ourM I S S I O N

The mission of the American Bureau of

Shipping is to serve the public interest
as well as the needs of our clients by
promoting the security of life, property
and the natural environment primarily
through the development and verification
of standards for the design, construction
and operational maintenance of marine-
related facilities.

quality & environmental

P O L I C Y
It is the policy of the American Bureau
of Shipping to be responsive to the
individual and collective needs of our
clients as well as those of the public at
large, to provide quality services in
support of our mission, and to provide
our services consistent with international
standards developed to avoid, reduce or
control pollution to the environment.

All of our client commitments, supporting

actions, and services delivered must be
recognized as expressions of Quality.
We pledge to monitor our performance
as an on-going activity and to strive for
continuous improvement.

We commit to operate consistent with

applicable environmental legislation
and regulations and to provide a frame-
work for establishing and reviewing
environmental objectives and targets.
Executive Summary

Bulk carrier safety initiatives have received a new sense of urgency, accompanied with a greater
sense of liability in the marine industry. The relationship of bulk carrier age to total loss of a
vessel cannot be ignored, but other operational considerations also play an important role in
maintaining the structural integrity.

Statistically, for conventional bulk carriers, those vessels with more than 20 years of operation
have a greater total loss probability, in addition to a greater loss of life probability. Capesize
(more than 80k dwt) and handysize (10 to 40k dwt) vessels account for the majority of losses
at sea. This is a concern as 51 percent of the handysize fleet is 20 years old or greater. There are
many operational considerations contributing to the loss of a vessel that must be addressed for
the next generation of bulk carriers.

ABS SafeHull is the starting point for an ABS approved design. Application of the principles
found in ABS SafeHull provide the cornerstone to a structurally sound vessel. Additionally, the
ABS SafeShip program follows a vessel from inception through its service life. This information
management system allows owners the best method for maintaining their vessels. For further
design verification, several analytical tools exist to address unique considerations for the larger
bulk carrier designs.

Design alternatives to the conventional single sided vessels have been proven in the market to
bring added strength, including the double hull or double side skin design. Bulk carriers with
double sides are more durable ships – bringing added benefits for safety and operations.

ABS is a classification society of choice for bulk carriers. With practical experience and
unmatched technical capability, ABS offers shipowners and shipbuilders of these vessels
the most comprehensive classification services available.

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 1

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................3

ABS’ STRONG POSITION .......................................................................................................4

MARKET SHARE ..............................................................................................................................................4

RECENT ACTIVITY - DOUBLE SIDE SKIN BULK CARRIERS ...................................................................................4

BULK CARRIER LOSSES.........................................................................................................5

OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................8

HOLD SIDE FRAME PROBLEMS .........................................................................................................................8

Fatigue ..........................................................................................................................................................8
Corrosion ......................................................................................................................................................9
Damage.......................................................................................................................................................10
GREEN WATER .............................................................................................................................................11
SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION .........................................................................................................................11

IMPROVING BULK CARRIER SAFETY..................................................................................12

APPLICATION OF ABS SAFESHIP ....................................................................................................................12

APPLICATION OF ABS SAFEHULL ...................................................................................................................12
Bulk Carrier Designs ..................................................................................................................................13
Side Frames ................................................................................................................................................13
Cross Deck Structures .................................................................................................................................14
Corrugated Transverse Bulkheads...............................................................................................................14
TAIL SHAFT BEARING PERFORMANCE .............................................................................................................15
PERMANENT ACCESS FOR SURVEY ..................................................................................................................15

DESIGN ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................................................16

DOUBLE SIDE SKIN BULK CARRIERS ...............................................................................................................16
PARAMETRIC STUDY: DOUBLE SIDE SKIN BULK CARRIERS.................................................................................17
Longitudinal Framing .................................................................................................................................18
Transverse Framing ....................................................................................................................................18
Double Side Space.......................................................................................................................................18
Ship Configurations ....................................................................................................................................18
Operating Costs ..........................................................................................................................................20
HYCON BULK CARRIERS ................................................................................................................................21

APPENDIX 1
DOUBLE SIDE SKIN BULK CARRIERS TO ABS CLASS.........................................................................................22

APPENDIX 2
WEIGHING THE OPTIONS ..............................................................................................................................24

2 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

Introduction

In selecting the most appropriate classification society for a new construction project, the client
should consider the following:

ABS’ strong position in bulk carrier classification comes from years of experience, backed by
advanced technical programs that address the needs of the industry, including shipowners and
shipbuilders. ABS stands out as a technology leader committed to continual research and the
development of appropriate Rules and Regulations governing the design parameters and vessel
life.

ABS surveyors’ experience is further enhanced by a commitment to technology and the analytical
programs offered by the engineering department. By responding to clients’ needs through a
worldwide network of offices, clients receive the necessary attention to ensure project success.

ABS has programs already in place and personnel with the needed experience to aid in the design
and construction of the next generation of bulk carriers. ABS currently has projects for both the
latest Dunkerque-max bulk carriers and double side skin (DSS) bulk carriers. ABS has the tech-
nology and practical experience necessary to meet the design challenges posed by these vessels.

Classification with ABS Includes:

• The most authoritative and appropriate Rules for
the classification of bulk carriers.
• Design review to verify the design complies with
the ABS Rule requirements.
• Surveys during construction to assure compliance
with classification requirements, as given in the
Rules and on the ABS approved plans, and atten-
dance on board during official sea trials.
• Governmental authorizations to issue certificates
and/or conduct surveys pertaining to the Load Line,
MARPOL, SOLAS, tonnage conventions, and ISM
Code.
• Acceptance by the ABS Classification Committee
and award of the appropriate notation.
• Performance of periodic surveys to assure that the
vessel is maintained to class standards.

The Benefits of Classing with ABS Include:

• Knowledge that the vessel is appropriate for the intended service.
• Backing of years of relevant knowledge and experience.
• Single source for all technical needs.
• Indication of due diligence of owner/operator.
• Compliance with governmental requirements.
• Indication of performance of proper maintenance.
• Assurance of protection of capital investment.

Based on extensive and varied experience, ABS provides comprehensive classification services
fulfilling client needs for any bulk carrier project, whether single or double sided.

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 3

ABS’ Strong Position

Market Share
At the beginning of 2002, the ABS bulk carrier fleet had 13 percent market share of existing
vessels and 17 percent of vessels on order.1 ABS is well-equipped with proven experience and
the technical tools necessary to meet today’s
market demand and provide for future project
success.

The ABS fleet at year-end 2001, contained

737 bulk carriers, aggregating 22.8m gt. Recent
contracts include the construction of new
DSS bulk carriers of 51,000 dwt in China.

By year-end 2001, ABS had a total of 65 bulk

carriers aggregating 2.3m gt on its orderbook
from owners worldwide. Experienced operators
recognize ABS’ technical excellence and choose
ABS for their classification needs.

Currently there are over 5,800 vessels in the

dry bulk carrier fleet. Of these vessels, some 119 (2 percent) are DSS bulk carriers.2

Recent Activity - Double Side Skin Bulk Carriers

ABS partnered with two different owners on the construction of DSS bulk carriers in 1996. Top
Glory and Hong Kong Ming Wah Shipping Company partnered with Oshima Shipyard in Japan
for their handymax bulk carriers. DSS bulk carriers are also being built to ABS Class in China
and Taiwan.

In January 1997, Oshima Shipyard in Japan delivered the 48,000 dwt Pacific Scorpio to Hong
Kong Ming Wah Shipping Company. This vessel was the last in the series of six vessels. The
Scorpio marked a double milestone for the bulk shipping industry: completion of the first signifi-
cant order by a major shipowner for double sided bulk carriers, and also a first for the SafeHull-
built bulk carriers.

The order was originally placed with the conviction

that such a vessel would provide simplified mainte-
nance and operation, increased efficiency in loading
and unloading, and enhanced structural safety.
Additionally, these vessels are expected to pay back
the increased steel and construction costs in less
than half their service life.

These vessels represent a step forward in longevity

and safety and represent cumulative benefits for their
owners.

____________________________
1 Source: LLP Seaway, gt based
2 Source: LLP Seaway, Jan 2002

4 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

Bulk Carrier Losses

Tragic losses from bulk carrier casualties led many in the marine industry, including ABS, to
investigate what design modifications could be made to promote bulk carrier safety and deter
further losses. Bulk carriers are built to transport various dry cargoes. The most common are
grain, iron ore and coal. In the 1960s there were various problems associated with the transporta-
tion of grain that were addressed after a series of accidents involving these types of vessels.
Requirements for the safe carriage of iron ore and other high-density cargoes were enhanced in
1997 with the introduction of structural survivability criteria and continue to be under scrutiny
today.

Primary barriers to resist flooding of a single skin side (SSS) bulk carrier vessel include:
• Hatch covers and foredeck fittings
• Side shell plating with attached supporting side frames

Once the foremost hold floods, a ship will likely suffer a total loss
and by some estimates, the number one cargo hold flooding
accounts for about 40 percent of casualties for bulk
carriers. Three areas of the hull structure have
been identified as main areas of concern
from past casualties. These are the:
• Hold frames and brackets
• Corrugated bulkhead
• Cross deck structure

Over the time period 1982 to

2001, hull damage leading to
sinking of conventional
bulk carriers accounts
for some 72 reported
losses. During the
same time period,
there was one record-
ed DSS bulk carrier
lost.

Cracked or damaged side shell is the leading cause of bulk carrier losses. This data has been
substantiated by a study conducted for the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and
submitted to the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) by the United Kingdom in March 2002.
This study confirmed that for any size bulk carrier, side shell damage dominates recorded losses.
By comparison, there are much fewer losses attributable to hatch cover failure.

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 5

These charts depict that side shell failures are the most likely reason for loss and are more likely
to occur to the panamax and capesize bulk carriers that are more than 20 years old.

This chart illus-

trates the area of
the initiating event
for a recorded
incident leading to
total loss. Side
shell damage can
have a dramatic
and sometimes
unseen effect on
the structural
soundness of a
bulk carrier.

This chart gives the

probability for each
type of initiating event,
across the various
vessel types. Here it
depicts that the larger
bulk carriers, capesize
and panamax, have a
higher likelihood of
loss.

6 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

Age is a contributing
factor in the loss of
bulk carriers.
Statistically, bulk
carriers 20 years and
older exhibit a greater
chance of total loss
than their younger
counterparts. Intercargo
notes that the actual
number of ships and
lives lost has fluctuated
each year, while the
average age profile of
lost bulk carriers has
remained at around
20 years.3

Many operational factors con-

tribute to the structural sound-
ness of a vessel. These issues
must be addressed to ensure that
safe operation is maintained and
casualties are reduced.

____________________________
3 Bulk Carrier Casualty Report, 2001 and the Previous Ten Years (1992-2001), Intercargo

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 7

Operational Considerations

For the safe operation of a bulk carrier there are many facets that must be identified and
considered. The majority of structural problems associated with bulk carriers arise with the side
shell. Other issues to address include the effects of green water on deck.

Hold Side Frame Problems

For conventional bulk carriers, the cargo hold side
frames and brackets can be considered the weakest
link in the structure of the vessel. These elements are
subject to fatigue, corrosion, and mechanical damage
during loading and unloading.

The International Association of Classification Societies

(IACS) first responded to these problems in 1993 when
it introduced the Enhanced Survey Program (ESP), in
an attempt to identify and correct degradation through
corrosion, fatigue, and hard wear and tear. Casualty
studies in the mid-1990s also focused on the foremost
cargo hold.

Fatigue
Bulk carriers are susceptible to many modes of cyclic forces that combine with other forces
acting upon the vessel’s structure. Over time these cyclic stresses, can seriously weaken the
vessel’s structural capacity. Three areas on a bulk carrier that are especially prone to fatigue
are the hold side frames, the side longitudinals in the upper and lower wing tanks, and the
toes of the hatch coaming termination brackets.

Cyclic wave pressure acts upon the side frames

of the vessel in a constant cycle of loading and
unloading forces. For bulk carriers carrying
high density cargo, such as iron ore, the side
frames do not have an internal pressure to coun-
teract the external forces and the side
shell is forced inward by the unbalanced forces.
This can result in a weakening of the side frame.
Conversely, internal pressures created by lower
density cargo impose loads in the opposite
direction when a wave trough is encountered.
This occurs when the cargo fills the cargo holds
and pushes out on the side frame structure.
This pressure can also fluctuate and react with
the motions of the vessel.

Additional fatigue loads on the side frames arise from hull girder shear forces. Bulk carriers with
cargo loaded in an alternate hold pattern experience high levels of still water shear forces as the
weight of the holds loaded with the cargo are pushing down and the buoyant forces are pushing
up the empty holds. These upward and downward acting still water forces combine with the
shear forces that fluctuate with the wave motions to impose fluctuating stresses on the side
frames.

8 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

Similarly, the longitudinal framing of the upper and lower wing tanks is subjected to fluctuating
stresses due to the external wave action as well as the internal pressure from the ballast tanks.
These longitudinals are also
subjected to the fluctuating
longitudinal hull girder
stresses imposed by the
passing wave along the
length of the vessel. The
toes of the hatch coaming
termination brackets are
subjected to the fluctuating
longitudinal hull girder
stresses as well as the
torsional wave induced
stresses imposed by waves
encountered at oblique
wave headings.

Corrosion
Certain products, including coal, phosphates and raw sulfur,
transported by bulk carriers can rapidly corrode the hold side
frames and promote fractures. For a capesize bulk carrier carrying
coal and iron ore it has been recorded that a hull web frame, with
an original thickness of 10 mm can corrode to only 3 to 5 mm
along the bottom portion of the hold in a short period. Additionally,
the hold frame does not corrode evenly along the vertical length of
the frame.

POSITION AREA OF PITTING CORROSION WEB THICKNESS

Upper Few 10 mm
Upper >50 percent 7 – 9 mm
Middle >100 percent 5 – 8 mm
Bottom 100 percent 3 – 5 mm

*due to carriage of coal and iron ore

The corrosive nature of coal is due to its sulfur content. This occurs
as condensation in the cargo hold of the vessel reacts with coal
to produce a diluted solution of sulfuric acid, which over time
corrodes supporting structures and frames.

Corrosion increases the structure’s susceptibility to fatigue and

buckling, and lessens the structural integrity of the vessel, as the
web thickness is not sufficient to support the heavy cargo being
transported. As a result, the frame can detach from the side shell.

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 9

Damage
Side shell problems are prevalent in all sizes of bulk carriers, although there is a higher occur-
rence for the larger panamax and capesize bulk carriers.

For high-density cargoes the speed of loading may cause damage to the ship’s structure. Any time
the vessel is loaded in an asymmetrical manner, in relation to the central axis, the ship will twist.
This will create other stresses within the hull structure.
These stresses can have a damaging effect on the hull,
even in still water conditions.

It is known that the dense nature of iron ore, about 3 tons

per cubic meter, generates large stresses on a ship’s struc-
ture. Loading this cargo must be carefully controlled to
not exceed allowable stresses. The risk associated with
improper cargo loading can be greatly magnified once the
vessel encounters the dynamic forces due to wave action.

Additionally, careless maneuvering of equipment used by

terminals can cause accidental damage to bulk carriers
transporting grains, ore and coal. Loading and unloading
practices have a very real effect upon the vessel’s opera-
tional life span that can ultimately lead to damage or loss
of the side shell plating. The practice of dislodging cargo
from side shell frames with jackhammers, removing ore
with multi-ton claws, or loading minerals at high rates
without considering the physical effect on the ship are
common occurrences. Certain types of bulk cargoes
require bulldozers to move cargo during unloading,
with inevitable damage to frames, bulkheads and plating.

Additionally, the concentrated weight distribution of

lower profile cargoes require special attention. Scrap Photo credit: International Dry Bulk Terminals Contact Group (DBTG)

metal, for example, must be handled carefully to prevent

damage to the bottom plating of the hold. Steel coils, if not properly secured, with their large
weight concentration may shift during voyage and damage the hull.

10 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

 These ocurences may cause unseen damage that is
manifested over the operational life of the vessel. This
can include structural cracks and detached side shell
frames.

This damage to the vessel hull only accentuates the

fatigue and corrosion affects. Side shell deficiencies
account for the majority of the bulk carrier losses. The
loss of the side shell plating may result in the total loss
of the vessel.

Green Water
The flooding of spaces below the main deck due to
hatch cover or securing device failure, or failure of
other deck fittings, has been linked to green water
loads. Failures have been attributed both to direct
impact loads of an impinging wave, and to impact by
loose gear, deck equipment or fittings that have broken
away from their foundations and then been carried by
green water.

Design options to provide increased reserve buoyancy

above the main deck and added bow protection against
green sea loads are currently being analyzed to reduce
the occurrence and effects of green water on deck.
Based on the formal investigation report on the loss
of the Derbyshire, new model tests and extreme value
predictions for severe wave conditions have been
carried out and are being used to reassess strength
requirements for hatch covers and foredeck fittings.

Preliminary assessment of these model test results indicate that current IACS unified strength
requirements for hatch covers are adequate for ships in the intact condition, but that further
assessment and refinement may be in order to account for greater forward green water loads if
the foremost cargo hold or forepeak spaces were to flood. Work is also proceeding within IACS
to evaluate the capacity of foredeck fittings and equipment attachments at the deck to resist the
lateral loads of boarding green seas.

Spontaneous Combustion
Additional problems arise in the transportation of coal, which may emit combustible methane
gas. Spontaneous combustion may also occur in certain types of coal that are self-heating. Even
with the transportation of fishmeal there is a need for special consideration as it too can sponta-
neously combust.

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 11

Improving Bulk Carrier Safety

ABS programs to improve bulk carrier safety not only monitor the vessel through its entire life
cycle, but also identify the loads that act upon the vessel and the verify the design against corro-
sion and fatigue. Additionally, ABS has programs available to evaluate the other aspects of vessel
operation.

Intercargo also reports that recent rules seem to be having a positive effect.4 Changes that will
allow for permanent survey access are a further effort to improve the safe operation of bulk
carriers.

Application of ABS SafeShip

The ABS SafeShip program starts in the design office with the
application of the proven power of ABS SafeHull, recognized
as the most rational, dynamically based system available for
evaluating the design of a bulk carrier.

As the vessel takes shape in the shipyard, construction

conforms to the superior requirements of the ABS SafeHull
Construction Monitoring Program.

On delivery, a structural database is created utilizing ABS

SafeNet Hull Maintenance. Specified as-built drawings are
entered into the ABS SafeNet Vessel Drawings system, pro-
viding life-cycle storage and easy updating of this crucial
information.

In service, the unique technical and commercial capabilities of the

ABS SafeNet Hull Maintenance, Maintenance & Repair, and Survey
Status modules are used to manage the structural and mechanical
condition of the vessel.

Significant cost savings flow from improved performance, less down time, greater
operating efficiencies and reduced exposure to risk.

Free enrollment in the ABS SafeShip program is open to all new and existing vessels designed
to meet ABS SafeHull criteria.

Application of ABS SafeHull

ABS SafeHull is ideal for identifying the loads and failure modes that need to be considered for a
bulk carrier. The ABS SafeHull System was conceived as a complete technical resource compris-
ing criteria based on design and structural evaluation, as well as a comprehensive suite of soft-
ware applications programs, technical support services, and related technical documentation and
guidance.

The SafeHull criteria has been developed, based on extensive research and analysis, with a view
to improving the performance of problematic structural areas in bulk carrier designs. Other criti-
cal areas, such as the supporting structures in the upper wing tanks and forebody structures,
have also been addressed in the criteria.

____________________________
4 Bulk Carrier Casualty Report, 2001 and the Previous Ten Years (1992-2001), Intercargo

12 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

 SafeHull Design Cycle
This system is divided into two parts. During the design process, or Phase A, the general arrange-
ment passes through a refining process beginning with an automated generation of the Hull
Configuration. Next, calculations determining the dynamic loads assess the reaction of the
designed vessel against specific criteria. This is followed by a determination of the structural
components, compliance with strength criteria and fatigue assessment.

Evaluation of the design is the next step in the process. Commonly referred to as Phase B, this
stage generates a Finite Element Model (FEM) that again runs through a calculation of dynamic
loads. Following 3-D Global Finite Element Analysis, the design runs through an assessment of
Failure Modes to confirm its structural integrity. This process verifies a design with a lifetime
performance able to withstand all relevant failure modes.

For bulk carriers, torsional strength of the hull is of concern due to large hatch openings.
Attention is also given to the effects of loading two adjacent holds – known as block loading,
as well as the strength of ballast holds. These conditions are explicitly covered in the load cases
for structural analysis.

Bulk Carrier Designs

Typical bulk carrier designs represent a compromise between operational demands and structural
requirements. Consequently, the margins of safety of different structural components are not uni-
form. Of main concern are the lack of structural redundancy and inadequate support in the trans-
verse direction. In addition, the rigid double bottom structure and large upper wing tanks are
much stiffer than the side frames and cross deck structure.

Side Frames
Side frames are one of the weakest links in a bulk carrier structure. These vertical frames on the
side shell connect two highly rigid structures, the double bottom/lower wing tank and upper
wing tank. Side frames in dry cargo holds experience maximum stresses when alternate holds are
loaded with high-density cargo and the ship is fully loaded. The low cargo profile causes side
frames in these holds to experience greater flexure due to the large external pressures that are not
counteracted by internal cargo pressures. The flexing is further magnified by the rotation of the
rigid lower wing tank caused by the large downward force of the high-density cargo acting on

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 13

the double bottom. All these effects contribute to reduc-
ing the fatigue life of the connecting brackets of the side
frames, sometimes causing their detachment from the
side shell.

Cross Deck Structures

In the past, minimal attention was paid to the strength
of cross deck structures, because they were not consid-
ered significant to the strength of the hull girder.
Because of frequent occurrences of buckling in these
areas, more attention is now directed to the design of
cross deck structures. Three kinds of buckling problems
can occur in these structures. First, in the case of block
loading (a load condition in which two adjacent holds are loaded with heavy cargo), large trans-
verse bending (sagging) can occur in the transverse bulkhead, causing high compressive forces
and stresses in the cross deck structures.

The static and dynamic external pressures further magnify the compressive stress. A second
buckling problem occurs in oblique wave conditions, where wave-induced torsion creates
shearing forces in the longitudinal direction of the cross deck, which can result in shear buckling
of the cross deck plating. Thirdly, lateral bending in the cross deck from shearing forces can
result in buckling of the hatch corners. The buckling problems become more pronounced in
wide bulk carriers with large cargo holds, since wave-induced torsion is a function of the breadth
of the ship.

Corrugated Transverse Bulkheads

Corrugated transverse bulkheads, especially those in dry cargo holds, are also considered critical
in a bulk carrier structure. Prior to 1997, the SOLAS Convention assumed that watertight trans-
verse bulkheads were able to prevent progressive flooding if the hold was accidentally flooded.
Nominal hydrostatic loads, which do not necessarily represent the actual dynamic loads in a
damaged condition, were applied. The 1997 amendments to SOLAS recognized that the collapse
of corrugated bulkheads after side structure failure, and subsequent progressive flooding, might
be one of the primary causes for bulk carrier losses.

This weakness was identified by ABS in 1994 during the development of SafeHull criteria for
bulk carriers, when evaluating the effects of loads in a simulated flooded condition, with estimat-
ed equilibrium waterline and static and dynamic loads (including sloshing) of sea water in the
flooded hold. IACS Unified Requirements now address this known weakness.

The strength formulation for corrugated bulkheads was developed based on the results of a series
of 3-D finite element analyses of corrugated bulkheads. The vertical bending moment acting on
the transverse bulkhead is a function of torsional rigidity of the upper and lower stools, the stiff-
ness of the double bottom structures, and the loading in the hold.

The ultimate strength of corrugated bulkheads is examined to prevent catastrophic failure in the
event of accidental hold flooding. The criteria also address in an explicit manner other critical
areas, such as:
• fore-end strengthening against slamming:
• transverse webs in the upper and lower wing tanks, in way of the ballast hold;
• double bottom structures for alternate hold loading conditions;
• transition zones between the fore peak and Number 1 cargo hold; and
• operational wear and tear, primarily of inner bottom plate and side frame connections.

14 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

Tail Shaft Bearing Performance
For the larger bulk carriers driven by high-powered diesel engines there is the potential for tail
shaft bearing problems if careful attention is not paid to
the propulsion shafting alignment during the design and
construction of the vessel. The issue is of particular
importance in the design of bulk carriers where the
extremely high bhp of the engine results in very stiff,
large diameter shafting.

The ABS SHAFT software can be used to analyze shaft

alignment and evaluate tail shaft bearing condition
using deflection data derived from the finite element
modeling of the hull structure.

ABS SHAFT takes into account hull flexibility as well

as permitting the evaluation of the condition of the
tail shaft bearing. This program is intended for the
design/evaluation stage of the vessel’s life, but it can also be used to trouble-shoot existing
installations.

Permanent Access for Survey

SOLAS Regulation has been drafted requiring ballast tanks and cargo holds of bulk carriers
greater than 20,000 gt, constructed on or after 1 January 2005 to be provided with a permanent
means of access to enable, throughout the life of a ship, overall and close-up inspections and
thickness measurements of the ship’s structures to be carried out by the flag Administration and
ship’s personnel. The means of access are to be described in a Ship Structure Access Manual
approved by the Administration, an updated copy of which is to be kept on board.

Of particular importance are the following means of permanent access:

• Vertical access to a minimum of 25 percent of the total number of hold frames port and
starboard equally distributed throughout the hold including at each end in way of trans-
verse bulkheads, with no less that three means of vertical access fitted port and starboard.
• Three means of access fitted at both ends of sides of the cross deck and in the vicinity of
the centerline. Each access is to be accessible from the cargo hold or directly from the main
deck. Alternatively, if the height of the overhead structure of the cross deck is less than
16m, a movable means of access (e.g., hydraulic arms with a stable base or wire lift plat-
form) may be
accepted.
• One longitudinal,
continuous access is
to be provided for
the full length of
each top side and
bottom hopper
tank, if 6m in
height, fitted adja-
cent to side shell
with vertical access
ladders to the main
deck access.
Portable ladders
may be used for Source: IACS document, IMO DE 45, March 2002
such tanks with a
height less than 6m.

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 15

Design Alternatives

Tragic losses from bulk carrier casualties led many in the marine industry, including ABS, to
investigate what design modifications could be made to reduce the risk of further losses. Double
side skin bulk carriers, and modifications thereon, are being built to counteract some of the
problems associated with single side bulk carriers.

Double Side Skin Bulk Carriers

The double hull principle is not new to the marine industry. Tankers are being built with a dou-
ble hull to reduce the risk of oil spills after collisions and grounding. For bulk carriers, the moti-
vation is to protect the primary structural members against cargo-related corrosion and mechani-
cal damage, as well as providing a barrier against extensive flooding due to low-impact side shell
damage.

To date there has not been a reported loss of a purpose built DSS bulk carrier with a size greater
than 20k dwt. One DSS vessel of 20k dwt was lost at sea after 23 years of operation. On average,
a DSS bulk carrier is scrapped after 27 years of service.

DSS bulk carriers have improved structural

integrity by:
• Eliminating exposed, damage-prone
transverse framing and their end
attachment
• Protecting against cargo-related
corrosion and mechanical damage
• Allowing better quality surface prepa-
ration and coating application – both
initially and carrying out repairs
• Creating much stiffer side structures
effectively eliminating the flexing or
fatiguing of side frame structures in
conventional designs

With the addition of a double side, improvements are made to the operation of bulk carriers. The
time required for cargo discharge is decreased. For coal, on average, this translates to 10 percent
higher daily discharge rate when compared to ships with conventional hold configuration.

Because of the
smooth hold sides,
Side the damage per ton
Shell of cargo discharged
can be six times
lower than the aver-
Side Double age in conventional
Frames Hull bulk carriers. DSS
smooth holds also
save time and costs
in hold cleaning and
protect the cargo
against external tem-
perature variations.

16 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

 Significant savings
and economic advan-
tages can be realized
through an increase
in structural strength.
The DSS design not
only eliminates
exposed damage-
prone side frames,
but also reduces the
risk of hold flooding
and possible sinking;
especially for smaller
size bulk carriers
with fewer compart-
ments. On the other
hand, if the double
side space were used
as a ballast tank it
would require closer
attention.

The construction cost

differential for a DSS
bulk carrier is nomi-
nal, and higher resale
values may be real-
ized. Additionally, the
operational advan-
tages translate into
economic advantages as the speed of cargo discharge has been improved, time and cost is saved
in hold cleaning, and less down time is required for repairs.

Parametric Study: Double Side Skin Bulk Carriers

In 1999 ABS conducted a study to determine the structural design and operating costs of
DSS bulk carrier designs. The study focused on the:
• Selection of the most suitable width of the DSS structure
• Identification of the type of DSS framing system
• Determination of the newly formed side space (ballast vs. void)
• Scantlings/steel weight of DSS vs. SSS comparison based on SafeHull requirements
• Construction cost of DSS
• Estimation of annual operating cost

In determining the ideal width of the double side space, ABS used current IMO regulations
on access openings – 600x600 (horizontal) and 600x800 (vertical). The space should provide
sufficient width for safe access and inspection. The ABS Rules and SOLAS mandate that 1000mm
be the minimum width; however, the ABS study increased the width to 1400 mm for capesize
and handymax, and 1200 mm for panamax to provide adequate space for inspection and mainte-
nance, as well as provide the space needed for adequately sized structural frame members.
Additionally, the type of double hull framing could be either longitudinal or transverse. In either
case, the horizontal stringers and vertical webs in the double side space are required for strength
and safe access.

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 17

Longitudinal Framing
Longitudinal framing in bulk carriers poses additional design concerns that result in increased
fatigue. In the longitudinal framing in the double side space system, the horizontal stringer has
no impact on longitudinal framing scantlings. The web framing in the double side space could
be every third or sixth frame spacing, and fatigue would be a factor in wider frame spacing. In
a longitudinal framing system, side pressure is transmitted to the vertical web or the transverse
bulkhead. Additionally side pressure loads can cause high shear forces in the webs. Careful
consideration needs to be made for this high shear force.

Transverse Framing
Transverse framing is preferred for a variety of reasons. One advantage is that the web frame loca-
tion is flexible. Additionally, greater buckling strength is found in the side shell plating as it is
subject to large vertical direction compressive loads. The web frames support the local scantling
requirement, and the side pressure loads go directly to the upper and lower hopper tanks – elimi-
nating the high shear problem encountered by the longitudinal system. The ABS study considers
a transverse framing system.

Double Side Space

For the DSS bulk carrier there is an additional consideration of the space created by the design. If
it is used as ballast space it will require high quality internal coating. There is an added cost for
maintenance, and the double side spaces cannot replace the designated ballast cargo, owing to
volume and strength considersations. However, if it is left as a void space there is no need for a
high quality internal coating. The ABS study considers it as a void space.

Ship Configurations
The ABS study compares DSS and SSS for three typical sizes of bulk carriers: capesize, panamax
and handymax. These ships were selected to establish a baseline reference in each of these
respective size ranges against which DSS bulk carriers of identical deadweight, cubic capacity and
speed would be compared with SSS bulk carriers.

Typical Ship Size of Single Side Bulk Carriers

SHIP TYPE SIZE (DWT) L.B.P. (M) BREADTH (M) DEPTH (M) DESIGN DRAFT (M)
Capesize 150,000 264.00 45.00 23.20 16.90
Panamax 60,000 212.00 32.24 17.80 12.40
Handymax 45,000 180.00 32.00 15.80 10.50

To provide the DSS ships with a cubic capacity equal to that of the single side equivalent, the
depth of the DSS ships were increased to compensate for the loss of cargo capacity due to the
double sides. The depths of the capesize, panamax and handymax double sided ships were
increased by 0.6m, 0.7m and 1.11, respectively. The length and breadth remained the same.

18 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

Although larger vessels are now the norm in bulk carrier new construction, the steel weight
increase and economic findings can be used as indicators in understanding the difference
between single sided and double sided bulk carriers.

Comparing a typical SSS and DSS capesize vessel, there is a weight increase in the cargo block
of 419 tons for the DSS bulk carrier. This can be broken down into the various sections in the
table below.

REGION DSS WEIGHT TONS SSS WEIGHT TONS DIFFERENCE TONS

Longitudinal Members 8,834 8,585 249
Web Frames 1,831 1,640 191
Trans. Hold Frames 590 634 -44
W. T. BHD 1,416 1,452 -36
D. T. BHD 588 550 38
Hatch Coamings 170 170 0
Cross Deck 360 360 0
Bilge Keel 10 10 0
Phase B Increase 283 262 21
TOTAL 14,082 13,663 419
*For a capesize vessel of 150,000 dwt

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 19

By adding the steel necessary beyond the cargo block region, the total structural weight differ-
ence of a typical DSS capesize bulk carrier would be 484 tons.

TOTAL STRUCTURAL WEIGHT OF EACH

SHIP (TONS) DIFFERENCE (TONS)
Double Hull Single Side
Cargo Block Weight 14,082 13,663 + 419
Total Weight 17,377 16,893 + 484
*For a capesize vessel of 150,000 dwt

The addition of this steel also adds to the construction costs.

TOTAL STEEL DIFFERENCE CONSTRUCTION

WEIGHT (tons) COST DIFFERENCE
SSS capesize 16,893
DSS capesize 17,377 484 $484,000
*Note: the construction cost is based on $1000 per ton steel (average between Japan and Korea)

Operating Costs
In the study, it was determined that the operating cost difference is small. Although there will be
some revenue loss due to port draft restrictions requiring the carriage of less cargo.

ANNUAL COST DIFFERENTIAL

CONVENTIONAL VS. DSS DESIGN
Capesize Panamax Handymax
Port Charges $10,000 $13,200 $11,800
Canal Tolls $1,300 $8,600 $11,500
Fuel Cost $6,700 $4,700 $5,100
# of total voyages (9) (13) (11)
days at sea (297) (264) (301)
days at port (35) (72) (48)
Cargo Hold Maintenance -$22,300 -$10,400 -$5,600
Cargo Hold Cleaning -$22,500 -$18,000 -$12,000
H & M Insurance Cost $11,400 $8,900 $5,800
P & I Insurance Cost $5,700 $3,700 $4,900
TOTAL ANNUAL COST DIFFERENTIAL -$9,700 $10,700 $21,500
(-) Cost savings for DSS design in 1997 USD

20 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

The operating cost savings for a capesize DSS bulk carrier adds up to a total of $194,000 (USD)
over a 20-year period.

Capesize Cost Differential

Initial Cost Differential = $484,000
Operating Difference = -$194,000
(-$9,700 per year for 20 years)
Total Cost Differential = $290,000
COST DIFFERENTIAL
Net Present Value (@ 6 %) = $373,000
*Note: 1997 USD value

Overall, a DSS bulk carrier offers added structural strength and operational advantages over the
conventional SSS bulk carrier, which may eventually translate into economic benefits. The “off-
hire” risk of DSS bulk carriers is reduced with better maintenance and efficient operation, result-
ing in better availability. Repair and maintenance costs can be reduced due to the smooth-side
inner hull and protected structural members located in the double side compartment spaces.
Owners of DSS bulk carriers can also expect a better resale value for vessels that have had the
appropriate repairs and fewer damages.

Hycon Bulk Carriers

Hybrid Configuration (Hycon) Bulk Carriers are being built with double sides in the fore and
aftermost holds in a shipyard in Japan. The concept of the Hycon Bulk Carrier evolved with the
increased structural integrity demands from IACS in 1999 that addressed flooding of holds of
SSS construction.

The weight of the extra steel used for the inner skin in the fore and afts holds is offset as no extra
steel is needed for the deck. Additionally, protection has been added where the wave action is the
most severe.

The structural safety of the hybrid design brings structural stiffness by reducing flexing and
fatigue from wave loads at the fore end of the side structure. This double side also reduces the
risk of hold flooding should the side structure fail.

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 21

Appendix 1

Double Side Skin Bulk Carriers to ABS Class

ABS Classification Activity – sample of DSS Bulk Carriers built 1995 to 2002.

Oshima Shipyard - Japan

Pacific Acadian, Pacific Dolphin, Pacific
Emerald, Pacific Mercury, Pacific Primate,
Pacific Scorpio
48,400 dwt
Owner - Hong Kong Ming Wah
Built: 1995 to 1997 to SafeHull standards

Pacific Dolphin

CSBC Shipyard - Taiwan

China Steel Trader, China Steel Investor
154,600 dwt
Owner - China Steel Express
Built: 1997 to SafeHull standards

China Steel Trader

Oshima Shipyard - Japan

Top Sugar, Top Pioneer, Top Progress,
Top Explore, Top Reliance
29,600 dwt
Owner - Top Glory
Built: 1998 to 1999 to SafeHull standards

Top Progress

22 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

 Oshima Shipyard - Japan
Top Leader, Top Knight, Top Beauty,
Top Vigour
73,600 dwt
Owner - Top Glory
Built: 1999 to SafeHull standards

Top Leader

New Century (formerly Jing Jiang) Shipyard - China

Clipper Galaxy
51,000 dwt
Owner - Galaxy Shipping
Built: 2002 to SafeHull standards

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 23

Appendix 2

Weighing the Options

There are pros and cons to be considered for an informed decision to be made regarding DSS and
SSS bulk carriers.

DSS Bulk Carriers SSS Bulk Carriers

Pros: Pros:
• Safer in structure • Commercially competitive
• Flexible in operation
Perception
Cons: Cons:
• Loss of grain capacity • Vulnerable to side structure
(for handymax vessels) failure
• Effect of regulations yet to be
evaluated

Pros: Pros:
• High corrosion resistance, only • Easy blasting, re-coating and
when double hull is left void renewing of side structure if
necessary
Corrosion
Cons: Cons:
• Extensive corrosion is envisioned • Hold frames are exposed to
if the hull space were used for cargoes with high
ballast corrosion rates

Pros: Pros:
• Improved resistance against low • Hold structure and hull girder are
Flooding energy collision resulting in holds strengthened against one hold
resulting from flooding flooding, and easily maintained
damage to
side structure Cons:
• If side shell integrity were
breached, one hold flooding may
lead to a progressive flooding and
loss of the ship

Pros: Pros:
• Hold side structure is protected • Hold frames are easily accessible
from possible mechanical for repairs
damage
Mechanical
Damage Cons: Cons:
• Repair work of DSS structure • Hold frames are vulnerable to
may require hot work in confined mechanical damage during
space – both outer/inner hull unloading

24 • Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels

 DSS Bulk Carriers SSS Bulk Carriers

Pros: Pros:
• Access to DSS spaces will be • Hold structure and hull girder
facilitated using the hull are strengthened against one
structure – in the absence of hold flooding and easily
Inspection ballast maintained
and
Maintenance Cons: Cons:
• Maintenance work could be • Special means of access is
more challenging due to DSS necessary (permanent means
spaces being confined of access is not feasible)

Pros: Pros:
• Small difference as long as the • Lighter than the same size for
strengthening for hold flooding DSS BCs
is exempted in SOLAS XII
Steel Weight
Cons:
• Heavier than the same size of
SSS BCs – such effect may
become larger of smaller BC

Bulk Carrier Solutions: Safer and Stronger Vessels • 25

 Produced by
ABS Marketing Development & Communications
16855 Northchase Dr.
Houston, TX 77060-6008 USA
ABS World Headquarters
ABS Plaza
16855 Northchase Drive
Houston, TX 77060 USA
Tel: 1-281-877-5800
Fax: 1-281-877-5803
Email: abs-worldhq@eagle.org

Website:
www.eagle.org

TX 2097 05/02 4000