KMC NAVAL LTD

House of 50, Perindustrian Nakhoda 1,

32200, Lumut, Perak darul Ridzuan,
Malaysia

Phone: [+605 443444] Fax: [+605 4424443]

Website: kmcnavalltd.com

REPORT
Evaluation the full scale resistance of a tanker
 UniKL MIMET/ACAD/
Doc. No.
DTL/F-06
UNIVERSITI KUALA LUMPUR
Revision
Malaysia Institute of Marine Engineering No.
00
Technology (MIMET)
Effective
26/09/2016
Date:
ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET AND
SUBMISSION DECLARATION Page No. 1 of 1

Attach this coversheet as the cover for your submission. All sections must be completed.

Section A: Submission Details

Programme : BNASB
Course Code & Name : LNB 30203 SHIP RESISTANCE AND PROPULSION
Course Lecturer(s) : IWAN ZAMIL BIN MUSTAFFA KAMAL
Submission Title : ASIANTA REPLY LETTER
Deadline : Day 21 Month 10 Year 2016 Time 1700
Penalties : 5% will be deducted per day to a maximum of four (4) working days, after
which the submission will not be accepted.
Plagiarised work is an Academic Offence in University Rules & Regulations
and will be penalised accordingly.

Section B: Academic Integrity

Tick () each box below if you agree:

I have read and understood the UniKLs policy on Plagiarism in University Rules & Regulations.
This submission is my own, unless indicated with proper referencing.
This submission has not been previously submitted or published.
This submission follows the requirements stated in the course.

Section C: Submission Receipt

(must be filled in manually)

Office Receipt of Submission

Date & Time of
Student Name(s) Student ID(s)
Submission
AHMAD KHAIRIL BIN AZMAN 56211114197
MUHAMMAD SAFWAN BIN RASAHIDAN 56211215095
MOHD FIRDAUS AL MUSANNA BIN AHMAD 56211215237
(Sign & Official Name Stamp)

Student Receipt of Submission

This is your submission receipt, the only accepted evidence that you have submitted your work. After this is
stamped by the appointed staff & filled in, cut along the dotted lines above & retain this for your record.

Date & Time of Student ID(s)

Course Code Submission Title
Submission & Signature(s)
LNB 30203 ASIANTA REPLY LETTER 56211114197
56211215095
56211215237
(Sign & Official Name Stamp)
 LNB 30203 SHIP RESISTANCE AND PROPULSION

ASSIGNMENT NO 1 PROBLEM BASED LEARNING ACTIVITY

TASK Evaluate the full scale resistance of a tanker

Description A concise group report needs to be submitted electronically by the assignment

due date.

Submission is to be via PDF documents and Excel spreadsheet submitted

through Elearning. Save your file as <Company_Name>_Assgn1_PBL.pdf.

The reply letter to ASIANTA SHIPPNG SDN BHD shall be in A4 document in

PDF format using your own company letterhead.
Filled the Assignment Cover Sheet and Submission Declaration Form in
Microsoft Word and send it in .docx format (UniKL MIMET/ACAD/ DTL/F-06).

Letter detail A one page reply letter from your company with saying that you are interested
in this job offer and a price quote for the job above.
The reply letter will be checked at 5pm on Friday, 21st October, 2016.
Report Length A minimum report length would be 2 pages of writing and a spreadsheet or
Matlab code, however it is up to the student to decide exactly on the length of
the report
Submissions will be checked at 11pm on Friday, 11th November, 2016.
Date Due Friday 21st October, 2016 @ 1700hrs for the reply letter
Friday 11th November, 2016 @ 2300hrs for the group report

Assessment % This assessment is worth 7.5% of the total course mark.

Late submissions will result in 5% of the total available mark forfeited per day
late to a maximum of four (4) working days, after which the submission will not
be accepted.

ASSESSMENT OUTCOME & OBJECTIVES

COURSE OUTCOMES
2 Analyse the ship resistance using the prediction method. Specifically students must be able to analyse the full scale resistance
force and the effective power for the selected trawler / tug / fishing vessel using regression based data.

1 IWAN MUSTAFFA KAMAL , ISSUED 17TH OCTOBER 2016

ASSESSMENT DETAILS
There are six parts to the assignment; each submission must address each of the following:

1. Read the Section 10.3.1.5 of Molland et al. (2011).

2. The table of offsets (including the principal particulars) for two designs, design A and design B
were given by ASIANTA SHIPPING SDN. BHD attached in the letter. Calculate the necessary
parameters such as the tankers volumetric displacement, CP, CM, CWP, lcb, etc.
3. Use the Holtrop and Mennen regression equations to evaluate the resistance of the Asiantas
design A and design B tankers for ship speeds from 1 knot to 14 knots. Check whether the
design particulars must be within the limits of the Holtrop and Mennen data. Write a
programme in Excel or Matlab for the computations using these Holtrop and Mennen
regression equations.
4. Plot RT and RR variations with respect to FR. Analyse for any humps and hollows in the plot.
Comment on your findings. Are these results realistic?
5. Determine the effective power for the whole range of the ship speeds. Present the plot of PE
variations with respect to VS. Comment on your findings.
6. Within the PDF document name two design features which are not modelled by the Holtrop
and Mennen regression equations and why they are not modelled.

ADDITIONAL NOTES TO HELP YOU COMPLETE THIS ASSESSMENT POINT

1. Calculate the necessary parameters such as the tankers volumetric displacement, CP, CM, CWP,
lcb, etc. from the table of offset for design A and design B.
2. Check the design particulars of the two designs and ensure that the design particulars are within
the limits of the Holtrop and Mennen data, see Section 10.3.1.5 of Molland et al. (2011).
3. Developed a programme in Excel or Matlab using the equations described in Section 10.3.1.5
(Molland et al., 2011).
4. Plot the curve RT and RR in the same diagram for the 14 different Froude number as mentioned
above.
5. Determine the effective power required for the whole range of the ship speeds. Comment
whether the values of the effective power are reasonable.
6. Plot the curve PE variations with respect to the ship speed, VS.
7. Comment on two design features which are not modelled in your spreadsheet or Matlab
programme.

Resources:
Excel or Matlab
Molland, A.F., Turnock, S.R. & Hudson, D.A., (2011), Ship resistance and propulsion
Practical estimation of ship propulsive power, Cambridge University Press, New York
Holtrop, J. and Mennen, G.C.J., (1982), An approximate power prediction method,
International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 29.

2 IWAN MUSTAFFA KAMAL , ISSUED 17TH OCTOBER 2016

Marking Scheme

Possible
Criteria
Mark
Reply the letter to Asianta Shipping Sdn Bhd with a price quote. 5
Calculate the necessary parameters such as the tankers volumetric displacement,
20
CP, CM, CWP, lcb, etc. from the table of offset for design A and design B.
Developed a code written in Excel or Matlab to evaluate the full scale resistance
of a trawler / tug / fishing vessel using the Holtrop and Mennen regression
20
equations. Make 14 changes to the ship speed values and plot the variation in RT,
RF and RR with respect to FR.
Determine the RT and RR required for the ship. Show all the calculations in the
5
spreadsheet or Matlab programme.
Determine the effective power PE required for the ship. Plot the variation of the
5
effective power PE with respect to the ship speed VS.
Describe two design features which are not modelled by the method employed and
5
why they are not modelled.
Produce a professional quality report, including attention to spelling, grammar,
40
graphics and concise content. Recommend the best design to the client.
100 scaled
Total Mark to be out of
7.5

References:
Molland, A.F., Turnock, S.R. & Hudson, D.A., (2011), Ship resistance and propulsion Practical
estimation of ship propulsive power, Cambridge University Press, New York
Holtrop, J. and Mennen, G.C.J., (1982), An approximate power prediction method, International
Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 29.

3 IWAN MUSTAFFA KAMAL , ISSUED 17TH OCTOBER 2016

BET Naval Architecture and Shipbuilding: LNB 30203 Ship Resistance and Propulsion: Evaluation of the full scale
resistance of a tanker Application using Holtrop and Mennen Regression Data
Developed by Iwan Mustaffa Kamal
Synopsis of the task and its context
Use the Holtrop and Mennen regression method written in Excel or Matlab to evaluate the full scale resistance and the effective power of a trawler / tug /
fishing vessel. Comment on what is not modelled in this method. Make a prediction for the effect of varying the ship speed to the total resistance of the ship.
Match between course outcomes and criteria for the task
Course outcomes from the original course descriptor Task specific criteria
On completion of this unit you should be able to: To complete this task, you should:
Analyse the total ship resistance using the prediction 1. Read the Section 10.3.1.5 of Molland et al. (2011) and reply the letter to
method. Specifically students must be able to analyse the Asianta Sdn Bhd.
full scale resistance force and the effective power for the 2. Calculate the necessary parameters such as the tankers volumetric
selected trawler / tug / fishing vessel using regression displacement, CP, CM, CWP, lcb, etc. from the table of offset for design A and
based data. design B.
3. Use the Holtrop and Mennen regression equations to evaluate the resistance of
the tanker for ship speeds from 1 knot to 14 knots. The trawler / tug / fishing
vessel design particulars must be within the limits of the Holtrop and Mennen
data. Write a programme in Excel or Matlab for the computations using these
Holtrop and Mennen regression equations.
4. Plot RT and RR variations with respect to FR. Analyse for any humps and
hollows in the plot. Comment on your findings. Are these results realistic?
5. Determine the effective power for the whole range of the ship speeds. Present
the plot of PE variations with respect to VS. Comment on your findings.
6. Comment on two design features which are not modelled in your spreadsheet
or Matlab programme.
7. Produce a professional quality report, including attention to spelling,
grammar, graphics and concise content. Recommend the best design to the
client.

4
BET Naval Architecture and Shipbuilding: LNB 30203 Ship Resistance and Propulsion: Evaluation of the full scale resistance of a 100m tanker Application
using Holtrop and Mennen Regression Data.
Criteria and weighting High Distinction (A, A-)
Reply the letter from Your letter provide a clear
ASIANTA SHIPPING SDN and reasonable price quote,
BHD with a price quote and a submission deadline and
a submission deadline the letter were written in an
using your own company appropriate designed
letterhead. company letterhead.
5%
No grammatical error were
found in this letter.
A demonstrated high
standard of letter writing
which would easily exceed
typical professional
standards
No plagiarism of work was
detected in your letter.
Distinction (B+, B, B-)
Your letter provide a clear
and reasonable price quote,
a submission deadline and
the letter were written in an
appropriate designed
company letterhead, one of
the important details such as
dates, company name or
address is missing.
Less than two grammatical
error and spelling mistakes
were found.
A demonstrated high
standard of letter writing
which would exceed typical
professional standards
No plagiarism of work was
detected in your letter.
5
Credit (C+, C, C-)
Your letter provide a clear and
reasonable price quote, a
submission deadline and the
letter were written in an
appropriate designed company
letterhead, one of the
important details such as
dates, company name or
address is missing.
More than two grammatical
error but less than five
grammatical error and spelling
mistakes were found.
A standard of letter writing
which would equal typical
professional standards
No plagiarism of work was
detected in your letter.
Pass (D)
Your letter provide a clear and
reasonable price quote, a
submission deadline and the
letter were written in an
appropriate designed company
letterhead, more than one of
the important details such as
dates, company name or
address is missing.
More than five grammatical
error and spelling mistakes
were found reducing the
readability of the letter.
A standard of letter writing
which could be lifted to typical
professional standards with
only moderate changes.
No plagiarism of work was
detected in your letter.
Weighting 7.5%
Fail (F)
.Your report does not
provide a clear and
reasonable price quote, a
submission deadline and
the letter were written in
an appropriate designed
company letterhead, and
more than one of the
important details such as
dates, company name or
address is missing. Most
of the important
components in the letter
are missing.
Most of the word in the
letter contains
grammatical error
reducing the readability
of the letter.
A standard of
presentation which
detracts significantly from
any meaning the report is
trying to convey.
Plagiarism of work was
detected in your letter.
BET Naval Architecture and Shipbuilding: LNB 30203 Ship Resistance and Propulsion: Evaluation of the full scale resistance of a 100m tanker Application
using Holtrop and Mennen Regression Data.
Criteria and weighting
Calculate the necessary
parameters such as the
tankers volumetric
displacement, CP, CM, CWP,
lcb, etc. from the table of
offset for design A and
design B.
20%
Developed a code written
in Excel or Matlab to
evaluate the full scale
resistance of a trawler / tug
/ fishing vessel using the
Holtrop and Mennen
regression equations.
Make 14 changes to the
ship speed values and plot
the variation in RT, RF and
RR with respect to FR.
20 %
High Distinction (A, A-)
All parameters for design A
and B calculated and are
well presented. All the
calculations are correct with
no numerical calculation
errors.
The code written are well
presented and easy to use.
All the computations are
correct with no numerical
calculation errors.
The code are written to
accommodate variations in
ship speed, LWL, LCB etc.
Distinction (B+, B, B-)
All parameters for design A
and B calculated and are
well presented. All the
calculations are correct but
with one numerical
calculation errors which does
not affect the overall results.
The code written are well
presented and easy to use.
All the computations are
correct but with one
numerical calculation errors
which does not affect the
overall results.
The code are written to
accommodate variations in
ship speed, but failed to
accommodate one of the
variations in the design
particulars.
6
Credit (C+, C, C-)
All parameters for design A
and B calculated and are well
presented. All the calculations
are correct but with two or
fewer numerical calculation
errors which does not affect
the overall results.
. errors which affecting
The code written are difficult to
use. All the computations are
correct but with two or fewer
numerical calculation errors
which does not affect the
overall results.
The code are written to
accommodate variations in
ship speed, but failed to
accommodate two of the
variations in the design
particulars.
Pass (D)
All parameters for design A
and B calculated and are well
presented. All the calculations
are correct but with two or
more numerical calculation
errors which slightly affecting
the overall results.
The code written are difficult to
use and with two or more
numerical calculation errors
which slightly affecting the
overall results.
The code are written to
accommodate variations in
ship speed, but failed to
accommodate three or more of
the variations in the design
particulars.
Weighting 7.5%
Fail (F)
One or more parameters
for design A and B were
not calculated and are
not presented. All the
calculations are correct
but with two or more
numerical calculation
significantly the overall
results.
The code written are
difficult to use and with
two or more numerical
calculation errors which
affecting significantly the
overall results.
The code written is
exactly a similar code
written by other student.
The code are not written
to accommodate
variations in the design
particulars.
BET Naval Architecture and Shipbuilding: LNB 30203 Ship Resistance and Propulsion: Evaluation of the full scale resistance of a 100m tanker Application
using Holtrop and Mennen Regression Data.
Criteria and weighting
Determine the RT and RR
required for the ship. Show
all the calculations in the
spreadsheet or Matlab
programme.
5%
Determine the effective
power PE required for the
ship. Plot the variation of
the effective power PE with
respect to the ship speed
VS.
5%
High Distinction (A, A-)
Your report contained the
entire plot required with
comments on the result with
clear conclusions made with
reference to the Holtrop and
Mennen method.
All the calculations are
shown in the spreadsheet
and contained no errors
along with comments on the
results with clear
conclusions.
Your report contained the
entire plot required with
comments on the result with
clear conclusions made with
reference to the Holtrop and
Mennen method.
Distinction (B+, B, B-)
Your report contained the
entire plot required with
comments on the result
with conclusions but failed
to relate it to Holtrop and
Mennen method.
All the calculations are
shown in the spreadsheet
and contained no errors
along with comments on
the results but without clear
conclusions.
Your report contained the
entire plot required with
comments on the result
with conclusions but failed
to relate it to Holtrop and
Mennen method.
7
Credit (C+, C, C-)
Your report contained the
entire plot with comments
made on the result but failed
to make a clear conclusion.
All the calculations are
shown in the spreadsheet
and contained no errors but
without comments on the
results and without clear
conclusions.
Your report contained the
entire plot with comments
made on the result but failed
to make a clear conclusion.
Weighting 7.5%
Pass (D) Fail (F)
Your report omitted one Your report omitted two
relationship. relationships.
All the calculations are The calculations shown
shown in the spreadsheet in the spreadsheet
but contained 2 or fewer contained 3 or more
errors. errors.
Your report omitted one Your report omitted two
relationship. relationships.
BET Naval Architecture and Shipbuilding: LNB 30203 Ship Resistance and Propulsion: Evaluation of the full scale resistance of a 100m tanker Application
using Holtrop and Mennen Regression Data.
Criteria and weighting High Distinction (A, A-)
Describe two design Your report describes two
features which are not realistic design features and
modelled by the method explains why they are not
employed and why they modelled with direct
are not modelled. reference to the assumptions
in the Holtrop and Mennen
method.
5%
Produce a professional Your report contained
quality report, including concise comment which was
attention to spelling, all relevant to the task. All
grammar, graphics and graphics were presented
concise content. with line weights, font sizes,
Recommend the best axes labels, figure titles,
design to the client. annotations which conveyed
meaning even before the full
40% report was read.
A demonstrated high
standard of presentation
which would easily exceed
typical professional
standards with
recommendations to the
client.
Distinction (B+, B, B-)
Your report describes one
realistic design features
and explains why they are
not modelled with direct
reference to the
assumptions in the Holtrop
and Mennen method.
The second design feature
you have described has not
been completely
referenced to the
assumptions in the Holtrop
and Mennen method
Your report contained less
than two sentences that
could be removed without
loss of meaning. All
graphics were presented
with line weights, font sizes,
axes labels, figure titles,
annotations which conveyed
meaning even before the full
report was read.
A demonstrated high
standard of presentation
which would exceed typical
professional standards with
recommendations to the
client.
8
Credit (C+, C, C-)
Your report describes two
realistic design features but
fails to explain why one is not
modelled with direct
reference to the assumptions
in the Holtrop and Mennen
method.
Your report contained less
than 5 spelling or grammar
errors. Some of the text could
be removed with no loss in
meaning.
A standard of presentation
which would equal typical
professional standards with
recommendations to the client
but failed to make a clear
conclusion.
Pass (D)
Your report describes two
realistic design features but
fails to explain why either is
not modelled with direct
reference to the assumptions
in the Holtrop and Mennen
method.
Your report contained less
than 10 spelling or grammar
errors. 20% of the text could
be removed with no loss in
meaning.
A standard of presentation
which could be lifted to typical
professional standards with
only moderate changes with
recommendations to the client
but failed to make a clear
conclusion.
Weighting 7.5%
Fail (F)
Your report describes
only one realistic design
feature.
Your report contained 10
or more spelling or
grammar errors. The text
could be reduced by at
least 40% with the same
meaning.
A standard of
presentation which
detracts significantly from
any meaning the report is
trying to convey without
any recommendations to
the client.
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I am very grateful and would like to express my sincere appreciation to my lecturer Mr Iwan Zamil
Bin Mustaffa Kamal for his invaluable guidance, continuous encouragement and constant support
in making this report possible. I really appreciate his guidance from the initial to the final level
that enabled us to develop an understanding of this report thoroughly. I would also like to thanks
any person which contributes to my report directly or indirectly and would like to acknowledge
their comments and suggestions, which was crucial for the successful completion of this study

1
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ...................................................................................................................... 1

OBJECTIVE ......................................................................................................................................... 3

INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 4

COMPARISON BETWEEN TWO DESIGN TANKER................................................................... 5

CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 8

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 9

APPENDIX..10

2
OBJECTIVE

The objective of this report is to improve the knowledge of the students and expose them to a real
industrial situation by applying all the knowledge that was learnt in academic syllabus. By this
chance, all students can achieve an excitement working like environment as the students need to
full-fill the exact task that are needed to be done in the industry. Specifically, students get to learn
about the system that are often use in the industry and learn to pick which management system are
more suitable to a specific task or project.

Other objectives of this report are:

1. Check the design particular of the two design of 100m tanker
2. Evaluate the resistance of two design tankers for ship speeds from 1 knot to 14 knots.
3. Determine the effective power for the whole range of the ship speeds.
4. Compared the result of the data between two design tankers.

3
INTRODUCTION

KMC Naval has been chosen to do an evaluation of the full scale resistance of 100m tanker. There
are two design of 100m tanker provide by the client to be measure before dateline. For completing
the task, team of KMC Naval used application using Holtrop and Mennen Regression Data. The
application are suitable to calculate all the features that needed to do an evaluation which is
involving the displacement vessel such as merchant ship or tanker.

Holtrop and Mennen (1978) said this method was developed through a regression analysis of
random model experiments and full-scale data, available at the Netherlands Ship Model Basin. In
this task, the evaluation was made in term of speed of the tanker from 1 knot into 14 knots. The
result are within the limits of the Holtrop and Mennen data. There are also total resistance and total
residue be measure in this task. Furthermore, analysis of the data also made by KMC Naval team
and the result will be shown in next chapter.

To achieve the different result between two designs of 100m tanker, all the calculation are form in
programme in term to show a better visual analysis. Other than that, the effective power required
for the whole range of the ship speed also be determine to show the evaluation between two
designs.

All the comment and explanation are explained in next chapter to give a better understanding the
evaluation of the full scale resistance. KMC Naval provide a precise information to give a better
result on the task.

4
COMPARISON BETWEEN TWO DESIGNS TANKER

Particular Dimension Design A Design B

Length overall (LOA) 108.00 m 108.00 m
Length between perpendiculars (LBP) 102.00 m 100.00 m
Beam (moulded) 19.20 m 17.5.00 m
Depth (moulded) 9.30 m 9.25 m
Draft (design) 6.00 m 6.65 m
Station Spacing 5.1 5.0 m
volume displacement 4043.61 (m^3) 8421.046 (m^3)
Am 82.28 (m^2) 108.59 (m^2)
Cb 0.34 0.72
Cp 0.48 0.78
Cwp 0.138 0.81
Cm 0.71 0.93
LCB 7.05 m 15.67 m
Table 1: parameter of design

Figure 1: Total Resistance vs Froude Number for Design A and B

5
 Figure 2: Power Efficiency vs Ship Speed for Design A and B

In total resistance vs Froude Number, we can see in Design A is Lower than Design B. So, total
resistance in Design B increase accordingly by Froude number increase. The factor that cause the
condition is the relationship between sinkage and resistance. It is because when sinkage increase,
the resistance also increase. There a slight different in draft of the two tanker. The Draft of Design
B is higher than design A. Large trim changes or sinkage are one of the factor that cause high
resistance or effect on swallow water will contribute high resistance on vessel. Other factors that
can cause this condition is the appendage of the vessel. The Design B have more appendage than
Design A. In addition we might see Total resistance in design B starting at high with low speed
thus is quite hard in order to convert this design make it reality. However in design A the total
resistance increase smoothly with specific Froude number.

For the Power Efficiency vs Ship Speed, there also difference situation between two design
tanker. The condition also same as total resistance vs Froude number graph which is in both
design start at same rate but Design B have much more maximum power effective at maximum

6
speed however Design A slightly almost remains constant for every speed. Total resistance of the
tanker effect the power efficiency of the ship. It can be see that the Design A is more efficient in
term of power efficiency. It is because start from low knot into high knot, it is slowly increase.
The factor that cause the change in condition is the draft of the ship. The beam moulded of Design
A is bigger than Design B. It is also can be one of the factor the power efficiency in Design B is
low than Design A. In overall we can say that in order to design a tanker vessel design A is more
preferable it is because the vessel purposes is not about the speed but the efficiency and
requirement for tanker is meet towards design A.

7
CONCLUSION

In full scale, there are other factor can be measured to evaluate the resistance of the ship. The
factors that can be use are weather, sea current, temperature or salinity of the sea. From all the
information, KMC Naval team choose Design A after observation of the equation, graph and table
from the programme. KMC Naval team did not choose the Design B because the value of the total
resistance and power efficiency is large than Design A. All the information can be more precise if
technology or software used in this evaluation such as ProdCAD, NavCAD or HullSpeed
BENTLEY.

8
REFERENCES
1. Molland, A.F., Turnock, S.R. & Hudson, D.A., (2011), Ship resistance and propulsion
Practical estimation of ship propulsive power, Cambridge University Press, New York

2. Holtrop, J. and Mennen, G.C.J., (1982), An approximate power prediction method,

International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 29.

9
APPENDIX 1
FORMULA USED IN EVALUATE FULL SCALE RESISTANCE IN TWO DESIGN TANKER

Use Normal Shape for Design A but U-shaped section with Hogner stern for Design B

10
11
12
13