from · single to . multiple
into the dock sump reduces.
usage of the pumphouse would normally only be possible if
the original design had taken this into account and pro- ·
6.5. DRY DOCK DRAINAGE PUMPS

,·ision for the necessary \·akes and cuh"erts had been made
initially.
Drainage pumps with their suction in the dry dock
main sumps are required to deal with the water remaining Arrangements for the remoYal and replacement of all
in the dock after the last of the main pumps ha,·e cut the major equipment should be incorporated in the design
out. These pumps should ha\·e adequate capacity to deal such as the proYision of removable panels in the roof
with the maximum ' run off' from the dock floor in the which would normally be within the reach of t h e dockside
shortest possible time and at the same time remoYe the cranes.
rain water and any leakage from the gate, floor and walls.
Some pumphouses are equipped with an oYerhead crane
which is able to rnO\'e the equipment to a suitable place

6.6. DESIGN OF DRY DOCK PUMPHOUSE
for maintenance or to a pos i tion from which it can be
The design of the pumphouse for a dry dock should remo,·ed from the pumphouse using the dockside crane.
ULUST rm
)WI HUI
f!RE JOtrEY
mm
hlDD '/.
DISCHARGE
CULVERT
<]
I
-t:<l.. ri:";.i--=�=
. .,
mir DISC KU&{ :
mrm SYfHD•S
.
•
.
�
·r
l
hlOO
2 100 ·1•
'l•J
S(LWA T C R 1n
.
I
•
•
. ..
.
- - - - - "l
..,,
I
-��l
..
HOUS{ o�mm
':-�
.,. PUHtS
··-
2,100 .,. hlnO '/,
f (tJ
HY.
8 l mmL
=�-��-::-'--��_..:·��
: -!_'====�!
ru1-1r mvc
SUHr
� ISQl!TlkG
�
' SOlBOID GHHHD
11111 D£W1i [ RIXI mirs DOC! DUIUtE
YAlYE
l
'/,Jj
h�D '/,
( h ll
'/,] tUHPS
li1DO
1 1 . 100 ·1.1
-l<l- m-HlURI
VALVE
m ·nu1sE nm
rvKflXC uurmm1
Fig. 6 . 6
50 P.1.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

o so too ctn
0 '$ lll' m
-=- ..::.-=-�
Fig. 7 , 3 (a) - Pumphouse with butterfly valves
P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 51

Pro\"ision should be made for venti
lation of and heat extraction from
the pumphouse.
The main dock sump is usually
located under the pumphouse and
below the suction of the main
pumps. The ducts leading from the
dock floor to the sump should be
large to enabl e the flow to be as
fast and smooth as possible to pre
rnnt starvation of the pumps
towards the end of the dewatering
operation.
Model testing of the layout is
often done to optimize the shapes
proYided and to study the possible
interaction between pumps in a
common sump. This phenomenon can
usually be o\·ercome by suitably
placed baffles.
7. FILLING OF DRY DOCKS
7.1. INTRODUCTION
The filling of a dry dock is
normally by gra\'ity directly from
the sea. It may be supple mented by

pumping i f the operation i s required
to be particularly fast or if some
impounding of water abon� tide
Je,·eJ is needed.
7.2. FILLING TIME FOR A DRY
DOCK
The filling time for a dry dock
is normally considered to be the
time taken to fill the dock with
the outside water le,·el at Mean
High Water Springs and without a
ship in dock. The fiJJing time is
usually specified to be between '

and 2 hours. li'LOW GLI Dr�
.PA�.NJ.;L
7.3. TYPES OF FILLING VALVES
USED
-+
Equilibrium filling YalYes are
commonly used and consist of a
large rnrtical cylinder set in Yerti
cal guides in a compartment with
direct access to the sea. The top
Fig. 7 , 3 ( b ) ->
Dry docks using equilibrium valves
52 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BU LLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

of the C)'linder is abo\·e sea leYel and the bottom consists For some dry docks there may be a requirement for
of a seal set oYer a culvert leading directly to the dock. the dock to impound so that the gate in that case must
To open, the cylinder ls rai sed a small distance allowing be capable of retaining a reverse head. This may occur
water to flow radially into the cuh-ert and thence into the when there is a l arge tidal variation and. the ship in dock
dock. The weight of the cyli nder is often counterbalanced is required to remain afloat during a tidal cycle.
so that the force required to open the yal\'e is \·ery small
In dry docks which have the capability for pumped
and can be done by hand, operating a simple screw.
i mpounding, precautions should be taken against oYer filling
Altemath·ely they may be motori zed with remote control
by designing the gate accordingly, by pro,·iding an overflow
from the pumphouse.
facility or some other safety feature.
Sluice Yalrns for dry dock filling are large, power
operated and expensirn. Where impounding of the dock is
8.4. SPEED OF OPERATION
not required, single faced penstocks may be used which are
cheaper than double faced ,·akes but must still be power
The speed of operation required for the opening and
operated.
closing of a gate will depend on the use of the fac i lity
Butterfly val\·es are often used when the filling of which is protected by the gate.
the dock is carried out through the dock gate. Normally a
For shiprepairing dry docks fast opening and closing
number of such ,·alves are used which can be either hand
times are normally considered essential, especially when
or power operated. The number of \·aJves used permit
there i s a large tidal rnriation. An operating time of the
regular maintenance to be carried out so that the system
order of 10 m inutes is often considered appropriate.
can be generally reliable.
For shipbuilding dry docks slower operating times of
the order of 30 minutes are usually acceptable since the
&. DRY DOCK GATES
operations occur infrequently•.
8.1. INTRODUCTION
8.5. COST OF CONSTRUCTION
Dry dock gates are highly 1·ariable in principle and

design, the choice being goYerned by the different features The o\·erall 'Cos t of provision of the gate should in
which may be required and the different conditions under clude the cost of the assoc iated c ivil engineering works
which the gates must operate. The factors affecting the and the operating mechanism. The ch·il engineering works
choice are coYered by subsequent paragraphs followed by a form a major part of the total cost of some designs w h ich
more detailed description of alternath·e choices of gates is referred to in the descriptions of the various types of
together with their adYantages and di sadrnntages. The final gate. The cost of the operating mechanism also \'aries
choice may depend upon judgment and commercial consider widely with different gate designs.
ations.
8.6. ABILITY TO OPEN AGAINST A HEAD

8.2. WIDTH OF ENTRANCE
In gates requiring a fast opening speed there may be

The width of entrance will ham profound influence on
a great ad,·antage in the gate being able to open before
the type of gate chosen and on the structural solution
the water level on the ' low' side has reached the water
deYeloped. Whilst there are no absolute l i m i tations, there
level on the ' h igh' side. It may be noted that when a dry
may, for instance, be a practical limit to the length of
dock i s filled by gra\·ity, the speed of filling falls greatly
gate which is required to span horizontally across an
as the water le\·els approach equality and this is accentu
entrance.
ated if the operation is carried out before high tide. The
ability of a gate to open against a head of the order of
8.3. HEAD OF WATER TO BE RETAIN ED
50 mm to 1 00 mm is worth achieYing and greater figures
will shorten the o\·erall operating time still further. Hy
The maximum head of water, its direction and its
draulic rams are sometimes used for this purpose.
relationship to sill and cope lernls will influence the
choice of gate type.
8.7. DEPTH AVAILABLE OUTSIDE DOCK
The maximum height of water to be retained by a
gate facing the sea should be related to the highest re
corded tide le\·el at the gate location or the highest astro The natural depth of water arnilable outside the dock
nomic t i de ( H AT) plus an allowance to include for surges entrance will greatly affect the choice of gate. If a recess
and other exceptional water conditions. Wa\·e conditions below the general bed le\·el is required to house the open
should be considered separately as an addition to high gate there may be a problem of s i ltation.
water le\·eJ.
P.l .A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 53

8.8. PARKING SPACE AVAILABILITY ditions is most desirable from the point of view of accu
racy and workmanship and mass production of identical

'
The availability of quay space to accommodate a free units may show considerable saving.
floating or side hinged gate is an important consideration.

Erection of the . gate by joining the units may be
The parked gate should be protected against damage by
undertaken behind a temporary cofferdam on the dock floor
ships entering or leaving dock which may involve fendering
and the gate floated into position when the construction
systems and extra ci vii engineering costs.
site can be flooded. Erection may alternatively be under
taken on a slipway or in an existing dry dock and the
8.9. EASE OF MAINTENANCE completed gate floated to the site. Erection of the gate
on the sill, so that the dock construction site need not be
Consideration should be given to the ease of mainten prematurely flooded is also possible, but may produce some
ance of the gate. Preference should be given to those practical difficulties depending on the details of design.
types of gate which permit maintenance being carried out
with the gate in operation. The use of spare gates being

8.11;. FREE FLOATING GATE (SHIP-TYPE CAISSON)
placed in outer ' stops' so as to allow the working gate to
be fully dried out is an expensive possibility but becomes

The free floating gate is one capable of becoming
more acceptable if one spare can be used for a number of
buoyant by pumping out or otherwise discharging sufficient
similar gate entrances.
water ballast. The cross-sectional shape of the gate may
be either rectangular or ship-shaped .or be shaped to con
8.10 LABOUR FORCE REQUIRED TO OPERATE GATE form with the structural and operational requirements of
the gate. The elevational shape of the gate may be rec

The number of personnel required to operate the gate tangular or, in cases where the gate is required to be
can vary between one man controlling a single winch to a located in a close fitting groove in the dock walls and
considerable number of men forming mooring gangs com dock sill, it may be trapezoidal.
bined with tug crews.

The hydrostatic design usually involves the gate being
divided into separate compartments consisting of air tanks,
8.1 1 . PROVISION OF POWER
Whilst the total power consumed in one
operation of a mechanised gate will not be
large, the provision of suitable power sources
in the form of electric, diesel or hydraulic
motors may involve a considerable capital
cost affecting the choice of gate. An
emergency standby power facility is usually
provided for gates.
8.12. ACCESS ACROSS TOP OF GATE
In some shipyards, vehicular access

Dock Si l l Level
across the top of the gate is a feature,
ELEVATION CROSS SECTION
essential to the operational efficiency of the
yard. High wheel loads from fork lift trucks
and trailers may be required to be carried
by the gate. In other shipyards, only ped
estrian . _?ccess may be required across the Water

·' FREE
I
gate, which may be elevated on stilts above ' I FLOODfNG Level
, I
the main structure of the gate if required ,{ :
,� : I
to be at cope level. �� I I
I Gate Si l l !
1 l-------- ---
.
�-----J
· ·,,,·�.;s·· ,,.� *' ��·,. · ' .. ,,, ·t·; · ' ,,, ' v•»;;'-'
8 . 1 3 . METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION
ELEVATION CROSS SEC TI ON
The facilities available for fabrication
and erection of the gate should be con
sidered when choosing the design. Prefabri Fig. 8 . 1 4 - Typical free floating gates
cation of units of the gate in factory con- Top : Trapezoidal gate - Bottom : Rectangular gate
54 P.l.AN.C. • A.1.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

ballast tanks and free flooding tanks. Trim
ming tanks can also be provided for both
longitudinal and tra.nsverse stability. In some
designs small baUast tanks are located above

DOCK
sea level which are filled by pumping and
discharged by gravity when the gate is re

Dock Si 1 1
quired to float. Compressed air may be used
H i nge
to ' unstick' floating gates as dock filling
nears completion.
The structural design of the floating gate

Dock Gate
may vary in principle. Cl osed
(a) The gate may be designed to span between
the quoins possibly taking advantage of the

PLAN
support of the sill.
(b) The gate may be arranged with the upper
part being a horizontal beam and the lower
part spanning vertically between the beam
and the sill.
'!
Dock Entrance
Hi nge
(c) The gate may be designed as a gravity
structure supported on its base in which Water
case
gate
it
to
will normally be necessary for the
be fllled with ballast water and

!
l
Level
Out l i ne
II
for water pressure to be excluded from its of Gate
underside as the dock is pumped dry.

I !
Floating gates can be designed as re

L J_��-��--�----J
___
versible and advantage should be taken of this
feature where possible to enable mai ntenance

ELEVATION ON XX CROSS SECTION
to be carried out to both faces of the gate.
In some gates, complete maintenance of the
outside of the gate is possible i ncluding the Fig. 8 . 1 5 (a) - Hinged floating gate.
underside and seals.
connecting boom pushing or pulling direct on the gate
normally operated by an hydraulic ram. As a further
alternative it is possible to swing .the gate by means of

(a) The gate can be constructed remote from the site and
equipment similar to a ship' s bow thruster at . the end of
towed into position for immediate use. ,
the gate remote from the hinge. This incidentally has the
(b) The gate can be reversed and easily maintained.
added advantage of assisting the dewatering of the dock.
(c) Entrance civil engineering works are usually simple.
The hydrostatic principles of the gate are similar to the
(d) Can accept a wide heavy roadway if required.
free floating gate. It is possible to maintain the gate at a
(e) Can accept reversal of water pressure if required.
constant level with a slight upward pressure against the
(f) Does not require extra depth of water to operate.
hinges (in this case two in number). The effect of tidal
difference being kept low by using free flooding tanks. The
extra stability provided by the hinges may allow a re
(a) Requires mooring gangs and possibly a tug to operate. duction in width of gate and thus a cost advantage.
(b) Takes considerable time to operate. The structural principles of the gate are similar to
(c) Operation may be delayed in moderately poor weather the free floating gate except that it is difficult to arrange
conditions. for the gate to be located in a groove and thus reverse
(d) Operation may require careful monitoring of pumps and head conditions cannot normally be accommodated.
water levels.
8.15. HINGED FLOATING GATES

(a) Can be constructed remote from site.
(b) Can be reversed for maintenance.

A modification of the free floating gate can be made
i ntroducing a loose hinge or hinges on one side. The (c) Civil engineering works simple.
by
gate may be - opened and closed by means of wire ropes or (d) Can accept a wide roadway.
chains operated by a winch. An alternative method is by a (e) Does not require extra depth of water.
P.JAN.C. • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 55

river side dock s i d e
s e a l i n g under gate
?��,.. I
I
,,;,, : !�-�� temporary sheet p i l ing
for main tenance of
r---- -'�,::, _ _ _ _u, "�.��
sealing flaps
I '-, /
I ·��-.l!--:..�
' r- - .. - - -
-- ,
I I
I 1 support 1I
I I I
' � -- - - - - - -�
I
CAI S S ON GATE
the gate is capab le o f

retaining a reverse head
I
I guiding p in
I seal ing a t g a t e b o t tom !
I r - -·"' - -, - ..· - --- ... .J
I I I dock s i de
I 1 s up po r t 1
I I I
I '
I L _ _ _ _ __ J I
I I
I I
I I
::;:.
I.- - - - - - - -... -- !
Fig. 8 . 1 5 ( b )
&. 1 6. SLIDING CAISSON GATE
(a) Requires tug or extra machinery to operate. The sliding {or rolling) caisson gate is one which is
(b) Medium time to operate. housed, when open, in a recess or ' camber' at the side of
(c) Operation may be delayed by very poor weather con- a dock. To close, the gate moves across the entrance
ditions. under the action of a winch operating an endless chain or
(d) Some monitoring of water levels required. wire rope • . Before movement, the gate may be deballasted
(e) Cannot easily accept reversal of water pressure. to become semi-buoyant and in some cases wheels are
(f) Cannot operate against a head. designed to be jacked down under the gate to reduce
56 P:l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

(d) N o extra dredging required.·
r
(e) Small number of operating
personnel required.
Dock Entrance
(f ) Can accept a wide road
Camber Cover Jacked up
to a 1 1 ow Gate to Open way.
Wi nch A 1
.";;.. -..·.==-:.·..l-=::: ::::.::-c:::..--:::-:-- �
c:.-::;::::::
( g) Not affected by weather
1, ;1G':..�di::::.r�-;;..£:;� conditions.
( Handrai 1 folded l 1,.,. «•t T! DAL
Gate C l osed \ 'j' P AIR

(h ) Suitable for locl<s and
' ' lf docks.

t i -------- - ---------J
Gate Open
I in Gate Camber 1�
·.�.. .. ... '"' l: . .. } 'I.
:ir::-;�::-:-:-�-:.:::::;. .,.:....i.
� ,-�•.1·•· ···'7-,·
\. (i) Can be floated out for
·
,. .4 ,.<t., '•1� '"i'T-:·
repair.
ELEVATION ON AA V.i..e.adva.nta.gu o' 4Ud.i.ng

gahl :
(a) Very expensive ci vii engin
eering work.
Temporary Stop logs
for Gate Mai ntenance (b ) Mai ntenance possible but
difficult.
(c) M e c h a n i c a l maintenance
considerable.
(d ) Gate structure and equip
ment expensive.
Gate Open
'· i n C amber (e) Camber requires consider
'•
able space.
Dock
PLAN
&. 1 7 MITRE GATES
Mitre gates consist of a
pair of gates each with a

Fig. 8 . 1 6 - Typical sliding caisson ga te
vertical hinge · at one side of
the ..entrance. The gates are
arranged to meet or • mitre'

further the tractive force required. on the centre Ii ne of the entrance thus giving mutual
The cross section of the gate is usually rectangular support which, together with the two hinges, form a three
pinned arch structure. The sill is arranged to fit this con

and it can be provided with meeting faces on both sides,
and thus be able to accept a reversed water pressure as figuration so that the bottom edges of the gates are in ·
would be require ? for i mpounded docks. contact and form water-tight meeting faces. The gates are
usually constructed in steel with some buoyancy tanks to

The track on which the gate travels can be provided
limit load on the hinges when opening and dosing. The
with a slope to enable the gate to be housed at a lower
buoyancy is usually provided below low water level with
level in the camber. This allows for a permanent roof over
tidal tanks above to maintain a constant hydrostatic con
the camber to be provided for general access at cope
dition. The mechanism for operating and closing may be by
level. This roof can be jacked up to allow the gate to be
chain of steel wire rope or, now more commonly, by
moved and then lowered when the gate i s either open or
hydraulic ram.
closed. The gate may be .capable of becoming fully buoyant
for removal docking and maintenance purposes. A n alterna

The gates are unable to withstand a reverse water
tive arrangement may be made by sealing the end of the
pressure and provision must be made for the operating
camber with temporary stop logs and then dewatering the
camber completely, leaving the gate in the dry for main mechanism to be protected against an overload should a
tenance. reverse pressure on the gate tend to develop. The gates
require considerable precision in construction to maintain
their structural integrity and at the same time produce
water-tight seals. In this respect the sill should be de

(a) Can be fast operation. signed to accept a load from the gates, notwithstanding
(b) Can accept reversed head. the fact that the gates are designed to resist the full load
(c) Can operate .when under a small differential head. by arching.
P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 57

the gate is therefore below sill le\•el when open and mar
require a recess in the dock apron. The gate is usually
raised by a winch on one entrance pier pulli n g a steel
� Dock
win� rope which passes over shea\·es o n the gate and is
attached to a hold-fast on the opposite side of the en
trance. The gate is arranged to be semi-buoyant to reduce
the load on the rope and is di\'ided into buoyancy and
ballast tanks as requireq.
ELEVATION
ON AA
Dock Floor To Wi nch
iDock
Gate Open
Fig. 8. 1 8 - Flap gate
An attempt should be made i n the design to mini mize
the extent of free flooding tanks so that corrosion and
silting can be aYoided in the tanks. The structural design
Fig. 8 . 1 7 - Mitre gates of the gate is greatly influenced by the shape of the
entrance, in particular the ratio of height and width. The
gate may be designed with the top portion for m i ng a deep
box girder spanning the width of the entrance with the

(a) Fast operation. lower portion spanning \'ertically between the girder and
(b ) No extra dredging required. the sill. Alternath·ely, the gate may be designed as a grid
(c) Small number of personnel required to operate. of beams with supports on three sides being the two
quoins and the sill. Consideration should also be given in
the design to the method of initial stepping and remo\"al
of the gate for maintenance. This can be done by adjusting

( a) Great precision of construction required in\"OlYing high
the contents of the buoyancy and ballast tanks. The flap
cost.
gate is thus easy to operate and can be built on site or
( b) Machinery maintenance required.
i n a remote location and towed to site.
(c) Maintenance o f structure not easy.
(d) Space for recesses for gates in open position required
invoking high cost.

(e) Cannot accept rernrse loading. ( a) Relath·ely cheap structure.
(f ) Cannot accept roadway. (b} Simpl e construction work.
(g) Watertightness difficult to maintain. (c} Simpl e and cheap ciYil engineering works.
( h) Generally considered unsuitable for Yery large entrance (d ) Can be built on site or remote from s i te.
widths. (e ) Fast operation.
(i ) Are susceptible to ' slam' . (f) Operated by one man.
(g) Can accept a medium width roadway.
(h) Not susceptible to ' slam' •

8 . 1 8. FLAP GATE
A flap gate rotates about a horizontal axis on the
dock sill and remains horizontal when open to allow a ship (a) Requires extra depth of water outside s i ll.
to pass o\·er it to enter or lea,·e a dock. The whole of (b) Cannot easily accept a reverse head.
58 P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

(c) Cannot be maintained in-situ. (d} Can be erected in-situ.
(d} Can open against only a small head. (e} Only one man required to operate.
(f) Narrow roadway over top possible.
8.19 STRUTTED FLAP GATE
The strutted flap gate is used where the width of the

(a) High precision of manufacture and erection.
entrance is too large for a simple flap gate to span hori
(b} Maintenance not possible in-situ.
zontally between the quoins without becoming too heavy
(c) Requires extra depth of water outside slJI.
and uneconomic. The gate is arranged to be hinged hori
(d) Civil engineering of medium high cost.
zontally on the line of the sill in a similar manner to the
(e) Removal �nd repair not easy.
flap gate previously described.
{f} Struts reduce useful length of dock.
(g) Struts are potentially subject to damage.
Dock Cope
8.20. CANTILEVER FLAP GA TE
The cantilever flap gate is used for entrances which

are too wide for the gate structure to span horizontal ly.
The gate is so arranged to cantilever from the sill where
it is also hinged to rotate horizontally as it opens.
The gate can be operated by a winch system similar
Gate to the other flap gates or it can be operated by flotation

Open with compressed air arranged to expel ballast water from
H i nge the gate.
The gate requires a considerable extra depth of water

outside the sill to accommodate the extension of the gate
to form the cantilever anchorage and the remainder of the
Fig. 8 . 1 9 - Strutted flap gate gate when it is open. Various methods have been devised
to provide 'fixity' of the bottom of the gate when closed
When closed, the gate is supported at in tervals against but all involved considerable extra civil engineering work.
the horizontal water load by a series of inclined struts
which are pinned at the bottom and which arc usually
raised by the gate when it is lifted by the winch mech
Dock Cope
anism. The struts bear against a bracket on the face of
the gate structure when in the raised position. The vertical
component of the load in each strut is thus transferred to
the gate structure and it may be transmitted to the sill
through the hinges at the bottom of the gate or by some
other device.
An alternative arrangement is involved in the C.J.

Foster gate which provides for the vertical component of
the load i n each strut to be taken by tie rods which are
hinged and anchored to the sill forming a series of • A'
frames. In this case the gate structure simply transmits
horizontal load to the • A' frames without being subjected
to a vertical component. The tie rods and struts lie flat
on the gate when it is open.
The operation of strutted flap gates may be by winch Fig. 8 . 20 ( a ) - Cantilever flap gate
and wire rope using a multiple sheave system if the load
is too great for a single rope. The gate is usually made
semi-buoyant to reduce the lifting load.
(a) Can be used for very wide entrances.
{b} Fast to operate.
(c) Can be prefabricated remote from site.
(a) Can be used for very wide entrances. (d) Can be erected in-situ.
(b) Fast to operate. (e) Only one man required to operate.
(c) Can be prefabricated remote from site. (f) Narrow roadway on top possible.
P.1.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 59

Fig. 8 . 20 ( b ) - Cantilever flap gate
The door is moved by changing the water ballast in the door
( g) No obstruction by struts inside dock. 9. DRY DOCK EQUIPMENT

( h) Remornl and repairs possible with some designs.
9.1 . KEEL AND BILGE BLOCKS
Methods of supporting ships in dry docks haYe under

(a) Maintenance not possible in-situ.
gone yarious changes in recent years. A comm on system,
(b) Requires extra depth of water outside sil 1,
used for many years of docking, was to allow the keel of
(c) Cid! engineering high cost with some designs. the ship to be set down on a central row of cast iron or
(d) Remoyal and repair not easy with some designs. timber keel blocks, the full weight of the ship thus being
carried on the centreline of the dock. Lateral support to
each side of the ship was pro\·ided by timber or steel

8.2 1 . OTHER GATE DESIGNS
struts or shores placed horizontally between the ship and
the dock walls at interrnls along the length of the ship.
Other gate designs are numerous and are usually The outer ends of the shores usually rested on altars
deYeloped for special purposes where special conditions are formed on the dock walls. The shores were normally placed
present. Gates l ifted out by a floating crane haYe been in position and adjusted during the pumping process at the
adopted where a suitable crane is a\·ailable without a t i me when the keel just touched the blocks and buoyancy
prohibitiYe hire charge being required. Sectional gates lifted still proYided some stability. Additional blocks were some
into. position with joining seals to form i m m ediate gates t i mes placed under the ship' s bilges for additional stability
for di\·ision of large dry docks are in common use in ship after the dock was fully pumped out. These additional
building yards. blocks are usually referred to as bilge blocks.
60 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C. N . - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

If the profile of the ship is accurately known, it is platform with considerable efficiency.
often possible to set out on the dock floor, i n the dry, a

The dock arms may be electric or diesel powered.
complete set of keel blocks and bilge blocks each adj•Jsted
The electric power can be supplied by pro\'iding collector
to the correct height to suit the shape of the ship' s hull.
rails or flexible power cables but these must be so arranged
This method i s common in narnl rards where the shape of
to not i nterfere with the other serdces on the dockside.
the hulls is known and which sometimes i nrnll:es consider
The supply of water to the dock arm has been o\·ercome
able cun·ature.
in Yarious ways including a permanently connected reeling
Bilge blocks which are remotely adjustable both in hose or regularly spaced automatic supply points filling a
position and in height have been introduced into some dry tank carried on the dock arm carriage. Supplies of paint
docks with Yarious degrees of success. Many such instal and grit or shot must also be carried on the carriage.
lations have become disused due to maintenance difficulties

Longitudinal movement of the carriage is preferably
in the harsh em·ironment of a working shiprepair yard.
arranged by driving the upper wheels which always remain
Electrical, hydraulic and compressed air systems ha\·e been
out o f the water.
used i n addition to operation by chain.
Raising, lowering and slewing of the arms is usuallr
More recently, the design of many ships has provided
undertaken by hydraulic ram operation, but other methods
for the hull to be flat-bottomed which has greatly simpli
such as wire rope o n shea\·es ha\·e been used.
fied the dry docking problem. This has enabled sl)ipyards to
The design of the dock arms should be robust to suit
set out both keel and bilge blocks i n one plane i n position
shipyard conditions and it is recommended that the
to suit the loading condition with the ship being allowed
operators should be well trained to deal with this sophisti
to settle as the water is lowered without any adjustment
cated equipment.
or difficulty.
Keel blocks may be formed of hardwood, cast iron,

9.3. SHIP HAULING SYSTEMS
mild steel or concrete all of which are usually capped
with softwood to amid high concentrations of stress. Some

Modern dry docks are now fitted with ship hauling
are also laid on timber to o\·ercome irregularities of the
systems which control the entry and exit of the .ship.
concrete dock floor.
The remornl of blocks for repair purposes when under There are many differing systems used but most are
load from the ship has always presented a problem. Sand based on self tensioning winches with ropes. attached to
boxes on the top of the blocks with arrangement made for trollies or mules running on rails on the dock cope. It is
the sand to be remo\·ed by water jet have been \•ery essential to plan carefully the interaction between the
successfully used. hauling system and the dock arms although fortunatelr the
two systems are not required to be used at the same t ime.

Cast iron blocks were often formed in three wedged
Provision must, howe\·er, be made for the parking of the
shaped pieces which could be driYen apart when under load.
dock arms at the dock head and so they should be able to
Rubber capping pieces ha\·e recently been introduced pass the trollies at that point.
to take the place of the soft timber which el i m i nates the
The systems differ considerably w i t h respect to trollies
maintenance and regular replacement of t imber. A system
and the rope attachment. In some cases the hauling rope
of jacking has been de\·eloped to enable such blocks to be
is attached to the trolley with a separate ' spring' rope
removed under load.
extending from the ship to a hook on the trolley. I n other
cases the hauling rope passes round a shea\·e on the

9.2. DOCK ARMS
trolley and is attached directly to the ship.
A feature of modem ship repair docks has been the In these cases the trollies are sometimes pro\·ided
introduction of dock arms. A dock arm can be described with braking systems so that, when appl i ed, the trollies
as a mobile platform supported on an adjustable hinged can be used to centre the ship by hauling on the main
canti le\·er arm fitted to a carriage which runs on rails winches as appropriate.
fixed to the dock wall and cope. These ha\·e only become
In all cases there is angular pull on a trolley with a
possible with the elim ination of side shores.
high upward and outward component which must be resisted
High pressure water cleaning, shot blasting and paint by the trolley' s wheel srstem which requi res up to six
ing o f the ship' s hull can be performed from the dock arm running surfaces.

APPENDIX " A "
WORLD D R Y DOCKS CONSTRUCTED SINCE 1 950
The following pages show the data collected to date on modern
dry docks throughout the world with special reference t o their size,
type of construction, type of gate and type and capacity of pumps.
It will be observed from the summary overleaf that the majority
of modern docks are of the under drained floor type. It will also be
noted that only the Netherlands and Germany P.R. have a majority of
other types, no doubt due to the ground conditions. Germany appears

to favour anchored docks whereas the Netherlands appear to favour
gravity docks.
The most common gate used appears to be the steel flap type,
closely followed by the steel hinged caisson. The mitre gate which was
once very popular appears to have lost favour as the widths of docks
have increased.
P.l.A.N.C. - A.1.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 968 - N° 63 A-1

DOCK FLOOR DOCK GATE CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION
.µ ,..... -
0 'O ro s::
tlJ) c Q) 0
s:: s:: ..µ [/)
tll · .-! 'O 0. E Q) · .-! 0 [/)
� .µ Q) 'O ro ro 0. 4-< s::: ·.-!
() s:: ro tlJ) 0. Q) ..; Q) >., Q) ._. c;S
0 0 0 s:: ro .µ J:>.. P:i .µ 'O 0
0 'O [/) ..; ·.-! ..; .µ . ......, Cl)
4-<
0
c
:;:
0
.µ
·
>.,
.-!
'O
Q)
s::
Q)
f..
0
�
0
[/)
· .-!
ro
�
..;
s::
0
[/)
::c
..;
s::
0
[/)
4-<
..;
;:l
f..
.µ
.µ
s::
ro Q)
.µ
f..
0
tlJ)
c
•.-!
'O ·
s::
.-!
Q) ..µ
s:: :> · .-! .c s:: (.) Q) [/) Q) [/) Q) [f.) 0. (.) f.. 0. 'O tll) ro
. � ro ro () � Q) •.-! Q) · .-! Q) • ro .
.µ 0. · .-! c 0
0 s:: f.. f.. s:: s:: (.) .µ <ll +' ro .µ .µ ..; .µ •.-! ;:l ..; · .-! ..;
z ::::> 0 0 <i: ::::> 0:: [f.) (.) [f.) (.) [f.) [f.) 4-< [f.) ::.::;:: [f.) [f.) ::r: �
AUSTRAL I A 1 1 1
BE LGIUM 7 6 1 -
1 2 4
BRAZIL 2 1 1 1 1
CUBA 1 1 1
CANADA 2 2 -
1 1
D E NMARK 7 1 1 5 6 1
E GYPT 1 1 -
1
E IRE 1 1 1
FI NLAND 1 1 1
GERMANY FR 10 10 -
4 1 2 2 1
FRANCE 8 1 2 4 1 4 2 1 1
GREECE 2 1 1 -
1
GI BRALTAR 1 1 -
1
I ND I A 1 1 1
I TALY 4 2 2 2 2
J APAN 43 43 6 18 19
KENYA 1 1 1
MALAY S I A 1 1
MALTA 1 1 1
MEXI CO 2 1 1 -
2
MIDDLE E AST 4 4 1 3
NETHERLANDS A . 1 1 -
1
NETHERLANDS 13 10 3 3 8 2
NORWAY 3 3 2 1
PAKISTAN 2 2 -
2
POLAND 2 1 1 1 1
PORTUGAL 7 7 -
1 5
S I NGAPORE 8 5 3? 4? 4 1
SOUTH KOREA 6? 4 2 4? 2
SPAI N 2 1 1 -
2
SRI LANKA 1 1 -
1
SWEDE N 4 1 3 3 1
THAI LAND 1 1 -
1
U.K. 16 5 8 3 -
2 2 11 1
U.S.A. 24 21 3 13 9 1
A-2 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

\!Oilil DRY JXX:KS BUILT SJN:E 19:0
WJRUl DRY IXXl<S BUILT SIIO: 19:0
Ref Year Use Entrance IXlck Ef'fectr- Depth Tidal Canstructicn Construction Soil 'fype of 'fype
No. !.ocaticn Owner or Yartl in of Width Ba:r:rel ive over range of Walls of Floor i;}'pe Gate of Mo:ir1
coocrete - drained
caisscris
stooe filled
ClllW)A
Saint John Saint Jchn 1923 B/R 33.2 38.l 431. 8 12.8 8.5 Reinforced Reinforced coocrete rock Steel caisson 3 electric 8):i; 2 ancillary
:-0 N.B. Shipb.rl.lcling Ltd extended coocrete slabs o. 91!'.:rn - 1400 tens vertical spindle purps - 963t/h
3.lm thick 0.7621\ drai.ned c�rtri� purps each. 1 SU!p
s;: 1983
z and excavated Reinforced ccn:::rete 11, lrot/f each J"fP 6S.8t/h
9 rock face slab - drained
en exte'!Sicn
i'.':
"O Saint John Saint John 1942 R 18.3 21 .3 134.1 7.3 8.5 Ccncrete 3.an O::ncrete slabs sandy Steel 2 electric hori:ir- 9 2 SU1P purps
() N.B. Shipb.rl.lcling Ltd ttti.ck o.an thick ooder clay Mitre cntal centrifugal 132t/h each
� keel strips - rock puips 382t/h each
drained
CD
c:
r-
r- lENIWlK
m
-l
z Helsing.or B 21 .9 146 7 2Y,
(J)
co
co Nakshov Nakshov Shipyard 27.5 176 8.4 Reinforced Reinforced cmcrete 2
coocrete - Drained
z
0
"'
FrederiKshavn Frederickshavn R 26 176 Precast lhreinforced coocrete �
00 Vaerft og Tordok A/S coocrete - Drained
Lindo Odense Shipyard l 46 300 !'recast Reinforced ccncrete firm

coocrete slabs O. 7!'.:rn max thicl<ness clay
with anchors - Drained
Lindo Odense Shipyard 2 1969 83.9 415 8.7 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete firm
ccncrete 0.35- - Drained clay
0.73n thick
Ccpenhagen app . B/R 3'.).3 218 8.25 Chlcrete th:lerwater concrete sand over- 1%
195,5 at HI/ caisscns 4-!'.:rn ttti.ck lying
5.::rn wide Gravity l:imestcne
�en Bunreister & Wain 38 240 6.5 Reinforced Reinforced cmcrete clays/ Steel Flap
Shipyard cmcrete 1.0-1. !E thick gravels
- Drained
�.CIRl.D DRY 00'.YS BillLT SHT.E 19::0
Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal C'.onstruction C'cristructirn Soil Type of Type De- Renarl<s
!"·h . Locatim Ov.ner or Yard in of Widtti Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of Main (secondary
N3re Service Dock Width Sill DesiBJ1 Fhllosophy Furps ir..nps)
(m) (m) lml (m) ( m)
Alexandria 1965 R 39.6 42.0 2:B 10.8 Reinforced Reinforced c=rete sand Steel floating 3
ccncrete up to 2. 7m thick with caisscn
with anchor ties shells
in deep leyer
or sandstcne
D.Jblin Pre ' 58
(Jl
\>.QRill DRY o::x::KS BUILT SIN::E 19:0
)>
O> Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- D.:."'Ptil Tidal Ccnstructioo Ccnstructim Soil 'l'.',>pe of fype De- R�
No. Locatioo Owner or Yaro in of Widtil llarTel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of Main Watering (secood-ory
Nare Service Dock Widtil l/>.ngth Sill D.:.-'Sigp Fhlloscphy f\J1ps Time(hrs) prnps)
(m) (ml (m) (m) (m)
FEDERAL IU'-1'\ELIC OF G»ltlNY
Hu.sun Husumer 1974 B/R 22.0 25.0 120.0 4.10 3.50 Horizootal O:ncrete with anchor filled Mitre Gates 2
Schiffswerft at anchored steel steel piled bottcrn sand
M-!JS Sheet pile wall thickness l .CDn fine
sand
H..1sun HJsurer 1900 B/R 22.0 25.0 150.0 5.20 3.:0 furizootal Coocrete with steel filled Mitre Gates 2
Schiffswerft at anchored steel piled bottcm sand
l'IH#5 sheet pile wall thickness = 1. ron fine
:u sand
£
z
0 Thyssen 1954 B/R �.o 32.0 218.0 8.20 Ccncrete U frane, thickness of walls Floating 3 l\b. electric 2.6 2 l\b. ancillary
l\brdseewerke at and botton = 2.0n. Botton anchored caisson vertical spindle purrps 360t/h each
;:: M-!JS against uplift with prestressed cable gate 294t centrifugal purps 2 No. arergency
'o anchors 7 . z:tJ t/h each pulps: 218t/h each
0
:z
Kiel HoJ/aldtswerl<:e 1976 B/R 88.4 88.4 426.0 10.0 Steel sheet Ccncrete with anchor sa'ld Floating
co DeutcheWerft pile wall with steel pile bottcms in ex- caissoo
c inclined steel thickness "' 1.3'.rn
.- change gate
.-
m pile anchors for silt
-!
deposits
z
-
<D
CD
CD
Brall"'..n llrerer Vulkan 1973 B/R 58.0 ee.2 331 .6 8.6'.) 3.90 Left side - Ccncrete wi til anchor Support beam 2 No. electric 2 No. ancillary
at angular cooc- piles system Franki with skin vertical spindle pl.llpS
z
0
l<Th'IS rete retaining plate centrifugal purrps 5JJt/h each
"'
"' wall . Ri,Pt elements 10. CXl)t/h e.ach
side - steel
sheet pile wall
as part of a
cofferdam.
Bra:ner Vulkan 1979 B/R 25.0 25.8 170.0 8.� 3.90 Steel sheet thderwater coocrete Single leaf' 2 l\b. electric 3 3 l\b. ancillary
at pile wall with thickness 1. Qn with witil buoyancy vertical spindle puips 400t/h each
Mi\S inclined steel steel anchor piles charrbers borne centrifugal purrps Covered dock
pile anchors a1d concrete coostn>ctioo in gudgecn & 5.0COt/h each w:i th hangar
floor l. Qn thick plintle bearing dim3nsioos 37x
190n hei,Pt of
ridge over dock
boti=rd 5Qn
heigi't of ent-
ranee over MilJ
LIO. 7:'rn.
WJRID DRY J)'.X;l(S BUILT Sll'CE 1950
!Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect-- Depth TidaJ Ccnstructicn Constructicn Soil Type of 1yPe De
N::J . locaticn o.ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of M3.in Watering
Name Service Dock Width Length Sill Desi@1 Fhiloocphy Ptlrps Time(hrs)
(m) (rn) (m) (rn) (ml
FEl:ERAL REPlllLTC OF GEl1Mi\N\' (Cmtinood)
Papenburg Meyer Werft R 35.0 35.0 2:0.0 6.50 +.40 Hvrizcntal Concrete with anchor filled Steel flap 3 N::J . electric 1 2 N::J .
mchored steel piles system Franki sand gate vertical spindle pu1ps
sheet pile centrifugc!l purrps
wall 11. OX>t/h each
Kiel N::J . 7 Howaldtswerke 1953 B/R 38.0 38.0 260.0 6.63 Angular Ccncrete thickness filled Floating 3
Dock Deutsche Werft remining = l . lQn sand caisson
concrete wall with anchor piles gate
Widening: System Franki
( as above
l'b.7 1900 B 50.25 :0.25 310.10 6.63 ( Leng'"J1ening: as above as alxlve as above 5
enlargement ( concrete wall
( en steel piles
Howaldtswerke 1953 B/R M.00 44.00 285.0 6.63 Ps d<x;k l'b. 7
Deutsche Werft
Papaiburg Meyer Werft 1987 B/R 40.0 40.0 257.0 9.50 O.LIO Horizcntal Ccncrete with sand Steel flap Covered cb::k .
at an:::hored anchor piles gate Cover 101 . 8n x
M3L steel sheet system Franki 265-n heigJ'lt ffin
OJ
c pile wall ridge . Entrance
r heig)1t 41m above
ffi
z
MllL .
ID
CD
CD
z
0
Pemo Wartsila
\l.ORlD DRY ro:::KS BUil.T SII>CE 19:0
)>
00 Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal Ccristruction Coostructim Soil Type of Type De- R61larl<s
No. Location CN.ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive (Jlfer range of Walls of Floor type Gate of i'l'ain Watering -· _ ,
!'are Service Dock Width Length Sill Desi!?)1 Ihllosoph,y PU!ps Tilre{hrs)
{m) {m) (m) {m) {m)
FRAN:E
St J\l3Zaire Olantiers de l ' Atlantique B Inclined floor
Dunkerque Jlb.6 Dock 1978 :0 52 310 -5 Sheet piling Reinforced cmcrete fine Steel flap 3 1*>. purps 2
with ties at en filter layer sand 130'.l Kw
2 levels oo clay 3 x 8 rrr /s
Marseilles Jib. 7 or 8 Dock :0 320 Thick rein- Prestressed ccncrete

forced concrete 5.5-n thick
�
;i.. M3rseilles Jlb.9 Dock '37 2:0
z 9 Reinforced cm- Reinforced ccncrete
9 at LW crete app 5.an 4.3-4.7m thick
max thickn€ss
;::
1l
h Marseilles Jlb.10 Dock 1975 R 85 85 465 -11 .0 Reinforced Reinforced cmcrete clay Prestressed 3 No. J'.lUTPS 3)4 3 dewatering
;.:: at lJil crncrete with l.O-l . 5n thick cmcrete 3 x 13 5ii' /s purps
relieving on filter layer caissoo
CD platform
c
r
6 Brest No.2 Ccncessimnaire 1968 R 53 55 338 -7.3 Reinforced 5n thick anchored rock Caissoo 4 centrifugal 4 2 nfilntenance
purps
z 0::1 to rock purps
4 x 15.crotf /h
�
<O
00
00
z Brest N:>.3 1900 00 00 42) -7. 4 Reinforced 1 . !':m thick en schist Prestressed 3 No. puips 1-3 3 pmps +
0
(J) a:ncrete filter la,yec- ccncrete 40 , o:xni' /h 3 dewatering
w
caissoo plllpS
Bordeaux R 34 240 8.5 Mass coocrete Reinforced ccncrete marl �

or 218? at lJil - Drained
Hellenic Shipyards 1970 R 53.3 335.3 9 . 25 Reck filled Gr=t :intrusicn coo- rock Steel flap gate
O:xrpany coocrete Crete placed under resid-
caiSSCllS ..at.er �rox 7.5TI ual
thick soils
Scar-� Hellenic Shipyards 1977 R 75 420 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete resid- Steel cantilever
O:xrpany cuicrete Lan thick ual gate
originally i'IDChored soils
with prestressed
piles rD# drained
�
� (1986)
z
0
� GlHW..'fllR
'u
h Gibraltar Shipngpa:ir Ltd 10Cl5 R 37.8 37.8 Z76 12.42 r.Ess Gravity Floating caissm
z Refurbished cxncrete
1985
ID
c
r
r
m
::! INJ!A
z
�
<O
<X>
Visakhapatnam Hindustan
<X> Shipyard Ltd
z
0
� ITALY
Palerno 1979 68 370 11.3 Reinforced cco- Reinforced ccncrete Lime- Steel flap Dock bt.1ilt :in
crete caissms caisscns co piles/ stale/ gate twJ secticns
reinforced ccncrete alluvial
2. 5"n thick with ties clep:sits
No.5 Dock 1962 38 38 2:il 9 Prestressed precast an:rete Silt

caisscns assait>led co site and overlying
5U1k :in coe piece rock
Trieste Cantiere Navale !:',6 3:'D 8.5 Reinforced Re:infarced cax:rete Reck
del Italccntieri coocrete tied to rock
foondaticn
Livano Crnsorzio Livomese 1S75 !:',6 3&) 10 Re:inforced Reinforced ccncrete mixed Steel flap 4 l'b. vert . 3.5 3 l'b. centrif.
Bacini Carena,ggi.o cco:::rete - Gravity (sea Gate prq:ieller @ 2,crot/h. 3 fb.
)>
bed) 27,COJt/h 200t/h
(0
\>.ORl.D DRY ro::KS B'JILT SIN::E 19:0
::t>
Ref Year Use Eni:r'dl1Ce IX:ck Effect- Depth Tidal Ccnstructioo Ccnstructicn Soil 'fype of 'fype De- Re;arks
0 No. LoCaticn O.ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of �'.a:in Watering (secmdary
Natre Service IX:ck Width Length Sill Design Philooophy fuJps Time(hrs) prnps )
(rn) (m) (m) (m) (m)
JAPAN
1 Aioi No.l ED Ishikawajima 1975 B ro ro 291. 5 11.3 7.9 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete rock Steel Caisson
HariJra Heavy Calcrete on gravel layer & sand
Industries Ltd Drained
2 Aioi No.l FID 1963 R 35.3 41 .3 238.1 11.7 9.07 Plain Reinforced Ccr1erete rock Steel Caissoo ) Diagonal JJUTP 1.5 ) Cam=
Concrete & sand l 24.cro ni' /au ) use
) }
) )
3 Aioi !'b. 2 RD 1963 R 21.2 30.0 152.14 9.27 6.42 Pla:in Reinforced Ccncrete rock Steel Caissoo ) s.cro ni' /2x2 1.0 ) 540 rri' /h
Ccncrete & said ) )
:0
s;: 4 Aioi No.3 RD 1973 R 56.0 !Xl.O 340.0 11.0 8.0 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete sand Steel Flap Gate Diagoo;il JJUTP 2.5 Diagooal puip
z Cc:ncrete oo gravel layer 24 .cro ni' /M 7CO n? /h xl
!."> Drained
5 Kure l'b. 2 ID 1969 B 65.0 65.7 339.65 10.15 6.81 Reinforced O:nc:rete rock Steel Caissoo "=' 10.0 Centrifugal.
� Grav:ify """""" �""" -- -i:::>""
'o 'fype x2 3COii' /h xl

0 Diagcnal Diagcnal
� 700'.lli' /h xl 700i1' /h xl
6 Kure No.3 ED 1973 B 80.0 80.0 !003 . 2 12. 5 8.91 Grav:ify Reinforced Concrete rock Steel Caisson Diagcnal 7.0 Diagcnal
en
c 'fype en gravel layer & sand 2:).cmrr /h x3 lcmiT /h x2
r
r Drained
m
-i
z 7 Kure i'b.4 RD 1974 R 44.4 46.6 331 . 2 15.4 12.8 Plain Reinforced Ccncrete rock Steel Caissoo Diagonal 3.0 Diag::nal
...
<O Ccncx-ete 12.cmrr /h x2 :ooii' /h x2
"'
"' 15.cro xl
19.CIXl x2
0
z
°' 8 Tokyo No.2 RD 1962 R 24.0 30.0 100.0 9.9 7.25 Plain Reinforced Concrete sand Steel Caisson Centrif\igal 2.0 C'.entrifugal
(.:>
CcrlCrete 2. 7COi1' /h xl �
3.CXXJ xl
3.42:) xl
9 Yokohara RD 1966 R :x>.o 06.0 35'3.0 1 1 . 5 8.6 Sheet Reinforced Ccncrete sand Steel Flap Gate Diagcnal 4.0 Diagonal
Pile 24.cmiT /h x2 240x2
10 Aichi ID 1984 B 92.0 92.0 518.0 13.0 9.62 Reinforced Reinforced Ca1Crete sand Steel Caisson )Diagcnal 10.0 )Diagcnal
Ccncrete oo gravel layer )3'.l.CIXl x2 )10'.Xl x.l
Drained ) )
) )
11 Aichi RD 1980 R 43.4 43.4 290.5 13.0 9.62 Reinforced Reinforced Ccricrete sand Steel Caisson )Centrifugal 5.0 )Turbin
Concrete )6XXJ xl ) 200 xl
\l.ORW DRY DXKS BUILT SIN::E 19:0
Ref Yezr Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal O::nstructicn C'.onstruction Soil Type of Type De- RE<Tm'ks
!'b . l=ation o.ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over ra'1ge of Walls of Floor type Gate of 1"ain Watering (secoodary
Nare Service Dock Width Length Sill Desigp Fhiloscphy PLJrps Tilre(hrs) purps)
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
JAPAN (Ccntin.Jed )
12 Tsu J'b.IBD Nippcn Kokan K.K. 1969 B 75.0 75.0 348.3 7.9 2.1 Reinforced Reinforced Concrete sand Steel Caisson Electric vertical 4 Electric vertical
at Hl\IS Ccncrete 0.7$-2.0m thick with over Steel wt= mJ spindle miJ<ed flOH spindle nill<ed flOI>
0.75n thick Water cut off clay ton PUJP 39 , CXXlt/h purp fD)t/h
Drained
13 Tsu l'b.2BD Nippcn Kol<an K.K. 1969 B/R 75.0 75.0 143.0 7.9 2.1 Reinforced Reinforced Concrete sand Steel Caissm *Carbined use 1 *Ca!bined use
at tt.\15 Ccrr
.,rete 0.7:m-2.0m thick with over Steel wt= mJ 2 i'b. electric 2lb electric
0.75n thick water cut off en clay ton vertical spindle vertical spindle
gravel layer 4ffi.. 650 miJ<ed flOH purrps nill<ed flry,1 P'JlPS
� thick Drained 39, CXXlt/h each fD)t/h each
}>
z
9 14 Tsu Nippon Kokan K.K. 1970 R 75.0 75.0 500 . 0 10.2 2 . 1 Reinforced Reinforced Concrete sand Steep Flap 4
Repair Dock at tt.\15 Ccncrete 0.00-2.0m thick with over Steel wt= 900
?:'.: 0.75n thick water cut off and clay ton
'u water relief well
h system en gravel layer
� 450-6:0 thick Drained
CD
c 15 Kobe J'b.4 Kawasaki Heavy 1969 R 33 . 5 33 . 5 215.0 6.0 N/A Reinforced Reinforced Concrete sand- Steel Flap N/A 3Y,
r-
r- Industries Ltd Ccncrete Stene
m
-i
z
�
(!)
CD
CD 16 Sakaide i'b.l 1967 B 62.0 62.0 300. 0 5.9 N/A Reinforced Reinforced Concrete clay Steel Flap N/A 5 Exclusively for
Concrete on gravel 50-4:0 thick and building offshore
z0
Drained silt strucb.Jres
CJ)
U>
17 Sakaide i'b. 2 1968 R 72.0 72.0 4:0.0 7.9 N/A Reinforced Reinforced Concrete clay Steel Flap N/A 3Y,
Concrete on gravel layer 100- and
4:0 thick Drained silt
18 Sakaide i'b . 3 1972 B 75.0 75.0 420.0 6.2 N/A Reinforced Reinforced Concrete clay Steel Flap N/A 5
Concrete en gravel layer and
100-4:0 thick silt
Drained with water
relief well system
)>
V.ORID DRY lXlCKS BUILT SIN:E 19::0
)>
..... Ref Year Use Entrance iX1ck Effect- Depth Tidal Coostructioo Constructicn Soil Type of Type De- Rema."'ks
[\) N:>. L:x:aticn 0."1et' o:r Yan:l in of Width BarTel ive over ra.'1ge of Walls of Flooi- type Gate of !fain Watering (secoodary
fl0re Ser-vice Dxk Width Length Sill Design Fhi.lascphy PU!ps Tilre(hrs) puips)
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
JAPAN (Q:ntimed)
19 Tamano N:i . 1 Mitsui Zcsen O:>rp 1974 81 81 187 . 2 9.3 2.3 Reinforced Reinforced Ccocrete granite ffiXhi' /Hx9 9.5
�Tete etc.
al 01iba l'b. lA 1962 B 45.0 47.0 100.0 5.5 2.2 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete sand- Steel Flap 6.5
Ccncrete stcne
21 Qdba N:l.lB 1965 R 45.0 45.0 310. 0 5.5 2.2 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete sand- Steel FJ.l¥,l 114ffili' /Hx2 4
Ccncrete stcrie
�
)>
z 22 01iba !'b . 2 1968 B 72.0 72.0 400. 0 7.7 2.2 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete sand- Steel Caisscn 19aX:lli' /Hx2
9 Ccncrete oo gravel lqyer stcrie
2C!)..,l50
l thick with
;:: water relief' well

'o system
0
;z
23 Qrlba !'b.3 1973 B 72. 0 72.0 219.0 7.7 2.2 Reinf'orced Reinforced Ccocrete sand-
CD Ccncrete oo gravel layer' stone

c ZX)...450 thick with
r
r water relief' well
� system
z
(j)
�
Q)
Q) 24 Yura N:i . l 1973 R 65.0 65.0 350.0 9.5 2.5 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete rock Steel Fl!:IP Electrical Vertical 2.5
Concrete oo gravel layei- Mixed Flow Putp
z x
0
3'.l.cx.xrr? /Ii 3
°'
CU
25 Yoko.suka Sumi tmo Heavy 1972 B/R m.o .m.o !:ro.O 9.2 2.0 Reinf'orced Reinfor-ced Ccncrete vecy Steel Floating � N/A Th.ial entrance
Industries Ltd Ccncrete oo gravel layer- hard
Q:ipalra Shipyan:l 21XJ-700 thick clay
Drained
26 Toyahaski l',ariazash.i 1977 B 66.0 66.0 380.0 10.7 2.4 Reinfon::ed Reinforced Concrete fine
Aichi Zosen Ltd Ccncrete ro gravel layei- sand
Dmined
WORLD DRt rxx::KS BUILT SITO: 19::0
Ref Year Use fatrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal Constructirn Constructicn Soil Type of fype De- R6!0l'.i<s
No. Lccatirn O.i.ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive aver range of Walls of Floor 1;ype Gate of Main (secondary
N3me Service Dock Width Sill Desigp Fhllcoopey furps prnps)
(m) {m) (m) (m)
JAPAN (Ccntir:ued)
Z7 Tadotsu Hashihara 1975 B eo.o eo.o 38:).0 11 . 5 3.5 Reinforced Reinforced O::ncrcte clqy
Kagawa Zosen Ltd Ccncrete en gravel l"llfer sand
Drained
28 Oshirra Osaka 1975 B oo.o 00.0 53'3.0 13.0 3.3 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete rock
Naga.51'.i Zosen Ltrl O:ncrete layer
29 � MU � 1976 B 56.0 56.0 375.0 10.15 3.3 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete rock Steel Flap Vertical spindle 2.5 2 No. VS::: purrps
N::>. l Ccncrete o.an thick on axial flON purps lo:xni' /H
� 0.5n thick gravel layer 23CXXhi' /Hx3
Drained
;r:.
z
0 21) Nagasaki 1965 R 56.0 :'6.0 375.0 10.15 3.3 - ditto- -ditto- rock -ditto- Purp in camon 2.5 in crom:n
f'b. 2 wi th above dock with above
?::
'o 31 � 1900 R 38.8 41 . 0 276.6 9 . 33 3.3 Ccncrete Ccncrete 0.94m thick rock Steel caisscn Vertical spindle 4.0 1 [b. vs:: purrp
0 N::>. 3 l .2m thick oo gravel pU1p 48)if /H. Si.lb-
� �
1 purrp
Cl! l purrp roil' H
c
r-
r- 32 Koyagi 1972 B 100.0 100.0 790.0 11 . 65 3.3 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete rock Steel caisscn Vertical spindle 9.5 3 No. VSA purrJS
!!l No.I crncrete 1 . 5n thick en axial flow PLJTPS lo:xni' /H
z O. Sn thick gravel layer ro.cmrr /Hx3
�
<O � thick
Cl>
Cl> Drained
z 33 Koyagi 1973 R 100.0 100.0 400.0 11 . 65 3.3 Reinforced -ditto- reek Steel flap Vertical spindle 3.5 2 No. VSA ptrnpS
2(XXhi' /H
0
(l) ccncrete axial flow puips

U>
O.Em thick 40. CXXhi' /Hx4
34 Konnuku �HI Yol<oharra 1003 R ::0.8 !'0.8 332.6 8.84 2.0 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete clqy Steel flap Vertical spindle 2.0 2 No. VSA pl.JlpS
ccncrete 1.an thick oo gravel axial fl<M pu!pS lo:xni' /H
0. 5n thick layer Drained
35 1003 R !:D.8 !:D.8 57.4 8.84 2.0 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete clay Gate in Purps in cam= 2.0 Purps in camon
ccricrete 1 . an thick on gravel cmm:n with with above with above
a. Sn thick layer Drained above
WJRlIJ DRY JXC'i<S BUILT srra: 1900
)>
JAPAN (c.:ntirued)
:06 Homuku M:Il Yokoharra 1972 R ro.o ro.o 270.0 9.85 2.0 Reinfoixed Reinforced O:::ncrete clay Steel flap Purps in crnm:n 2.0 Purps i n =m:n
ccn::rete l.Qn thick en with above with above
gravel layer
31 1005 R 30.0 30.0 100.0 10.7 2.0 Steel sheet Reinforced Coocrete cla.y Steel flap Vertical sp:indle 2.0 1 No. VSA purp
piles l. cm thick oo aidal fle>N purps l<XXlli' /H
gravel layer l!'lX'Oii' /Hx2
38 K1.m31roto !'b. l Hitachi :&sa1 1973 ? 85.0 85.0 620.0 10.8 4.7 Reinforced Reinforced Ccncrete clay Steel caisson Electric vertical 10
:u Prof Nagaik Corporaticn 600-:nl 600-:nl on gravel flcm 3'.l. <XXlli' /HJ<2
Ariak� thick and layer Drained
;i.
z steel sheet with water relief
� piles well system
;i>- 39 No.2 1973 ? 85.0 85.0 :ni.o 10.8 4.7 -ditto- -ditto- cla.y -ditto- -ditto- 6
'o
0 40 Sakai !'b.l Hitachi Zasen 1966 B/R !"X>.O 56.0 400.0 7.8 0.3 Reinforced Reinforced Coo:te:re clay Steel flap Electric vertical 4
� Osaka Corporaticn ccncrete an-2.an thick with centrifugal
Osaka \llarl<s 2.lrn thick gravel lqyer 25. <XXlli' /HJ<2
Ol Drained
c
....
.... 41 !'b.2 1972 B/R 62.0 62.0 455.0 7.8 0.3 -ditto- -ditto- clay -ditto- Electric vertical 3
m
::!
z
�
"'
Q)
Q) 42 !'b.3 1900 B/R 100.0 100.0 lZl.O 9.3 0.3 Slcping !'nrm asphalt en clay Steel caisson
earth s:om. crushed
143
z greni te
0
°'
"' Innoshima Hitachi Z.OSen 1965 B 45.0 45. 0 227.25 11.3 3.5 Re:infoixed Reinforced Ccncrete silty ?
Hi.rcsh:ima Carporatioo en gravel en 12JO..- clay &
Jlb.3BD Innoshima Works 1300 thick sand over
Drained dock
llEN'iA
app app 3.&n Reinforced ccn-- Reinforced cxncrete Ge-rented

26 7.em crete 0.5-0.?m 0.&-0.9;n thick sands/coral
thick tied with tied with Macalloy over fine
M9callqy bars bars medl=e
sandstcne
�})Rill DR'I' rxx::KS BUILT SIN:E: 19:0
!Ref Year Use Entra.'1Ce Dock Effect- Depth Tidal Ccnstructioo Constructia; Soil 'fype of 'fype Re<narns
!lb. locaticn CMner or Yard in of Width Ba.""rel ive over t"dllge of Walls of F1oor type Gate of Main ( sc-cdary
cn
Nane Service Dock Width Sill Desigp Fhil�hy Purps pwps)
(m) (m) (ml (m) (m)
Ml\LAYSIA
Johore \\'alaysia Shipya..-U 8'.) 385 14 Flap gate

Bahru
MALTA
Valletta fiElta Drydocks R 62 65 ?BJ 9.2 17 .46Jt/hx3 lcrot/hx2

N::> . 6
�
)>
z
p
� r.rnrrro
"O
h
;z Ciudad ltadero '37 249 9.0 Anchored steel Reinforced ccoorete Floating
at M5L sheet piling o.an thick i. 7m thick steel
and steel under keel strip caisson
OJ
c sheet piled - Drained
r
r caf'ferdam
m
-I
z
.....
<O Veracruz B 36 36 269 5.7 M3!;s coocrete Gravity Floating 3 N::> .
°' steel in line
°' at MHW walls
caissa; sumersible
z
"'
0
"'
MIIDIB EAST
Dubai Dubai Dry Dock Co. R 66 '370 2.28 Reinforced ccn- Reinforced ca;crete Rock l?rq)ped 5 No. vertical
Dock No . l crete caissons 1 . 511 thick steel mixed flow pUtpS
- Drained flap gate to serve all docks
arranged in tv.o
purplxA.lses
Dubai Dubai Dry Ikx:k Co. R 100 525 2.28 Reinforced cm- Reinforced coocrete Rock l?rq)ped
Dock No.2 crete caissons 1 .511 thick steel
- Drained flap gate
Dubai Dubai Dry Dock Co. R eo 415 2.28 Reinforced cm- Reinforced ccncrete Rock l?rq)ped
Dock N::J . 3 crete caissons 1 . 511 thick steel
- Drained flap g;ite
)>
Bahrain f.sry 75 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete
......
(Jl concrete - Dra.ined
:J>
.... Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal Constructioo Constructioo Soil Type of Type De- Renarks
O'> l'b. Location e>.ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of M3.in Watering (secondary
Name Service Dock Width Sill Desigp fhlla;qIDy PL1!ps Till>3 (hrs) purps)
(m) (ml (m) (m) (m)
ffi:JllERLAN) ANl'Il..llS
Curacao Curacao Dry Dock 1971 47.70 48 200 8. 5 • 5 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete weathered Hinged 3 l'b. vert • 3
Caip. Inc. ccncrete - Drained rock floating 12,crot/h
t£JlERLN'1[6
Den Helder Dutch Royal Navy 1978 R 23 153 9 Reinforced Reinforced coocret e soil Hinged floating Covered dcrJ<
� coocrete - Gravity desilir! :iJlprove- caisson for frigates
)>
z ment med
9 Sloe- Kon rt11 "De Schelde" 1961 R 24 25.3 175 6.5 3 Reinforced Reinforced concrete sand Steel flap ) 3 !'b. vert. ) Purp r=n
Vlissingen Dock I ccncrete - Gravity d� ) spindle ) for
� ) 10,crot/h ) 2 docks
'u
h Sloe- Kon "1Y ''De Schelde" 1961 R 29.5 29.00 215 7.6 3 Reinforced Reinforced coocrete sand Steel flap ) )
� Vlissingen Dock II ccncrete Gravity desigp. ) )
Kon �1Y ''De Schelde" 1975 22 22 2)4 5 Covered dock

to
Vlissingen B/R Steel sheet Reinforced ccncrete mixed Hinged
c: Navy dock piles with coocrete piles floating for frigates
r caisson
r
gi
z Dok-en Werf- 3
Schiedam 1955 R 28.35 31 . 5 211 9.5 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete mixed ) 3 l'b. 2 ) Purp r=n
) horiz
�
<O !10atschappi j ccncrete - Gravity desigp ) for
"'
"' Wilb::n-Fyenoord NI/ caisscn ) cmtrif. ) 2 docl<S
Dock 6 ) 12,cx:ot/h )
z
) )
" Schiedam Dok-en Werf- 1956 R 28.35 31 . 5 216.4 9 . 5 3 Reinforced Reinforced c=rete mixed ) )
Hinged
&l M:latschappi j ccncrete - Gravity floating ) )
Wil b::n-Fyenoord NI/ caisson
Dock 7
Schiedam Dok-en Werf- pre ' 66 R 47.3 tl9 305 9.4 3 Reinforced Reinforced concrete sand 3 l'b. puirps 2
M3atschappij coocrete 6. 211 thick ancrored and 25, roJ t/h each
Wilin'l-Fijenoord with sheet to precast ccncrete gravel
N.V. Dock 8 piled backing piles
RosenbJrg Verolmz- 199'3 B 43.5 297.0 app 3 Reinfon:;ed Reinforced coocrete Hinged floating
(Scheur) l'b. 4 5.0 cmcr-ete 2.0-6.&n thick caissoo
at M3L min. wall - Gravity desilir!
thickness 2. Qn
�JJRlD 00\I ro::l<S BUILT SIN:::E 1950
f Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal Coostruction Coost:ruction Soil Type of Type Rerrarks
!'b. 1=ation CMner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of M3in (seccndary
Narre Service Dock Width length Sill DesillP Fhlloscphy Puaps pl.ITpS )
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
Ml:'� (Ccnt:inJej)
Rosenburg Verolme- 1962 R 36.0 230.0 app 3 Reinforced Reinforced cc:ncrete Hinged
(Scheur) l'b.5 8.0 a:ncrete 4.0-6.0n thick floating
at MSL - Gravity desillP caisson
Verolme- 1962 R 41.0 274.0 app 3 Reinforced Reinforced concrete Hinged

ll . O concrete 4. 0-6. On thick on floating
at MSL crnpression piles caisson
- Gravity desillP
�
;i.. Rosenburg Verollre- 1971 R 90.0 410.0 app 3 Reinforced Reinforced cc:ncrete Hinged
z (Scheur) !'b. 7 12.0 crocrete app 3.0n thick steel floating
9 at MSL app 3.0n teision/carpressim caisson
thick piles
�
'o
h Harlingen Frisian Dockyard 19:)7 B 30 30 145 6 2 Steel sheet Reinforced concrete sand
� piles
OJ
c
• Amsterdam Netherl andsche Dock 1956 R 36.6 39 . 50 245 8.4 Reinforced Reinforced coocrete sand
• en Scheepsba.!\\l- concrete app 5.0n thick
m
-i maatschapip j - Gravity desillP
z
'°
�
00
00
z
0
O>
w N:BJIM
Stord Steel arch

sliding g;ate
Kristiansand R 30.5 210 9 :?%
Kristiansand R a:J.4 137 6.3 2

il.Olll.D DRY lXJCKS BUILT SIN:E 1900
)>
.....
OJ
Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal Constru::tim Constructicn &:>il Type of Type De- Renarns
!'b . Lcx:aticn Ov.ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Flcxr type Gate of J\Bin Watering (secondary
Name Service IJcck Width � Sill Design Fhilcscphy PUips Tirre(hrs) puips)
(m) (m) (m) (m)
P.AKISTAN
Karachi Pakistan Irrlustrial 1959 R 27.4 27.4 190.8 7.8 3.0 Reinforced Reinforced caicrete fine St.eel floating 3 !'b. propeller 2Y, 2 !'b. bilge
DevelO[l'le'lt Corp. at ccncrete 1.2- l. 8n thick with sand caissm purps purps
!'b.l IJcck MM 3.an thick prestressed anchors 6, 6Xl t/h each 3rot/h each
!'b . 2 IJcck 1971 R 24.33 24.38 170.70 7.2 3.0 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete fine Steel floating
at M-111 o::ncrete min l . 511 thick with sand caisscn
prestressed anchors
�
)>
z
0
i::
'o roLAJI[)
b
� Gydnia Centroror'-lhlted B/R 42.5 239. 3 7.1 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete sand/ Steel flap 2 !'b. purps 4
Shipyan:ls cooc:rete 2.8-4.an thick cley 7 ,200 t/h each
CD 3.6m thick - Gravity
c
.-
.-
m
-i Gydnia Centrarol'.'-lhited B 70 38'.) 7.1 Steel sheet Reinforced o::ncrete sand 8 l'b. puips 8
N:J. 2 3,a::o t/h to
z
.... Shipyards IJcck piling with l. 7-2.411 thick
"'
00 - Drained 6,100 t/h each
00
relieving
platform/
gallery
z
0
"'
"'
WJRlll DRY ro::KS BUILT SIN::E 199:>
Ref
lib. Lxaticn 0...ner or
Name
f1:RlUll\L
Lisbm Lisnave 1970 B 54.0 54.0 300 7.55 3,30 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete miocenic Steel caisson 3 vertical spindle 4 2 filter purps
Tagus f'b.10 Dock ccncrete floor slab 0.911 thick silt hinge:! self purps lfilXl nf /H
estuary walls o,ron and keel beam; under'- clay prcpelle:l each
thickness floor drainage
and r.ccric-
rete gravi ty
wall£ O,OOn
thickness
:0 Lisbm Lisnave 1967 R 54.0 54.0 350 11 . 70 3.30 Reinforced Reinforced coricrete miocenic Steel flap 3 vertical spindle 2.5 2 filter purps
)> Tag.is No.11 Dock o:ncrete floor slab .911 thick silt purps lfilXl nf /H
z esruary gravi ty and keel beam; under clay each
9 walls LOO floor drainage
and 3.COOn
;::: thickness
'u
h Lisbm Lisnave 1967 R 42.0 54.0 263 11 . 70 3 . 30 Reinforced Reinforced cmcrete miocenic Steel flap 2.5 2 filter p.rrps
z
TagL1s !lb.12 Dock ccncrete floor slab .911 thick silt
estuary gravity and keel beam; under clay
Cl walls 1 . 00 floor drainage
c and 3.00n
r
r
m thickness
-i
z
� Lisl:x:n Lisnave 1971 R oo.o 97.0 5.3:) 12.00 3.30 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete miocenic Steel flap 3.0 2 centrifugal
"' Tagus [lb.13 Dock ccncrete floor slab . 9n thick silt filter purps
"'
"' b.rttrese
s s and keel l:ica-n; under
estuary clay 15'.X) nf /H each
and meta.lies floor drainage
z0 gabicns
m
VJ
Setuba1 Setenave 1974 B 75.0 75.0 420 6.50 3.10 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete hydraulic Re<rovable 3 SJRK vertical 2 KSB
Sado l'b.2:) Dock concrete slab and keel bo
..an sand iretalics 2000 each
estuary walls l .2:ln over reclalined area fill plus 2 KSB
and .70n (sand) purps l::a:J nf
thickness each
Setubal Setenave 1974 R 75.0 75.0 4::0 6.::0 3.10 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete hydraulic Steel flap 3 SORK vertical 2.5 2 !<SB PLl1PS
Sada l'b.21 Dock (17) ccncrete slab and keel beam sand spindle purrps 2000 ii /H each
estuary with over reclaimed area fill 3EOX> nf /H each plus 2 KSB
l:uttresses (sand) purps l:>:X>
nf /H each
SeUJbal Setenave 1974 R 55.0 55.0 3::0 10.00 3.10 Reinforced Reinforced ccncrete hydraulic Steel flap 3 s:lRK vertical 2 KSB purps
Sade l'b.22 Dock ocncrete slab and keel bean sarrl spindle purps 2000 nf /H each
estuary with over reclaimed area fill 3SXXl nf /H each plus 2 KSB
buttresess (sand) purps l::a:J
)> nf /H each
.....
CJ:)
1/XlRl.D Dffi' OCCKS BUILT SIN::E 19&>
)>
Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal Ccnstructicn Ccnstructicn Soil Type of Type De- Renarl<s
I\) l'b. Locatiai Owner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of M3:in Water:ing (seccndary
0 tare Service Dock Width J..ength Sill Desi!lTl Philosq:ihy PuJps Tlire(hrs) purps)
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
SilG\IUlE
Tuas Keppel Shipyard Ltd R 52 52 3)2 9 2.4 Reinforced ccn- Reinfol'Ced ca:icrete Steel 3 Jib. mixed flo.< 21;
Tenasek Dock at MSL crete with 0.8-l .2m thick flap pu!pS z:m'.)t/h
ccunterforts - Drained gate eoch
Tuas Keppel Shipyard Ltd R 00 335 9.4 2.45 ReinfOl'Ced ccn- Reinforced ca:icrete dense Steel 3 lib.
Rafiles Ib::k at �l:!JB crete 0.3-0.55 0.8-l .65n thick clayey flap
thick with - Drained silt gate
ccunterforts
� Sanbawang Sarbawang Shipyard Ltd 1975 R 64 65 384 8.0 Reinforced Reinforced o:ncrete Steel Centrifugal
)> Prenier Ib::k at ll'fMS ccncrete piled floip
z
p
Serbawang Seibawang Shipyard Ltd 39.6 42. 5 � 13 ll'ass ll'ass caicrete Steel Centrifugal
� King George VI Ib::k at !II-MS o:ncrete caissm
'u
b Singapore Slipwey 1982 R 20 20 lCO 3. 5 2.2 Sheet piled Reinfol'Ced ccncrete rrat"ine Steel 4 No. Flygt �
;z & Engineering Co (Pte) Ltd at MSL with relieving 0.92511 thick m clay flap sulmarsible puiµ;
platform steel piles - drained gate
OJ
c:
r
r 00 00 Efl.s:Dt/h totru
Tanjcng Hitactii Zcxsa1 R 35 6.0 a:mt/h total
� Qil ROOin DockYard (Pte) Ltd at LIJil
z
-' Channel
"'
co
co
Mitsubishi Singapore R 00 00 300 9.0 Steel 35. crot/hx3 2Y, lcrot/hx:2
Heavy Industries ( Pte) Ltd flap
z
0
gate
°'
(.:>
Jtll'.'CXlg JUl:"Q:lg Shipyard Ltd R � 56 3:0 5.64 39.9COt/h total
at Ll.Jil
\\QRUJ DRY IX:CKS BUILT Sm::E 19:0
Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal O::nsb:uctioo Coos1nlctioo S:lil 'fype of' 'fype De- Ranarl<s
l\b, Locatioo CJl..ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of Main Watering (seccndary
Narre Service Ilock Widlh Length Sill Design Fhilo;opcy Fl.Jrps Time(hrs) puips)
(m) (m) (m) {m) (m)
IDJlH l«llEA
Okpo Da..
"'VXJO Shipbuilding & B 131 131 529 Reinforced cm- Reinforced cmcrete rock Steel inverted 4 vertical mixed
Heavy Machinery Ltd crete CDlll1ter- o.s-1.an thick 'T' floating flow puips
forts - Drained caisson
Daew:io Shipbuilding 1983 B/R 81 81 3!50 10 Reinforced coo- Reinforced ccncrete rock Steel inverted 4
& Heavy M3ch:inery Ltd at M:iL crete 0.45-0.fm 0.8- 'T' floating
thick with - Drained caisson
OOJnterforts
Ulsan N:>.4 Hyundai Shipbuilding & B/R :B Ee 2SJ 8.0 4

Heavy Industries Co Ltd
�
)>
z l\b.3 B/R 92 92 00'.) 8.7 40.o:Dt/h total !'kD'.)t/h total
p
!'..'.
'o
h
z
SPAIN
Ol
c: cadiz 1975 386 4 No.
r
R 55.6 12.0 Reinforced con- Reinforced coocrete Steel flap
r at M3L crete caissons - Drained gate 24,CX::O each
gj
z
(Strutte:l)
"' 36
CD
El Ferrol l\stilleros del 1969 B/R :'>/.00 254 Chart D Reinforced con- Reinforced cmcrete sandy Steel flap Electric vertical
CD l\broeste SA -8.48 crete gravit;y gravit;y 5. ::on silt gate 3 side spil'.'dle centrifugal
dam 4.0J:n with boulders slate bearing pt.rrpS
z
"
"'
"'
ERI LAN<A
ColClltx) Colaitxl Dockyard 1985 R .a3 44 263 48.5 0.77 Reinforced cm- Reinforced ccncrete rock Steel flap 3 N:J. vertical <%
Ltd at LW crete 0.5n thick 0.5-1 .lm thick gate mixed flOll purps
with counter'- - Drained 14,CXXl t/h each
forts
\\ORl.D DRY DXKS BUILT Sil'O!: 19::0
)>
I\)
I\) Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effectr- Depth Tidal Ccnstructicn Ccnstructioo Soil Type of Type De- Re1Erl<s
lib. Locatioo Ol!.ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of !lain Watering (secoodary
Nooe Service Dock Width Length Sill Desi!?}'l fhilcsophy fu!ps Tbre(hrs) purps)
(rn) (rn) (rn) (ml (rn)
Uddevalla lkldevallavaret AB 100 400 Rock with cm- Reinforced concrete i.=k Steel
crete prctectioo 0.35n thick Floating
- Drained caissoo
Kockurs �ooiska 75 405 9 Steel sheet Reinforced concrete bculder

Verl<smi« AB piling with o.an thick cley/
relieving Drained with grUJt rrerl
platform injectioo belcm
�
)>
z Gothenburg Aredal Shipyard
9
Gothenl:urg Eriksberg 65.2 381.9 Rock with thin - Drained reek
�
"1)
concrete
CJ coating
z
CD
c
r-
r-
�
z '.lHAILAN)
....
co
O:>
O:> Bang}<ok Royal Thai Navy 1981 22.5 118.3 Steel sheet c.oncrete Um thick Steel Flap gates 1Y,
!Xlckyard piles with with anchors with buoyancy
z 2 l\b. Docks concrete t.q:J clarbers hinged
a>
0
at floor
....,
\\OOID DRY D:Xl<S BUILT SIN:,'E 19::0
Ref Year Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth TI.dal Ca:istructim Constructicn Seil 'fype of 'fype De- Remarks
!'b. U:>cati01 Owner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of Main Watering (secondary
Naire Service Dock Width Length Sill Desi@'I fhllosq>ey Purps Time(hrs) purps)
(m) (m) (m) (rn) (m)
lM'lEJ KThtD'.ll!
1 1'bM:h Shields Smith's Dock Co Ltd 1954 R 29.0 2-0.5 216.l 8.2 4.6 Sheet piled - Reinforced crncrete boulder Steel flap 2 No. electric horizontal 3 3 l'b. ancillary
No.8 Dock at slq:>e 20:1 1 .8 - 3 . &n thick cley gate-190t spindle centrifugal p.mps p.mps 0.3m dia
!IHllS Gravity 10,00J t/h each
2 Newcastle Swan H..tnter and 1995 R 32.0 34.7 217.9 8.8 4.6 Reinforced Ccncrete 3 .1 - 4 . '.h boulder Steel flap 2 lb. electric horizontal 2Y, 3 l'b. ancillary
(Wallsend) Wigtiam Rich--mlson at concrete thick - Gravity clay/ gate spindle centrifugal purps puips 0.3m dia
Ltd. lb.4 Dock !IHllS 3.&n thick sand 14,400 t/h each
3 South Shields Brigtiam & Ccmar1 19"6 R 28.9 28.9 217.9 6.4 4.6 !'recast C01Crete Reinforced crocrete boulder Steel flap 2 lb . electric vertical 4Y, 2 lb. ancillary
buttresess with 1 . 1-1.:ln thick with clay/ gate spindle centrifugal pLUpS purps 0.3TI dia
� insitu concrete H pile anchors soft 6,8XJ t/h each
)> between - Tied sand
z
p 4 Falm?uth Fa.1.m:uth Dock and 1958 R 39 . 6 39 . 6 289.0 11.0 Reinforced cuic- Moss coocrete reek Steel flap 3 lb. double entry, single 2%
Engineering Co Ltd at rete o.an thick awrox l . lm thick gate-s:::ot stage, split casing,
;:: Mi.I'S with reek anchors - Vented vertical spindle,
'o centrifugal purps
h 14,400 t/h each
;z
5 Inminghool H..m:>er D:lck and 1960 R 27 . 4 29.9 182.9 6.7-* Reinforced ccnc- Coocrete 4.lm thick sand/ Steel flap 2 lib. h:rizootal split 3'i:i *�ding en level
Ill Engineering Co Lt.cl 8 .2 rote 3.an thick reinforced under gravel gate casing centrifugal purps in >.et deck ccl:side
c keel strip-Gravity 6,8Xl t/h each 3 1'b. • 3TI dia
r
r ancillary purps
m
-i
z Jarrow The �tarcantile Dry
�
6 1960 R 25.9 28.3 182.9 7 .2 4.6 Steel sheet liass concrete boulder Steel flap 2 No. horizontal split 3Y, 2 tb • • 3m dia
(j) D:lck Co Ltd piling with casing centri:fUgal puips

GO at 3.fm thick cley gate ancillary pt.rrpS
GO !IHllS relieving Drained 6, 8X) t/h each
platform
z
0
°' 7 Hebbum Vickers ._. ..... . 't> 1962 R 44.2 44.2 2!'B .1 10.7 4.6 'lied re:inforced Mass ccncrete cley Steel flap 3 Jib. vertical spindle 2Y,
"'
(Sf>;'.'" '' ' -'�-::; Ltd at cmcrete 1 . 7m 7 . 3m thick over gate axial flCM purrps
l'b . 2 Dock M-!IB thick Gravity sand 548t 18, 3::0 t/h each
8 Greenck
c .Firth of Clyde 1964 R 44.2 44. 2 a:i4.8 8.2 3.1 Re:inforced crno- Ccncrete O.&n thick reek Steel flap 3 l'b. vertical prr,peller
Dry Dock Co Ltd at rete 3.lm thick l . lm thick under gp.te-5'Dt type 23,Z:O t/h each 2Y,
MlllJS keel strip-Drained
9 Belfast Harland & Wolff 1968 R :D.3 9'.l. 9 335 11.6 3.9 Steel sheet Reinforced ccncrete clay Steel flap 3 No . electric vertical 3� 3 !'b. ancillary
llHiB piling with 3.l-\3.4n thick with gate-647t spindle axial DCM purrps purrps lcm t/h each
relieving grcund anchors and 28, Ero t/h each underfloor clra.inage
platform pressure relief drains =54 t/h approx
)>
[\)
(;)
!i.ORlll DRY J:)XKS BUILT SIN:E 19:0
)>
!Ref Yli>.ar Use Entrance Dock Effect- Depth Tidal Ccnstructirn Constructirn �il Type of Type De- R�
f\)
.i::. l'b. I=atirn o...ner or Yard in of Width Barrel ive over range of Walls of Floor type Gate of Main Watering (secc:ndary
l'hre Service Ikx:k Width Length Sill Design Fhilceqol\)I Purps Ti!T>2(hrs) purps)
(m) (m) (m) (m ) (m)
UNITED KINGDOM ( Continued)
10 Belfast Harland & Wolff 1969 B 93.0 93.0 556 8.38 3.9 Reinforced crnc- Reinforced ccncrete clay Steel 2 l'b. vertical spindle 12 2 lb . underfloor
at rete L rn steel 1.8-2.311 fuick en caisscn electrically driven drainage pU1ps 135
Mi;/$ piles-Headwall drained broken mixed flCM pu1pS t/h each. 3 l'b.
tied reinforced rock fi 11-Drained 20. 5'.Xl t/h each dock floor puips
ccncrete HID t/h each
11 Nigg Bay Bro-.n & Root + 1974 B* 122 176 305 13.5 4.6 Slq:iing 1 : 1 : 5 Crushed granite sayj/ Concrete 4( +4 standby) 217 *far offshore
George W:i.npey & bituiai sand sand- caisscn 2Xhrn Flygt pU1pS structure
Co Ltd covered stale
12 SUnderland Sunderland Ship- 1975 . B 49 :o.o 181 5.47 4.4 Precast crnc- Reinforced ccncrete lime- Steel 2 l'b. 24" vertical Covered deck
:0
builders Ltd at rete panels, 0.22511 thick stale caisscn axial flCM pu1pS
� Pal.lien JIH>IS wal:ings and - Drained
z
colums
!:">
- Drained
� 13 Birl<.enhead Cannell Laird 1961 R 42.7 45.l 289.6 10.3 9 . 2 Rock (0.15-n thick ccno- sayj/ Sliding 2 l'b. harizcntal shaft
,,
h (Shiprepairers ) Ltd at (as excavated) rete with 0.45 thick stale steel centrifugal purrps
� Princess Dry Dock llf'f;B keel strip caisscn 24,:oJt/h each
- Vented cn ciro-
ular tra:k
Ill
c:
r 14 Devooport Ministry of Defence 198J R* 21 147 Reinforced ccno- 'Ihin reinforced rock Steel flap 2 l'b. ** 4
r approx * Sul::rnarine refit
m 14 Dock lQn rete 1 . 25-n cx:ncre te Drained gate (ll ,3:0t/h ea:h) ** l?\.IJpha.lse serves
-i
z 15 Dock thick 1>.1th 1=k up ties ( lOOt) both docks
-
(.0
()) 15 Stmderland Steel flap furphcuse for l'b. 2
()) T W Greenwell & Co 1952 R 26.7 28.6 205.7 8.3 4.5 Reinforced cooo- Reinforced ccno- rock 1%
Ltd. No . l Dry Dock at rete 1. 2-4. 3n rete 1.4-1 . :rn gate deck used
z Mi\$ - Drained - Drained
0
"'
<.:> 16 Swansea Duke of Edi.nbu:rWi 19$ R 28 2:)4 6.4 Reinforced cone- Reinforced ccno- cx:ncrete Caicrete (Siared p.npha.ise ) 2Y, with ship
Dry Dock at rete rete - Gravity caisscn in d::x;k
llORLD DRY DOCK BUILT SlllCE 1950
Count ry : U .S . A .
Sheet l o f 3
REF YEAR USE ENTRANCE DOCK EFFECT- DEPTH TIDAL CONSTRUCT! ON C O!lSTRUCTI Oil SOIL TYPE OF TYPE OF DE- REHARKS
NO. LOCATION OWNER OR YARD Ill OF WIDTH BARREL IVE OVER RANGE OF \/ALLS OF FLOOR TYPE GATE MAIN PtmPS WATERING ( SECO!IDARY)
NA.ME SERVICE DOCK WIDTH LENGTH SILL DESIGH PHILOSOPHY TIME PUl!PS)
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (HRS)
l Bangor U . S . Navy 1981 R 32 . 07 27 .43 2 18 . l 16 . 16 3 .05 Reinforced Concret e , Reinforced Concrete , Sand Floatill8 3-Electric Driven, 2 .75 2-Electric
Washington TRIDENT \/EST Varies from 4 .87m 4 .87m to 5 . 79m, and Caisson, 5 4 , 000 GPM, Driven,
Refit Facility at Floor to 2 .74m G ravity Type , Gravel Rectall8ular Mixed Flow, 2 , 500 GPM
at Service Gallery Soil Supported Box Typ e , Vertical
Steel
2 Charleston U . S . Navy Rebuilt R 32 .31 28.35 176 .8 1 1 . 46 l . 07 Reinforced Concret e , Reinforced Concrete , Marl Floatill8 2-Electric Driven, 2 .75 2-Electric
SC Charleston 1968 varies from 3 .28m l . 22m und er Keel, Caisson, 83 ,000 GP!l, Driven,
Naval Shipyard at Floor to 3 .20m Partially Relieved Rectall8ular 48" , 550 HP 2 , 000 GPf.!,
DD#2 at Copill8 Soil Supported Box Type , 8 " , 250 HP
Steel
3 Charleston U . S . Navy 1964 R 40 .24 33 . 69 193 . 6 ll .28 l .07 Reinforced Concrete , Reinforced Concrete , Marl Floatill8 3-Electric Driven, 3 2-Electric
SC Charleston 3 .35m 2 .74m under Keel, Caisson, 65 , 000 GPM, Driven,
Naval Shipyard Partially Relieved , Rectall8ular 42" , 700 HP 10 , 000 GPH,
DD#5 Soil Supported Box Type , 14" , 150 HP
Steel
4 Norfolk U . S . N avy Rebuilt R 2 9.57 23 .28 148 .4 l l . 37 0.85 Reinforced Concret e , Reinforced Concrete, Sand , Floatill8 1-Electric Driven, 2 .7 5 2-Electric
Virginia Norfolk Naval 1966 Sloped , 5 .Sm at l . 06m und er Keel, Clay Caisson, 45 ,000 GPM, 42" , 600 HP , Driven,
Shipyard Floor to 4 .89m at Partially Relieved,. and Recta!J8ular 1-Electric Driven, 4 , 500 GPM,
DD#2 Copill8 Pile Supported Shells Box Type , 5 0 , 000 GP!l, 42" , 600 lil' , 12 " , 125 HP
Steel 1-Electric Driven,
96 , 000 GPH, 42" , 800 lil'
Philad elphia U . S . Navy Rebuilt R 26 .04 23 .26 131.7 8 .41 l .70 Reinforced Concret e , Reinforced Concrete , Sandy Floatill8 2-Electric Driven, l.5 2-Electric
5
Pennsylvania Philad elphia 1956 0 .9lm et Floor, 0 .762m under Keel, Clay Caisson, 34 , 000 GPM, Driven,
Naval Shipyard 0 . 4 lm above alter, Fully Relieved , Rectall8uler 36 " , 500 HP 7 , 500 GPf.!,
DD#l 2. 9m et Copill8 Pile Supported Box Type, l6" , l25 HP
Steel
6 Kittery U . S . Navy Rebuilt R 23 .78 18 . 9 148.3 l l . 28 2 . 44 Reinforced Concrete , Reinforced Concret e , Bedrock Floeti!J8 2-Electric Driven, 2 2-Electric
Maine Portsmouth 1962 l . 92m 3 .54m, Gravity Type , Caisson, 30,000 GPM, Driven,
Naval Shipyard Rock end Pile Rectall8uler 36 " , 350 HP l , 500 GPM,
DD#3 Supported Box Type, 8", 40 HP
Steel
7 Bremerton U . S . Navy 1962 R 52.59 5 4 . 88 35 1 .2 1 6 . 23 3 . 29 Reinforced Concrete , Reinforced Concret e , Sand Floetill8 4-Electric Driven, l.5 3-Electric
lleshill8ton Puget Sound Column Support ed , 2 . l3m, end Caisson, ll4,000 GPJ.I, Driven,
Naval Shipyard 3 .66 et Floor, Fully Relieved , Sandy Rectell8uler 54 " , 1 , 500 HP 15 , 000 GPM,
DD#6 8 .84m et Copill8 Soil Supported Gravel Box Type, 20" , 400 HP
Steel
?. '!{O"t:i \:
8 Sturgeon Bey Ship- 1976 B/R 42 . 68 42 . 68 353 7 . 92 l .28 Reinforced Concrete , Reinforced Concrete, Coarse Hill8ed 2-Electric Driven, 7.5 2-Electric
Bay, Wi s . buildill8 Corp. Sloped 0. 9lm to 0 .76m, Send Gate, 28 , 000 GPM, Driven,
0 . 305m Fully Relieved, and Steel Vertical 2 , 000 GP!-!,
Soil Supported Gravel Vertical
Notes: B•Bui ldill8; R•Repeir ; B/R•Bui lding and Repair
This information is taken from existill8 documentation which i s approved for Public Release end is in the Public Domain.
WORLD DRY DOCK BUILT SINCE 1950
C ountry : U . s .A .
Sheet 2 of 3
YEAll USE EJITRANCE DOCK EF - DEPTH TI DAL C OIISTRUCTI O!i C ONSTRUCT I Oll SOIL TYPE OF TYPE OF DE- REMARKS
LOCATI O!I OWNER OR YAllD Ill OF WI DTH BARREL I OVER RANGE OF WALL S OF FLOOR TYPE GATE MAll! PUMPS WATERil!G ( SECOllDARY )
NAME SERVIC E DOCK WIJJ.l'H L SILL DESIGN PHILOSOPHY TH!E PUJ.IPS)
(m ) ( m) ( (m) (m) (HRS)
9 Sparrows Bethlehem 1971 B - 4 5 . 43 329 . 5 7 .36 0 . 335 · l . 67m Diame t e r , Reinforced Concrete , Unknown Floating 2-Electric Driven, 18 )-Electric
Point , MD 17 , 800 GPM Driven ,
1�
St eel Corp . Prestressed 1 . 22m,
C oncrete Cylind e r Fully Relieved , "� � - :::;:;, 3 . 50 0 GPH
Piles Soil Suppo rted Box Type ,
St e e l
10 G roton DD#l, General 1963 B/R 2 1 . 03 22 . 17 159.6 1 0 . 15 0 . 914 Sheetpile C el l s , Reinforced Concrete , Bedrock Hinged Gat e , 2-Electric Driven, 3.5 4-Electric
C o nnecticut Dynamics , Filled with Sand 0 Steel 5 0 , 000 GPM, Driven,
Elect ric Boat and G ravel Fully Vertical 2 , 00 0 GPM,
Division I S o i l Supported Vertical
ll Groton DD#2 , General 1968 B/R 2 6 .85 2 9 . 167 190 .85 9 .7 5 0 . 914 C el l s , Reinforced Concrete , Bedrock Hinged G at e , 2-Electric Driven, 5 4-Electric
C o nnecticut Dynami c s , with Sand 0 . 914m Steel 3 0 , 000 GPM, Driven,
Electric Boat and G ravel Fully Relieved , Vertical 2 , 000 GPM,
Division Soil Supported Vertical
12 G roton DD#5 , General 1977 B 3 3 . 91 2 9 .42 188 . 2 11.7 0 . 914 Sheet}'ile C ells Eart h , Floating Bed rock Floating 2-24" Air Lift 92 1-12" Air
Connecticut Dynamic s , C o fferdams, Platform within Caisson, Pump s , 8000 GPM Lift Pump ,
Electric Boat 1 9 . 83m Diamet e r , Super- s t ructure Rectangular 640 GPM
Division Filled with Sand Soil Support ed Box Type ,
and Gravel Steel
13 G eneral 1958 B 37 .4 38.32 264 . 2 4 . 87 2 .8 9 Sheetpile C ells Reinforced Concrete , Fine Hinged Gat e , 2-Electric Driven, 13 2-Electric
Dynamic s with Sand and l .22m, Sand , Steel 12 , 000 GPH, Driven ,
Quincy Division Gravel F i l l , and Fully Relieved , Trace V e rtical 3 ,800 and
DD#6 Steel Bulkh eads Soil Supported of Clay 2 , 000 GPH
14 Quincy G ene ra
I ""·-"-' "Q
l 1958 ll 44 . 8 1 44 . 87 289 . 8 4 . 87 2 .8 9 Steel Eulkheads Reinforced Concre t e , :Fine
l�!:;
ed Gat e , 2-Electric Driven, 8 2-Elect ric
Mass .
, -, l . 22m, Sand , 12 , 000 GPM, Driven,
! Quincy Division Fully Relieved , Trace Vertical 5 , 800 and
I DD#7 S o i l Suppo rted of Clay 2 , 000 GPM
15 General 1958 B 38 .2 38.22 264 . 9 4 . 87 2 .8 9 Sheetpile C ells Reinfo rced Concrete , Fine · Hinged Gat e , 2-Electric Driven, 13 2-Blectric
Dynamics with Sand and l . 22m , Sand , St eel 12 , 000 GPM, Driven,
Quincy Division Gravel F i l l , and :Fully Relieve d , Trace Vertical 3 , 80 0 and
DD#S St e e l Bulkhead Soil Supported of C lay 2 , 000 GPM
C e l ls Reinforced Concret e , l �i
lfu�;,
16 Quincy 1975 B 44 , 7 44 . 7 9 266 . 6 4 . 87 2 . 89 Fine nged Gat e , 2-Electric Driven, 10 . 5 2-Elect ric
Mass . with and Fully Relieved , Send 5 0 , 000 GPM, Driven,
Division Grave l Fill So i l Suppo rt ed Vertical 2 , 000 GPM
l
Notes : B=Building; R=Repai r; B/R=Build ing and Repair
Thi s informat i o n is taken from existing documentation which i s approved for Public Release and is in the Pub lic Domain.
WORLD DRY DOCK BUILT SINCE 1950
Count ry : U .S . A .
Sheet 3 of 3
-- -
REF YEAR USE EJITRA!ICE DOCK EFFECT- DEPTH TIDAL C Ol!STRUCTI Oll C O!ISTRUCTI OI! SOIL T!PE 01'
no.
Tll'E OF DE- RE!IARKS
LOCATI OJI O\niER OR YARD Ill OF ill llTH ilARREL IVE OVER RAJlGE OF WALLS OF FLOOR TYPE GATE MAIN PUHPS WATERillG ( SEC OJ/DARY )
NA.ME SERVICE DOCK Wl lY.l'H LENGTH SILL DESIGN PHILOSOPHY '.i'HIE PUJ.!PS )
(m ) (m) (m ) (m) (m) (HRS)
17 Quincy General 1975 B 44 .7 44. 7 9 6

26 . 6 4 . 87 2 . 89 S t e e l Sheetpile Reinforc ed C oncret e , F i ne Hinged Gat e , 2-Electric Driven, 10.5 2 -E l ec t ri c
Maas. Dyne.mic e C el l s vi t h Sand Fully Reli eved , Sand Steel 5 0 , 000 GPM, Drivenp
Quincy Div ision and Gravel Fill Soil Supported Vert i c al 2 , 000 GPM
DD#l2
,, ,1. I nga lls

18 1972 })
iH """""'_;,,..-<--
2 2 .7 4 26.52 156 . 1 10.5 0 .44 Stoel Sheetpile Reinforced Concret e , Silty Hinged Gat e , 2-Elect ric Driven, 3-12 2-Elec tri c
Shipyard C el l s , Filled l . 16m, Sand Steel Driven,
30, 000 GPM each ,
with Sarni and Fully Relieved , Vert i cal 2 , 000 GPM
Cravel Soil Supported
19 San N ational Steel 1976 ll 5 1 .2 5 5 4.8 8 304.87 1.71 Steel Reinforced Concret e , Float ing 1-El ect ric D riven , 21 2-1000 GPM
l'o 1 H '<'!'n' -
6 .40 Soft
Vert i c al
Ship Building Cells, 0 . 609m, to Gate, Not a 1,800 GPM,
& Dry Dock C o . with Sand and Fully Relieved, F i rm C a isson Vertical Turbine
DD#l
G rave l S o i l Supported Clay
20 Newport News Newport Neva Rebuilt il/R 35 . 97 38 .2 6 2 62 . 67 9.56 0 . 798 Reinforced Reinforced Concrete, Marl F l oat i ng 2-Electric Driven, 1.5 I-Electric
Virginia Ship Buildi il8 1959
Concret e , 0 . 635m, C a i aeon 115 , 000 GPM, 60", Driven,
II: Dry Dock C o .
Slant e d , Fully Relieved , ::�� •a"!>" 600 HP 2 0 " , 600 GPJ! ,
DD#2
Vari ea from O .83t Soi l Supported Box I-Electric
to l . 7 0m
21 Newport News N ewport Jlews Rebuilt ll/R 1 9 . 93 2 l .34 156 .4 1 0 . 06 0 . 7 98 S t e e l Sheetpile Reinforced Concret e , Marl Float ing 1-Electric Driven, 3.0 2-3" SubDe rsible
Vi rgini a Ship Building 1980 aod Reinforced 0 . 915m, Caisson, 60" and
& Dry Dock C o .
Concrete Fully Relieved , Rectangular 1-Electric Driven.
DD#3
Soil Supported :Box Type , 20·
St e e l
22 N ewport News Nevport News 1981 ll/R 21.7 2 2 .86 160 . l 1 0 . 06 0 . 7 98 1 . 67m Diamet e r , Reinforced Concre t e , Ma rl Float ing 2-Electric Driven, 3 .78 2-Elect ric
Vi rginia Ship iluild ing
Prestreaaed o . 915m, Caisson 25 , OOO GPM, 36" Driven,
& Dry Dock C o .
C o nc ret e , Fully R e l i eved , Rectangular Mixed Flov, 200 HP 2 , 000
DD#4 Cylind ri c a l P i l e s S o i l Supported ilox Type , 16" f
Steel 2 5 HP
23 Newport News N ewport l!ewa

Virginia Ship Builditl(!;
1976 }) 75,3 76.22 491 .77 9 . 93 I 0 . 798 l . 67m Dirunet e r , Reinforc ed C onc re t e , Marl Float ing 8-Electrie Driven , 13 1-Electric
Prest reseed 0 . 915m, Caisson, 1 1 , 600 GPM, Drive n ,
II: Dry Dock C o . Concrete Fully Relieved , R e ct angula r Mixed Flow, 2 0 0 HP 1 , 900 GPH,
DD#l2 Cylind e r Piles S o i l Supported Box Type , 100 HP
Steel
24 Tampa Tampa 1978 B/R 45 . 5 2
lilij ""'"
45 . 5 2 27 6. 5 7 . 87 0 . 314 S t e e l Sheetpile Reinforced Concret e , 4-Electric Driven, 4 2-Electric
Florida Shi pyard Inc .
C e l l s and Fully Reli eved , Steel 30,000 GPM
Reinforced Soil Supported 1 , 200
C oncrete
-
e
'" ..
Not e s : B•llui lding; R•Repa i r ; ll/R•Building and Repair
This information is taken from existing documentat i o n which is spprovea for Public Release and i s in the Public Domain .
APPENDIX " B"
STRUCTU RAL ANALYSIS OF GRAVING DRY DOCKS

BY THE FINITE ELEMENT M ETHOD (*)
by
M:tliuA: ff. Ml, Ge.o:tecluti.eal Engineui.ng s�.Na.vat faeU.l..t.i.u Enginee.Wlg

c_,m Headq�, AJ.vc.andtia., VA !f33f
lU.c.had. YACllNlS, Ch.ie.6 Eng.br.e.e.t, Na.vat faei.Ut,i.u Engineui.ng
c_,m HeadqutVttM.6, AJ.�.ia. VA 22332
E-tnu.t fll. 8ROOKS, 'Rue.Mch Sta.66 , Va.v.id Tayto.Jt Na.vat Skip 'RUe.Mch 8 De.11e.lo,,..e.n.t Ce.n.tM,
Bethuda., "" 20140
STRUCTURAL TYPES OF DRYDOCK
Graving drydock structural analysis by the finite The gra\'ing drydocks are constructed on the shoreline.
element method is described . Structural and geotechnical
They are, generally, e mbedded i n the ground to a depth of
parameters, which are important in setting up structural
models are discussed. Loads include static load, the 50 to 70 ft, the width ranging from 100 f t to 1 60 ft and
earthquake induced dynamic load, and the ship weight .
the length from 800 to 1 200 ft. Since each case is different
The analytical method is useful for evaluation of drydock
stability and in certifying the safety of drydooks. in shape, size, and type of backfill soil and drydock struc
ture, the formulation of the finite element model cannot
be standardized. The type of drydock used depends on what
is needed to neutralize the water pressure (3). The degree

{
INTRODUCTION to which the water pressun must be relieved determines
which of the following three types of drydock is used
A structural analysis for gra\'ing drydocks has been

(1) Full Hydrostatic - A drydock is classed as being fully
made using a NASTRAN finite element method (FEM) com
hydrostatic if there is no relief drainage system that
puter program ( 1 ,2). The purpose of this analysis is to
lowers the natural hydraulic head on the walls or floor.
e\-aluate the safety of drydocks which are subjected to
The full buoyancy of the drydock must be resisted by
static soil and hydrostatic pressures, as well as the appli
one or more of the following : (a) weight of concrete,
cable updated earthquake i nduced dynamic loads and \'arious
(b) weight of soil behind the dock and/or friction of
shi ps' weights. In the past, analysis was generally made
the earth on the sidewall; and (c) piles installed to
using concepts of elementary strength of materials and
support the floor slab.
simplified elasticity theories. Factors such as the soil/
(2) Fullr Relie\·ed - A fully relie\'ed drydock is one which
structural interaction, the restraint from the surrounding
has a drainage system to eliminate or reduce the
structures, and the rigidity and stress-strain characteristics
hydrostatic pressure o n the floor a n d walls.
of the drydock were not fully included in the analysis.
Because of the complexity of the drydock structure, the (3) Partially Relie\·ed - A partially relie\'ed drydock pro\·ides
analysis should begin setting up structural models which relief for the floor only. Its use reduces the amount of
can accurately include structural and geotechnical para floor concrete and minimizes difficulty i n the cofferdam
meters for finite element numerical analysis. The accuracy to be used temporarily during construction. It features
of the results can then be checked through a comparison the following : (a) cutoff wall to surround the floor
of the d i fferent models used in the analysis. This paper area only; (b) filter course under the floor; and (c)
describes the analytical procedures for drydock stability holes in the floor for the water seepage flow into the
analysis, and includes examples of the results. The results drydock chamber.
of the analysis are used in certifying the safety of dry
docks.
MODES CAUSING PROBABLE DRYDOCK FAILURE
Structural analysis of a drydock must include the

l * J 4th lntvr.nati.ona.l. Con6M.e.nee.
on AppUe.d NumeJt.lcal
Mode-llng, Ve.c. 27-29, 1 984, T�, Ta.iwan, R.O.C. applicable earthquake induced seismic load as this load is
PJAN.C. - A l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63 B - 1

critical to the stability of the drrdock. In general, there (a) Under the earthquake loading, one side o f t h e dock wall
are two types of drydock failure mopes which may be will experience active earth pressure as well as earth
caused by seismic loads ( 4) : quake induced pseudo-static pressure. These two pressures
may be assumed to be in- or out-of-phase;
A. FLOAT AND TILT (b) The opposi t e side wall will deYelop semi-passh·e earth
pressure, which · may be assumed to be equal to or

The maximum uplift pressure under the floor slab higher than t h e at-rest earth pressure;
occurs when the dock is empty. The uplift stability of the
(c) In the passi\·e side wall, a series of horizontal linear
drydock mar reach a critical rnlue if the uplift pressure
springs can be modeled to simulate the lateral soil
during earthquakes exceeds static value due to increase in
stiffness induced by the earthquake; and
pore pressure caused by the shaking. If pore pressure of
(d) In the static loading case, the drydock walls are subject
the backfill behind the wall were to increase to nearly the
to at-rest earth pressure and the structure is in static
total pressure, effective stresses and shear strengths would
.
equi librium.
approach zero and soil liquefaction would occur. A net
uplift would result, causing the drrdock to float and/or
tilt. Howe,·er, if soil liquefaction is unlikely, then this type

2. flg�o.Jltat;ic P.t�e.. Since the drydock may be
either a full h>·drostatic type, a fully relieved type or a
of failure would not result.
partially relieved type, the uplift hrdrostatic p r essure mar
or may not act at the floor slab even when the dock is
B. OVERSTRESS AND/OR OVERTURN OF DRYDOCK WALL
empty. · Figure 3 shows a ful i hydrostatic type with the
uplift force.
Should an earthquake occur when the dock is e mpty,
the ultimate moment capacity of the drydock wall ma}· be
exceeded, causing overstressing and/or O\'erturning if the
wall is considered to be a "cantile,·ered" structure. This is
the usual assumption made, which calls for a construction
joint between the drydock wall and the floor slab. Obviously
the "cantilevered" structure approach is an o\·erly simplified
assumption.
STRUCTURAL AND GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS
F i gures 1 and 2 show two examples of drydock cross

Typical Cross Sec tion
sections which ha\·e been used in the analysis. Backfill soil
properties are also shown in Figure 2.

,.
· Granular Fi l l . 0 to 36 ' deep

· · · . : Yt• l 2 0 lb'/c . f . ; �30° ; c•O
. . . .
rtilUy
h!!!......ll '!Unn<l
Figure 2. An Example of a Drydock Cross -Sect ion

Pro lws•·1loodi1>& 'llmod and Backfill Soil Charac teris tics
�&RT IA.\. �fCTION P-..ll TIAL '!>eCTION
n ,.,...,.., aoow,otW'aTt•..w:. � lflf wv..0•1•·nc •c&.,t.r w1.u..
==:·;:.�=�="::C'ta.. f t'UIQPiN' ftfio&.T.
Figure 1 . An Ex1mpl e of • Drydock Cros s ·S�c tion
3. VJtgdock FloOJt SUbg.tade. Uodulu.4. The floor slab is

generally a reinforced concrete, high rigidity structure
supported by competent foundation soils. The ultimate

A. ST ATIC LOADS
bearing capacity of the foundation soil can be est i m ated
by
1 . La:teJtal Eiuth P.t�e.. To establish lateral earth
pressures acting against the walls, the follbwing assumptions
are made :
8 - 2 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N . BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

where
F Friction force adjusted for earthquake excitation
p Resultant of the lateral soil pressure
Ship in Dock (Mid s hip Lo a d in g )
tano soil/drydock wall friction earthquake force
Wi thou t Ea r t hquake Load ing
Correction factor for earthquake force
a Horizontal seismic coefficient
h
c A constant, use 1 0 to satisfy the following
1 = 1 .0 for a =O; l=O for a =0.35
h h
,. , .
Note that .the P \'alue may be an acth·e force, an
at-rest force, or a passive force. From the abo\·e equation,
Yi-
I
l\t 1Wt.f.
the earthquake versus drydock wall friction factor is as
follows :
�
..,.,-.,7.,T .. -,
,,.
. , ._...._..J... E .,,-
1 :..
. ...1 I "L
,__'J;
.1-L__L__J__ h ,.,.. , ,.ur
''.J---',___-;:
/- 37 a (g)
h
Figure 3 . A S truc tu r a l Mo d e l for Fini te E l ement o.o l .O

Ana ly s i s • A Ful ly Hyd ros ta t i c Type 0. 1 0 0.92
0. 1 5 0.86
0.20 0.78
where 0.30 0.39
q ulti mate bearing capacity
uit
c cohesion of the foundation soil The F rnlues which represent the drydock wall friction
N N bearing capacity coefficients force, modified for earthquake load, are used i n the finite
e' q
y effecti,-e weight of overburden element analysis.
D depth of the floor slab.
3. Soil lnvr.t.ia. Fo-tce. For earthquake conditions, an
Deflection of a simulated elastic foundation which equi\'alent pseudo-static loading was used to include the
support the floor slab is general l y not to exceed d=0.50 dynamic loads. An effective horizontal surface acceleration
inch. Considering that a safety factor of F5 is assigned to of K is selected for each of the loading cases. To calcu
h
the bearing capacity of the foundation so il, then the sub late the pseudo-static earthquake pressure acting against
grade modulus, K5 can be estimated by the drydock wall, a computer program was deYeloped. The
method was adapted from NAVFAC DM-7.2 (5), Earthquake
Loading section. The dynamic earth pressure distribution
was modified to make the resultant force act at a point
two-thirds of the wall height up from the base.
B. EARTHQUAKE LOADS
C. CRANE RAIL SUPPORT AND CONCRETE TIE BEA M ·

I. Ea.U:hquak.e Ct.i.:t.e.tia.. The drydock shall be con
RESTRAINT
sidered adequate' if it can resist w ithout collapse the forces
associated with an earthquake of magnitude such that there
is an 80 % probabil ity of not being exceeded in 50 years.
Because of the uncertainties inrnh-ed in seismlcity ernlu
ation, and the difficulty and cost of upgrading existing
structures, remedial measures usually are not deemed
necessary if the structure' s capacity to resist the force of
an earthquake is equal to at least 75 % of the demand
associated with a postulated earthquake. This criterion is
adopted for the drydock stability analysis.
2. llla.U Invr.t.ia. tUld F.ti.d.ion Fo-tcu. An additional

horizontal load of the drydock wall generated by the
earthquake load is added to the wall stability analysis. It
is the gravity force of the drydock wall times the horizon
Figure 4. Crane Track Found a tion and Concrete
tal seismic coefficient. Applying the Coulomb earth pressure Tie Beam
theory and considering the euect of earthquake excitation,
the wall friction force for \'arious ground accelerations is
calculated by the following equation Figure 4 shows the connection of crane track foun
dation and concrete tie beam. The tie beam stiffness is
F P tan.S I calculated by
P.l.A.N.C. • A.1.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 8 - 3

where
concrete tie beam stiffness

140 '
steel reinforcement cross section
Young' s modulus of the steel reinforcement
tie beam length
S tie beam spacing
These
because the beams

concrete tie beams are included in the analysis
would provide a restraint to the lateral r.•7.6 1t1p1 i -su 1t1p1ftt21tt r,•t . 1
s.02 luf
ltlp•
)
,
loads. i •17.50 lr.lp•fft
,
Kt•14S kip• f f •
Figure 5 . An Example of Finite Element Model
toad Case
LOADING TO BE USED IN STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
The concrete tie beams at the top corners of the wall are
A. SHIP LOADING CONDITIONS
modelled by horizontal springs with a computed stiffness of
K • For the earthquake load cases, the right side wall of

8
The ship types to be considered are a submarine,
the backfill is modelled, in addition to the lateral resisting
destroyer, frigate, cruiser, or carrier, depending upon the
pressure, by a series of horizontal · springs. The lateral soil
capacity of the drydock. The blocking loads are based on
pressures, wall friction force, hydrostatic uplift force, if
the assumption that the largest ship that will fit in the
any, and ship line loadings for the various cases are input
drydock will generate the heaviest loading per foot of dock.
as equivalent nodal loads which are determined using a
The blocking loads for the earthquake case are determined
pre-processor.
by applying a horizontal load of seismic coefficient (a )
h
To determine the friction force to be applied at
multiplied by the ship displacement at the approximate
nodal points along the bottom, an initial analysis may be
center of gravity of the vessel. The overall capacity of
performed with the friction force equal to zero. The
the dock may range from 25,000 to 80,000 long tons.
normal forces along the slab bottom are then determined
from the spring displacements determined by this analysis.

B. CASE OF LOADING CONSIDERED
These net normal forces are multiplied by the coefficient
of friction to obtain the friction forces which are included

Generally, five to six cases of drydock loading con
in the final analysis.
ditions are included in the analysis. The main loading con
Output from the NASTRAN analysis is in the form of
ditions considered are :
displacements and local clement stresses (crx ' cry ' i:xy )
L L L
(a) empty drydock with an earthquake load;
at the nodal points. The stresses were input into a post
(b) flooded dock with an earthquake load;
processor (ISOSTRS) which output the average stresses at
(c) ship in the dock without an earthquake load;
the nodal points in a global coordinate system ( crx ' cry '
g g
(d) ship in the dock with an earthquake load.
i:xy ) along with the corresponding major and minor prin-
g
Loading condition (d ) may include the case of the cipal stresses and maximum shear stress. ISOSTRS also
ship on center or off center; aft keel line or aft quarter flags all stresses which exceed prescribed values. A second
loading; midship loading; or with a higher earthquake load. post-processor (PLTSTRS) is used to interactively generate
computer graphs of these six stresses versus positions along
essentially horizontal or vertical lines through the structure,

STRUCTURAL NUMERICAL ANALYSIS - FINITE ELEMENT
for example, the top of the dock floor slab or inface o f
METHOD
the dock wall.
A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
B. FORMULATION OF FINITE ELEMENT MESH
The drydocks are analyzed for different cases of

An example of finite element mesh developed for the
loading using the NASTRAN finite element structural
analysis is shown in Figure 6. This model consists of 966
analysis computer program. Examples of load cases analyzed
IS2D8 elements (an iso-parametric, quadratic, plane stresses,
are shown in Figure 5. This drydock consisting of concrete
8 noded element) with 3 2 1 5 node points.
and steel reinforcement, is modelled as a non-linear elastic
The objective in modelling this structure is to generate
material having different properties in tension and com
a fine mesh in areas where high stress gradients might
pression.
occur. A pre-processor (DCKMSH) is developed which allows
The soil foundation is modelled as a series of vertical, for the generation of a model requiring concentration of
linear springs using ELAS2 elements (scaler spring element) . elements in some areas while requiring less concentration
B-4 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

(a) Maximum Displaceme n t : 0 . 6 55 inches
F igure 6 . An Examp l e of Fini te El ement Me s h

Formula ted for Ana lys i s
in other
structure
areas.
into
The use of
quadrilateral
DCKMSH
sub-regions
involves
prompted
dividing the
by either
1
geometrical or element concentration considerations. One of
(b) Maximum Disp lac emen t : 0 . 221 inc hes
the important features of DCK MSH is the numbering
pattern for nodal points and elements. These numbering F i gure 7 . Drydock Displacement Under Load ing
_
schemes facilitate plotting the output stresses and displace (a) Wi th Ship Load , and Kh•O . JOg
(b) Wi thout Ship Loa d , Kb•0 , 1 5 g
ments by computer.
C. MODE.LS OF FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
Normally as many as six different loading models are

I
selected to evaluate the results of various critical loading I
G
It
conditions using two-dimensional, static, and elastic finite ..
element analysis. The models chosen include a combination I
of the following conditions : empty dock; ship in dock; with
or without earthquake load. The configurations of the utility p

'
tunnel and discharging/flooding tunnels are both included in I
the analysis.
Recent research indicates that while the location of
the resultant of the earthquake induced dynamic earth
pressure for an at-rest condition is near the two-thirds

- · 10N' � lllhlC[ l f ! I
Figure 8 . Example o f Sigma·X S tresses Along

point of the wall height measured from the base up, the
the Top of the Floor S lab
location of te resultant drops rapidly to the one third
point when the wall displacement is sufficient to approach
or achieve the conditions of the active state of the back the displacement and stresses for the different models. The
fill. In the analysis, we apply the resultant of dynamic results are reviewed to determine whether the tensile,
lateral earth pressure at the two-thirds point of the wall compressive, and shear stresses are within or beyond the
height. This is a conservative assumption. allowable limits.
D. RESULTS OF FINITE ELEMENT METHOD ANALYSIS SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions from the drydock structural analysis using

Figure 7 shows the exaggerated displacement of a
the finite element method- of analysis are as follows :
drydock under two loading cases. The maximum displace
ment of the wall ranges from 0.3 to 0.7 inches, and the 1. Geotechnical mechanics principles can be applied to
floor slab ranges from 0.09 to 0.36 inches. the structural analysis of a drydock. However, over-simpli
fication of structural mechanics principles may lead to

Normal stresses in tension and compression, shear
unrealistic results. For example, the drydock wall can not
stresses, and major principal stresses for the two loading
be considered to behave as a "cantilever" structure. The
conditions were plotted using the computer and are shown
use of the equilibrium of free body concepts should be
i n Figure 8.
avoided. The use of elementary strength of material con
Some nodal points, mainly at the center of the floor cepts, such as a simplified flexural equation of f=My I /
slab, were chosen to summarize the results and compare should not be adopted for the overall analysis.
P.LA.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - No 63 B-5

2. The crane rail foundation and concrete tie beam numbering schemes would facilitate plotting of the stresses
does provide a restraint to the lateral movement. However, and displacements by computer.
the passive resistance of the soil actually dissipates the
6. The validity of the analytical results obtained by
unbalanced lateral force. Thus, a tie beam does not signifi
the finite element method must be checked by experienced
cantly reduce the stresses in the drydock.
structural and geotechnical engineers.
3. The finite element models must be carefully

developed to simulate the drydock structural properties and REFERENCES
geotechnical loading conditions. The assigned values of sub

grade modulus, drydock wall and soil interactions, and soil [1 ] Naval Facilities Engineering Command , Structural
· Analysis , Drydock Nos. 1 and 2, Long Beach Naval
lateral soil stiffness induced by the earthquake are signifi
Shipyard , California , August-Novembe r , 1 983.
cant to the results of analysis.
[2] Naval Facilities Engineering Command , Structural
Analysis, Drydock No. 5, Charleston Naval Shipyard,
4. A two-dimensional finite element method for the South Carolina, Apri l , 1 984.
entire drydock structural analysis provides satisfactory
[3J NAVFAC DM-29 . 1 , Graving Drydock, May, 198 2 .
results. The structure may be considered to behave as a
linear or non-linear material, depending on the effect of
[ 4J Woodward-Clyde Consultants and Moffat & Nichol
Engineers, Fac ilities Certification Report, Long
the steel reinforcement. Beach Naval Shipyard , Drydock No. 1 , April , 1 979 .
[5J NAVFAC DM-7 .2, Foundation and. Earth Structures, May,

5. A well formulated finite element mesh with proper 1 982 • .
8-6 P.1.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BU LLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

Dry Docs (Pianc)

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Dry Docs (Pianc)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

P IANC REPORT

FOREWORD decision being made on the o\·erall design philosophy con­

During the l8th Meeting held on 8th October 1984 in

Shiplifts be given to a new commission. Jn matters con­

1987. Clrap.t:u g describes the factors affecting the choice

Reporter on the subject of Dry Docks. The proposal was

The Appendix 'A' is preceded by a simple statistical

The report is concerned with the planning and design

an attempt has been made to record information about

docks built since 1950, the results of which are shown in

P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

CAR&DA Mr D . P . BERTLIN, M .Eng FICE,

2 P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

1. GENERAL 4.14 Loading on dry dock floor

1.1 Introduction 4.15 Structural analysis of dry dock floor

l.2 Terminology and assessment of dock size

3. OVERALL STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF DRY DOCK 8.3 Head of water to be retained

3.1 Introduction 8.4 Speed of operation

3.2 The influence of the location 8.5 Cost of operation

time 8.7 Depth available outside dock

ation 8.9 Ease of maintenance

3.5. Making a decision 8.10 Labour force required to operate gate

3.6 Possible dock structures 8.11 Provision of power

3.10 Analysis in seismic areas 8.15 Hinged floating gate

4-.l Introduction 8.18 Flap gate

4.2 Gravity dry dock floors 8.19 Strutted flap gate

4.3 Under-drained dry dock floors 8.20 Cantilever flap gate

4.4 Tied dry dock floors 8.21 Other gate designs

4.5 Dry dock floors bearing directly on the ground

P.IAN.C. - A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 3

DOCK NO PROJECTING ALTARS

DRY DOCK PROJECTING ALTARS

DRY DOCK STEPPED ALTARS

DRY DOCK WITH TRAPEZOIDAL GATE

4 P.l.A.N.C. • A.1.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

mechanical lift docks (sometimes referred to as shiplifts),

DRY DOCK WITH LEVEL

Effect�".'._e length (with ste ed end w all

Dock Dock cope (u s u ally level)

Slope down us u ally about 1:300

DRY DOCK WITH SLOPING

P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1 988 - No 63 5

6 P.!AN.C. A.LP.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

A TYPICAL SH\PBUlLDlNG DR.Y [)OCK

HE l80A LANG l0,00 HDll 2,52

_A_ TYPICAL REPA.IR. 'DR.'( t>OCI".

P.l.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. BULLETIN 1988 N° 63 7

Fig, 2. 1 ( c ) - Covered docks

8 P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63

Min. clearance 2.5m

Fig. 2.2 - Cross section showing minimum clearances

Stern Section Completed Ship

Fig. 2.3 - Shipbuilding dock with intermediate gate

P.J .A.N.C. - A.l. P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 9

(d) The pro\·ision of rails for dock arms or ship leading

10 P.l.A.N.C. · A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63

Fig. 2.7 - Longitudinal section of dry dock showing temporary eofferdam

docks ships will be required to approach to and depart

P.l.A.N.C. - A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1 988 - N° 63 11

- 9·0 m dredged level

12 P.1.A.N.C. • A.l.P.C.N. - BULLETIN 1988 - N° 63

�i: l19htrng lower

Jetting Keel block heigh! 1 ·8 m

Dredged 10 - 9-0 MSL (- 7·4 COi

FOREWORD decision being made on the o\·erall design philosophy con

Shiplifts be given to a new commission. Jn matters con

The type of dock struc

will in their turn lead to dif

closed of.f from the water