Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:52:49.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determining Restricted Fairway Additional Width due to Bank Effect for Fine Form Vessels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2019

Mate Baric ,
Robert Mohovic  and
Djani Mohovic
Mate Baric*
Affiliation:
(Maritime Department, University of Zadar, Mihovila Pavlinovica 1, 23000 Zadar, Croatia)
Robert Mohovic
Affiliation:
(Faculty of Maritime Studies, University of Rijeka, Studentska 2, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia)
Djani Mohovic
Affiliation:
(Faculty of Maritime Studies, University of Rijeka, Studentska 2, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia)
*
(E-mail: mbaric@unizd.hr)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In order to determine fairway width accurately and to ensure an adequate level of safety, it is necessary to fulfil different safety standards and user needs. There are a number of international recommendations for fairway design, but the recommendations by Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses (PIANC), Puerto Del Estado (ROM 3·1) and the Japanese Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) are some of the best known. However, in all of these recommendations, additional width due to ship-bank effect is obsolete and needs to be improved. The objective of this paper is to use a navigational simulator with a predefined ship-bank interaction model and fine form ships models to determine the ship trajectory caused by ship-bank effect. The methodology of research used in the paper consisted of using ship trajectory data to propose a deterministic model for improving fairway additional width due to ship-bank effect. Results showed that such a method is not time-consuming and can improve fairway design in terms of ship-bank effect, increasing additional width accuracy.

Keywords

ManoeuvrabilityModellingShip behaviourInteractionUnder keel clearance
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 72 , Issue 6 , November 2019 , pp. 1435 - 1448
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barrass, B. (2004). Ship design and performance for masters and mates. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Demirbilek, Z. and Sargent, F. (1999). Deep-draft coastal navigation entrance channel practice. Engineer research and development center Vicksburg MS coastal and hydraulics lab. Coastal and Hydraulic Engineering Technical Note IX-1.Google Scholar
Eloot, K. and Vantorre, M. (2011). Ship behaviour in shallow and confined water: an overview of hydrodynamic effects through EFD. AVT- Specialists' Meeting on Assessment of Stability and Control Prediction Methods for Air and Sea Vehicles, Portsdown, UK.Google Scholar
Lataire, E., Vantorre, M., Laforce, E., Eloot, K. and Delefortrie, G. (2007). Navigation in Confined Waters: Influence of Bank Characteristics on Ship-Bank Interaction. International Conference on Marine Research and Transportation, ICMRT, Naples, IT.Google Scholar
MathWorks, Matlab R2009b. (2009). Licenced by Faculty of Maritime Studies, University of Rijeka.Google Scholar
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), Japan (2009): Technical Standards and Commentaries for Port and Harbour Facilities in Japan, OCDI.Google Scholar
Norrbin, N. H., (1985). Bank clearance and optimal section shape for ship channel. 26th PIANC International Navigation Congress, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
Norrbin, N. H., (1976). Bank effects on a ship moving through a short dredged channel. 10th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses (PIANC). (2014). Harbour Approach Channels Design Guidelines, Report No. 121–2014.Google Scholar
Puertos Del Estado. (1999). Recommendations for Maritime Works (Spain) ROM 3.1-99: Designing Maritime Configuration of Ports, Approach Channels and Floatation Areas, Spain: CEDEX.Google Scholar
Serban, P. S. and Panaitescu, V. N. (2015). Simulation of ship to shore interaction in shallow and narrow waters. Scientific Bulletin “Mircea cel Batran” Naval Academy, 18(1), 112.Google Scholar
Sian, A. Y., Maimun, A., Priyanto, A. and Ahmed, Y. M., (2014). Assessment of Ship-Bank Interactions on LNG Tanker in Shallow Water. Journal of Technology, 66(2), 141–144.Google Scholar
Transas NaviSailor NTPro 5000, v.5.35. (2016). Licenced by Faculty of Maritime Studies, University of Rijeka.Google Scholar
Transas. (2019). Simulator Development Tools. (Accessed March 2019) https://www.transas.com/products/simulation/simulator-development-tools/MWGoogle Scholar
Vantorre, M., Delefortrie, G., Eloot, K. and Laforce, E. (2003), August. Experimental investigation of ship-bank interaction forces. International Conference MARSIM, Kanazawa, JP.Google Scholar