1
|
- Chris Barry, P.E.
- The opinions expressed are those of the author,
- and do not necessarily represent
official policy of the United States Coast Guard
|
2
|
- Speed
- Tonnage
- Design Options
- Hull Design
- Propulsion Systems
- Optimization
- Rules
- Alternative Energy
- Ferry Construction Productivity Improvement
- Finance
|
3
|
- High Speed Is Expensive
- Cost/Speed Tradeoff Critical
- Very Dependent on Route, User
- Competition From Other Modes
- Consider/Reduce Load, Maneuver, Low Wake Times
- Simulate Commuter Decisions
- Will More Smaller, Slower Boats Reduce Trip Time ?
- Best Role For Technology Is Reducing Cost of Speed
- Check Speed/Motion Tradeoff
- Are Higher Speeds Reliable In All Weather?
|
4
|
- Emissions
- Engine Cost
- Weight
- Fuel
- Maintenance
- Wake
|
5
|
|
6
|
|
7
|
- Ferries Now Must Be Less Than 100 “Standard” GRT
- 100 GRT = 10,000 Ft3 of “Enclosed Volume”
- Various Ways of “Exempting” Space
- “Open To Weather”, Deep Frames
- Adds Steel Weight, Cost, Strongly Type Forming
- CG Has Proposed to Convert To (Int’l) Convention
- 1999 Request For Comments:
www.uscg.mil/hq/gm/regs/localnav/97-3198.htm
- True Enclosed Volume (m3): GRT = (0.2+0.02Log V) V
- Breaks Will Be Increased: 100 GRT Becomes 1600 GRT ??
- Rule Rewrite Is Very Complex - Affects Many Regulations
- New Tonnage Rules Make Big Changes For Ferry Design
|
8
|
- Lots Of Choices - “Horses for Courses”
- Planing / Semiplaning Monohulls
- Catamarans/Wave Piercers
- Air Cushion
- Hydrofoils
- Hydrofoil Hybrids
- Planing Hulls With Partial Hydrofoil Support
- SWATH/HSYSWAS
- Wing In Ground Effect: WIG/PARWIG, Ekranoplan
- More Like An Airplane - Similar Roles In Transport
- Much Faster Than Surface Craft (150 Knots +)
- Caspian Sea Monster: Soviet Airborne Battalion Ferry
|
9
|
- Well Proven/Lowest Risk
- Classic “NPL” Hull Very Efficient Up To 30 Knots
- Limited Deck Area, Not Favored by Tonnage
- New Developments
- Improved Hull Forms - Double Chine Types
- Shallow Draft
- Excellent at 20 - 30 Knots
- Poor Motions In Waves
- Roll - May Require Stabilization
- Pitch/Heave Acceleration
- Lowest First Cost
- Can Be HSLA Steel or Aluminum
|
10
|
- Not Always the Best Solution
- What is the “Equivalent Monohull”?
- Higher Structural Weight Fraction
- Higher Cost Than Monohulls
- Gives Deck Space/Stability Without Hull Beam
- Displacement Types - Long, Narrow Hulls
- Very Efficient In Mid Range - No Hump Problems
- May Have Reduced Wake
- Planing Types - Higher Speed Range
- Structural Issues - Nuisance Cracking Common
- Accelerations May Be A Problem
|
11
|
- Catamaran Modified for Improved Motions
- Several Different Designs Available
- Hull Extension “Anticipates” Waves
- Hoverspeed Great Britain Now Holds the Blue Ribband
- Reduced Hull Lift Improves Motion In Waves
- But
Also Reduces Hull Efficiency
- Must Be Tuned for the Required Sea State
- Bottoming Out / Bow Diving Can Be Problems
- Requires Longer Hulls Forward Of Passenger Space
- Structural Cracking Very Common
|
12
|
- HoverCraft - Has Fabric Cushion Seal All Around
- Amphibian - May Be Valuable On Some Routes
- Surface Effect Ship (SES) - Actually a Planing or Displacement/ACV
Hybrid - Not Amphibian
- Less Fan Power But More Hull Drag, No Side Seals
- Some Designs Require No Seals At All
- ACVs Still Have Wakes, Still Have Wave Drag
- Motions Can Be A Problem
- Besides Normal Motions, ACVs Can “Cobblestone”
- Propulsion Systems Can Be Complex & Expensive
- Especially For Amphibian Designs
|
13
|
- Potentially Most Efficient Concept At High Speed
- Potentially Best Motions At High Speeds
- Can Have Deep Draft At Speed (Limited Routes)
- Propulsion Systems Tend To Be Complex & Expensive
- Fully Submerged Foils Give Best Efficiency But
MUST HAVE RIDE CONTROL SYSTEM (RCS)
(RCS Failure Is A Possible Safety Problems)
- Surface Sensing Foils Do Not Need RCS But
Less Efficient, Poorer Motions In Waves
- Foil Design & Manufacture Complex, Expensive
- Structure Can Be Complex And Expensive
|
14
|
- Planing/Hydrofoil Hybrids
- RCS Not Usually Required
- Better Performance Than Planing Hulls
- Low Cost Than Full Hydrofoils
- Monohull Designs
- German / Swedish Stepped Hull, Kunitake, Rodriguez, Payne
- Catamaran Designs
- HYCAT (Calkins), Catfoil (Gee), Hysucat (Hoppe)
- Buoyancy/Hydrofoil Hybrids
- HYSWAS, TechnoSuperliner
- Submarine Hull(s) With Wings Supporting Upper Hull
- Very Good Motions - RCS Required, Very Deep Draft
|
15
|
- German / Swedish Monohull Design (WWII)
- Catamaran Concept: Better Roll Stability, Performance
- Planing Forward Hull Provides Surface Sensing (No RCS)
- Polyurethane Over Steel Core (Low Cost) Foils
- SP or Waterjet Propulsion - Simple, Low Cost, Efficient
|
16
|
|
17
|
- Conventional Propellers
- Cavitation is Usually A Limit Above 30 Knots
- External Shaft & Appendages Add High Speed Drag
- Waterjets
- Good For Higher Speeds - No Appendage Drag
- Costly, Heavy, Requires Lots Of Space Aft
- Surface Piercing Propellers
- Potentially Most Efficient At High Speeds
- Lower Cost, Also No Appendage Drag
- Engine Matching At Hump (Getting On To Plane) Requires Deep Gear
Reduction
- Air Propellers For Amphibious Service
|
18
|
- Diesels Are Well Proven, Cost Effective
- Pollution Issues - Fuel Choices Limited (Cetane, Lubricity)
- Aircraft Derived / Industrial Gas Turbines
- Light, High Power, Proven, Lower Emissions
- High First Cost, High Fuel Cost, High Maintenance Cost
- Multifuel - CNG, Other Alternative Fuels
- Future Alternatives (Back To the Future?)
- Steam Assisted Gas Turbine (STAG - Bottoming Cycles)
- Better Efficiency, Lower Temps: Less NOx, Lower Cost
- Steam Turbine - Also Multifuel, Low Emissions
- Fuel Cells, Stirling, Sail Assist, SCORE (Rotary Diesel)
|
19
|
- 8% Here, 12% There - It All Adds Up
- Stern Flaps = 8%+ Fuel & Emissions Savings
- CODOG or CODOD Engines & Slow Steaming Schemes
= Reduced Emissions, Fuel, and Maintenance Costs
|
20
|
- Ferries An Opportunity For Alternative Energy
- For Solar, Real Efficiency is Power Per Dollar
- Perhaps $3 / Gal Diesel Equivalent (Using Hg MHD)
- Photovoltaics - Proven, Low Efficiency, High Cost
- Dish Engines - Stirling Cycle
- Helium - Excellent Heat Transfer - Seal Problems
- Air - Poor Heat Transfer, Big Surfaces - No Seal Problems
- Steam Turbine - Dish Or Trough
- Direct Contact Condenser, Remote DFT (Also Solar)
- Mercury Vapor MHD - Direct Electrical Generation
|
21
|
- Do Synthesis Studies
- Do Point Designs
- Validate Specs
- Validate System
Design
- Avoid “Off the Shelf”
- Rarely Optimum
- Source Of Risk
- “Just A Few Minor Changes”
- No Real Advantage
- No “Ferries ‘R Us”
- Design Small Fraction
Of Cost (CAE / CAM)
|
22
|
- For Vessels Under 100 GRT
- SubChapter K
- For More Than 149 Passengers (or 49 Overnight)
- Intermediate Between T and Full H
- Requires “Structure Equivalent to Steel”
- Aluminum Requires Extensive Insulation
- SubChapter T
- Less Than 149 Passengers or 49 Overnight
- Simplified Rules In Many Areas of Construction
- More Acceptance of Common Boat Practices
- Fiberglass Construction Allowed
|
23
|
- Many Areas Still Require Interpretation
- “Total Engineering Approach”
- Includes Operations & Rescue, Not Just the Boat
- Applicable to High Speed Craft In Ferry Service
- Recognizes “Aircraft Like” Operations and Weight
- New Issues
- Requires Crashworthiness, Seat Belts, Training, Etc.
- Allows Fiberglass with Appropriate Measures For Equivalent Safety For
More Than 149 Passengers
- More Expensive In Service
- Is It Worth It? Is It Really Safer?
|
24
|
- Shipyards Have Low Capital Costs, High R.O.I.
- CAD/CAM/CAE =Radical Increases In Productivity
- Integrated CAD Model
- Extensive CAM - New Production Techniques
- Highly Empowered, Skilled Workforce
- Bender - 20%+ Labor Reduction Using Product Model
- No Increases in Engineering Labor
- Other Process Improvement Techniques
- Re-engineering (Deming, Juran)
- Lean Manufacturing (Toyota Production System), 5 S
|
25
|
- Grants Typically 80% of Costs - Three Programs
(All Allow Public/Private Partnerships)
- Public Ferries That Provide “Links in the Federal Highway System” From
Highway Funds
- Transfers to Federal Transit Admin for Mass Transit
- Direct Grants From Discretionary Fund ($18 M)
- Common in Air Pollution Non-Attainment Areas
- Projects Routed Through State Highway/
Regional Transit Agencies
- Major Source of Funds For SF Bay Area/Seattle
- Almost Entirely Earmarked Funds
|
26
|
- Maritime Administration Federal Loan Guarantee Program (Title XI)
- 87.5% Funding For Ferries
- Guarantees For Foreign Sales
- Loans For Technology/Shipyard Improvement
- Not Worth Looking At For Less Than $2 M
- Minimum Fee Is $10,000 - Extensive Documentation Required
- MARITECH Grants For Technology Improvement
- SBIR - Dual Use Innovative Technologies,
Mainly NAVY / DOD Projects, For Small Business
- NSRP Grants (50%) For Shipbuilding Productivity
|