Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Hull and Propeller Performance Monitoring (Fuel Conservation and Emission Reduction) Daniel Kane DKane@PropulsionDynamics.com SNAME Climate Change and Ships February 16, 17, 2010 . Introduction. Assessment of CO2 Emission Performance of Ships Marintek, 2005
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
(Fuel Conservation and Emission Reduction)
Daniel Kane DKane@PropulsionDynamics.com
SNAME Climate Change and Ships February 16, 17, 2010
Assessment of CO2 Emission Performance of ShipsMarintek, 2005
“Reasons behind variation in CO2 index …hull and propeller fouling…”
GHG for Shipping and Implementation Guidance IMO Report, 2006
“…Utilizing ship specific resistance curves, draft, speed and
consumption are more suitable to monitor hull performance…”
List of Early Action Measures to Reduce GHGCal-EPA, 2007
“These measures include methods of hull maintenance and advanced coatings to reduce fouling…”
Hull Resistance Management…”Performance monitoring for hull conditions and fouling”-- IMO Ship Efficiency Management Plan, 2009
1st CASPER Report (containership) April 03
1st CASPER Report (tanker) April 03
1st CASPER Report (bulker) Sept 04
Recent Press: Teekay Shipping: 90 tankers
Seaspan Ltd: 14 containerships
Norden Tankers– ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’
China Navigation – ‘Technical Fuel Efficiency’
A system of data collection, post-voyage analysis and (anonymous ship-type comparisons). No additional software or instruments required.
In active use on hundreds of ships with over 1,000 ship-years work. (tankers, bulkers, ro-ro’s, boxships).
Compatible with all performance monitoring, data recording and weather routing systems.
Results of analysis is calculation of added resistance
Procurement of equipment no procurement of equipment
Calibration of equipment calibration of power measures
Debugging software no debugging by shipowner
High frequency of data collection one set of data per week
Establish analysis methods mature analysis methods
Dedicated resources to be effective no R&D staff needed
Years of benchmarking to derive benefit immediate benchmarking and
Trial Trip data adjusts this model
Actual “Performance Model”
We find the three added resistances:
1) Weather: wind and waves
2) Residual: trim, nozzles, engine degr.
3) Fouling: affects resistance/wake
Ship speed log is not used in the calculation since it is erroneous
“Today it is necessary to analyze deficiencies…information exchanges are not enough” -- Tanker Shipping Oct. 2009
[Awareness and Implementation]
Age of ship / hull shape
Time in port
Port water (fouling pressure)
Loading conditions (changes in draft/duration)
Factors in your control
Courtesy: Norwegian Technical University
(there is only one true curve in this scatter for one loading condition)
True performance and trial trip reference
The added resistance of hull and propeller translates into a speed/fuel penalty(at 15 kn was 57 t/day NOW 67 t/day = 10t/day excess fuel = 31.7 t/day CO2
At 22 knots: 140 tons/day
At 140 t/day: 2 knot loss from trials
At 22 knots: 154 tons/day
At 154 t/day: 2.5 knot loss from trials
Reference: 110 tons/day trials at 22 knots
24 t/day of excess CO2 emitted at design speed
20 year old
VLCC on first docking
Outdocking: 40% resistance (at 13 knots, 17 tons/day or more – 1 kn loss)
1st hull cleaning: 3% increase in resistance per month
2nd hull cleaning: 7% increase in resistance per month (21 tons/day or 1.4kn)
Drydock: 40% decrease in resistance (at 13 knots, 10 tons/day saving or 0.5 kn)
Depends on age of fleet, FOC, docking intervals, etc.
This table must not be reproduced or disseminated unless notes on following slide are included with the figures in this table.
“…Most companies have not allocated internal resources to optimize fuel consumption, lack goals and ambitions, do not benchmark and report fuel reduction obtained, and many simply outsource the problem to ship managers…” -- Class Society 2008
Hull and propeller condition should be an established part of the IMO Total CO2 Footprint since: a) mitigating invasive species while reducing fuel use b) immediate $ savings possible NOW on world fleet c) gives technical operator ability to adjust total index
Charter Party contract should give charterer right to acquire sea trial data in order that Charterer may diligently evaluate hull and propeller condition of chartered vessels and reward owners based on true propulsion efficiency. Such a rating system is already developed.