ELSEVIER OCEAN ENGINEERING BOOK SERIES

VOLUME 9

STABILITY AND SAFETY OF SHIPS

Volume I - Regulation and Operation
Elsevier Internet Homepage:
http://www.elsevier.com
Consult the Elsevier homepage for full catalogue information on all books, journals and electronic
products and services.

Ocean Engineering Series

Published PILLAY & WANG

Technology and Safety of Marine Systems
WATSON ISBN: 008-044148-3
Practical Ship Design
ISBN: 008-042999-8 BOSE & BROOKE
Wave Energy Conversion
YOUNG ISBN: 008-044212-9
Wind Generated Ocean Waves
ISBN: 008-043317-0 OCHI
Hurricane-Generated Seas
BAI ISBN: 008-044312-5
Pipelines and Risers
ISBN: 008-043712-5 Forthcoming titles

JENSEN McCORMICK & KRAEMER

Local and Global Response of Ships Ocean Wave Energy Utilization
ISBN: 008-043953-5 ISBN: 008-043932-2

TUCKER & PITT MUNCHMEYER

Waves in Ocean Engineering Boat and Ship Geometry
1SBN: 008-043566-1 ISBN: 008-043998-5

Related Journals
Free specimen copy gladly sent on request. Elsevier Ltd, The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington,
O:iford, OX5 1GB, UK

Applied Ocean Research Engineering Structures

Advances in Engineering Software .Finite Elements in Analysis and Design
CAD International Journal of Solids and Structures
Coastal Engineering Journal of Constructional Steel Research
Composite Structures Marine Structures
Computers and Structures NDT & E International
Construction and Building Materials Ocean Engineering
Engineering Failure Analysis Structural Safety
Engineering Fracture Mechanics Thin-Walled Structures

To Contact the Publisher

Elsevier welcomes enquiries concerning publishing proposals: books, journal special issues, conference proceedings,
etc. All formats and media can be considered. Should you have a publishing proposal you wish to discuss, please
contact, without obligation, the publisher responsible for Elsevier's civil and structural engineering publishing
programme:

James Sullivan
Publishing Editor
Elsevier Ltd Phone: +441865843178
The Boulevard, Langford Lane Fax: +441865843920
Kidlington, Oxford E.mail: j.sullivan@elsevier.com
OX5 1GB, UK

General enquiries, including placing orders, should be directed to Elsevier's Regional Sales Offices - please access
the Elsevier homepage for full contact details (homepage details at the top of this page).
ELSEVIER OCEAN ENGINEERING BOOK SERIES
VOLUME 9

STABILITY AND SAFETY OF SHIPS

Volume I: Regulation and Operation

LECH K. KOBYLINSKI
Technical University of Gdansk, Poland and Foundation for
Safety of Navigation and Environment Protection

SIGISMUND KASTNER
Bremen University of Applied Sciences, Germany

OCEAN ENGINEERING SERIES EDITORS

R. Bhattacharyya
us Naval Academy,
Annapolis, MD, USA

M.E. McCormick
The John Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD, USA

2005
ELSEVIER
Amsterdam - Boston - Heidelberg - London - New York - Oxford - Paris
San Diego - San Francisco - Singapore - Sydney - Tokyo
ELSEVIER Ltd
The Boulevard, Langford Lane
Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, UK

© 2003 L. Kobylinski and S. Kastner.

This work is protected under copyright by Elsevier, and the following terms and conditions apply to its use:

Photocopying
Single photocopies of single chapters may be made for personal use as allowed by national copyright laws.
Permission of the Publisher and payment of a fee is required for all other photocopying, including multiple or
systematic copying, copying for advertising or promotional purposes, resale, and all forms of document
delivery. Special rates are available for educational institutions that wish to make photocopies for non-profit
educational classroom use.

Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier's Science & Technology Rights Department in Oxford, UK:
phone: (+44) 1865 843830, fax: (+44) 1865 853333, e-mail: permissions@elsevier.com. You may also
complete your request on-line via the Elsevier homepage (http://www.elsevier.com). by selecting 'Customer
Support' and then 'Obtaining Permissions'.

In the USA, users may clear permissions and make payments through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.,
222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; phone: (+1) (978) 7508400, fax: (+1) (978) 7504744, and
in the UK through the Copyright Licensing Agency Rapid Clearance Service (CLARCS), 90 Tottenham Court
Road, London WIPOLP, UK; phone: (+44) 207 6315555; fax: (+44) 207 6315500. Other countries may have
a local reprographic rights agency for payments.

Derivative Works
Tables of contents may be reproduced for internal circulation, but permission of Elsevier is required for external
resale or distribution of such material. Permission of the Publisher is required for all other
derivative works, including compilations and translations.

Electronic Storage or Usage

Permission of the Publisher is required to store or use electronically any material contained in this work,
including any chapter or part of a chapter.

Except as outlined above, no part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior
written permission of the Publisher. Address permissions requests to: Elsevier's Science & Technology Rights
Department, at the phone, fax and e-mail addresses noted above.

Notice
No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter
of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products,
instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, in
particular, independent verification of diagnoses and drug dosages should be made.

First edition 2003

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

A catalog record from the Library of Congress has been applied for.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record from the British Library has been applied for.

ISBN: 008043001 5

@ The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-l992
(Permanence of Paper).
Printed in Hungary.
This book is dedicated to the seafarers
that lost their lives at sea.
 Vll

SERIES PREFACE

In this day and age, humankind has come to the realization that the
Earth's resources are limited. In the 19th and 20th Centuries, these resources
have been exploited to such an extent that their availability to future
generations is now in question. In an attempt to reverse this march towards
self-destruction, we have turned our attention to the oceans, realizing that
these bodies of water are both sources for potable water, food and minerals
and are relied upon for World commerce. In order to help engineers more
knowledgeably and constructively exploit the oceans, the Elsevier Ocean
Engineering Book Series has been created.

The Elsevier Ocean Engineering Book Series gives experts in

various areas of ocean technology the opportunity to relate to others their
knowledge and expertise. In a continual process, we are assembling world-
class technologists who have both the desire and the ability to write books.
These individuals select the subjects for their books based on their educational
backgrounds and professional experiences.

The series differs from other ocean engineering book series in that the
books are directed more towards technology than science, with a few
exceptions. Those exceptions we judge to have immediate applications to
many of the ocean technology fields. Our goal is to cover the broad areas of
naval architecture, coastal engineering, ocean engineering acoustics, marine
systems ~ngineering, applied oceanography, ocean energy conversion, design
of offshore structures, reliability of ocean structures and systems and many
others. The books are written so that readers entering the topic fields can
acquire a working level of expertise from their readings.

We hope that the books in the series are well-received by the ocean
engineering community.

Rameswar Bhattacharyya
Michael E. McCormick

Series Editors
 ix

FOREWORD
Naval architecture for a long time concentrated on problems that have a direct impact on
the ship's economics, i.e. resistance and powering. The importance of stability was
recognised and shipbuilders from the earliest times knew well that ships have to survive
the perils of the sea. Nevertheless, because of a lack of understanding of stability
principles, the losses of ships due to capsizing or foundering were enormous but seafarers
who considered the losses unavoidable accepted this situation.
Gradually the understanding of stability developed, but it was not before the second half
of the twentieth century that the tools for "investigating dynamic behaviour of the ship in a
seaway became available. Until then, stability was investigated in a quasi-static way and
the main problem was development of the methods of calculation of the righting
moments curve.
Nowadays, safety of shipping is the focus of attention. In order to promote safety at sea
the International Maritime Organisation - IMO was created, (until 1982 called the Inter-
governmental Maritime Consultative Organisation - IMCO). This United Nations Agency
from the very beginning of its work recognised the necessity to set up international
stability safety standards. This fact increased worldwide interest in stability problems.
In many countries research programmes were initiated, and scientists throughout the
world, directly or indirectly, participated in the work of IMO on the development of
stability standards. A number of scientific reports were prepared on stability problems
and published in scientific or technical magazines, or presented to IMO. Several
international conferences, symposia and workshops, particularly devoted to stability and
safety of ships, were organised with hundreds of papers presented. The amount of
knowledge on stability, accumulated over the years, is now enormous. There is, however,
a lack of publications containing the review of.the knowledge in this particular field.
The intention of this book is to fill this gap and to present, as far possible, the state of the
art focused on the regulatory, operational and theoretical aspects of intact stability. The
book is addressed to readers who are interested in promoting safety against capsizing,
who are involved in research on, and practical application of stability regulations on an
international or national level, to ship operators and designers and members of the
maritime administrations. The initiative to write this book belonged to the late N. B.
Sevastianov, professor at the Kaliningrad Institute of Technology (Russia).
The book is divided in two volumes, I and 2. (These correspond to Volumes 9 and 10 of
the Elsevier Ocean Engineering Series). The first volume (authored by L. Kobylinski and
S. Kastner with subtitle "Regulation and Operation") describes the state of the art in the
field of intact ship stability. It is focused on how intact safety is promoted; it considers
stability regulations; its current state is given an historical perspective. The methods used
to develop these regulations are carefully examined. Besides regulations, the first volume
addresses the operational aspect of stability: ocean environment and ship behaviour are
described as they are seen from the bridge. A large amount of graphical material allows
x

using the presented information for practical guidance. Special attention is paid to on-
board stability measurements and their accuracy .•
The second volume (authored by V. L. Belenky and N. B. Sevastianov with the subtitle
"Risk of Capsizing") is a gathering of today's knowledge for tomorrow's development. It
is focused on how risk and reliability can be applied for evaluation and regulation of the
intact stability. First, the framework of future risk-based stability regulations is
considered. Then the book examines physical phenomena associated with stability loss
including broaching, greenwater influence and breaking waves action in order to evaluate
the risk of capsizing in different situations. Much attention is paid to the mechanics of
capsizing: as it seems to be necessary for interpretation and validation of numerical
simulation results. The latter is meant to facilitate confident applicability of these
methods for new ship designs.

Volume 9: L. Kobylinski and S. Kastner

Stability and Safety of Ships. Volume 1: Regulation and Operation
ISBN - 0-08-043001-5

Volume 10: V. L. Belenky and N. B. Sevastianov

Stability and Safety of Ships. Volume 2: Risk of Capsizing
ISBN - 0-08-044354-0
 xi

PREFACE
This book focuses on the state-of-the-art in the field of promotion of stability safety. It
includes regulatory and operational aspects of intact stability of ships. Ships must be safe
against capsizing at sea. Although capsizing accidents do not happen often nowadays, a
stability accident is one of the worst things that can happen to a ship. In most cases it
involves loss of life, often all hands aboard and total loss of the ship and her cargo.
Catastrophic heel leads to losing cargo, structural damage and serious danger to human
life.
Safety against capsizing or loss of stability accident may be secured by regulatory and
operational means. Stability regulations or requirements allow designing stable ships. But
it is obvious that no ship can be built that cannot be capsized by mismanagement or bad
operation. Therefore, operational measures are equally important for the safety as design
requirements. This book reviews knowledge, experience and information gathered in both
areas for the last 50 years and presents it in a systematic manner.
The authors anticipate that the potential readers of this book are familiar with the basic
stability theory and practical methods of calculation. Therefore, only very brief
references to the general stability concepts are included in Part 1 and Part 2 of this book.
It is the view of the authors that damage stability problems should be dealt with
separately, therefore they are not included here.
Part 1 (written by Professor Lech K. Kobylinski, Technical University of Gdansk) on
regulatory aspects of intact stability presents the progress on setting stability standards
from work at IMO, based on numerous contributions from a large number of shipping
nations. It discusses various methods used for the purpose of developing stability
standards and provides a critical review of standards currently in use. As it is obviously
impossible to assure safety only by design measures, the importance of operational
requirements and of the human factor is stressed. Prospects of developing improved
standards of safety against capsizing in various situations and the newest trends to
achieve enhanced safety at sea that take into account the above mentioned factors are
discussed.
This part is addressed mainly to ship designers, officers of national maritime
administrations, surveyors and plan reviewing engineers of classification societies
allowing them a better understanding of the background of stability requirements they
should respect. It is addressed also to scientists and administrative personnel who work
on the development of new, or the improvement of, existing safety rules involving
stability. Students studying ship stability problems may find useful material for further
study. These professionals are assumed to be interested in current national and
international stability regulations as well as the scientific background of the regulations
that are in force today.
Xll

Part 2 (written by Professor Sigismund Kastner, University of Applied Sciences Bremen)

is addressed to shipmasters, nautical ship officers, students of maritime and naval
academies, port authority officials, surveyors and engineers at shipyards, operators and
nautical personnel, in particular to lecturers and students of nautical schools. It can be
also recommended to ship designers and administrators. The structure of Part 2 is based
on his guest lectures at the Wodd Maritime University (WMU) in Malmo (Sweden). The
WMU was established on behalf of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) in
1983. This lecture entitled "Ship Dynamics and Stability" was given for students in
Maritime Education and Training (MET) for almost 2 decades.
The safe ship needs the responsible master to make decisions coping with the severe sea
environment. Seafarers have a different background and experience than ship designers,
although they both contribute to safe and economic shipping. The shipmaster operates the
vessel the shipyard has delivered, hence the specific terms operational stability and
safety were designated. The master has to cope with a number of problems with respect
to ship stability. The correct loading to fulfil the requirements must be assured. Stability
estimates can diverge from the real ship status due to inherent inaccuracies.
Environmental forces are not specifically known whilst at sea. Stability risk cannot be
judged solely by experience. Operational stability and safety needs special measures,
such as awareness of the human factor and enhanced maritime education and training
with specific guidance for the ship operator. Tools are the development of safety
scenarios in severe situations, ship motion characteristics made available on the bridge,
sensor support on the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic status of the ship, and safety
management and decision systems with computer support.
It has been a demanding but fascinating task to co-operate among the authors and the
editor from four different countries, with the publisher located in another country. The
authors appreciate the support of organisations, such as DAAD (Bonn) in funding
University co-operation and meetings. The authors want to express their warmest thanks
to all persons, colleagues and friends "Yho supported them with their comments,
discussion, advice, and active involvement at the different stages of writing this book.
We appreciate language aid and preliminary proof-reading carried out by Szymon
Kobylinski (Part 1) and Gregor Berns (Part 2). We are especially grateful to Robert M.
Conachey, who performed the language editing Qfthe whole manuscript.
We also wish to express sincere thanks to our wives Maryna Kobylinski and Marlene
Kastner, for their understanding and patience.
We are confident that the span of material covered in this new book on stability and
safety of ships can be widely used for reference, study and training in the shipping
community, from ship designers to ship operators, from administrators to researchers.
Opinions expressed are those of the respective authors and not necessarily of
organisations and institutions they have ever been affiliated with.
L. Kobylinski, S. Kastner,
April, 2003
The views and opinions expressed in this book are solely and strictly those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect those of Technical University of Gdansk, Foundation for Safety of Navigation and
Environment Protection or University of Applied Sciences, Bremen.
 xiii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Series preface .................................................................................................................... vii

Foreword ............................................................................................................................ ix
Preface ............................................................................................................................... xi

Part 1. Development of stability standards

Chapter 1. Historical development and basic stability concepts ................................... 3

1.1 History of stability and safety .................................................................................... 3
1.2 General ..................................................................................................................... 10
1.3 Measures of stability ................................................................................................ 10
1.4 Effect of heeling moments ....................................................................................... 15
1.5 Effect of shifting of the centre of gravity ................................................................. 19
1.5.1 Transverse shifting of loads ............................................................................... 19
1.5.2 Vertical shifting of loads .................................................................................... 21
1.6 Effect of adding or removing loads .......................................................................... 22

Chapter 2. Development and present status of stability standards ............................. 25

2.1 Concepts of safety and early attempts to establish stability standards ..................... 25
2.21MO work on development of stability standards .................................................... 36
2.3 Status of the international intact stability standards for various types of ships ....... 39
2.3.1 General ............................................................................................................... 39
2.3.2 General recommended intact stability.criteria for passenger and cargo ships ...40
2.3.3 Special criteria for certain types of ships .......................................................... .42
2.3.4 Compulsory stability requirements under provisions of SOLAS convention ...49
2.4 Operational and constructional requirements in IMO instruments .......................... 51
2.5 Review ofIMO instruments related to stability ....................................................... 52
2.6 Possible methods of developing stability standards ................................................. 52

Chapter 3. Standards based on the consideration of heeling moments ...................... 57

3.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 57
3.2 Factors causing heeling and influencing ship's stability .......................................... 58
3.3 Heeling moments caused by shifting the position of the centre of gravity .............. 59
3.3.1 Free surfaces of liquids ...................................................................................... 59
3.3.2 Icing ................................................................................................................... 61
3.3.3 Water absorption ................................................................................................ 62
3.3.4 Crowding of passengers on one side .................................................................. 62
3.3.5 Loose goods ....................................................................................................... 63
3.3.6 Water in deck well ............................................................................................. 66
3.3.7 Suspended loads ................................................................................................. 70
xiv

3.4 Heeling moments caused by external pulling forces ................................................ 70

3.4.1 Heeling moment created in turning .................................................................... 70
3.4.2 Heeling moments created by a towing hawser .................................................. 73
3.4.3 Heeling moment created by fishing gear ........................................................... 75
3.4.4 Heeling moment created by the anchor cable .................................................... 75
3.4.5 Heeling moment at replenishment at sea ........................................................... 76
3.5 Effect of wind and seaway ....................................................................................... 76
3.5.1 Practical models of the wind effect.. .................................................................. 76
3.5.2 Wind velocity ..................................................................................................... 78
3.5.3 Wind heeling moment ........................................................................................ 82
3.5.4 Calculation of rolling amplitude used in the weather criterion .......................... 86
3.5.5 The applicability of the weather criterion .......................................................... 89

Chapter 4. Statistical methods of developing stability standards ............................... 91

4.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 91
4.2 Method of J. Rahola ................................................................................................. 91
4.3 Method applied for development ofIMO stability standards .................................. 93
4.4 Results of the analysis of intact stability casualty records and stability parameters 95
4.5 Discrimination analysis .......................................................................................... 101
4.6 Regression analysis ................................................................................................ 104
4.7 Statistical evaluation ofthe effectiveness of stability criteria ................................ 107

Chapter 5. Probabilistic approach to the development ofstability standards ......... 111

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 111
5.2 Definition of capsizing and of stability accident.. .................................................. 112
5.3 Long-term probability of capsizing ........................................................................ 115
5.4 Short-term probability of capsizing ........................................................................ 117
5.5 Wave climates ........................................................................................................ 119
5.6 Capsizing scenarios ................................................................................................. 121
5.7 Probability of capsizing and stability criteria ......................................................... 125
5.8 Risk assessment. ..................................................................................................... 127
5.9 Acceptable level of risk .......................................................................................... 128

Chapter 6. Model tests of capsizing ............................................................................. 133

6.1 General ................................................................................................................... 133
6.2 Conditions of similarity and preparation of models ............................................... 135
6.3 Model tests of capsizing in open waters ................................................................. 138
6.4 Methodology and results of experiments on capsizing in open waters .................. 139
6.4.1 Basic techniques ............................................................................................... 139
6.4.2 Experiments performed by the University of Hamburg team .......................... 140
6.4.3 Experiments performed by the Gdansk Technical University ......................... 142
6.4.4 Experiments performed by the University of California ................................. 143
6.4.5 Experiments performed by Hokkaido University ............................................ 144
6.4.6 Results of capsizing experiments in open waters ............................................ 145
6.5 Model tests of capsizing in towing and seakeeping tanks ...................................... 149
6.5.1 Tests performed in various countries ............................................................... 149
Contents xv

6.5.2 General observations and guidelines on model tests of capsizing ................... 150
6.5.3 Results of systematic model tests of capsizing in the Hamburg Ship Model
Basin ................................................................................................................ 153
6.5.4 Systematic model tests of capsizing carried out in Japan ................................ 155
6.5.5 Capsizing model tests in breaking waves ........................................................ 159
6.5.6 Model tests performed in Canada .................................................................... 161
6.5.7 Model tests in beam waves .............................................................................. 164
6.5.8 Model tests in following waves ....................................................................... 164

Chapter 7. Stability regulations - future outlook ........................................................ 167

7.1 Stability criteria - state of art ................................................................................. 167
7.2 System approach to safety against capsizing ......................................................... 168
7.3 System safety assessment ....................................................................................... 170
7.4 Importance of operational factors ........................................................................... 171
7.5 New design philosophy. Formal safety assessment ............................................... 172
7.6 Concluding remarks ............................................................................................... 174

Part 2. Operational aspects of stability and safety

Chapter 8. Operational stability - hydrostatics and hydrodynamics ....................... 177
8.1 Ship operation as an interaction process ................................................................ 177
8.2 Ship stability in practice ......................................................................................... 178
8.3 Basic principle of stability ...................................................................................... 179
8.4 Hydrostatics and dynamics in ship stability ........................................................... 180
8.5 Definition of ship stability using quasi-static moment balance ............................. 182
8.6 Learning from disasters or transfer of theoretical achievements? .......................... 184

Chapter 9. Sea environment ......................................................................................... 191

9.1 The ship in the marine environment ....... :............................................................... 191
9.2 Wind ....................................................................................................................... 191
9.3 Variations in level of sea surface ........................................................................... 193
9.4 Regular waves ........................................................................................................ 194
9.4.1 The trochoid ..................................................................................................... 194
9.4.2 Higher order waves. Stokes and Airy theory ................................................... 195
9.5 The sinusoidal wave ............................................................................................... 197
9.5.1 Basic relationships to describe regular waves in deep water ........................... 197
9.5.2 Normal dispersion of a wave field ................................................................... 199
9.5.3 Orbital motion of water particles in a wave ..................................................... 200
9.6 Irregular waves ....................................................................................................... 20 1
9.7 Spectrum formulae by Pierson/Moskowitz and Bretschneider .............................. 204
9.8 The JONSW AP seaway spectrum .......................................................................... 205
9.9 Maximum wave height in stationary random sea ................................................... 206
9.10 Long-term statistics of irregular seaway .............................................................. 210
9.11 Wave data from observations ............................................................................... 211
9.12 Wave climate ........................................................................................................ 214
xvi

Chapter 10. Roll excitation and influence of speed and heading .............................. 217
10.1 Motion directions of rigid body ........................................................................... 217
10.2 Mass moment of inertia ........................................................................................ 220
10.3 Linear restoring moment ...................................................................................... 221
10.4 Natural roll period ................................................................................................ 222
10.5 Roll damping ........................................................................................................ 223
10.6 GM - To relationship and the rolling period test .................................................. 225
10.7 Different modes of roll excitation in a seaway ..................................................... 228
10.8 Ship roll in beam seas .......................................................................................... ·228
10.9 Roll in beam seas at large amplitudes .................................................................. 232
10.10 GZ-variation in longitudinal waves .......................................................... ·........ ·234
10.11 The encounter period of ship and waves ............................................................ 239
10.12 The encounter frequency .................................................................................... 243
10.13 Wave group of two regular waves ...................................................... ·····......·.... 243
10.14 Wave encounter of a ship in irregular seas ........................................................ 247
10.15 Wave energy and encounter spectra ................................................................... 251
10.16 Relevant frequencies ofthe spectrum of encounter ........................................... 252
10.17 The bandwidth of the transformed seaway spectrum ......................................... 255
10.18 Irregular time series of wave encounter ............................................................. 257

Chapter 11. Resonance and large roll motion ....................................................... ·....·261

11.1 Roll resonance ...................................................................................................... 261
11.1.1 Resonance from external excitation in beam seas ......................................... 262
11.1.2 Parametric roll resonance in following and stem quartering seas ................. 265
11.1.3 Practical method to avoid roll resonance ....................................................... 267
11.1.4 General steps by the master of avoiding resonance ....................................... 270
11.1.5 Effective GM$ at large roll .......................................................... ·................ ··273
11.1.6 Taking notes on extreme roll ........................................................... ·····........ ·277
11.2 Modes of capsize in irregular seas .:..................................................................... 278
11.2.1 Free running model tests to study capsize in irregular seas ........................... 278
11.2.2 Capsizing mode 1: low cycle resonance ........................................................ 280
11.2.3 Capsizing mode 2: pure loss of stability ........................................................ 283
11.2.4 Capsizing mode 3: broach and capsize .......................................................... 285
11.2.5 Detailed dynamics of ship capsize ................................................................. 286
11.2.6 Videos on capsizing model tests .................................................................... 289
11.3 Statistical precision of determining the probability of capsizing in random seas 290
11.3.1 How predictable is capsizing in extreme random seas? ................................. 290
11.3.2 Binomial, Poisson and exponential distribution ............................................ 293
11.3.3 Probability of time until capsize .................................................................... 294
11.3.4 Probability background for random trials ...................................................... 296
11.3.5 Testing of capsizing hypothesis ..................................................................... 297
11.3.6 Statistical error type 1..................................................................................... 299
11.3.7 Statistical error type II ................................................................................... 301
11.3.8 Conclusions for preventing rare events ...................................................... ·..·302
Contents xvii

Chapter 12. Forces due to roll motion .....................................•................................... 305

12.1 Roll acceleration ................................................................................................... 305
12.2 Acceleration forces due to roll depending on location within the ship ................ 309
12.3 Acceleration forces on cargo ................................................................................ 312
12.4 Resultant force from all motion degrees offreedom ............................................ 313
12.5 Approximation of dynamic loads on cargo .......................................................... 316
12.6 Simulation of dynamic behaviour of ship and cargo ............................................ 318
12.7 Ships lost after shifting of cargo and corresponding operational conditions ....... 320

Chapter 13. Measurement and accuracy of stability status ....................................... 323

13.1 Decision systems based on measurements ........................................................... 323
13.1.1 Purpose of stability measurements ................................................................. 323
13.1.2 Load computer for mass calculations and hydrostatics ................................. 325
13.1.3 Loading management supported by measurements ....................................... 327
13.1.4 Automatic ship inclining to measure the metacentric height GM .................. 328
13.1.5 Monitoring of operational stability ................................................................ 331
13.1.6 Voyage data recorder for monitoring casualties ............................................ 334
13.1.7 Ship routeing .................................................................................................. 334
13.1.8 Measurement of actual ship stability in waves .............................................. 337
13.1.9 Mathematical decision systems and artificial intelligence ............................. 338
13.1.10 Economic advantages of stability control systems ...................................... 341
13.2 Accuracy of the estimation of ship stability status ............................................... 342
13.2.1 Historical background .................................................................................... 342
13.2.2 Basic requirements for a measuring system in ship inclining ........................ 343
13.2.3 Theory of ship inclining measurements with a pendulum ............................. 343
13.2.4 Dynamic response of heel gauge aboard the ship .......................................... 344
13.2.5 Correct reading of bridge pendulum .............................................................. 348
13.2.6 Laboratory testing of gauge accuracy ............................................................ 349
13.2.7 Measuring errors ............................ :............................................................... 349
13.2.8 Accuracy of heel measurement ...................................................................... 351
13.2.9 Accuracy of heel measurement for ship yard inclining ................................. 353
13.2.10 Practical length of pendulum ....................................................................... 354
13.2.11 IMO requirements for ship inclining test.. ................................................... 355
13.2.12 Conclusions on heel measurement with pendulum ...................................... 356
13.2.13 Error statistics of operational ship inclining ................................................ 358

Chapter 14. Safety management and operational requirements ............................... 359

14.1 Safety management of ship stability .................................................................... 359
14.1.1 Need to introduce a ship stability management system ................................. 359
14.1.2 Tools of an efficient stability management. ................................................... 360
14.1.3 The Master's range of judgement for operational stability assessment.. ....... 360
14.1.4 Seakeeping guidance and survivability criteria ............................................. 362
14.2 Guidelines on the in-service ship stability ........................................................... 368
14.2.1 Purpose of guidelines for operational stability .............................................. 368
14.2.2 Loading and stability manua1... ...................................................................... 369
xviii

14.2.3 Guidelines on the management of ship stability ............................................ 370

14.2.4 Guidance to the Master for avoiding dangerous situations in following and
quartering seas ............................................................................................... 371
14.2.5 International safety management code (ISM) ................................................ 378
14.3 The human factor. maritime education and training ............................................ 379
14.4 Operational stability in the future- a wishful forecast ......................................... 382

References ........................................................................................................................ 383

References on international documents .......................................................................... .404
Documents IMO .......................................................................................................... .404
Documents of other international organisations .......................................................... .406
Stability requirements of various countries ................................................................. .406
Subj ect index .................................................................................................................. .409
Part 1

Development of Stability Standards

 3

Chapter 1

Historical Development and Basic Stability Concepts

1.1 History of Stability and Safety

Seafaring was always a dangerous enterprise involving serious risk of losing life and
property, and also risk of pollution ofthe environment.
Looking back at the history of seafaring, one may find that in old times perils of the sea
were well recognised and great risks to which ships were subjected at sea were in a way
accepted. In fact, even in the nineteenth century people risking a sea voyage considered
themselves to be very fortunate if they arrived safely at the port of destination and for that
a vote of thanks to God had to be offered. The reflection of this situation could be found
easily in the literature, art and. tales of seamen but also in the reports on casualties,
although systematic statistics of casualties have been carried out only recently.
The industrial revolution of the nineteenth century and rapid expansion of sea
transportation, seafaring and shipbuilding that followed caused the issue of marine safety
to become more important. From one side, in view of the growing number of ships at sea,
a very high risk involved in seafaring could not· be accepted. On the other hand, progress
in marine technology provided realistic possibilities to improve safety against capsizing
or foundering.
From the oldest times shipbuilders were fully aware that ships must be stable at sea.
Seneca in the first century A.D. wrote: " Navis bona dicitur, non que prestiosis coloribus
picta est ... sed stabilis et firma ... et iuncturis aquam exc1udendibus spissa, ad ferendum
incursum maris solida, velox et non sentiens ventum ... "(quote after Gleijeses [1945]).
The knowledge of how to build safe ships was, however, based solely on experience that, in
turn, was based on methods of "trial and error" where "errors" were sea disasters. Lessons
from sea disasters materialised in rough recommendations on appropriate proportions and
dimensions of the ship's hull and its construction that would safeguard stability and good
seakeeping qualities. These recommendations were passed from generation to generation of
shipbuilders and were guarded in extreme secrecy. Naval architecture was really a craft and
not a science. Only in the second half of the nineteenth century did science began to affect
shipbuilding appreciably, although Bouguer [1746] laid down the fundamentals of naval
architecture much earlier.
4 a~~l

In view of the lack of knowledge about the basic laws concerning stability of floating
bodies, the first recommendations on how to build safe ships referred to stability in the
indirect way by requiring sufficient height of the deck above water. With the proper
recommendations regarding distribution of weights and the form of the underwater
portion of the ship, this in fact, secured sufficient stability in most cases.
The oldest traces of safety recommendations refer to the prevention of overloading of ships,
i.e. to the freeboard if we use the modem terminology. In a document found in Tunisia dated
to the first century B.C., containing the contract for transportation of goods by sea, the
skipper solemnly promised not to take any additional load over the agreed quantity. The
load line mark was known already in the middle ages. The Venetian code of maritime law
from 1255 required the insertion of the load line mark in the form of an iron cross-nailed to
the ships' side. [Krappinger 1964]
In the second half of the eighteenth century Lloyd's Register of Shipping issued the first
recommendation on the magnitude of the freeboard - it required 2 to 3 inches per foot of
the height of the hold. Lloyd's subsequently amended the recommendation. Also the
Liverpool Underwriters Society had issued other more elaborate recommendations much
earlier. [Cowley 1988]
Wooden ships, however, were built according to well-grounded, traditional and
experienced practices and were comparatively safe. The introduction of steel as a
material for ships' hulls was an important new development, but with no previous
experience, it caused the number of casualties to quickly increase. The public reaction to
high losses forced the British Government to form the Marine Department of the Board
of Trade, but its resources were small and activity limited. Only in 1864, in view of
further pressure of public opinion, a committee was created to investigate this situation.
The committee presented its report in 1867 proposing draft freeboard standards.
In the following years, there was a rapid development of freeboard rules. In this
connection, the name of Samuel Plimsoll (1824 - 1898) has to be mentioned. He led the
campaign aimed at increasing the safety of ships and proposed the load line mark in the
form used to present days known as the "Plimsoll disc" [Alderman 1972]. The chronicle
of events related to the development ofload line rules is as follows:
1876 - Merchant Shipping Act which required positioning of the load mark on all British
ships over 80 GRT.
1885 - Creation of Load Lines Committee with Lloyd's Register of Shipping, which
developed the first load line tables.
1894 - Second Merchant Shipping Act containing load lines rules compulsory in Britain
up tb 1930.
1903 - See-Berufsgenossenschaft issued first German regulations on load lines.
1927 - Load Lines Committee prepared draft international load lines rules.
1930 - First International Convention on Load Lines adopted (LL Convention).
It has to be stressed that in spite of the passing of the two important Merchant Shipping
Acts of 1876 and 1894 under pressure of public opinion and in spite of the Samuel
Plimsoll campaign, the opinion of legislators was against introducing any regulations. In
Historical Development and Basic Stability Concepts 5

1866 the Head of the Marine Department, Thomas Gray at a conference, expressed the
philosophy of the legislators in the following terms: "there can be no question that
government interference is not only unnecessary, but may really become vicious if it
attempts to attain an end by official inspection and supervision that can be better attained
by the development of free healthy competition and by the self-interest and emulation of
the trader, since it fetters the development of trade, it stands in the way of the
advancement of science, and it interferes to the prejudice of the liberty of the subject ".
The Board's Permanent Secretary, at the same meeting, said that: "they must look to self-
interest and not to government regulations, as the great element of safety of life on board
ship". The ship owners agreed with him that: "ship owner and ship master together are
very much better judges of what ought to be done to a ship than anybody else can
possibly be" (quoted after [Cowley 1988]).
Recalling these opinion that result from liberal ideas of the nineteenth century, one must
remember appalling conditions present on board cargo and passenger ships, where
sometimes one third of the emigrants died during the voyage and numerous casualties
occurred. Legislators and ship owners gave up only under great pressure from public
agitation in response to the high death toll.
The development of the freeboard rules only in an indirect way inadequately secured
safety against capsizing. The LL Convention referred directly to one aspect of stability
only, viz. it required the master must be supplied with information concerning stability.
The most important international instruments, viz. International Convention for the
Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS Convention) did not include requirements concerning
stability either, with the exception of a similar provision as in the LL Convention.
The history of SOLAS Conventions was very turbulent. The SOLAS Conventions from
the very beginning included subdivision and damage stability requirements that were to a
great extent influenced by sea disasters.
It is known that by the Middle Ages, it was required in China that junks must be fitted
with collision bulkheads in order to secure surVivability in case of collision. Hulls of
wooden ships were rather resistant to damage and as it was comparatively easy to plumb
a hole, the installation of watertight bulkheads was considered not important. Along with
the substitution of steel for wood in hull construction the situation changed and damage
stability became important elements of safety.
The British Merchant Shipping Act from 1854 included probably the first requirements
concerning subdivision. It required that passenger ships be fitted with a collision
bulkhead and two bulkheads around the machinery space. In 1891, the Committee of the
British Board of Trade proposed subdivision and damage stability rules for passenger
ships (no one bothered at the time about cargo ships and their crews) where a two-
compartment standard was required. The rules were, however, considered by the
maritime world unnecessarily severe and were never implemented. Only after several
serious disasters, where ships foundered due to lack of proper subdivision, did public
opinion force maritime authorities to take actions. (ON WO foundered in 1894 with 250
lives lost, 1897 ELBE with 355 lives lost, 1912 - TITANIC * with 1513 lives lost, 1913-

*) Different sources quote different number of lives lost. The number 1513 is quoted after Encyclopedia
Britannica.
6 CMpwl

EMPRESS OF IRELAND with 1024 lives lost). The TITANIC disaster particularly
caused sharp reaction of the public. Although many lives were lost at sea in minor
casualties, public opinion was always much more sensitive to serious casualties involving
heavy losses than to regular losses of lesser magnitude. Moreover the TITANIC was a
flagship and was claimed to be unsinkable and was on her maiden voyage with many
personalities on board. It was that which shook the marine world and the general public.
The main cause of heavy loss oflife was insufficient life boat capacity, however.
The Court of Formal Investigation ofthe casualty recommended that boatage be provided
for all persons on board as well as effective subdivision to standards determined by the
newly appointed Bulkheads Committee. The final recommendation was that the United
Kingdom should call an International Conference to consider and possibly agree upon an
International Convention.
Between 12 November 1913 and 20 January 1914 the first International Conference on
the Safety of Life at Sea took place but the prepared text of the Convention was never
ratified because of the outbreak of the First World War. It was not until 1929 the SOLAS
Conference took place and adopted subdivision and damage stability regulations basically
following the rules of its unratified predecessor. Further International Conferences
adopted the 1948, 1960 and 1974 Conventions, Protocols to the Conventions and several
amendments.
The 1960 SOLAS Conference adopted an important recommendation requesting
IMCO**) to initiate work on the development of subdivision and damage stability
regulations based on probabilistic approach both for passenger and cargo ships, which
subsequently were developed and adopted by the IMO Assembly by Resolution A.265
(VIII). The 1960 SOLAS Conference recommended also that IMO should develop intact
stability standards for passenger, cargo ships and fishing vessels. IMCO, (IMO) was the
sole United Nations agency responsible for marine safety. It commenced its work in 1959
after its convention came into force. This was an important turning point in the promotion
of maritime safety, and IMO through .its Committees and Subcommittees started
developing safety requirements in various fields of maritime activity, inter allia in the
field of subdivision, load lines and stability.
As it was already mentioned the SOLAS Conventions did not directly refer to intact
stability, except that they included the provision concerning stability information that has
to be supplied to the master.
Adoption of the afore-said recommendation appeared to be an important turning point in
the work on the development of stability standards as for the first time the need for
international stability standards was articulated and also a scientific approach to the
development of safety standards was recommended. At the same time the subdivision and
damage stability requirements of the 1960 SOLAS Convention were strongly criticised as
based on vague assumptions involving several "factors" intended to take account of ship
characteristics in an approximate way. Nevertheless a long time passed until the

**) IMCO- Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organisation. In 1982, it changed its name to the
International Maritime Organisation -IMO. In the text, references are made to IMO irrespective of whether
it was before or after 1982
Historical Development and Basic Stability Concepts 7

preference for a probabilistic approach to subdivision was fully recognised and

probabilistic subdivision standards were developed. [IMO, Resolution A.265(VIII)].
Further work on subdivision and damage stability concentrated on the development of
standards for cargo ships that subsequently were included in the amendments to the
SaLAS Convention. In view of several serious casualties with Ro-Ro ferries and in
particularly after the casualties of the HERALD OF FREE ENTERPRISE, attention was
also drawn to the safety problems of Ro-Ro ships and respective amendments to the
SaLAS Convention were developed and adopted. After the ESTONIA disaster, further
amendments to the SaLAS Convention were adopted related to the safety of Ro-Ro
passenger ships.
Development of regulations securing safety against capsizing encountered serious
problems. This might not be simple, because of the extreme difficulty in dealing with the
complicated phenomena of motion of ships amongst the waves. Also, opinions were
expressed that the responsibility for securing sufficient stability should be left to the
master. With a series of stability accidents, particularly with small vessels and with the
view that many new ships with proportions and arrangements different from those of
conventional ships had been built the need to develop intact stability criteria was more
obvious.
Safety against capsizing was, however, recognised a long time ago and theoretical and
practical investigations of stability problems have a long history.
Probably Bouguer [1746] in his previously mentioned book already was the first to
introduce the concept of metacentric height as a measure of stability. Jean Bernouilli
[1714], Euler [1749], Attwood [1796] and others referred to stability without, however,
proposing any standards. In particular Daniel Bernouilli [1757] developed the theory of
rolling which was followed up to the middl~ of the nineteenth century. The first who
introduced the concept of dynamic stability was Moseley [1850].
The metacentric height was considered as a, sufficient measure of stability up to 1870.
The tragedy of the naval ship "CAPTAIN" which capsized in Biscay Bay during a squall
drew attention of naval architects to stability at large angles of heel. This casualty is
worth recalling.
"CAPTAIN" was a low-built ship built by Coles. Her righting arm curves are shown in
fig.I.I. In the same figure the righting arm curves of the ship "MONARCH" are shown.
"MONARCH" built by Reed was of traditional design having a high freeboard.
Metacentric heights of both ships were not very different, but the range of righting arm
curves was widely different. Both ships were sailing alongside in Biscay Bay in moderate
weather conditions when during a short squall accompanied by heavy rain "CAPTAIN"
capsized and disappeared almost instantly taking with her all hands to the bottom of the
sea [Brown 1981].
Admiral Reed warned the British Admiralty during the construction of CAPTAIN that
her righting moments curve is insufficient but his warnings were not heard. After the
disaster, the importance of stability at large angles of heel was recognised, and the
righting moment curve was widely known as Reed's curve [Reed 1868].
By the end of the nineteenth century the first criteria regarding minimum values of
metacentric height and of some other stability parameters were proposed. These
proposals are discussed in detail in Chapter 2.1. The proposals were, however, never
officially accepted and remained as loose recommendations without any legal power. The
activity in developing and proposing such criteria was always greater after serious
stability casualties occurred. For example, in 1894 during the stormy night of 22/23
December, six German fishing boats capsized and foundered in the North Sea. Following
these casualties the German Professional Mariners' Association initiated investigations
that finally resulted in recommending minimum values of the righting arms for fishing
vessels. [Herner, Rusch, 1952].
It has to be noted that in 1939, Rahola developed a method of establishing minimum
values of stability parameters based on the analysis of casualty records [Rahola 1935,
1939]. The criteria recommended by him were used for a long time in several countries
until 1968, when an international recommendation on stability criteria was finally
developed by IMO, using a basically similar method.
The first official national standards and requirements concerning stability were developed
and introduced in 1947 by the Russian Register of Shipping. They were based on the
principle of equalisation of the wind heeling moment wi'th the righting moment of the
ship (see Chapter 2.1).
After IMO had started working on the development of the international standards the
activity in the field of stability of ships increased greatly. Work of the Organisation on
development of stability standards is discussed thoroughly in Chapter 2.2. This work
ultimately resulted in adoption of several recommendations and codes that included
stability standards for various types of ships. This was possible, because research
programmes on stability were initiated in many universities and research organisations
throughout the world.
Until the end of the 1950's stability was treated in a static or quasi-static way and
research was concentrated on the improvement of methods of calculation of righting arm
curves and on evaluation of static or dynamic heeling moments. Rolling of ships in waves
was considered on the basis of the Froude-Krylov method, which assumed regular wave
and small inclinations. After the famous paper by St. Denis and Pierson [1953] had been
published, the tool was available to investigate stability of ships in a seaway where the
Historical Development and Basic Stability Concepts 9

ship could be treated as a dynamic system. The probabilistic approach to safety against
capsizing was also pursued and nonlinear phenomena investigated.
The results of these investigations were published in numerous papers and presented at
specialised international conferences on stability. The first International Conference on
Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles (STAB) was organised in Glasgow in 1975.
Subsequently, further STAB Conferences were held in Tokyo in 1982, in Gdansk in
1986, in Naples in 1990, in Melbourne, Florida in 1994, in Varna in 1997 and in
Launceston, Tasmania in 2000. The eighth STAB Conference is scheduled for the year
2003 and it will be held in Madrid. In 1990 also the International Stability Forum was
created with the objective to pursue work on stability problems internationally.
Apart from the STAB conferences, several international symposia and workshops were
also organised in a few countries, with some meeting regularly. In Kaliningrad (Russia)
the Workshop on Physical and Mathematical Modelling of Vessel's Stability in a Seaway
was held in 1993. That was followed two years later by the Symposium on Ship Safety in
a Seaway in memory of Professor N. B. Sevastianov. In 1993 also, the u.S. Coast Guard
organised a Vessels Stability Symposium in New London, Connecticut.
In 1995, the first International Workshop on Contemporary Problems of Stability and
Operational Safety of Ships was organised in Glasgow. This was followed by the second
one in Osaka (1996), the third in Crete (1997), the fourth in St. Johns (1998), and the fifth
in Trieste (2001). Also the International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC) created the
Stability Committee to study first of all problems related to mathematical modelling and
to model tests of stability.
Comprehensive research programmes on stability were accomplished in several
countries. The results of these programmes are elaborated on in subsequent chapters.
However, two such programmes sponsored by the British and Norwegian governments
were aimed at developing "rational" or "improved" criteria and included a wide range of
subjects. The results of the British SAFES HIP project were presented at a specially
organised international conference organised by RINA in 1986. Planning and
supervision of the Norwegian project was performed by an international scientific
Committee consisting of several specialists on stability problems.
It is obvious that the main cause of the increased activity in the field of was the fact that
IMO started in 1962 work towards development of stability standards. Although the
results achieved in this work are remarkable and from a practical point of view an
introduction of the international stability standards resulted in increased safety against
capsizing, there are still many problems to be solved until an ultimate solution, which is
not yet available, can be obtained.
This tremendous effort which certainly resulted in a much better understanding of
stability problems and capsizing phenomena showed, however, that problems of stability
of ships in a seaway including safety against capsizing are extremely complicated and the
task of development of criteria of surviving based on risk of capsizing taking into
consideration all possible situations which may be encountered during the vessel's
lifetime is still far from being accomplished.
 25

Chapter 2

Development and Present Status of Stability Standards

2.1 Concepts of Safety and Early Attempts to Establish Stability Standards

In the past the ability to build ships that were safe and had good seakeeping qualities was
based entirely on experience gained over a long time and passed on from generation to
generation. The dimensions and proportions of the ship to be built, ensuring stability and
seaworthiness, were estimated on the basis of this experience. If an accident happened,
the shipbuilders learned from their lesson and improved the construction of subsequent
ships.
This was the oldest concept of safety, where safety was achieved by the "trial and error"
method.
This traditional way of building ships has survived to this day in many developing
countries, where small ships have been built without any drawings and calculations and
the design was solely based on experience. This method however, cannot be accepted any
more, although lessons from accidents still have to be taken in order to improve ship
design for safety. We may only mention the HERALD OF FREE ENTERPRISE;
ALLEXANDER KIELLAND or ESTONIA casuc;lltiesfollowing which several measures
aimed at increasing safety were undertaken.
The method where safety was related to ship size and proportions was used by
classification societies not so long ago, where their regulations specifying hull scantlings
were related to ship parameters. Krappinger [1967] defined this concept of safety as the
assignment of hardware and this concept is often used as a basis of simple safety
requirements up to this day.
A more advanced concept of safety does not include assignment of dimensions or
proportions of an object, but assignment of its physical properties. In respect to stability,
this means assignment of values of metacentric height or of the righting arms at various
angles of heel. The method of estimation of these values could be, however, the same, i.e.
the trial and error method. All older stability criteria or recommendations were actually
based on this method.
The method of establishing criteria in the form of the hardware could be improved if
there were sufficient statistical data and if these data are methodically and scientifically
analysed. There are known cases of the application of this method comparatively recently
(e.g. IMO, Resolution A.207 (VII».
Although standards proposed by Rahola were not officially adopted, they attracted wide
attention in the maritime world and were unofficially adopted as a recommendation by
several countries. In some other countries they constituted a basis for the development of
national requirements. Finally, they were taken into account when IMO developed its
requirements in the mid-sixties, and the method originally invented by Rahola, with
certain improvements, was used in the analysis of casualty records collected by IMO.
This is discussed in detail in subchapter 4.2.
A very good review of the historical stability criteria was included in the book by
Lugovsky [1963] and in the paper by Henricson [1980]. It reveals that there were three
basic approaches in this development.
The first approach represented by Anderson, Posdyunin and Niedermair consisted of the
standardisation of the metacentric height, which was considered as a sufficient measure
of stability. The advantage of this approach is .simplicity; however limiting requirements
to GMo only cannot ensure safety at large angles of heel. In particular, ships with a small
freeboard, having a large GMo , but a small range of righting arm curves might be
dangerous (for example - CAPTAIN).
The second approach consisted of the standardisation of the GZ curve. This was
represented by Denny, Benjamin, and Skinner. Criteria developed by those authors were
based on the physical parameters of the ship, they did not, however, take into
consideration external heeling moments acting on the ship at sea.
The third approach included the consideration of dynamic stability and at least the partial
consideration of external heeling moments. This approach was represented by
Blagoveshchensky, Pierrottet, Rahola, and Norrby. The last approach is the most
advantageous and substantiated as it gives due consideration to the physical phenomena
involved. Most national stability requirements developed later were based on this
approach.
All the above quoted proposed standards of stability were only recommendations without
any legal power. Probably the first official proposal to establish stability criteria was put
forward in 1926 by the American Marine Standardisation Committee [USA 1926]. The
32 Chapter 2

proposed standards included the criterion of minimal metacentric height. They reflected
the tendency of those times. Minimal metacentric height was estimated, taking into
account the wind heeling moment, heeling moment of passengers crowding and heeling
moment caused by flooding of two adjacent compartments.
About the same time the Technical Committee of the Russian Register of Shipping
commenced work on the preparation of national stability criteria. This work was not
completed, although the draft requirements as prepared by the Committee were published
in 1934 [Nogid 1934]. The criteria were based on the calculation of the dynamic wind
heeling moment. In 1938 - 1939 the Russian Register of Shipping resumed work on
stability criteria and the results of this work were presented by Avotin [1940]. The
criteria were based on the calculation of the dynamic wind heeling moment, which has to
be balanced by the restoring moment. This was finally adopted as a basic criterion of
stability in the officially adopted regulations of the Russian Register of Shipping [USSR
1948, 1961]. In 1948 they were approved as temporary requirements and after subsequent
modifications in 1959 and 1963 they received permanent status. For details concerning
the development of these regulations, refer to the book by Lugovsky [1963]. The basic
principle of these requirements consisting of calculation of the dynamic wind heeling
moment, and taking into account rolling, is discussed in subchapter 3.5.
In several countries after WWII attempts were made to develop national stability
requirements. Some countries, e.g. Poland [1957, 1982], German Democratic Republic
[1953], Yugoslavia [1959] and China [Lugovsky, 1963] adopted requirements based on
the regulations of Russia. Also, Japan [1959, 1963] introduced requirements based on
calculation of the dynamic wind heeling moment, taking into account amplitude of
rolling. The standard based on this approach, known as "weather criterion" was adopted
also as a recommendation in some other countries. The USA developed their
requirements in the form of minimal metacentric height taking into account various
heeling moments [USA 1959- 1963]. Canada [1969], Greece [1963], Italy [1963], France
[IMO 1964] and the Netherlands [IMO 1977] officially adopted recommended stability
standards which were, however, not compulsory.
The situation regarding the current status of national stability requirement in various
countries was analysed in 1964 by the IMO Working Group on Intact Stability as a
background for the development of international standards. Results of this analysis were
presented in [IMO 1964]; they were also reported in other publications [Jens 1965,
Kobylinski 1964]. At that time (1964) the information on the current status of national
stability requirements was received from 33 countries. Those countries could be divided
in three groups. The first group, consisting of six countries, reported that they did not
apply any stability requirements. The second group, consisting of sixteen countries,
reported that they required compliance with the SOLAS 1948 regulations. Five of them,
in addition, recommended the application (unofficially) of Rahola criteria. The third
group, consisted of eleven countries, which adopted national stability requirements in
addition to the SOLAS 1948 regulations. The scope of application of these requirements
varied however, and is shown in table 2.2.
In most of the eleven countries of the third group, the regulations also included
requirements pertaining to the GZ curve. A comparison of the requirements is shown in
Development and Present Status of Stability Standards 33

table 2.3. Apparently, the differences among the required parameters in the various
countries were not very large

From the time of the analysis mentioned above, the situation regarding stability
requirements in force in various countries has changed because of IMO developed
international stability requirements for different types of ships, which were implemented
by several countries and included into their own national regulations. At the same time,
most countries gave up further development of their own requirements, although some of
them supplemented IMO requirements. As the application of IMO Resolution A.167
36 Chapter 2

2.2 IMO Work on Development of Stability Standards

Since its establishment under its founding Convention adopted in 1948, IMO (lMCO) has
made considerable progress towards the development of marine safety requirements.
IMO practically commenced its work in 1959 when its convention came into force.
Three types of instruments can be prepared and adopted within the IMO structure, each
having a different legal status. These are conventions, recommendations and guidelines.
The conventions, together with appendices and attachments are adopted by the
international conferences or by the expanded Maritime Safety Committee. After coming
into force in accordance with the agreed procedure, they became compulsory for all
parties. The IMO Assembly adopts recommendations by its resolutions. Unless countries
implement them by inclusion in their national requirements they are only
recommendations in nature. Guidelines are also recommendations in nature and contain
detailed specifications of less importantance.
At the time IMO commenced its work, no international requirements concerning intact
stability existed except the requirement in the SOLAS 1948 Convention related to the
information to be provided to the Master and to the inclining test. A, similar requirement
was included in the 1966 Load Line Convention. The SOLAS Convention, however,
included specific requirements on carriage of grain
At the 1960 SOLAS Conference some countries submitted proposals to include in the
Convention requirements concerning intact stability. The proposals were not accepted
because the majority of delegations considered that detailed stability requirements need
thorough consideration and checking, for which time during the conference was not
available. Some delegations also were of the opinion that intact stability of passenger
ships is indirectly required by requirements concerning damage stability included in the
SOLAS Convention.
Ultimately, the 1960 SOLAS Conference adopted the important Recommendation No 7,
which actually initiated work towards development of international stability standards.
The text of this recommendation reads:
" 7. Intact Stabilitv of Passen1!er Shivs. Cargo Ships and Fishing Vessels
The Conference, having considered proposals made by certain Governments to adopt as
part of the present Convention Regulations for intact stability, concluded that further
study should be given to these proposals and to any other relevant material, which may
be submitted by interested Governments.
The Conference therefore recommends that the Organisation should, at a convenient
opportunity, initiate studies, on the basis of the information referred to above of (a)
intact stability of passenger ships, (b) intact stability of cargo ships, (c) intact stability of
fishing vessels, and (d) standards of stability information, taking into account the
decision of the present Conference on requirements for damage stability and the results
of any further studies which may be carried out by the Organisation on the subdivision
and damage stability of cargo ships in pursuance of recommendation 8 of the
Conference, the object being the formulation of such international standards as may
appear necessary.
Development and Present Status of Stability Standards 37

The Conference further recommends that in such studies the Organisation should take
into account studies already undertaken by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the
United Nations on the stability of fishing vessels and should co-operate with that
Organisation on that aspect of the matter" (end of quotation).
Following this recommendation, IMO was compelled to create the Sub-Committee on
Subdivision and Stability Problems (STAB) and in 1962 to undertake work on the
development of stability criteria for passenger, cargo and fishing vessels.
Two subsidiary Working Groups - on Subdivision and Damage Stability and on Intact
Stability originated during the beginning of work of the IMO STAB Sub-Committee. The
Working Group on Intact Stability existed until 1968 when it was disbanded and the Sub-
Committee itself undertook further development. Until then, however, the work of the
Working Group was restricted to passenger and cargo ships.
In 1964, IMO also initiated the development of stability requirements for fishing vessels.
As fishing vessels were also under the responsibility of the other United Nations Agency,
the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), a conference was organised in Gdansk in
1963 [FAO 1963] with the participation of both FAO and IMO representatives and
invited experts from various countries in order to consider stability problems of fishing
vessels. This Conference agreed that further work on the development of stability
requirements for fishing vessels would be performed within the IMO structure. Following
this decision, the Panel of Experts on Stability of Fishing Vessels (PFV) was created
within the IMO in which the representatives of the FAO and of the International Labour
Organisation (ILO) also participated.
In 1969, this panel was transformed into the Subcommittee on Safety of Fishing Vessels
(SFV), which in turn, after concluding the 1977 Torremolinos Conference on Safety of
Fishing Vessels, was in 1980 combined with the STAB Sub-Committee into the Sub-
Committee on Stability and Load Lines and on Fishing Vessel Safety (SLF). The SLF
Sub-Committee in 1978 again created the Working Group on Intact Stability as a
subsidiary body, meeting in parallel to the Sub-Committee meetings and reporting at the
end of each meeting to the Sub-Committee. The bulk of the technical and drafting work
in preparation ofrequirements was performed within this working group.
Commencing its work on intact stability criteria the STAB Sub-Committee stated that
when developing international criteria, it is necessary to take into account the heeling
moments from external forces at sea. It realised, however, that such an approach would
not enable the development of stability criteria in a short time. Therefore, the Sub-
Committee decided to base future criteria, as a first step, on statistics of casualties, and in
particular, analysing stability parameters for ships which capsized and for those which
were considered safe in operation. It decided also to analyse the contents of existing
national stability requirements. [IMO 1962] As a result of this decision, the Intact
Stability Working Group (IS) as well as the Panel of Experts on Stability of Fishing
Vessels (PFV) began to collect data on ships and fishing vessels that capsized and on
ships that were considered safe in operation.
A comprehensive discussion of the method used for the development of criteria could be
found in several publications [Thompson and Tope 1970, Nadeinsky and Jens 1968,
Kobylinski 1972; Cox 1976]. Standards were eventually established as a result of the
38 Chapter 2

analysis of the stability parameters for ships that capsized and for those that were safe in
operation. The method of the analysis is discussed in detail in Chapter 4. The analysis, for
passenger, cargo and fishing vessels, was performed jointly by the Federal Republic of
Germany and Poland and submitted to IMO in two basic documents [IMO 1966, 1966a].
Standards developed were then thoroughly checked against a number of existing ships
and compared with criteria already existing in various countries. Results of these
calculations were presented in numerous documents submitted to IMO. A particularly
comprehensive evaluation of the proposed standards was presented by the Polish
delegation to IMO [IMO 1966d,1967].
Eventually in 1968, the IMO Assembly adopted the first international stability
requirements as per Resolution A.167 (ES.IV) for passenger and cargo ships under 100 m
in length and Resolution A.168 (ES.IV) for fishing vessels.
As many small fishing vessels are constructed without any drawings or stability
calculations, which makes application of the criteria of Resolution A.168 (ES.IV)
impossible, separate criterion based upon a regression analysis of dimensions and
stability characteristics of small vessels was developed and adopted by Resolution A.207
(VII). The method of development of the regression formula is discussed in Chapter 4.
Resolution A.267 (VIII), adopted in 1973, contains guidelines for accuracy of stability
calculations and guidelines for the inclining test of fishing vessels. Recommendation for
skippers of fishing vessels on ensuring vessels endurance in conditions of ice formations
was developed with the view to improve safety of vessels fishing in high latitudes. It was
adopted in Resolution A.269 (VIII).
In 1974, the SFV Sub-Committee, in co-operation with ILO and FAO, developed Part B
of the Code of safety for fishermen and fishing vessels. The Code covers all aspects of
safety including the stability requirements of Resolutions A. 167(ES.IV) and A.207(VII).
All other resolutions adopted by IMO related to stability of fishing vessels were also
included. As the Code is applicable to fishing vessels of24 m and over, in 1979, the three
Organisations developed safety guidelines. for small fishing vessels, under the heading
"Voluntary Guidelines", where stability requirements were also included. Currently both
instruments, Part B of the Code and the Voluntary Guidelines are under review by the
SLF Sub-committee ofIMO.
The text of the 1977 Torremolinos Convention was prepared by the SFV Sub-Committee
on the basis of the previously referenced Part B of the Code. Stability related
requirements include requirements of Resolution A.168 (ES.IV) and Part B of the Code,
with small amendments. However, the Convention included a provision for taking into
account external forces caused by fishing gear, water trapped on the deck and the
influence of strong winds and rolling. In an appendix to the Convention, guidelines on
calculating the influence of winds and rolling, of icing and of water trapped on the deck
were attached, as well as guidance for simplified criterion for small fishing vessels (as in
Resolution A.207 (VII)), and for calculating the bow height and the height of the deck
above water.
Because the Torremolinos Convention did not enter into force until 1989, IMO decided to
proceed with the preparation of the Protocol to this convention, which was adopted in
1993. The text of the protocol, which is not yet in force, in the stability part is not
substantially different from the text of the convention.
Development and Present Status of Stability Standards 39

After the new Working Group on Intact Stability was created in 1978, it started with the
consideration of the so-called "rational" stability criteria, and improvement of existing
criteria. Under the term "rational" criteria consideration was given within the Sub-
Committee to performance based criteria utilising probabilistic approach to be applied
instead of prescriptive criteria included in the above-mentioned resolutions. This project,
however, was too difficult to handle at that time and ultimately was abandoned.
Apart from this main task, however, the group was charged with some current work, and
in particular, with the development of stability requirements that have to be included into
IMO codes under development by other Sub-Committees. This task was fulfilled and
stability requirements of codes for off-shore supply vessels - (Resolution A.469(XII)) ,
for dynamically supported craft - (Resolution A.373(X)), for high speed craft -
(Resolution MSC.36/63), for mobile off-shore drilling units (MODU) - (Resolution
A.414(XI) and Resolution A649(16)), for special purpose ships - (Resolution A.534(13))
and for nuclear merchant ships - (Resolution A.491(XII)) were developed. Also, interim
(MSC/Circ.348) and final (MSC/Circ.503) stability criteria for pontoons were developed.
Stability requirements included in some of the above mentioned codes were subsequently
reviewed when the entire codes were revised. In particular, those of Resolution A.373(X)
(superseded by the HSC Code 1996 and 2000 adopted by the resolutions MSC 36(63) and
97(73)) and Resolution A.414(XI) (superseded by Resolution A.649(16)). The main
result of the work of the group was, however, the development of the weather criterion
for passenger and cargo ships (Resolution A.562(14)) and for fishing vessels (Resolution
685(17)).
The important task given to the Sub-Committee in 1988 was the development of the Code
of Stability for all types of ships, which was intended to summarise all stability
requirements included in various Resolutions. This Code had been finalised in 1993
(Resolution A.749(18)) and subsequently amended in 1998 (Resolution MSC 75(69)).
The Code is a "living" document under constant review and into which all new
requirements developed by IMO will be incorporated in the future ..
IMO also developed some operational guidances -related to stability. Those applicable to
fishing vessels were included in the previously referenced Code of Safety for Fishermen
and Fishing Vessels, Part B and in the Torremolinos Protocol 1993. Apart from those,
Guidance on intact stability of existing tankers during liquid transfer operations
(MSC/Circ_706) and Guidance to the master for avoiding dangerous situations in
following and quartering seas (MSC/Circ.707) were adopted by the Maritime Safety
Committee in 1995.
The current status of the IMO stability requirements at certain stages and their
development were discussed in several papers presented to STAB Conferences: by Jens
and Kobylinski [1982] by Plaza and Pertrov [1986 and 1994] and by Plaza and Semenov
[1990].

2.3 Status ofthe International Intact Stability Standards for Various Types of Ships

2.3.1 General
Intact stability criteria developed by IMO for various types of ships are included in
several recommendations adopted by the IMO Assembly or by the Maritime Safety
~ a~~2

Committee ofIMO. From a legal point of view, they are not compulsory unless they are
included in the national regulations of countries concerned. The only compulsory stability
requirements are those included in the 1974 SOLAS and 1966 LL Conventions and
further discussed in subchapter 2.3.4.
The review of IMO work on instruments, which include stability requirements, is given
in subchapter 2.2, and the complete list of these instruments is given in Table 2.7. The
Code on intact stability for all types of ships covered by IMO instruments (Resolution
A.749(18» as amended in 1998 by Resolution MSC 75(69), referred in the following as
the IS Code, superseded many of them or incorporated stability requirements taken from
them. In the IS Code, stability requirements for various types of ships were compiled in
an orderly manner which made application of particular recommended criteria much
easier for designers and operators.
The IS Code separates general criteria applicable to all ships and special criteria for
certain types of ships. It also includes chapters on general provisions against capsizing
and information for the master on icing, on watertight integrity and on determination of
lightship displacement and centres of gravity. It is supplemented by Annexes containing
detailed guidance for the conduct of an inclining test, guidance for skippers of small
fishing vessels on ensuring a vessel's endurance in conditions of ice formation and on
determination of ship's stability by means of rolling period test.
In the following paragraphs, the main principles of the criteria included in the above
mentioned IS Code are briefly discussed. Readers are referred to the original text of the
IS Code together with amendments thereon which are available from IMO.
It has to be noted that satisfying the prescribed criteria is no assurance that under all
circumstances ships will be safe from capsizing. There are ships known, which satisfied
all criteria, but nevertheless capsized. Stability is not the single nor the prime factor that
determines safe operation of a ship, and prudent navigation in a seaway, in particular in
severe weather conditions, as well as proper stowage or lashing of cargo or both, and
proper use of closing appliances contribute to a safe voyage. Resolution A. 167(ES.IV)
included an important statement which was later included in the IS Code which reads:
"Compliance with the stability criteria does not ensure immunity against capsizing,
regardless of the circumstances, or absolve of the master from his responsibilities.
Masters should therefore exercise prudence and good seamanship having regard to the
season of the year, weather forecasts and the navigational zone and should take
appropriate actions as to speed and course warranted by the prevailing circumstances"
(end of quotation).

2.3.2 General Recommended Intact Stability Criteria for Passenger and Cargo
Ships
Stability requirements of the IS Code for passenger and cargo ships of 24 metres in
length and above, but under 100 metres in length were transferred from Resolution
A. 167(ES.IV) and from Resolution A.562 (14) which includes the weather criterion. The
application of weather criterion is, however, not restricted to ships under 100 metres in
length.
2.3.3 Special Criteria for Certain Types of Ships

Cargo Ships Carrying Timber Deck Cargoes

For ships carrying timber deck cargoes, criteria from Resolution A.167(ES.IV), as
amended by resolution A.206(VII), are applicable. Both Resolutions were replaced by the
IS Code. Reference is also made to Resolution A.715(17): "Code of safe practice for
ships carrying timber deck cargoes, 1991" where requirements on stowage, securing and
Development and Present Status of Stability Standards 43

personnel protection are included. For such ships, if the deck cargo, which remains
securely fixed at a large angle of heel extends longitudinally between superstructures
transversely for the full beam of the ship, with due allowance for a rounded gunwale not
exceeding 4 per cent of the breadth of the ship and/or securing supporting uprights, the
criteria shown in the table 2.5 may be applied in substitution for criteria specified in
subchapter 2.3.2 (see fig.2.12).
The metacentric height GMo should be at all times during a voyage not less than 0.10 m
after correction for free surface effects of liquid in tanks and, where appropriate, the
absorption of water by the deck cargo and/or ice accretion on the exposed surfaces.

Fishing Vessels

Intact stability criteria for fishing vessels originally were adopted by Resolution
A.168(ES.IV),. and amended by Resolution A.268(VII). Later, they were incorporated in
the FAO/IMO/ILO Code of safety for fishermen and fishing vessels, Part B. and in the
Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels 1977 and its
1993 Protocol (both not in force) with some modifications.
The 1993 Protocol to the Torremolinos Convention includes additional requirements of
taking into account the external forces during fishing operations and of the effect of water
on deck. It does not specify, however, the method of calculation of these effects leaving
the decision to the national Administrations. The intact stability criteria for fishing
vessels are included in the IS Code.
General intact stability criteria for passenger and cargo vessels are applicable also to
fishing vessels having a length of 24 m and over, with the exception of the requirement
on the initial metacentric height, which is recommended 0.35 m for single deck vessels.
In vessels with a complete superstructure or vessels of 70 m in length and over, the
metacentric height may be reduced, but should be not less than 0.15 m.
For fishing vessels of 45 m in length and over, the weather criterion as for passenger and
cargo vessels is also applicable. For smaller fishing vessels, but longer than 24 m, the
weather criterion was modified as to the values of wind pressure which should take into
account the wind velocity gradient versus the distance "h" between the centroid of
windage area and the waterplane. Weather criterion for fishing vessels was adopted
originally by Resolution A.685(l7).
For decked fishing vessels under 30 m in length, to which the above requirements may
not be applicable, a simplified regression formula based on statistics has been developed
which relates the minimum recommended metacentric height to some geometrical
characteristics of the hull. It was adopted by Resolution A.207(VII), superseded by the IS
Code. The method of development of this formula is discussed in Chapter 4.6.
With respect to fishing vessels, reference is also made to Resolutions A.208(VII),
A.267(VIII), A.269(VIII) and MSC. CircA08 (see Table 2.7). For small decked fishing
vessels of 12 metres in length and over but less than 24 metres FAO/IMO/ILO Voluntary
guidelines are applicable.
Dynamically Supported Craft

Stability requirements for hydrofoil boats, air-cushion vehicles and similar craft carrying
more than 12 passengers but not more than 450, with all passengers seated and not
proceeding more than 100 miles from a port of refuge are included in the Code of safety
for dynamically supported craft (Resolution A.373(X) amended by Resolution MSC
37(63)). The requirements were also incorporated in the IS Code.
This DSC Code makes a distinction between intact stability of the craft in the
displacement (hull-borne) mode and in the transient and non-displacement (foil or
cushion borne) mode.
For the displacement mode, the stability of a craft should be such that when in still water
conditions, the inclination of the craft from the horizontal is not to exceed SO in any
direction under all permitted cases of loading and taking into account uncontrolled
passenger movements as may occur. A calculation of the dynamic stability should be
made with respect to critical design conditions.
The method recommended includes the effect of heeling moments when turning and of
the wind pressure and rolling. The method of application of the wind and rolling effect is
shown in fig. 2.14 (when using a static stability curve) and in fig. 2.15 (when using a
dynamic stability curve). It differs from the method adopted for passenger and cargo
vessels in that the amplitude of rolling has to be taken from the upright position of the
craft.
Development and Present Status of Stability Standards 45

For details of the calculation method of heeling moment due to turning and of the wind
heeling moment refer to Chapter 3.

The method of calculation of stability in the transient and foil-borne mode for hydrofoils
is not specified in the DSC Code and only general recommendations are given. The only
exception is a simplified formula for calculation of the metacentric height for hydrofoil
boats with surface piercing foils, which is mentioned as one possible method.
The DSC Code also contains a recommendation for calculating ice accretion similar to
that for fishing vessels.
By Resolution MSC 36/63 a revised version of the DSC Code, applicable to high speed
craft constructed on or after 1st January 1996, was adopted under the title International
code of safety for high speed craft - (HSC Code) (see subchapter 2.304).

Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODU's)

The Code for the construction and equipment of mobile off-shore drilling units
(Resolution Ao4I4(XI)) (1979 MODU Code) included stability criteria which are
governed by the entirely different design features of MODU's compared with
conventional ships and are therefore different from those for other types of vessels. The
revised version of the Code was adopted by Resolution A.649(16) (1989 MODU Code),
with alternative criteria for twin-pontoon column stabilised semisubmersible units
adopted by Resolution A.650(16). The revised Code is applicable to MODU's whose
keels are laid or which are at a similar stage of construction on or after 1 May 1981. The
new Code supersedes the 1979 MODU Code regarding these units. Requirements for
MODU"s were also incorporated in the IS Code.
The principle for the stability provisions for MODU's in the 1979 Code is the concept of
withstanding the wind heeling moment (weather criterion).
48 Chapter2

Special Purpose Ships

Provisions for special purpose ships included in the Code of safety for special purpose
ships (Resolution A.534(13», also incorporated in the IS Code, require that the intact
stability for ships of under 100 m in length should comply with the provisions for
passenger and cargo ships, except that the alternative criteria given in the Guidelines for
the design and construction of offshore supply vessels (Resolution A.469(12» may be
used for special purpose ships of similar design and characteristics. The intact stability of
ships of 100 m in length and above should be to the satisfaction of the Administration.

Pontoons

Interim guidelines on intact stability requirements for pontoons included in the

MSC/Circ. 348 (1987), consisting of collation of criteria used in some countries, were
superseded by the MSC/Circ.503 (1989) containing uniform requirements, which were
incorporated in the IS Code.
For pontoons operated in an open sea, the effect of a beam wind should be taken into
account, and the method recommended is that used in the Netherlands (see Chapter 4).
The stability criteria for pontoons are as follows:
1. The area under the righting lever curve up to the angle of the maximum righting arm
should be not less than 0.08 metre-radians.
2. The static angle of heel due to a uniformly distributed wind load of 0.54 kPa (wind
speed 30 m/sec) should not exceed an angle corresponding to half the freeboard for
the relevant loading condition, where the arm of wind heeling moment is measured
from the centre of the windage area to half the draught.
3. The minimum range of stability should be
For L ~ 100 m, 20°;
For L ~ 150 m, 15°;
For intermediate lengths it should be determined by interpolation.

Containerships Greater than 100 ill

Stability criteria for containerships greater than 100m in length are included in the IS
Code. As experience did show, large containerships (longer than 100 m), when sailing in
following waves could exercise substantial loss of the righting arm, and therefore
increased stability criteria are recommended for those ships. The criteria for
containerships are summarised in Table 2.5, where coefficient C is introduced.
The coefficient C is a function ofthe following parameters:
C = j(d,D',Bm,KG,CB,Cw,L)
where: Bm - breadth of the ship on the waterline at half draught, D' - moulded depth of
the ship corrected for defined parts of volumes.
For the method of calculation of this coefficient, reference is made to the original text of
the Code. The method of calculation of the coefficient C is explained in subchapter 6.5.3.
Development and Present Status a/Stability Standards 49

2.3.4 Compulsory Stability Requirements under Provisions of SOLAS Convention

In the 1974 SOLAS Convention, as amended, (2002 edition), Annex, Chapter II-I, Part
B, Regulation 22 and I the 1966 LL Convention as modified by the Protocol of 1988, as
amended, Annex I, regulation 10 it is required that the master shall be supplied with
information concerning stability enabling him to perform stability calculations in a
simple way. This information shall be based upon an inclination experiment. The full text
ofthe requirements can be found in the original editions of the respective instruments.
The SOLAS Convention also includes provisions for stability of ships carrying grain in
bulk and for high speed craft constructed on or after 1st January 1966.

Carriage of Grain

The stability requirements for the

carriage of grain covered by the
International grain code, adopted by
Resolution MSC 23(59) and made
mandatory under the provisions of
Chapter VI of SOLAS, take the
possibility of shifting grain during the
voyage into consideration. As the
possibility of shifting grain depends on
the amount of empty space above the
grain load the detailed specification on
how to calculate assumed voids in holds
are included in the International grain
code.
The intact stability criteria are as follows
(see fig. 2.19):
1. The angle of heel due to the shift of grain shall be normally not greater than 12° (the
Administration under certain conditions may reduce this angle to 10°).
2. The residual area in the static stability diagram between heeling and righting arm
curves up to the angle of heel of maximum ordinate between the two curves, or 40°,
whichever is the less, shall be not less than 0.075 m rad.
3. The initial metacentric height, after correction for free surface effects of liquids in
tanks, shall be not less than 0.30 m.
For details of the requirements on carriage of grain reference is made to the original text
of the International grain code.

High-speed Craft

Stability requirements for high-speed craft are covered by the International code of safety
for high speed craft (HSC Code) adopted by Resolution MSC 36(63), amended by MSC
119(74), which is mandatory under the provisions of Chapter X of the 1974 SOLAS
Convention, as amended. By resolution MSC 97(73), a revised version of this Code was
adopted (HSC Code 2000) which enters into force on 1st July 2002.
 The angle of heel due to steady
wind when the heeling arm hHwl
is applied should not exceed
16°. The maximum GZ value
should occur at an angle of at
least 10°.
The effect of rolling in a seaway
upon craft's stability should be
demonstrated mathematically.
In doing so, the residual area
under the GZ curve (A2), i.e.
beyond the angle of heel (<Ph)
should at least be equal to 0.028
mrad up to an angle of roll <Pro
In the absence of model tests,
this angle should be taken as 15°
or an angle of (<Pd - <Ph),
whichever is less. This is shown
in fig. 2.20.

2.4 Operational and Constructional Requirements in IMO Instruments

In the IS Code, certain operational, design and constructional requirements are included.
Although they are not directly related to stability criteria themselves, they have an
important bearing on the safety against capsizing. Operational and design provisions
include a detailed specification of information to be supplied to the master, operating
booklets for certain types of ships, and operational procedures related to weather
conditions. They include also loading conditions to be examined, recommendation on
calculation of stability curves, a detailed description of the procedure for inclining test,
etc. These matters are discussed in Part 2 of the book.
Constructional provisions as included in the IS Code include aspects related to
maintaining watertight integrity of the hull. Those aspects are covered also in SOLAS
and in the Load Lines Convention to which reference is made.
52 Chapter 2

2.5 Review of IMO Instruments Related to Stability

All IMO instruments related to stability are summarised in Table 2.7. As previously
mentioned, many IMO recommendations were incorporated in the IS Code which
superseded them. Nevertheless, they are all included in the Table for the sake of
completeness.

2.6 Possible Methods of Developing Stability Standards

In numerous papers, at many international conferences and symposia and also at several
sessions of the IMO Sub-Committee, the problem of developing solutions for stability
criteria were discussed and several proposals were advanced in this respect. In general,
four possible approaches could be adopted in order to develop stability criteria. They are
as follows:
1. Balancing external heeling forces/moments with the righting moment.
2. A statistical approach including collection and analysis of casualty records.
3. A probabilistic approach involving calculation of the probability of capsizing using
mathematical simulation of the behaviour of the ship in a seaway and under action of
other external forces.
4. Systematic model tests.
The method of balancing external heeling moments with the righting moment was
already applied, for example, in the in development of weather criterion as in Resolution
A.562(14). This method has also been used in the development of stability standards for
certain types of ships or when taking into account shifting of loads, crowding passengers
on one side, etc. This method is discussed in detail in Chapter 3.
Statistics of casualties constituted the basis for existing stability standards of IMO as in
Resolution A.167(ES.lV) and A. 168(ES.lV). Also, some older criteria, such as the
Rahola criteria were based on statistics. Statistical methods are discussed in Chapter 4.
The probabilistic approach to safety against capsizing and to the establishment of stability
criteria seems to be a natural solution as both external environmental loads as well as the
ship's stability characteristics during a voyage are random quantities. This approach,
which is strongly connected with the mathematical simulation of capsizing leading to
calculation of the probability of capsizing in a seaway deserves more consideration. The
ultimate goal of the probabilistic approach is development of performance based criteria
The probabilistic approach to the development of stability standards is discussed in Part 1
of the Volume 2 and in Chapter 5 of this Part, and methods for a mathematical simulation
of capsizing are discussed in Part 2 ofthe Volume 2
Systematic model tests were also proposed as a possible method to develop stability
criteria. Model tests of capsizing in open waters in natural wind created waves were
performed in some places and results of the experiments were available. Also, model
tests of capsizing were performed in towing tanks. However, to conduct systematic model
tests of capsizing in a realistically simulated environment poses extreme difficulties and
might be an enormously costly and time consuming enterprise. Therefore, this method
has not been used yet. It is discussed in Chapter 6.
 57

Chapter 3

Standards Based on the Consideration of Heeling Moments

3.1 General

The principle of developing stability standards based on the consideration of heeling

moments, which could be met in the process of operation of a ship, was widely used in
national and also recently in international stability requirements developed by IMO.
Heeling moments, whether acting statically or dynamically, have to be balanced with the
righting moment and the resulting heeling angle must be kept within safe limits.
These considerations lead to the possibility of establishing safety criterion in the
following form:
MH <MR or hH <hR

and
M H <M HCrit or hH < hHCrit
where: MH, hH - heeling moment and arm respectively
MR, hR - righting moment and arm respectively
MHcrih hHcrit - critical heeling moment a.ndarm respectively (see Chapter 1.3)

This Chapter describes methods of calculation of various heeling moments acting on a

ship in service as they are used in developing stability standards included in national or
international requirements. The physical phenomena of the behaviour of a ship under
action of various heeling moments and particularly, under action of wind and waves are
very complex and they require sophisticated mathematical modelling and lengthy
calculations. In all practical cases of stability criteria, heeling moments, acting statically
or dynamically, were calculated in a simplified way, which is basically described in this
Chapter.
The obvious philosophy of this approach is the assumption that the ship heels under
action of external heeling forces taking into account also internal causes which may
affect the position of the ship's centre of gravity. However, because of the apparent lack
of consideration of physics of capsizing, the application ;-': this principle to the
development of stability standards has serious shortcomings. Even if all heeling moments
acting on the ship in a seaway could be correctly evaluated, one must take into account
that the ship in a seaway presents a complex dynamic system. The physical model, where
stability characteristics in the form of the righting moment curve for the ship heeled on an
58 Chapter 3

even keel in calm water are considered, constitutes a far-reaching simplification. If on the
other hand, heeling moments are calculated using simplified methods, the criteria
developed in this way must be taken cautiously and accepted only after wide practical
experience with their application has been gained.
One of the most important applications of this principle is "weather criterion", where
heeling of the ship under action of wind and waves is considered. Weather criterion has
been included in stability requirements for almost all types of ships. It was, however,
evaluated through an approximate quasi-dynamic method including many simplifications.
Apart from the effect of wind and rolling, almost all national and international stability
requirements include the consideration of other heeling moments caused by: crowding of
passengers, pulling towing hawser, centrifugal forces in turning, forces caused by fishing
gear and also such factors as the effect of free surfaces of liquids in tanks and icing. They
are, however, considered as acting not necessarily simultaneously. The possibility of
those factors of acting at the same time is taken into account in present standards solely
on the basis of speculation supported by experience.
In general, it might be concluded that the method of developing stability standards on the
basis of comparing heeling and righting moments is not rigorous and includes widely
simplified consideration of physical phenomena involved. It may also provoke the
impression that criteria produced assure absolute safety, which obviously is not the case.
Their application to ships of novel design features may be dangerous, because the safety
margin required to maintain stability at sea is based on experience gained with existing
ship types. With these reservations, however, this method provides probably the best
criteria that could be achieved at present.

3.2 Factors Causing Heeling and Influencing Ship's Stability

The principle of balancing of heeling and righting moments requires assessment of all
possible factors causing heeling of ships or influencing the position of the centre gravity,
thus affecting the righting moments curve.
There are a number of such factors. They could be categorised according to various
principles. Krappinger and Hormann [1984] divide all factors into two groups;
1. Factors, which at least in principle could be controlled and which could be avoided by
applying suitable measures. Included in this group are factors such as shifting of
cargoes due to faulty stowage, wrong distribution of cargoes, water inrush through
unsecured openings, etc.
2. Factors, which could not be controlled by the crew. Included in this group are factors
such as wind and waves, water on deck, shifting of cargoes due to heavy rolling,
icing, etc.
This classification is, however, not suitable for developing design standards and rather
might be more applicable to developing operational requirements. This applies also to a
proposal by Cleary [1975], who distinguished factors either as a surprise event for which
the crew may not be prepared or events to which the crew can be expected to prepare for.
Standards Based on the Consideration of Heeling Moments 59

Dorin et al [1975] proposed probably the most comprehensive list of factors influencing
the ship's stability. According to this proposal all factors could be divided into three
groups:
1. Factors generating heeling moments,
2. Factors reducing stability,
3. Factors reducing stability and generating heeling moments simultaneously.
Each classification approach has its merits and deficiencies. From the point of view of
formulation of stability criteria, there is some merit in classifYing all factors as those
influencing righting moments and those that cause external heeling moments. Strictly
speaking, even such classification is dubious, because some factors (e.g. water in tanks)
could be classified either way. Some others are rather related to operational measures
rather than to design standards. Therefore in this chapter division of all factors will be
discussed in three groups:
1. Heeling moments caused by shifting the position ofthe centre of gravity,
2. Heeling moments created by external pulling forces,
3. Effect of wind and seaway.
The vertical position of the centre of gravity of the ship in any loading condition is
assumed to be the initial condition to which all factors affecting ship's stability are
applied. Although some of the factors could be evaluated by simple methods described in
many basic manuals, they will be all discussed in the following sections for the sake of
completeness. However, only those heeling moments are discussed which may affect
conventional ships. Many special types of ships, e.g. floating cranes, offshore support
ships, oceanographic vessels etc. are subjected to heeling moments specific to those
ships. Methods of calculation of some of these heeling moments are discussed only
briefly.

3.3 Heeling Moments Caused by Shifting the Position of the Centre of Gravity

3.3.1 Free Surfaces of Liquids

Liquids in partially filled tanks (i.e., where free surfaces of liquid exist) reduce ship's
stability because as the ship heels the liquid moves causing the centre of gravity of the
ship to shift to the inclined side (see fig. 3.1) . The new position of the centre of gravity at
inclination is G1, its projection on the new horizontal - G;. The gravity force has to be
assumed as acting along the line G'G; and the new reduced righting arm is G;Z. At
small angles of inclination the metacentric formula is:

With G'Mo new reduced metacentric height. When there are several tanks filled partially
with fluids, then the reduced metacentric height can be calculated by the formula:
3.3.2 Icing
Ice accretion is actually additional mass taken onboard. The mass of ice is usually
considered to be distributed symmetrically, so it does not produce any heeling moment.
Intensive ice formation usually occurs on the stem, bulwark rail, front walls of.
superstructures and deckhouses, hawser openings, anchors, deck gear, forecastle deck and
upper deck, freeing ports, aerial stays, masts and spars. The most intensive ice formation
takes place when the wind and sea come from ahead. In beam and quartering winds, ice
accumulates quicker on the windward side of the vessel thus leading to a constant list that
is extremely dangerous.
The main problem is the estimation
of the accrued ice. Ice accretion
depends on the geographical zone,
season and atmospheric conditions
and can be estimated only on the
basis of statistical observations.
Allowances for ice accretion are
included in some national
requirements and also in the IS Code
(Resolution A.749(18)). According
to the IS Code, for vessels operating
in areas where ice accretion is likely
to occur, the mass of ice accrued
should be:
- 30 kg/m2 on exposed weather decks and gangways;
- 7.5 kg/m2 for projected lateral areas of each side of the vessel above the water plane.
62 Chapter3

The projected lateral area of discontinuous surfaces of rails, spars (except masts) and
rigging of vessels having no sails and the projected lateral area of other small objects
should be computed by increasing the total projected area of continuous surfaces by 5%
and the static moments of this area by 10%. The areas, where the ice accretion should be
taken into account are specified in the IS Code as well as in the Torremolinos Convention
(Protocol).
The above figures may be, however, inadequate in certain areas. In particular, in
Canadian waters it is recommended to adopt a higher figure for accrued mass of ice.
Also, the Rules of the Russian Register of Shipping [USSR 1961] adopted higher figures.
The mass of ice accrued on the total area of the horizontal projection of weather decks
should be assumed to be 30 kg/m2. The mass of ice on the windage area should be 15
kg/m2.
Much higher figures were adopted by the rules of the German Navy [Arndt 1965, Arndt
et al. 1982]. They are:
- 50 kg/m2 on exposed weather decks, superstructures and front sides of deckhouses
- 100 kg/m2 on transverse projected areas of weapons, boats, masts, rigging and other
small objects on deck.
The effect of added mass on the metacentric height and on the righting arm curves is
discussed in subchapter 1.5 and this effect is shown in figs. 1.21 and 1.22.

3.3.3 Water Absorption

Another example of added mass is water absorption of deck cargo, particularly timber,
coal or coke deck cargo. The stability calculation should take into account the additional
mass of water absorbed by deck cargo in bad weather that reduces the metacentric height
and righting arms. The amount of water absorbed may vary considerably and should be
estimated on the basis of experience. For cases where no appropriate data are available,
the mass of deck timber cargo may be assumed to be increased by 10%.

3.3.4 Crowding of Passengers on One Side

In certain situations, passengers, normally to be found in various places onboard the ship,
are crowding on a deck on one side. This is the case of transverse shift of loads, as
described in subchapter 1.4. This results in heeling of the ship, which in certain cases
might be dangerous, especially when combined with heeling caused by other factors.
Referring to formula (1.21), the resulting angle of heel could be calculated by the
following formula:
Standards Based on the Consideration of Heeling Moments 63

When calculating metacentric height, passengers should be assumed as crowding on the

highest deck which is accessible.
Most national stability requirements and also the IS Code
(Resolution A.749(18» take the effect of passenger
crowding into account. According to the IS Code,
passengers without luggage should be considered as
distributed to produce the most unfavourable
combination of angle of heel and metacentric height,
which may be obtained in practice. In this connection, it
is anticipated that a value higher than 4 persons per m2
will not be necessary. Some national stability rules e.g.,
the Russian Register of Shipping [USSR 1961] required
higher figures, such as 6 persons per m2• The mass of
each passenger is assumed to be 75 kg, except that this
value could be reduced to 60 kg where this can be
justified. The height of centre of mass for passengers
should be assumed equal to:
- 1.0 m above the deck for standing passengers,
- 0.3 m above seat for seated passengers.
The maximum allowable heeling angle is estimated on the basis of the "panic effect".
This is the angle at which passengers feel that the ship is in danger and they may behave
in an uncoordinated manner. Usually the angle of panic is assumed to be 10°.

3.3.5 Loose Goods

Loose goods carried in bulk, such as ore, coal, coke or grain, could shift transversely
when the ship rolls or heels to an angle greater than the angle of repose for the substance
carried. The angle of repose is an angle, specific to the substance in question, between the
horizontal and the cone slope obtained when the substance is freely poured over the
horizontal surface. The angle of repose is different for static conditions and for dynamic
conditions, where, as the ship is rolling the granules of the substance are subjected to
acceleration.
Approximate natural angles of repose for some goods are for [Johow-Foerster, 1928]:
Grain 25 to 35°
Coal 30 to 45°
Coke, lignite 35 to 50°
Earth, sand, gravel, limestone 30 to 45°
Ore 30 to 50°
Rock-salt, slag 35 to 50°
Smaller values are dynamic angles, which are also valid for loading. Greater values are
static angles at which the substance is shifting when the ship heels slowly. Because ofthe
acceleration when the ship rolls, those angles are reduced by approximately 2/3 when the
substance starts shifting and a further reduction of 2° may occur because of heaving
motions. Therefore, even at a 20° rolling amplitude, shifting of cargo may occur, but only
when the period of roll is very short.
66 Chapter3

3.3.6 Water in Deck Well

When a low-built ship is moving in a seaway, there is a danger of shipping and trapping
water in the deck well that is formed by superstructure bulkheads and bulwarks. In
general, rolling of the ship with water in the deck well is a complex problem, which
requires consideration of a dynamic system of the ship moving amongst the waves and a
variable amount of water moving in the deck well. Several authors have published papers
containing results of numerical simulations of motions of ships with water in the deck
well and some results of experimental investigations of this situation [Dillingham and
Falzarano 1986; Rakhmanin 1989; Grochowalski 1990, 1993; Shin 1990; Lee et al1994;
Huang and Hsiung 1997]. Although those investigations are important from the point of
view of understanding physical phenomena of capsizing of a low-built ship in a seaway,
they have no direct bearing on stability standards. In this paragraph, therefore, the quasi-
static approach is described, which is based on the principle of balancing of heeling and
righting moments and which may be used in regulatory work. This approach was pursued
by the Russian delegation to IMO [Rakhmanin 1982; IMO 1966c, 1969a, 1970, 1973b]
that proposed to include consideration
of this situation into the stability and
freeboard requirements. Ultimately,
however, this proposal was not
adopted.
In certain cases, when the ship is
sailing in head or following seas and
meets very steep waves, a certain
amount of water may be trapped in
the deck well. The ship with the deck
well fully or partially filled with water
heels dynamically under the action of
heeling moment MH produced by the
water which may be considered as
liquid cargo located on deck [IMO
1966c] This moment is calculated as
the moment created by water collected
on one side (fig.3.7):
 Chapter 3
68
This means that the centre of gravity of the suspended load should be assumed to be at
the suspension point.

3.4 Heeling Moments Caused by External Pulling Forces

3.4.1 Heeling Moment Created in Turning

Forces acting in the transverse plane of the ship during the turning motion excite a rolling
motion; the maximum roll angle may be large enough to endanger the ship. The
magnitude of the heel angle induced in turning can be estimated by considering heeling
moments arising by the vertical disposition of forces acting on the ship. The disposition
of these forces is different in different phases of the turning motion. Generally the rolling
motion during turning should be considered by using a six degrees of freedom description
of the motion of the ship, but for the purposes of stability criteria usually only heeling in
the transverse plane is considered, which means only a one degree of freedom approach.
The disposition of forces in the transverse plane in the first phase of turning motion is
shown in fig. 3.l5a. In this phase, (a starboard turn is shown in the figure) rudder force
FR is countered by the inertia force of the ship F1 and by inertia force of the water F1W•
The resulting heeling moment is to starboard. In the third phase of turning (steady turn
with radius R), there is centrifugal force Fe acting in the centre of gravity to the port side
which together with the rudder force is countered by transverse resistance force Rwr. The
resulting moment acts outwards from the turn, to the port side (fig.3.15b). The heeling
angle is then to starboard (inwards) in the first phase and to port side (outwards) in the
third phase.
StandardsBasedon the Consideration
of HeelingMoments 77

by several authors. Reference is made to

some of them [Avotin 1940; Fedaevsky and
Firsov 1957; Semenov-Tian-Schansky, et al
1969; Aage 1971, Bie1anski 1994]. In this
subchapter, simplified methods of dealing
with this problem are discussed which may
be used in formulating stability standards.
Several national stability standards
included so called "weather criterion"
which takes into account heeling of the ship
under action of wind and, sometimes, also
rolling in waves. Also the "weather
criterion" was included in the IMO
recommended standards for almost all
types of ships (see Resolution A.749(18)(IS
Code».
The simplified assumption in development
of the weather criterion is the concept that
the ship should withstand the wind heeling
moment when it is in a position
transversely to the direction of the wind.
Various simplified models for this situation
had been utili sed in stability standards
where the wind heeling moment is assumed
to act as a static or dynamic moment, to be
constant or dependent on the angle of heel
and acting on the ship in the upright
position or heeled. The collation of various
models is shown in fig. 3.23.
The simplest model used for the purpose of
stability standardisation, where the wind
heeling moment is assumed to be a static
moment, was first proposed by
Blagovestchensky [Lugovsky 1963]. This
model was also used in the United States in
the stability requirements for passenger
ships [USA 1959-63, Jens 1965] (fig.3.23
a).
The model, where a constant wind heeling
moment is assumed to act dynamically, was
proposed first by Pierrottet [1935] (see
subchapter 2.1). It was later used in the
interim stability requirements of the USSR
[1948] and also by some other countries
that modelled their requirements after the
78 Chapter 3

provisions of the USSR (Poland, Rwnania, GDR, China) [IMO 1964] (fig.3.23b). France
and the Netherlands also adopted this principle [Jens 1965; IMO 1964] along with the
German navy, however with heeling moment dependent on heeling angle [Vogt 1988]. In
the above described models, the ship was asswned to be in the upright position initially.
The asswnption that the dynamic wind heeling moment is acting when the ship is heeled
to a specified angle to the windward side was adopted in the regulations of the Register of
Shipping of the USSR [1961] (fig.3.23c). The same principle, with an amendment, was
adopted by Japan [Japan 1959]. The amendment specifies that the amplitude of roll to the
windward side is calculated from the static angle of heel to leeward side (fig.3.23d). This
principle was adopted in IMO Resolutions A.562(l4), A.685(17) and A.749(18) (IS
Code).
In the regulations of Yugoslavia [1959] another principle was applied (fig.3.23.e). It was
asswned that the ship is heeled under the static action of the wind heeling moment. It was
asswned further that when the ship heels under action of this moment, at the resulting
angle of heel, a dynamic heeling moment equal to 1.96 times the static moment is
applied. The wind heeling moment is asswned to be variable and related to the heeling
angle.
The comparison of the above models of wind action is not directly possible because in
different models different methods were used for the calculation of wind pressure and of
amplitude of rolling, including various coefficients derived from practice. Neither of the
models described above reflects correctly the complicated phenomena of ship motions in
waves under action of wind. The dynamic system of ship motions under influence of
waves and wind was studied by the authors already mentioned at the beginning of this
paragraph. Those investigations allowed some evaluation of the simplified models
adopted in the development of the weather criterion, but they had no direct bearing on
criteria finally included in the IS Code.

3.5.2 Wind Velocity

As the pressure exerted on the surface element of windage area of the ship is proportional.~
to the wind velocity asswned and the heeling moment is directly related to the wind .
pressure, the appropriate estimation of the wind velocity is of prime importance.
Motion of air in the wind has a turbulent character. Air turbulence is particularly
pronounced in the vicinity ofthe earth or water surface, up to 20-30 metres height. Due to
the turbulence of the air and frictional forces, wind velocity is not constant but oscillates
around the mean value. Wind velocity increases also with the height over the earth or
water surface.
During a squall, the wind velocity is increasing and on the increased mean velocity are
superimposed high frequency oscillations of the wind velocity. These high frequency
oscillations are called gusts. The frequency of oscillations and their amplitude increases
with increasing wind velocity.
From the point of view of the effect on the vessel these oscillations are not important at
high wind velocities because their energy is small and their frequency is much higher
than the natural frequency of rolling. The rate of increase of the mean velocity with time
is, however, of importance as it induces a rolling motion of the vessel. On the other hand,
3.5.5 The Applicability of the Weather Criterion
As it may be seen from the review of the methods of formulation of the weather criterion,
they are far from the rigorous treatment of the physical phenomena involved. In all stages
of the calculation, far-reaching simplifications were made. They may be summarised as
follows:
1. Calculation of the dynamic heeling angle is based on the assumption that wind
velocity increases suddenly at zero time to its maximum value (see fig. 3.23d). This is
not true. Time of growing wind velocity diminishes with increasing mean velocity as
is seen in fig. 3.24 and there exists a possibility of resonance at high wind velocities.
The turbulent components of wind velocity are neglected and also its low-frequency
oscillations, which may also cause resonance. The change of wind heeling moment
with the angle of heel is also neglected.
~ CMprer3

2. The physical model of heeling is based on the assumed righting moment curves in
still water. The effect of heave on the righting arm curve is neglected. The effect of
waves is non-existent and the model adopted is a one-degree of freedom model
neglecting coupling effects. In fact, this is a still water model with initial inclination
only. Calculation of the amplitude of rolling is highly simplified, neglecting nonlinear
effects and the possibility of parametric resonance.
3. The most important parameter, wind pressure is selected arbitrarily in such a way that
the average ship considered safe has to satisfy the criterion. The same applies to the
other important parameter, that is, the amplitude of rolling. Therefore calculation of
the weather criterion is not related to the actual wind force that the ship may
encounter.
4. The main drawback of the adoption of the weather criterion is, however, the wrong
feeling of safety. With all these sophisticated calculations, the designer as well as the
operator, may consider that a ship satisfying the criterion is absolutely safe. This
obviously is not the case and a false feeling of safety might lead to a casualty.
At the time when the adoption of the weather criterion was considered at IMO, the above
shortcomings were pointed out by several members at the sessions of the IMO-
Subcommittee as well as were stressed in some published papers (e.g. [Kuo and Welaya
1981)). Nevertheless, despite the simplifications, the application of the weather criterion
provides an additional degree of safety in many cases, especially for ships with a large
windage area. Analysis of the application of the weather criterion and the statistical
criteria of Resolution A.167(ES.IV) to a number of ships (IMO 1978) revealed that in
some cases statistical criteria are more severe, in others, weather criterion is more severe.
The weather criterion was more severe for ships in light ship condition because of the
larger windage area. This is in line with previous observations and proposals to make
criteria of Resolution A. 167(ES.IV) more severe for ships in ballast condition. Casualties
of some ships in ballast condition were sad confirmation of this conclusion, if only the
casualty of MS HELLAND HANSEN [Dahle and Kjaerland 1980] may be quoted.
The final conclusion might be that in view of the lack of more rigorously developed
criteria, the weather criterion should be considered as the best which could be developed
at present with reservations, however, that it has to be applied together, not instead of, the
statistical criteria. This point of view was actually adopted during the development of the
IS Code (Resolution A.749(18)).
At its 45th session the SLF Sub-Committee having in mind that weather criterion as in the
IS Code (Resolution A.749(l8)) might be unsuitable for certain types of ships decided
following proposals by Germany [IMO 2002a] and Italy [IMO 2002b] to initiate process
of amending the Code. In particularly the Sub-Committee agreed on some interim
modifications to the weather criterion, in particular, modifications of the procedure of
calculation of the rolling amplitude as shown in equation (3.49) and the table 3.8 (factors
rand s).
 91

Chapter 4

Statistical Methods of Developing Stability Standards

4.1 General

Analysis of statistical data on stability parameters of capsized ships may be used for
establishing stability standards. This data could be supplemented by the analysis of
stability parameters of ships considered safe in operation. As previously mentioned in
subchapter 2.1, stability criteria established by the German Professional Mariner's
Association were based on the analysis of stability arm curves of 15 fishing vessels, 6 of
which capsized in December 1894 (see fig. 2.2). Also, stability criteria developed by
Benjamin were based on the analysis of righting arm curves of ships, which capsized.
Those however, were not very rigorous approaches. A more systematic attempt to
develop stability standards was made by Rahola [1935, 1939] who applied an original
method of analysis of stability parameters of ships that capsized and of ships considered
safe in operation. As this method, with modifications, was also applied by IMO when
developing stability standards included in Resolutions A.167(ES.IV) and A.168(ES.IV),
the work of Rahola is described in more detail in this chapter. Also, the method adopted
by the IMO STAB Sub-Committee is described together with other proposed more
rigorous methods based on statistical analysis of stability parameters.

4.2 Method of J. Rahola

Stability criteria proposed by J. Rahola were developed on the basis of statistical analysis
of fourteen vessels, which capsized within the period from 1870 to 1938. In his analysis,
Rahola considered stability characteristics of those vessels dividing them into three
groups:
1. Vessels with insufficient stability;
2. Vessels with critical stability;
3. Vessels sufficiently safe.
Fig. 4.1 shows righting arm curves for all ships analysed. Some vessels were classified as
belonging to two or even three groups depending on whether the superstructures were
included in the calculations of righting arm curves or not.
92 Chapter4

In his analysis, Rahola selected the following parameters for consideration: the angle of
maximum GZ, the angle of vanishing stability and GZ values at 15°, 20°, 30° and 40°.
Therefore, in fact, he considered the area under the GZ curve, or in other words dynamic
stability. The righting arms for all ships were then plotted in the form of the vertical bars
for each vessel as shown in fig. 4.2 for 15°,20°, 30° and 40°. In the diagram, righting
arms estimated as insufficient were blackened and those judged as critical were shaded,
both on the left side of the vertical lines for respective angles of heel. The righting arms
judged as sufficient were plotted on the right side of the vertical lines and hatched from
above.
The method of plotting the righting arms adopted by Rahola allowed drawing the
demarcation line between sufficient and critical values of righting arms. The demarcation
line is shown as the broken line in fig. 4.2. He recommended that righting arm curves for
ships should be above this demarcation line and the GZ values for respective angles of
heel should be adopted as standards. Those are the standards referred to in subchapter
2.1.
Statistical Methods of Developing Stability Standards 93

Apart from the analysis of values of righting arms in the form of the diagram shown in
figA.2, Rahola also thoroughly analysed the form of the stability curves. He pointed out
that the righting arm at 200 heel is strongly influenced by GMo and therefore for large
ships having a small GMo, it might be difficult to achieve GZ20 = 0.14 m, which was the
critical value recommended. He suggested that if for those ships it would be impossible
to obtain this value, the range of righting arm curves should be greater, which could be
easily achieved with larger freeboard. For small vessels having larger GMo values, the
righting arm curves are usually without a hollow (see fig. 4.1) and the value GZ20 = 0.14
m could be easily achieved. In order to make the criteria more flexible, Rahola also
introduced criterion for dynamic stability.

The analysis performed by Rahola is far from rigorous. The classification of vessels
analysed belonging to different categories was made on the basis of personal judgement.
Nevertheless, the criteria proposed by Rahola were used in many countries for a long
time and the method of plotting of righting arms was subsequently used in the
development ofIMO criteria.

4.3 Method Applied for Development ofIMO Stability Standards

The stability standards as they were included in Resolutions A.167(ES.IV) and

A.168(ES.IV) of IMO were developed as a result of discussions conducted at several
sessions of the Sub-Committee on Subdivision and Stability Problems and of the
Working Group on Intact Stability. The problem of how to develop the criteria was then
considered and there was general agreement that the criteria would have to be developed
upon the statistical analysis of stability parameters of ships that suffered casualties and of
ships that were operated safely. The detailed discussion of the work of these IMO bodies
and of the method used in the development of stability standards was reported in the
following papers: Nadeinski and Jens [1968], Thompson and Tope [1970] and Kobylinski
[1964,1972] to which reference is made.
StatisticalMethods of Developing Stability Standards 95

the stability information was to be submitted was developed. Also, for these ships, tables
were prepared of stability parameters.
Item 5 of the programme included analysis of the collected data. This task was performed
jointly by the Federal Republic of Germany and Poland and the results were submitted to
IMO in several documents separately prepared for passenger and cargo ships and for
fishing vessels [IMO 1965; 1966; 1966a; 1966b].
After IMO Resolutions A.167(ES.IV) and A168(ES.IV) had been adopted and further
intact stability casualty data were collected, it was decided to repeat the analysis in order
to find out if additional data might change conclusions drawn in the first analysis. This
second analysis was performed by Poland [IMO 1985]. Actually, the second analysis
confirmed, in general, results achieved in the first analysis. In the following text, results
of the second analysis that was based on the larger database are referred to.
The analysis performed consisted of two parts. In the first part, details relevant to
casualties were evaluated, which allowed qualitative conclusions with regard to the
circumstances of casualties to be developed and therefore the specification of general
safety precautions. In the second part, stability parameters of ships reported as casualties
were compared with those for ships that were operated safely. Two methods were
adopted in this analysis. The first was identical with the method adopted by Rahola and
the second was the discrimination analysis. The results of the analysis of intact stability
casualty data and of the first part of the analysis of stability parameters are included in
subchapter 4.4 of this Chapter. The results ofthe discrimination analysis are referred to in
subchapter 4.5.

4.4 Results of the Analysis of Intact Stability Casualty Records and Stability
Parameters

The evaluation of details relevant to the casualties .is shown in figures 4.3 to 4.8.
In all 166 casualties reported, the ships
concerned were: 80 cargo ships, 1 cargo
and passenger ship, 1 bulk carrier, 4 off-
shore supply ships, 7 special service
vessels, and 73 fishing vessels.
Distribution of ship's length is shown in
fig. 4.3. It is seen that the majority of
casualties occurred in ships of less than
60 m in length.
A great variety of cargoes were carried so
that no definite conclusions could be
drawn. It may be noted, however, that in
35 cases of 80 cargo ships reported, deck
cargo was present.
A result of the analysis of the location of the casualty is shown in fig. 4.4. It is seen that
the majority of casualties -(72 % of all casualties) occurred in restricted water areas, in
The type of analysis described above is not entirely rigorous; it was partly based on
intuition and allows arbitrary judgement. Nevertheless, from the point of view of
practical application, it provided acceptable results and finally was adopted as a basis for
IMO stability criteria. There are several shortcomings to this method. They relate,
however, mostly not to the principle but rather to its execution. These shortcomings were
properly summarised [Bird and Odabasi 1975] as follows:
1. Statistical procedures are not rigorous.
2. Types and sizes of ships of investigated population were widely different.
3. Loading conditions at the time of casualty were different. Adopted assumption that
the loaded arrival condition can be taken, as safe is not justified.
4. The environmental conditions for each casualty were different, the significance of this
fact was ignored.
5. The ages, especially of so-called "existing" ships were different.
6. The fact that some of the so-called "existing" ships (assumed to be safe) might
become casualties in the future was neglected.
7. The possible influence of ships dynamics in a seaway was neglected.
8. There is a lack of connection of criteria with the environmental conditions.
Statistical Methods of Developing Stability Standards ] 0]

4.5 Discrimination Analysis

As previously stated, the statistical method used by Rahola and later in the IMO analysis
of intact stability casualty records is not rigorous. When two populations of data, as in
this case, data for capsized ships and for ships considered safe, are available and the
critical values of parameters from these two sets have to be obtained, the method of
discrimination analysis may be applied.
The first application of the discrimination analysis in order to estimate critical values of
stability parameters was proposed by the Polish delegation to IMO [IMO 1965]. The
results of this analysis were later included in a joint report by FRG and Poland [IMO
1966, 1966a], and constituted the basis fOJ;development of IMO stability criteria along
the previously described Rahola method.
In this investigation, discrimination analysis was applied independently to nine stability
parameters. Using data from intact stability casualty records (group 1) and from intact
stability calculations for ships considered safe in operation (group 2) the distribution
functions were plotted, where for group I the distribution function F 1 and for group 2
function (l - F2) were drawn. Practically, on the abscissa axis of the diagram, values for
the respective stability parameter were plotted and the ordinates represent the number of
ships in per cent of the total number of ships considered having the respective parameter
smaller than the actual value for ships of group I and greater than the actual value for
ships of group 2 considered safe.
The point of intersection of both curves in the diagram
provides the critical value of the parameter in question.
This value is dividing the parameters of group 1 and of
group 2. In an ideal case, both distribution functions
should not intersect and the critical value of the
respective parameter is then at the point between two
curves (see fig. 4.17, upper part).
In reality, both curves always intersect and the critical
value of the parameter is taken at the point of
intersection. At this point, the percentage of ships
capsized having the value of the respective parameter
higher than the critical value is equal to the percentage
of safe ships having the value of this parameter lower
than the critical value.
The set of diagrams prepared in this way for various
stability parameters based on IMO statistics for cargo
and passenger ships and for fishing vessels was included
in the reports submitted to IMO [IMO 1966, I966a, 1985]. One of the diagrams is
reproduced in fig. 4.18. It means that the probability of capsizing of a ship with the
parameter considered higher than the critical value is the same as the probability of
survival of a ship with this parameter lower than the critical value.
In order to increase the probability of survival, the value of the parameter should be
increased, say up to x· (fig. 4.17), at which the probability of survival (based on the
102 Chapter4

population investigated) would be 100 %. However, this would mean excessive severity
of the criterion, which usually is not possible to adopt in practice because of unrealistic
values of parameters obtained in this way.
The fact that both distribution curves do intersect could be explained in two ways. It is
possible that ships of group 2 having values of the parameter in question x < Xcrit are
unsafe, but they were lucky not to meet excessive environmental conditions which might
cause capsizing. On the other hand, the conclusion could also be drawn that consideration
of only one stability parameter is not sufficient to judge the stability of a ship.
The last consideration led to an attempt to utilise the IMO data bank for a discrimination
analysis where a set of stability parameters was investigated [Krappinger and Sharma
1974]. From the IMO casualty statistics, the authors excluded ships where shifting of
cargo occurred or where circumstances of the casualty were unexplained.

As can be seen from fig. 4.18, the accurate estimation of the critical value of the
respective parameter is dubious because those values are very sensitive to the running of
the curves in the vicinity of the intersection point, especially if the population of ships is
small.
The critical value is much less sensitive if the arithmetical mean of the for both groups is
used:

(4.1)
 Chapter 4

In general, the separation ability achieved was higher than when taking each parameter
separately. The fact that in some combinations there are negative coefficients could be
explained by mutual interaction of particular parameters. This is explained in fig 4.19.
For example, by the determined value of GZ40, an increase of GMo influences
unfavourably the safety. Similarly, an increase of e40 modifies the righting arm curves
unfavourably.
In spite of the fact that the above described method constitutes a good tool for analysis of
statistical data of stability parameters for capsized ships and safely operated ships, it was
not applied in the practice of establishing national or international stability standards.

4.6 Regression Analysis

The method of regression analysis could be used when a number of data on stability
parameters of ships are available in order to establish a relationship between stability
parameters and ship parameters. One example of the application of this method is known.
In 1967 the Panel of Experts on Fishing Vessels Stability (PFV) of IMO recommended to
develop an appropriate stability standard for small fishing vessels less than 30 m in
length. For small fishing vessels, usually no drawings and stability data are available;
therefore, the application of criteria of Resolution A. 168(ES IV) is not possible. It was
proposed that a stability standard for those vessels could be developed in the form of a
formula for GMcrit that could be compared with the actual GMo estimated on the basis of
the rolling test. The value of GMcrit should correspond to the criteria of Resolution
A.168(ES IV).
Statistical Methods of Developing Stability Standards 105

Following the recommendation of the Panel, the task of developing an appropriate

formula was undertaken by the delegation from Poland [Kobylinski and Maksymiuk
1971]. For this purpose, members of the Panel were requested to submit stability data for
as many small fishing vessels as possible and also, information regarding approximate
formulae on GMcrit used in their countries, if any. Those formulae were at the later stage
compared with the formulae developed by the regression analysis. Although they are not
directly connected with the regression analysis, they provide valuable comparable
material and therefore, they are reproduced here (see Table 4.3).
The applicability of all these formulae was analysed by the Polish delegation to lMO
[IMO 1968]. For a number of fishing vessels, for which data were submitted by several
countries the coefficients k were calculated:
 111

Chapter 5

Probabilistic Approach to the Development of Stability

Standards

5.1 Introduction

An essential achievement of the human mind in the twentieth century is the transition
from formulating basic laws of physics in a deterministic way to formulating them in a
probabilistic sense. Safety understood as safety against an accident, in respect to ships as
well as human beings and environment is a concept that could be evaluated quantitatively
on the basis of probability. Application ofthe probabilistic approach to safety regulations
is known in many areas, in particular in nuclear and chemical technology. The crucial
turning point in the analysis of the behaviour of ships in a seaway constituted the paper
published by St. Denis and Pierson [1953] where probabilistic methods were employed.
In the everyday language safety could be understood in many ways. Often, under the term
of safety, one may understand exclusion of the possibility of an accident, in particular
with regard to human life. Historical experience shows, however, that accidents happen
notwithstanding which safety measures are undertaken. Safety could never be equal to
100 per cent.
Probably the most serious problems in accepting the probabilistic concept of safety result
from human nature. The realisation, for example, that safety is never absolute in the
quantitative sense seems to disturb or even terrorise some people when the decisions on
new enterprises have to be taken. Even if it can be proven the probability of failure is
much less, for example, such as an improbable event as a meteorite strike, the
undertaking might be considered by the public as unsafe.
There are, however, serious arguments in favour of the application of the probabilistic
approach to stability criteria. Caldwell [1986] stressed that first of all the majority of
factors affecting safety against capsizing, external as well as internal, are of a random
character. External factors, such as wind and seaway are obviously random quantities.
Less obvious is that the stability characteristics of a ship are also of a random character.
112 Chapter 5

For example, the displacement and the position of the centre of gravity vary randomly
with the loading and unloading of cargo, fuel and stores consumption and with gradual
changes of the mass of the ship with age. Variations of the metacentric height in service
are also of a random character because of errors in the estimation of the position of the
centre of gravity of the light ship during inclining experiments and errors in the
estimation of various pieces of cargo and stores. Those variations also introduce the
element of randomness into the current estimation of stability.
Because real environment is of a random character and the data on casualties allow us a
posteriori to estimate risk level, it is logical that the level of risk associated with seafaring
may constitute the basis for the establishment of design criteria and operational
requirements.
Great progress has been achieved recently in the application of probabilistic methods in
other domains of technology and such methods are already widely accepted. The offshore
industry made great efforts to apply safety criteria based on the probabilistic approach
[Fidgerald and McGrant 1991, Rimington 1991]. IMO Resolution A.265(VIII):
Regulations on subdivision and stability of passenger ships as an equivalent to Part B of
Chapter II-I of the SOLAS 1960 Convention, adopted in 1973 was based, at least
partially, on the probabilistic approach. So are the subdivision requirements for cargo
ships, included as an amendment to the 1974 SOLAS Convention.
The above arguments make a case in favour of the application of the probabilistic
approach to the development of stability criteria. Using probabilistic approach it would
be possible in principle to develop performance based instead of existing prescriptive
criteria. Several authors, as previously mentioned, advanced this idea, but all of them
stressed practical difficulties in application of this approach. Boroday and Rakhmanin
[1975] attribute this idea to Firsov who published a paper in the late 1950's on a
probabilistic approach to stability criteria.(not available to the author). From the 1970's
onwards several authors considered this concept, inter allia Sevastianov [1970, 1992,
1993], Caldwell [1986], Krappinger and Hormann [1984], Krappinger [1967], Kastner
[1969, 1970] and Kobylinski [1975, 1984, 1990]. In the 1980's more attention was
devoted to this concept and numerous papers were published on this subject. Also IMO
Sub-Committee during late seventies considered application of probabilistic approach to
stability criteria [IMO 1975-1990, 1978, 1979]. During the fifth STAB Conference, a
special workshop was organised on the probabilistic approach to stability standards that
evoked wide discussion [Kobylinski 1994]. However, in spite of those efforts there are
no definite proposals presented of stability criteria based on probabilistic approach.

5.2 Definition of Capsizing and of Stability Accident

In common language, capsizing usually is understood as the passing of the ship from the
upright position or zero degrees angle of heel to the upside down position or 180 degrees
heel. The above concept of capsizing is, however, not satisfactory from the point of view
of studying safety against capsizing. The ship oscillates in a seaway under the action of
waves and wind. The oscillations are stable and after heeling to starboard there is
consecutive heel to port. At a certain time, heeling to one side might be such that the ship
Probabilistic Approach to the Development of Stability Standards 113

does not come back to the upright position, increases its heeling and ultimately capsizes.
The above-described process of capsizing is connected with the occurrence of a large
amplitude of rolling; it may also be defined by instability of the oscillatory motion.
As described by Boroday and Rakhmanin [1975], the stability of an oscillating system is
estimated by the ability of the system to absorb and dissipate the kinetic energy
transmitted to the system by external disturbances. The main portion of the energy of the
rolling ship is transferred into the work of the righting moment; therefore, the stability of
rolling depends to a great extent on the characteristics of the righting moment curve. This
curve is strongly nonlinear which corresponds to the nonlinear stiffness characteristics of
the system. Because of this feature of the righting moment curve, the rolling ship belongs
to the category of systems with "soft" stiffness characteristics. It means that the period of
rolling increases with the increasing amplitude and that the amplitude cannot increase
indefinitely. In other words, the rolling ship always has a limited range of stability in
comparison with the system with "hard" stiffness characteristics.
The limit of range of stable oscillations shows that a possibility of capsizing exists if
external disturbances are too large for the particular ship. The relative danger due to the
occurrence of such disturbances could be estimated using the concept of reserve stability
that ensures safety under such disturbances. From the point of view of the energy
balance, the reserve stability is generally proportional to the difference between the
limiting value of work of the righting moment and the total kinetic energy in rolling
under the influence of external loads.
It is obvious that in order to estimate the reserve stability, it is necessary to obtain
information on the magnitude of the external loads. If the reserve stability is positive, the
external loads are not dangerous, otherwise the rolling motion is unstable and the ship
capsizes.
In the mathematical theory of motion, the definition of stability according to Lyapunov
(see: Minorsky [1948]) is adopted. Odabasi [1982] proposed to apply this definition to
the stability of ships. This concept was. also utilised by other authors considering
mathematical theory of ship motions in a seaway (e.g. Phillips [1986], Caldeira-Saraiva
[1986])
Without going into the details of the Lyapunov theory, in the following is provided only a
sufficiently broad intuitive definition of stability in the sense of Lyapunov. Let us
consider a periodic phenomenon indicated by a motion of the representative point R on a
closed trajectory C (fig.5.2). Let us consider also a slightly perturbed motion depicted by
the motion of R' on C'. If the initial distance of RR', which is assumed to be small and
remains small for any value of time t, such a motion is called stable in the sense of
Lyapunov. It is noted that the stability in this sense requires not only that C and C' be
sufficiently close to each other, but imposes that the motions of Ron C and R' on C' be
strictly isochronous.
Criterion of stability of motion could be used for the assessment of stability of solutions
of equations describing the motion of a body. Kastner [1969, 1970] stated that this
concept could be used for the estimation of whether changes of physical characteristics
of a ship, for example changes of the righting arm curves in waves do not cause a loss of
stabilityof motion. In this way, mathematical criteria of stability of motion under the
114 Chapter 5

assumption of small disturbances could be determined. This concept, however, has one
important fault: if the solution for the disturbed motion differs from the solution for the
undisturbed motion(unstable motion), it does not necessarily mean that it will lead to
capsizing and on the contrary, capsizing may occur when the motion is assessed as
stable.
During the second STAB Conference in 1982
[Rakhmanin, et al 1982], there were prolonged
discussions on the definition of stability of
motion and stability criterion. The discussions
did not result
in an unanimous conclusion and there were
revealed widely different opinions among the
theoreticians and those applying stability
criterion. As the concept of stability in relation to
ships has many different meanings in practice,
attempts to establish one single definition of
stability seems to be of no use. More purposeful
from the point of view of safety against
capsizing would be to define capsizing, loss of stability and stability accident. With these
definitions the concept of stability will also be found.
When considering practical problems of safety from the stability point of view, it would
be better to introduce a concept of loss of stability instead of capsizing. Nevertheless,
both concepts in the following discussion will be considered as synonymous, although
loss of stability better describes situations occurring in reality when a ship considered as
capsized may not necessarily be in the upside down position.
With excessive rolling amplitudes, the ship may be in a situation where further handling
is impossible. Water may inrush through openings in decks and superstructures. The
rudder may be disabled and the ship may have to be abandoned.
Kastner [1969,1970], Abicht [1972] and Odabasi [1982] proposed to define this situation
as a capsizing or loss of stability accident. Also, several members of the discussion panel
at the second STAB Conference [Rakhmanin et al 1982] offered a similar definition of
the loss of stability or capsizing concept. Morrall [1982] proposed to define loss of
stability as the situation where amplitudes of rolling exceed a certain limit and make
operation of the ship impossible, ship systems inoperable or when broaching results in
large amplitudes of rolling making manoeuvring impossible.
It is worthwhile to mention that the above definitions of capsizing coincide with a much
earlier definition of stability proposed by Weinblum [1952]( see Subchapter 1.2)
Capsizing or loss of stability will then be defined as exceeding the amplitude of rolling or
heel at which operating or handling of a ship is impossible for various reasons. On the
other hand, under the term stability accident, we understand this as any accident related to
the stability of a ship that does not, however, lead to capsizing and/or loss of the ship
(e.g. heel due to shifting cargo, etc).
Probabilistic Approach to the Development of Stability Standards 115

5.3 Long-term Probability of Capsizing

The most attractive application of the probabilistic approach to the development of

stability criteria is to base them on the calculation of the probability of capsizing during
the lifetime of the ship, i.e., on the long-term prediction of capsizing. Sevastianov and
Kobylinski discussed this approach in several papers (e.g. Sevastianov [1970, 1992,
1993], Kobylinski [1975, 1984, 1997]).
During its lifetime, the ship may find itself in a number of different situations where each
situation is characterised by heading and speed, loading condition, sea state and wind
force and direction as well as other factors influencing stability.
Supposing there are k - such situations in which the ship may find itself during its
lifetime, then the lifetime probability of capsizing could be expressed as:

Where: Pi = T;!T is probability that the ship is in the i-th geographi,cal area
Ti is part of the voyage time (or ship's lifetime) spent in the i-th area
Tis total voyage time (or ship's lifetime)'
Pij is probability of meetingj-th weather force in the i-th area

Pi! is probability of meeting [-th encounter angle relative to wind in the i-th area
pim is probability of occurring m-th loading condition in the i-th area
Pin is probability of appearance of n-th additional factor in the ith area

The above probabilities could be estimated on the yearly basis of the analysis of the
ship's route, statistics of weather conditions and loading conditions and experts opinions.
Discrete values of all of the above circumstances have to be chosen and then the number
of situations identified. The probabilities of each situation occurring should be then
estimated under the condition that the sum of the probabilities has to be equal to one.
In practical calculations the planned route should be divided in a number of sections in
such a way that in each section probability distributions of weather conditions (wind and
waves) and of stability characteristics of the ship could be considered stationary and
ship's heading being constant. The number of sections depends on the route.
On the basis of weather conditions statistics to each situation that depends on the weather
condition the definite probability could be assigned. Because of the symmetry of the ship
116 Chapter 5

only five possible ship's headings relative to the direction of waves could be adopted:
head waves (H), oblique waves (0), beam waves (B), quartering waves (Q) and following
waves (F). This is illustrated in the table 5.1 and in fig.5.2. It has to taken into account
that the wind direction is not necessary the same as wave propagation direction.
In the next step the sea state scale consisting of 9 degrees is adopted and usually also
division in four seasons is taken. Then for the i-th section of the route the matrix of
external conditions could be found.

Furthermore it is necessary to consider situations which are related to the loading

condition of the ship and to the slow changes of the centre of mass due to elapsing time.
Analysis of changes of the position of the centre of mass in time and loading conditions
provides the possibility to assign the probability of the definite stability characteristics.

Table 5.1. Wave propagation direction relative to ship's course

Probabilistic Approach to the Development of Stability Standards 117

Loading conditions have to be analysed during the single voyage. The number of discrete
positions of the centre of mass caused by loading condition and fuel and water
consumption depends on the ship's type cargo carried and the voyage. Changes of the
position of the centre of mass due to ship's age are rather slow and may be considered in
yearly periods.
Additional factors endangering stability in each situation, may be events such as shifting
of cargo, crowding passengers on one side, rudder action, openings not closed, water
trapped on deck and others that should be considered separately or in groups.
If, for example, the number of sections to which the route is divided is assumed 20 and if
we assume further that the situation kj is characterised by the time spend in that situation,
sea force, season, heading relative to direction of wind and waves, stability parameters
and additional factors as they may occur then the total number of situations to be
considered could be of the order lx105• The calculation of probability of capsizing for
such a number of situations is realistic, bearing in mind that for the great majority of
situations, particularly for those that correspond to low sea force this probability could be
assumed as equal zero.

5.4 Short-term Probability of Capsizing

The probability PCk in formula (5.1) is the short-term probability of capsizing in k-th
situation where stationary conditions occur, i.e. for the definite sea state, heading and
stability characteristics of the ship. It may be calculated by this formula:

where: tk is the time during which the ship remains in this situation and Ie is the so called
risk function that is the probability of capsizing within the period (t, t+d ) on the
condition that until then capsizing did not occur. A is assumed constant in each situation.
The basic discussion of the background of the formulae (5.1) to (5.3) could be found in
Chapter 9 of the Volume 2. The possibility to use the above approach to the development
of stability criteria was discussed also by Kobylinski [1993, 1994], including an example
where the assumed at choice values of probabilities were adopted. Hutchinson [1981]
demonstrated also that operational and human factors could be included in the analysis.
Although in principle, the lifetime probability of capsizing could be calculated as shown
in [Kobylinski 1993], there are no known attempts to apply this as a stability criterion.
Calculation of LP C or even P Ck meets serious difficulties. Calculation of risk function It
in the formula (5.3), for short-term probability of capsizing in principle could be
evaluated by three different methods:
1. Analysis of records of casualties,
2. Model tests,
3. Mathematical modelling.
lIB Chapter 5

With regard to the first method it is obvious that collecting data on casualties suitable for
the estimation of risk function required in the probabilistic analysis would be extremely
difficult, because not only precise stability characteristics of the ship capsized and
environmental conditions at the time of casualty have to be known, but also data and time
history of the ship operation (i.e. loading conditions) until casualty occurred are
necessary. Statistical data on casualties collated by IMO [l966,1966a] (see Chapter 4) do
not include necessary information particularly information regarding time history of ship
operation. Descriptions of many stability casualties were included in the book by
Aksyutin and Blagoveshchensky [1975] but even those descriptions, some of them very
detailed and accurate, do not include necessary information for this purpose. It is
unrealistic to assume that such data will be available in the future except, perhaps, in few
isolated cases. There are very limited possibilities to perform probabilistic analysis on the
basis of available data.
Model experiments are discussed in Chapter 6 where the limitations of this method are
also stressed. Model tests provide extremely useful information on the behaviour of ships
in a seaway, they also could be, in principle, used to evaluate the rate of capsizing in
situations simulated in the towing tank or in open waters. Model tests are actually
recommended as a method of checking survivability of damaged passenger ro-ro ships by
Resolution 14 of the 1995 SOLAS conference.
Seakeeping tanks are equipped with wave generators usually capable of creating waves of
desired significant wave height and wave spectrum. Models run on the simulated
irregular seaway, but because of the limited length of the tank usually meet only few
waves. In order to take long time record of motions and in particularly in order to assess
probability of capsizing runs should be repeated many times, which makes such tests very
time consuming and costly. Moreover, because each run starts from zero with a randomly
chosen realization of wave pattern, wave groups or extremely high waves may not be
created. It is even much more difficult to produce freak or abnormal waves. To produce
such wave in a small model tank few.successful attempts are known (fig.5.3) [Buckley
1994], however this is far from a standard practice in larger tanks where model tests may
be actually performed.
Probabilistic Approach to the Development of Stability Standards 119

The realization of more complex scenarios, where factors other than environmental are of
importance, is hardly possible in towing tanks.

Model tests of capsizing could be performed also in open waters (see Chapter 6).
Although those tests provided extremely useful information on the possible capsizing
scenarios they appear to be very costly and time consuming because of the necessity to
wait for suitable weather conditions. This method was never considered as a standard
practice.

The estimation of risk function on the basis of mathematical simulation of ship's

behaviour in a seaway is probably most realistic. Development of the suitable
mathematical models of ships rolling in a seaway, which ultimately should provide the
possibility to calculate probability of exceeding certain limiting angles of heel considered
as capsizing, attracted many scientists and the literature of the subject is immense (see
Part 2 of the Volume 2). The difficulty lies in the fact, that the phenomena are highly
non-linear and therefore it is in general impossible to obtain closed solutions and it is
necessary to apply time domain approaches. Moreover, due to complexity of phenomena
6-D or even 7-D (including rudder motions) analysis of ship motions is required in most
cases.
In the most mathematical models only environmental effects are considered, mainly
waves, sometimes wind is also considered in a simplified way as additional factor. The
other factors that may cause capsizing, except of some attempts to include the effect of
water on deck, are not taken into account. There is also the problem of assuming
appropriate wave climates and the problem of how to model seaway.
Great progress has been achieved during last 20 years in this field, nevertheless
apparently much more effort must be put in order to achieve results applicable in practice
and in particular mathematical models of capsizing scenarios that include several factors
except of the effect of seaway have to be developed. This was confirmed by the 23rd
ITTC Specialist Committee on Prediction of Extreme Motions and Capsizing [2002] that
reviewed at depth available mathematical models of capsizing and reached the conclusion
that: "only a few of these models consistently agree qualitatively with all the extreme
motions and modes of capsize identified in free running model experiments. None of the
models does so quantitatively."

5.5 Wave climates

The estimation of the critical seaway climates is necessary for the mathematical or
physical modelling of capsizing in assumed situations. This fact was recognised by the
IMO as early as in 1968 and at that time the Joint Ad Hoc Working Group for the Study
of External Forces Affecting Ships was created with the task to study wave and wind
characteristics. This group consisted of several international organisations interested in
oceanographic research. The Group at its five sessions considered characteristics of wind
and waves, statistics of wave groups, sea spectra in various areas and attempted to assess
wave characteristics at the time and place of some casualties by hindcast analysis [IMO
I 970a].
120 Chapter 5

When calculating lifetime probability of capsizing using voyage simulation method, for
each situation considered wave data could be taken from the Global Wave Statistics
[Hogben et al 1967, 1986]. Global Wave Statistics provides data on significant wave
heights, modal period and direction of propagation for four seasons in various areas of
the world's oceans and there is a common practice to adopt in simulation exercises the
seaway spectra (Bretschneider, JONSW AP) related to it. Using those data -wave scatter
diagrams short-term probability could be calculated by numerical simulation.
In numerical simulations most often the seaway is assumed consisting of irregular 2-D
waves with the spectrum having one peak. As a rule deep water is assumed. It would also
be necessary to consider the existence of wave groups in the deep-sea wave pattern that
often cause capsizing. Moreover, in certain areas breaking and conical waves have to be
considered that might be very dangerous especially for small vessels. Data acquired from
the Global Wave Statistics are not good enough for assessing ship survivability in such
situations. Ships with unlimited range of operation must survive extreme weather
conditions that might be met during their lifetime. For the purpose of assessing ship's
survivability Buckley [1988,1993,1997] derived climatic and extreme worldwide wave
spectra, which were based on millions of measurements taken primarily by NOAA buoys
or taken from other sources.

On the basis the measurements taken,

envelopes of modal period T p versus
significant wave Hs were drawn
(Fig.5A). The survivability envelope
corresponds to severe storm climatic
conditions and it is recommended to
use it in safety analysis, the lower one
is operational envelope used for
evaluation of the design seakeeping
characteristics.
It has to be noted that extreme wave
heights are much larger than
significant heights. Taking for
example from the survivability
envelope Hs = 14.0 m with
corresponding Tp = 13.3 sand using Longuet-Higgings formula the following extreme
wave heights are obtained [Faulkner and Buckley 1997]:
Interpretation of this table shows that during the 36 hours typhoon the ship will meet
waves of 30.0m height with 63 % probability and waves of 36.7m height with 1%
probability i.e. about 10 times in 36 hours.
Waves of extreme heights have entirely different characteristics from fully developed
wind waves. They are highly non-symmetrical; their wave steepness H/A might reach
10%, height above average water level up to 1.8Hs and slope up to 30°. Wave profile
recorded during the hurricane Camille is shown in fig.5.5 [Faulkner and Williams, 1996].
The record shows a very steep and high wave that may cause ship to capsize or large
amount of water coming on the deck resulting in serious damages and foundering.
Presumably such a wave caused foundering of the bulk carrier DARBYSHIRE. Some
other records show that groups of very high and steep waves could be met during a severe
storm

5.6 Capsizing Scenarios

When calculating the lifetime probability of capsizing (or non-capsizing) it is necessary

to take into consideration a great number of possible situations and to calculate the short
term probability of capsizing in each of them. This may pose some problems. However,
the number of situation considered might be considerably reduced because in reality in
the great majority of situations the probability of capsizing is so low, that obviously there
would be no need to take those situations into account. This concept was discussed in
several papers, e.g. by Boroday and Rakhmanin [1975], Kobylinski [1975], Takaishi
[1982], Cleary [1975], Dorin et al [1975] and formally proposed to IMO by Poland [IMO
1978].

The essence of this concept consists of the calculation of the probability of capsizing
(loss of stability accident), not for all possible combinations of environmental and
] 22 Chapter 5

internal conditions, but in some selected situations deemed to be dangerous. From the
statistical records of stability casualties and on the basis of experience it appears that
only a few possible situations during the service life of a ship are really dangerous. In
particular, capsizing caused by the action of waves and wind may occur only in heavy
weather. Naturally, the choice of dangerous situations is an important issue.

The authors of the above references were of the unanimous opinion that in a stormy sea,
the highest probability of a loss of stability accident occurs when the ship is in the
following three situations:

1. In a beam sea and gusty wind,

2. In a following sea,

3. In a quartering sea in conjunction with broaching.

Situation where the ship is in head seas and the possibility of parametric resonance exists
was not considered at that time and the attention to this situation was drawn in particular
after the accident of a post-Panamax Cll ship was analysed [France, et a12003].

In each of the above situations several scenarios of capsizing have to be analysed taking
also into account, apart from waves and wind action, also other factors contributing to
capsizing.
As stated above, capsizing scenarios should take into account conclusions taken from
statistics and records of casualties. The other sources of information are model tests and
interesting conclusions regarding possible way of capsizing could be drawn from
observation of the model behavior in waves. The other source of information are detailed
descriptions of actual casualties, many of them are included in the book by Aksyutin and
Blaygoveschensky [1975]. In general, a multitude of capsizing scenarios is possible.
Cleary and Letourneau [1986] listed 34 possible causes of capsizing, de Kat, et al [1994],
Alman, et al [1999] prepared a list of capsizing scenarios in a more systematic way. Also,
the IMO working group considered this problem when considering dangerous situations
(IMO [1979]).
Some of the possible capsizing scenarios are listed in the Table 5.3. They are developed
from single modes mentioned above. In the list that is not in any way exhaustive except
environmental effects some other factors, such as water on deck, shifting of cargo, icing,
and free surfaces of fluids are included. Obviously some other factors have to be added
depending of the type of ship and its cargo. The matrix of possible scenarios is obviously
extremely large.
The real difficulty lies in assigning the probabilities to each scenario. Statistics is not very
helpful in this case and opinions of experts might be more appropriate. One way to
organize opinion of experts is Delfic procedure, where a number of experts are
individually asked to complete questionnaires in which their replies are required to be
substantiated. Then, during a series of iterations, the experts are repeatedly asked the
same questions to establish whether they refine their answers in light of being provided
(anonymously) with the replies and justifications of the other experts. The iteration
continues until satisfactory degree of agreement is reached
.~
In this way, the number of necessary calculations and analyses would be substantially
smaller making the calculation of the probability of capsizing more realistic. Naturally,
the choice of dangerous situations is an important issue. The conditions for which
"dangerous situation" should be satisfied could be defined as follows [Cleary 1975; Dorin
et a1.l975; Kobylinski 1975; IMO 1979]:
1. The situation should be a realistic one in the sense that the probability of the joint
action of several factors endangering safety against capsizing is sufficiently high,

2. The results of action of the adopted combinations of external factors could be related
to the sufficient number of ship characteristics (parameters defining hull form,
architectural features, mass distribution etc.), and

3. Computation procedures for these situations should be manageable.

The above opinions were confirmed by the statistics for capsizing accidents. Two such
statistics are particularly conclusive. From table 5.4, which includes Japanese data on
casualties of fishing and cargo vessels for the years 1973-1977, it is seen that more than
half of all capsizings occurred in stormy weather. In a rough sea, about one third of the
casualties occurred in following or quartering seas and about two thirds in beam or head
seas. Accidents in head seas were not separated from those in beam seas, however from
other sources it is known that capsizing in beam seas occurs more often and weathering
in head seas is considered as the most safe although in the last situation certain types of
ships may encounter parametric resonance.
Probabilistic Approach to the Development of Stability Standards 125

In both situations, save wind and wave action, also other possible external heeling forces
have to be accounted for. An assessment of the possibility of the simultaneous occurrence
of several additional factors endangering stability is, however, a difficult task and such a
possibility could be estimated only on the basis of opinions of experts supplemented by
the analysis of casualties.

5.7 Probability of Capsizing and Stability Criteria

Several authors discussed the problem whether the lifetime probability of capsizing
could be used as a criterion of stability [Kobylinski, 1975,1984, I993b,1994;
Sevastyanov 1970, 1978, 1979, 1982, 1993, McTaggart, 1993, Kastner 1975a]. There are
strong arguments in favour of this approach because the probability of capsizing is the
real measure of risk to the ship during its operation. On the other hand there are serious
difficulties in adopting probability of capsizing as a measure of safety.
If the risk function and the long-term probability of capsizing could be evaluated there
would be a problem of how to use them for assessment of ship's safety. The probability
of capsizing is measured by very small numbers because capsizing is a rare event. To
evaluate such probability with sufficient accuracy would be an extremely difficult task
with uncertain result. Sevastianov [1970] even argued that the required accuracy of the
calculation of LPc lies outside ofthe possibilities ofthe method (see Part 1, Volume 2).
Sevastianov [1992] analysed the possibility of applying three criteria that could be used
in the probabilistic approach (see also Chapter 9, Volume 2 of the book):
1. Probability of safe operation during time t:
126 Chapter5

requires great accuracy of its estimation, which would be very difficult to achieve
because of the scarcity of statistical data.
The third criterion, average lifetime of a ship before it capsizes, is not practical. From the
formula (5.6) it is seen that this will be on the order of 8000 years. It is clear that no ship
has a chance to remain afloat during such a "theoretically possible" lifetime and any
prolongation or shortening of this period will not have any effect on the opinion of
mariners about its safety.
In theory the lifetime probability of non-capsizing could be used as a criterion of safety.
The most obvious method would be to calculate values of this probability for a
population of existing ships considered safe in operation and in this way to estimate
hidden preferences. Those values could be then used as a criterion for assessment of the
required probability of non-capsizing in the design process of new ships. However, this is
hardly realistic because of extremely small numbers involved and high scatter of such
probabilities for existing ships which could be used for comparison (Belenky [1993],
Bielanski [1994]). The other method, using expressed preferences estimated on the basis
of the opinion of the public leads to nowhere because the attitude of the public with
regard to dangers is irrational and people have no feeling regarding degree of danger
expressed by extremely small probabilities. It cannot be expected that required
probabilities could be estimated in this way.
Instead there is a tendency to estimate the probability of
survival in the dangerous situation the ship may meet
simulating capsizing scenarios as, for example, in the Table
5.3. This leads to the recently advanced tendency to replace
prescriptive criteria as e.g. in the IMO IS Code by
performance oriented criteria. The First Principle
Methodology (FPM) has to be used for this purpose.
Several authors discussed the applicability of FPM to safety
against capsizing. (Pierson [1993], Buckley [1994, 1997],
Faulkner and Buckley [1997]). In the FPM ship responses
to various hazards, particularly to hazards posed by seaway,
are directly calculated and assessed whether they are
acceptable or not. FPM employs analytical methods by
which responses to assumed seaway criteria are calculated
on the cause and effect basis. This methodology is most
useful in assessing safety of non-conventional ships, to
which existing prescriptive criteria are not readily
applicable, but it might be also useful to assess safety of
conventional ships in abnormal conditions. The block
diagram ofFPM is shown in fig.5.6.
Operational requirements identify areas and routes of
operation, loading conditions and, if necessary, also other requirements. Seaway criteria
in respective areas of operation comprise long-term climatic wave conditions as well as
extreme storm wave conditions. Critical design conditions specify those conditions which
must be observed in the design process and on the basis of which ship responses are
calculated using analytical methods (capsize simulation).
Probabilistic Approach to the Development of Stability Standards 127

5.8 Risk Assessment

Risk is defined as a product of hazard probability and hazard severity (consequences):

R=P·S (5.7)
In order to assess risk, both quantities in the above equation should be evaluated. From
the above definition of risk it is seen that even the most improbable event with having
catastrophic consequences may be defined as an event involving substantial risk.
The general classification of hazard probabilities and classification of hazard severities
compiled after Halebsky [1989] and IMO DSC Code (Resolution A.373(X) are shown in
tables 5.6 and 5.7 respectively. Obviously, in order to use this classification in QRA,
values should be attached to categories specified as in table 5.7. This can only be done by
subjective judgement taking into account analysis of accidents and reaction of the public
and governments to the consequences of casualties.
With catastrophic or critical hazards, three levels of action may be necessary:
Grade X - action to eliminate the hazard;
Grade Y - action to control or reduce the probability of the hazard;
Grade Z - action to control the hazard, desirable if cost effective.
This is shown in the risk assessment matrix in table 5.8. [Halebsky 1989].
In terms of risk of capsizing due to the effect of the seaway, this would mean that when
the risk is on the level of Grade X; then the ship should be prevented from sailing. At the
level of the risk of Grade Y, a limited navigation zone will have to be established. Design
and operational requirements and measures may lead to a decrease in the hazard
probabilities and in the consequences of the risk grade.
128 Chapter 5

5.9 Acceptable Level of Risk

In the probabilistic approach, ultimately the overall risk of capsizing is evaluated. It is

necessary to estimate its acceptability. There are different ways to assess if the evaluated
risk is acceptable or not.
One possibility is to calculate the risk for a sample of existing ships known as being safe
in operation using the same methods as risk calculated for the ship in question, and then
comparing the results achieved. A similar method had already been used in assessing the
acceptability of new stability criteria developed by IMO, but the weak point of this
method is that it cannot be used to assess new designs that differ from existing ones. The
choice of sample of existing ships judged as being safely operated is also subjective.
Nevertheless, there were a few attempts made to check if this method might be used
within the scope of the probabilistic approach. Belenky [1993, 1995] calculated the
probability of capsizing for 17 vessels in 3 loading conditions, which in each case just
satisfied the existing IMO criteria. Notwithstanding the fact that the method of
calculation may not be perfect, relative values of computed probability possess a certain
meaning. They were found to be widely different (within the range of about 2.0 .10-3 to
about 2.0 .10-3 , and in most cases between 2.0 .10-5 to 1.0 .10-7). The wide range of
results actually prevents making any conclusions regarding acceptable levels of risk on
this basis. Similar calculations using different methods performed by Bielanski [1994]
provided identical results.
The other possibility to assess the acceptable risk is to compare the risk calculated with
the actual risk in various other industries and activities. All available data in this respect
are, however, given in terms of risk to personnel whereas for the case of stability, data
should refer rather to the risk of a loss of stability accident.
The results of risk evaluation with regard to personnel can be presented in several forms:
1. Number of fatalities per annum,
ProbabilisticApproachto theDevelopmentof StabilityStandards 129

2. Fatal accidents (mortality) rates (FAR),

3. Number of fatalities per accident (F-N curves),
4. Individual risk at key location.
Risk to personnel is not the best criterion for the assessment of the acceptable risk of a
loss of stability (capsizing) accident, but most available data refer to FAR or F-N curves.
FAR (hourly mortality rates) for various activities are shown in table 5.9. Krappinger and
Sharma [1974] provided F-N curves for accidents at sea (fig 5.7).

Mortality rates (FAR) in various activities

are related to the benefit to be gained from
this activity. People tend to accept a higher
level of risk if the benefit is large. There is,
however, a high-risk level where risk
cannot be justified, whatever the benefit.
Below this level the ALARP principle (as
low as reasonable and practicable) is
usually applied as a basis for drafting
requirements. The ALARP principle is
illustrated in fig. 5.8.
The relation between tolerable FAR and
benefit gained is shown in fig. 5.9 (from
[Starr 1969]). In the figure, a distinction has
been made between first and second
persons who undertake risk connected with
their activity fully consciously and
voluntarily, e.g. crew members, and third
persons, who are unconscious of possible
dangers, e.g. general public. Fig. 5.9 shows
that tolerable FAR for third persons should
130 Chapter 5

be four orders lower than for the first and second persons. According to Caldwell [1986],
the risk for third persons should be three orders lower than for the first and second
persons.
Rimington [1991] discussing risk level considered in British nuclear power station design
referred to the HSE discussion document from February 1988 where it was suggested that
tolerability levels should be based on current experience in other industries where hourly
FAR is about 12.10-8 . It was suggested that this is the dividing line between what is just
tolerable and what is intolerable for workers. From table 5.9 it is seen that this is exactly
the value of FAR for the world fleet on average, but for some other industries the current
figures are 3 to 5 times higher.
It seems that the level of risk
that presently exists in seafaring
is socially acceptable and
generally work at sea is not
particularly risky except for the
deep-sea fishing and offshore
industries, but even their risk is
much lower than, for example,
the construction industry.
For the estimation of the socially
acceptable risk, in particular risk
related to loss of ship's stability
accidents, FAR is not the best
measure. The public, in general,
does not realise what the term
"mortality rate", which is given
in a very small number means in
practice. From experience, it is
known that society is inclined to
accept accidents where a single
person dies, e.g. as in automobile
accidents. But, where there are
many fatalities in a single
accident, society generally feels
that the safety level is
inadequate, notwithstanding the
fact that the mortality rate might
be much smaller. The effect of a
casualty on public opinion
depends also on where the
casualty occurred and what
kinds of persons were involved.
Good examples are the TITANIC, the HERALD OF FREE ENTERPRISE and the
ESTONIA disasters, which caused violent reactions of the public and organisations
responsible for safety. On the other hand, the most serious marine casualty (with the
Probabilistic Approach to the Development of Stability Standards 131

exception of war casualties), the DONA PAZ, with more than 4000 fatalities was hardly
noticed because it occurred in the Philippines.
FAR also is not a good measure of the risk of capsizing. First of all, capsizing usually
causes loss ofthe ship, but not necessarily the loss oflives. Even without the loss oflives,
it could have very serious consequences, for example, serious pollution of the
environment. Secondly, data on FAR available refer to all fatalities at sea, but not to the
fatalities caused by capsizing. Generally the latter are not available, although Caldwell
[1986] published some data on FAR related to loss of ships, but still they are referred to
all causes. The respective figure is 3.10-8 which compares favourably with the mortality
rate from all causes equal 20.10-8 to 25.10-8 •
From the point of view of stability, it is better substantiated to use the rate of loss of
stability accidents. The difficulty is that required data are hardly obtainable. Based on
statistics it could be found that the hourly loss of ships rate is about 0.35.10-6 to
0.65.10-6 depending on the ship's type (ships lost per hour related to the number of
ships in operation).
For the statistics available, however, data on ship's capsizing mentioned in Lloyd's
statistics may be included in all three categories: capsizing, foundering and missing.
Assuming that apart from capsizings, one half of the founderings and one half of the
ships missing are due to loss of stability accidents, then about 19 % to 25 % of all ship
losses could be attributed to loss of
stability accidents. Stability is
therefore important although not
the most frequent cause of ship
losses. Capsizing, however, usually
involves heavy loss oflife.
When assessing safety in general,
and safety against capsizing in
particular, economic considerations
have to be taken into account. The
requirements of safety and
economy are partially opposed to
each other. When making a
decision to build a ship, the
optimisation calculation should be
performed where safety criterion is
estimated taking into account minimal cost. It is shown in fig 5.10 [Hutchison 1986] that
with the above procedure, the problem of safety is reduced to the problem of economy. It
we take into account the possible loss of life, this method is not acceptable, although
there are attempts to evaluate cost oflife in economic terms. It seems, however, that such
a relationship could be found only when the risk of human life is compared with gains
achieved by first and second persons and with social advantages for third persons. In
seafaring, the general aim of increased safety is to reduce the mortality rate and to reduce
damage to the environment and thirdly, to achieve maximal profit.
 133

Chapter 6

Model Tests of Capsizing

6.1 General

Model tests constitute a powerful tool for investigating complex hydrodynamic

phenomena of ship motions. Testing models is the method widely used in ship
hydrodynamics in order to gain information on the behaviour of the full-scale ship,
particularly in cases where due to the complexity of physical phenomena numerical
methods are not accurate. The methodology of model tests for resistance and propulsion,
for manoeuvring, and seakeeping characteristics are now standardised and constitute the
routine tool available for design purposes.
As mentioned in subchapter 2.6, there is a theoretical possibility to base stability
standards on systematic model tests of capsizing. This method was widely discussed at
IMO during the consideration of development of the so called "rational" stability criteria
[IMO 1975-1990] and it was recommended that stability criteria might be developed on
the basis, at least partially, of systematic model tests of capsizing. In fact, however,
because conducting model tests of capsizing is an extremely costly enterprise, systematic
model tests were not performed anywhere on· a large scale with a few exceptions
discussed later in this chapter. Even with those few exceptions, the number of models and
scope of tests performed was limited. In general, this method was not employed for the
development of stability criteria but was used mainly in order to investigate various
modes of capsizing, to validate theoretical predictions and to assess the relationship
between hull form, stability characteristics and seaway characteristics and susceptibility
to capsizing. Observations of the behaviour of the model in different situations in a
seaway provided extremely useful information on causes of capsizing and on the effect of
freeboard, bulwark, freeing ports and deckhouses on capsizing. This information is
invaluable for creating mathematical models of capsizing and computer simulation of
capsizing phenomena.
Analogous to the methodology of model tests of propulsive, manoeuvring and seakeeping
characteristics the concept was advanced to standardise also model tests of capsizing, or
even further, to require model tests of capsizing as a method of checking the safety of
ships in a seaway. This concept was the subject of discussion of the working group
created during the 17th International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC) [Krappinger et al
1984]. It was not pursued further until 1997 when at the 21st ITTC the Technical
134 Chapter6

Committee on Stability was created with the aim inter alia to develop standard guidelines
for model testing of stability.
Krappinger and Hormann [1984] proposed to divide all model experiments related to
capsizing of ships into three groups:
1. Tests intended to gain information on hydrodynamic forces which are required as
input in the equations of motions in mathematical modelling.
2. Tests intended to gain information on the physical phenomena involved when ships
capsize. In this category there are also included model tests aimed at explaining
causes of capsizing of particular casualties.
3. Systematic model tests of capsizing aimed at development of safety standards.
Model tests of groups 2 and 3 are conducted using self-propelled free or only partially
captive models that are manually or automatically controlled. Such model tests are
performed usually in open water or in large seakeeping tanks. Model tests of group 1 are
conducted using captive models of ships or simplified bodies in towing tanks. Model tests
of group 1 are not discussed here because they are related to general seakeeping theory
rather than to specific problems related to safety standards. From groups 2 and 3, only
those model tests are discussed which are aimed at investigating capsizing phenomena or
aimed at developing or improving stability standards.
Model tests of capsizing belong to the most difficult category of model tests. Capsizing
usually is the final link in the chain of events, which could be initiated sometimes by a
minor incident. There are many possible scenarios leading to capsizing which could be
different for different types of ships. Such scenarios are impossible to reproduce in model
tests. Therefore, usually model tests of capsizing are limited to reproducing as far as
possible the action of the seaway. If model tests are performed in open water in natural
wind created waves, the influence of wind is also present.
The following factors have to be observed in model tests of capsizing [Krappinger et al
1984]:
1. The realistic simulation of all changing environmental conditions;
2. The simulation of the above water shape of the ship including openings in the
superstructure, bulwarks, freeing ports etc;
3. Simulation ofthe action ofthe helmsman (human factor);
4. There is no practical possibility to obtain full simulation of conditions at the time of
loss of the ship
Because capsizing is a rare event, model tests of capsizing require extremely long test
durations that are not very practical. In order to overcome this problem, the severity of
the seaway could be increased but even so, if tests are performed in a towing tank, runs
have to be repeated many times.
The real conditions that are at sea during stormy weather cannot be reproduced in towing
tanks. In open water the situation is better, but characteristics of waves that are naturally
created in lakes where such tests are performed do not entirely represent the real
conditions at sea. The problem, whether wind created waves in lakes properly reproduce
seaway spectra occurring at sea, was studied by Dudziak [1963a] and Kastner [1963].
The conclusion was that if the depth of the water in the lake and fetch were sufficiently
Model TestsafCapsizing 135

large the wave spectra in the lake, although not exactly identical, are nevertheless
practically close enough to wave spectra in open sea for performing model tests.
The behaviour of the ship in stormy seas depends on the behaviour of the helmsman, i.e.
on human factor. In assessing the safety, worse seamanship has to be assumed and this
could be partially taken into account if some kind of autopilot is used, which simulates
ship handling in a manner being in contrast to good seamanship.
In spite of these difficulties, model tests of capsizing create a very useful tool for the
investigation of capsizing phenomena. According to the opinion expressed, [Krappinger
et al 1984; Hormann 1982] results of model tests cannot lead to a definite answer in the
sense of safety, but could provide means for learning about the physics of capsizing and
the relative assessment of safety against capsizing.

6.2 Conditions of Similarity and Preparation of Models

In order to ascertain the possibility of estimation of the behaviour of the full-scale ship on
the basis of model tests, it is necessary to satisfy the geometric, kinematic and dynamic
similarities of the model.
Geometric similarity is satisfied when all dimensions of the model are scaled down from
the respective dimensions of the full-scale ship. The model scale is:
136 Chapter 6

laws of similitude, models have to be sufficiently large. It is recommended [Voitkunsky

1985] that the Reynolds number for the model should be preferably at least about 2.106,
but in any case not less than 1.106 but it has little meaning when the model is rolling at
slow or zero velocity. In practice it means that for an example model of a fishing trawler
45 m in length and sailing at 14 knots has to be at least about 2 m long, but considering
that it has to be tested at slow speed, it should preferably be longer.
With rolling, the viscous damping is caused by friction and vortices separation at sharp
bilges, flat keels or bilge keels. Therefore it would be more appropriate to relate the
Reynolds number to the breadth of the model and to the angular velocity. In any case, the
model has to be large enough, especially when bulwarks and freeing ports are provided
because the flow through small openings should not be affected by surface tension.
It is essential that the model is correctly balanced statically and dynamically. The
longitudinal and vertical positions of the centre of mass, initial metacentric height and
moments of inertia around the central axes have to be correctly reproduced. Instead of
estimating the longitudinal position of the centre of mass, usually the longitudinal
position of the centre of buoyancy is estimated because at the correct trim these two
measures are equal. Because the transverse dimensions of the ship normally do not differ
considerably, it might be assumed that the mass moment of inertia around the central
transverse axis Iyy is equal to the moment Izz around the central vertical axis.
For the purpose of estimation of Izz> the model is suspended on two cords as shown in fig.
6.1 and oscillations around vertical axis are induced. From the measured period of
oscillations, Tz , the mass moment of inertia is calculated using the formula:
Model TestsafCapsizing 139

The most important limitation is lack of possibility to control the weather and seaway. In
order to perform tests in conditions that properly simulate real required environmental
conditions, sometimes a very long waiting period is needed. Planning of experiments
requires availability of statistical data on wave formation in the chosen water area in
order to estimate the period when the probability of the occurrence of the desired seaway
is the greatest. The model size has to be adjusted with regard to the characteristics of
waves in the area. Obviously, the model's size should not be too small in order to avoid
excessive scale effect and in order to make it possible to install propulsion and equipment
inside. Therefore, the waves expected should not be too small and in general, significant
wave height Hl!3 should not be less than about 0.15 m, which requires that the testing
area should be quite large.
The difficulty, which is not easily overcome, is that wind is not scaled down with the
model size. Therefore, generally the wind heeling moment is too large in spite of the fact
that in models tested higher tiers of superstructures, masts and rigging are not
reproduced, which makes the windage area considerable smaller than with the full scale
ship.
The experiments in open waters require logistic support and because of the
unpredictability of weather conditions, plenty of idle time. This causes such tests to be
quite expensive and only a few cases where such experiments were performed are known.
In spite of the above-mentioned difficulties, this method offers important advantages that
are clearly visible from the experience of researchers who performed such tests. They
could be summarised as follows:
• This method offers the possibility of obtaining more realistic severe sea conditions
than could be generated in a laboratory.
• There are relatively much larger measuring distances than in a model tank; therefore
more data samples could be obtained, especially in following and quartering seas.
• The information on the behaviour of the model could be obtained in a short time.
Watching the model behaviour is a good help for the imagination. Ship motions and
geometrical dimensions appear in a more vivid and comprehensive way than in
reality.
• There is a possibility to run the model at all possible headings with all degrees of
freedom. This is not possible in the majority oflaboratories.
• Economy of operation is possible since the capital investment is lower.

6.4 Methodology and Results of Experiments on Capsizing in Open Waters

6.4.1 Basic Techniques

There are two basic techniques of conducting model tests of capsizing in open waters. In
the first method, radio controlled self propelled models are used where the source of
energy, propulsion and all instrumentation is contained in the model and data are either
recorded in the model or transmitted to the shore station. In the second method, an
140 Chapter 6

accompanying craft is used where research staff, source of energy and data acquisition
system are situated and the model is connected with elastic cable with the craft.
Comparatively larger models are required in the first method in order to contain all
equipment, while by using the second method they could be much smaller. The
advantage of having an accompanying craft is also the possibility of observing (and
filming) the behaviour of the model at a close distance, the disadvantage being the
negative influence of the connecting cable. Both methods could be, however, combined
utili sing advantages of both of them.
In both methods it is necessary to install the following measuring and control systems:
1. A system for measuring waves, wind direction and velocity.
2. A system for measuring motion parameters of the model.
3. A system for controlling of the model course and speed.
4. A system of propulsion ofthe model.
5. A system of transmitting and recording data.
6. Film or video cameras.
As far as it is known, there were only four projects of this type which were all conducted
by university teams. This is because universities have no access to large seakeeping tanks
and have the opportunity to employ students and academic staff who are not under such
pressure of time as the professional staff of towing tanks.
Altogether 9 models were tested within these projects, some of them with varying GMo
and freeboard. Particulars of the models tested are compiled in table 6.1. When
investigating the causes of loss of the stem trawler GAUL [Morrall 1980], its model in
addition to capsizing tests in the seakeeping tank was also tested in Solent. However,
because these tests constituted only a fraction of the more systematic tests in the tank,
they are referred to in the section on model tests in tanks.

6.4.2 Experiments Performed by the University of Hamburg Team

The University of Hamburg installed the first known project of this type during the years
1961 to 1964 and the experiments were performed on the Groesser Ploener lake near
Hamburg. The experiments were reported in several papers presented by Kastner [1962,
1963,1964 1969, 1970, 1975], Kastner and Roden [1965] and Roden [1962, 1962a]. The
technique used by Hamburg University was reported by Kastner [1962]. Remote
controlled, self propelled models were used in the experiments. Batteries, the propulsion
motor and other equipment and measuring apparatus were installed inside the model, the
sketch of which is shown in fig. 6.3. The model was constructed ofreinforced resin and
made watertight. It was tested with different freeboard values and with or without a
superstructure. Adding layers of polystyrene foam accomplished changes of freeboard. In
fact, all models used in these experiments by other teams in open waters were also
equipped similarly.
Measurements of waves and wind were taken at a fixed point in the area of the
experiments by means of sensors attached to steel pipes post positioned on the bottom of
the lake at 6m depths. Signals were transmitted by cable and recorded on shore.
142 Chapter 6

Two models were tested: one cargo ship and one fishing boat. The data for the cargo ship
are shown in table 6.2. Data for the fishing boat cannot be found in the publications. The
experiments were limited to runs in head and in following seas, as it has been found that
in these situations the model capsized more easily than in beam seas. During the
experiments, it was attempted to find the highest value of GMo at which the model always
capsized and the lowest value of GMo at which the model did not capsize. In fact, the
difference between these two values was found rather small.

6.4.3 Experiments Performed by the Gdansk Technical University

The Ship Research Institute of the Gdansk Technical University conducted a series of
experiments on Lake Jeziorak in Ilawa, Poland during the years 1963 to 1968 and in
1993. The experiments were reported by Dudziak [1963d, 1975], Dudziak and
Kobylinski [IMO 1969] and Kobylinski [1970, 1993a]. They were reported also at IMO
[1970b, 1973]. The technique used differed from the one applied by Hamburg University
in that for the first time the second method as described in 6.4.1 was adopted.
For experiments performed in Ilawa, a custom built accompanying craft was used. The
purpose of the craft was:
1. To support the model for transport to the test area with the capability to launch and
recover the model allowing modifications and repairs if necessary,
2. To provide shelter for instruments and personnel,
3. To provide a mobile test platform which follows the model during tests with a data
acquisition system on it and allowing observations and filming,
4. To provide a capability to launch and recover the wave buoy.
The accompanying craft was constructed in the form of a catamaran about 12 m long and
3 m wide with two slender hulls covered with continuous deck. A small erection was
provided on the deck in order to accommodate the data acquisition centre,
instrumentation and shelter.
The model was connected with the test catamaran by a multicore thin elastic cable
attached to a long thin rod operated by a member of the crew in such a way as to not
influence the motions of the model. The model (its speed and course) was controlled
from the catamaran, which was moving with constant speed on a desired course. All the
Model Tests of Capsizing 143

data was recorded on the catamaran, including wind velocity and direction. There was
also a sensor for measurements of the wave height that, because of the very small
motions of the catamaran, provided reliable results. However, the second measurement of
the wave height was taken using a fixed wave sensor on the wave buoy or, later, on a
platform positioned at the bottom of the lake in the area of the experiments. During the
experiments conducted in 1993, the model was not connected by the cable with the
catamaran, but was remote controlled and all data from the model were transmitted by
radio to the data acquisition centre on the catamaran, which was following the model at a
certain distance.
Altogether three models were constructed and tested as shown in table 6.2. The data for
the cargo ship cannot be traced in the literature although some results of tests were
published.

6.4.4 Experiments Performed by the University of California

In the experiments performed by the team of the University of California at Berkeley in
San Francisco Bay, the technique used was similar to the one used in experiments on
Lake Jeziorak in Ilawa. These experiments were reported by Haddara et al [1972],
Paulling et al [1970, 1971, 1972, 1975] and Kastner [1974]. A catamaran 10.5 m long and
3.8 m wide named Froude-Kriloffwas used in the experiments as an accompanying craft.
It was, however, designed mainly as a shelter for personnel and for carrying the model
and wave buoy.
144 Chapter 6

One model of a fast cargo liner was tested in two loading conditions. The dimensions of
the model are shown in table 6.2. The model was controlled by radio from the Froude-
Kriloff craft and was entirely independent, fitted with an autopilot. Measuring apparatus
and recorder were installed in the model. Four quantities were recorded during tests,
namely:
I. yaw angle versus time,
2. rudder angle versus time,
3. -pitch angle versus time,
4. roll angle versus time.
Waves and wind were measured on a specially constructed buoy positioned in the area of
the experiments. The buoy was constructed as a tension leg stable platform. Such a
platform had total buoyancy that exceeded the platform weight and was moored by
vertically tensioned anchor lines in which the tension equals the difference between the
buoyancy and weight. As a result, vertical movements of the buoy were negligible. The
buoy was connected by cable with the supporting craft on which the records of wave
height and wind velocity and direction were taken. At the time of the experiments, the
accompanying Froude-Kriloff craft was stationary and the model was controlled from
there.

6.4.5 Experiments Performed by Hokkaido University

Kawashima et al [1982] reported on experiments performed by Hokkaido University
during the years 1971to 1981. Six models of fishing vessels were tested, data for three of
them were reported, the particulars of which are given in table 6.2. The aim of the tests
was not to develop or check stability standards, but rather to determine how to ensure
safety of a fishing vessel in rough weather by proper seamanship. Tests were conducted
on Lake Ohnuma. The maximum fetch in the test field was about 4 km for wind direction
from the SSW. The experiment was begun whj::n the wind blowing from this direction
reached at least 8 mls.
The experiments were performed using the following systems:
I. System for measuring wind waves, wind direction and velocity,
2. System for measuring motions of models,
3. Data processing system.
For measurements of wind and waves a steel pole 8m long was positioned in the centre of
the test area. Measuring apparatus was fixed to this pole and data was transmitted by
cable to the observation station. The model was remote controlled and equipped with a
motions measuring apparatus, propulsion and power supply system. The data were
transmitted by VHF radio to the observation station, where a multichannel data
processing system was installed.
During the tests, the behaviour of the model was recorded by a 35 mm motor driven
camera and 8 mm film camera. The model was cruising at head, beam, quartering and
following waves and experiments were repeated for each condition. Runs leading to
capsizing were also recorded.
Model TestsafCapsizing 145

6.4.6 Results of Capsizing Experiments in Open Waters

As previously mentioned, only four cases of performing model experiments of capsizing
in open waters are known. Some of the results and conclusions obtained and reported are
discussed below. In no case, however, did the results lead to the conclusions, which
affected the stability standards already in existence, although they helped to better
understand the physical phenomena that led to capsizing. It seems also that no project
was planned with the purpose of developing new or improving existing criteria. The
purpose of the experiments was probably best formulated by Paulling et al [1972] as
follows:
"Based on physical insights gained in the experimental program modifications will be
made in the analytical methods, and new analytical or numerical tools will be developed
to facilitate the prediction of ship survivability either in conjunction with model tests or
independently"( end of quotation). Therefore the goal of such tests was to provide tools
for prediction.
Important results of the tests were observations of the behaviour of the model in a
seaway. It was observed that the history of vessel motions before capsizing could be of
two types as shown in figs 6.4 and 6.5. In the first type capsizing occurred after large
pseudostatic angle of heel was observed (fig. 6.4). In the second type a pseudostatic angle
of heel was not observed and the angle of heel was growing progressively before the
model capsized (fig. 6.5). In all cases the model capsized to the leeward side. [IMO
1970b].
The other conclusions from the tests were as follows: [Kastner 1962, Kastner & Roden
IMO 1965, Kobylinski 1970, IMO 1970b, Dudziak 1963a, 1965]:
• Capsizing and high pseudostatic angles of heel are always connected with intensive
deck flooding. If the construction of the vessel is such that intensive deck flooding
does not take place, capsizing is not to be expected .
• Capsizing susceptibility is related to the form of the hull. A model of a small fishing
trawler tested on the lake never capsized, even at very low stability, and the reason
for this was as a result of the double-chine form, deck flooding was very small (fig.
6.6). For this model a pseudostatic angle of heel was not observed [IMO 1970b].
146 Chapter 6

• The flooding of the deck depends also on the bulwark and on the freeing ports.
Generally, in moderate sea conditions the bulwark protects the deck against flooding.
However, in heavy seas the bulwark helps to accumulate water on deck. With the
same model in the same sea conditions a large pseudostatic heel was observed with
the bulwark and no pseudo static heel when the bulwark was removed. Closing freeing
ports slightly increased pseudostatic heel [Dudziak 1975, IMO 1970b ].
• Pseudo static heel may occur, even ifthere is no bulwark when stability is very low.
• Deckhouses the breadth of which are smaller than the ship's breadth have an
important effect on the deck flooding and the pseudostatic heel. Water can collect
between the deckhouse and bulwark causing additional heel to the windward side and
eventually capsizing. On the other hand, the increase, even small, of the height of the
freevboard considerably reduces risk of capsizing [Dudziak 1975].
• The average duration and
height of large pseudo static
heeling angles were related
to the appearance of the
sequence of large waves of
almost identical intensity.
This was observed in all
courses with respect to the
oncoming sea. If the
number of large waves was
small, then the model was
able to upright itself, if the
number of high waves in
the group was large, the model capsized.
• In head seas the model rolled mildly at the beginning with small amplitudes, then
inclined to one side and capsized. The curve of angular velocities indicates passing
waves. This is shown in fig. 6.7. [Kastner 1962].
Model Tests afCapsizing 149

Pure loss of stability was the most frequently observed mode of capsizing. Such
capsizings occurred most frequently in very steep waves of a length between 0.5 and 1.5
of the ship length and at a high model speed. Capsizing occurred if the model was on the
wave crest for a sufficiently long time.
Broaching caused by the loss of directional stability on the face of the wave was mainly
observed on relatively short, steep waves with the model at high speed. A pure broaching
effect was rarely observed in the experiments as the large containt;r vessel has sufficient
directional stability. Capsizings observed were a result of the combined effect of
broaching, loss of stability on the wave crest and of motion instability.
The third mode, capsizing due to low cycle resonance was caused by the oscillations of
the righting arm that led to a resonant build-up of roll motions. This occurred when the
increased righting arm at wave through
amidships resulted in a large roll velocity
timed to meet a crest amidships one half an
encounter period later. This, however, was
observed rarely.

6.5 Model Tests of Capsizing in Towing and Seakeeping Tanks

6.5.1 Tests Performed in Various Countries

A number of model tests of capsizing in towing or seakeeping tanks were performed over
the years in different countries. It is impossible to trace all of them as they were
performed with different aims, not necessarily with the view of improving or checking
stability standards. From the numerous experiments published those, which have some
effect on stability standards or at least were aimed at checking the safety level of different
types of ships are those referred to below.
150 Chapter 6

General recommendations with regard to various model-testing techniques, particularly

methods of generation of the wind field suitable for testing of capsizing are discussed in
the paper by Shaughnessy et al [1994]. Systematic model tests of capsizing using a series
of models were reported by Blume [1986, 1990, 1993] and by Blume and Hattendorf
[1982, 1983, 1984]. There were also several tests performed of capsizing in breaking
waves: Balitskaya [1965], Dahle and Kjaerland [1980]; Ishida and Takaishi [1990];
Kholodilin and Tovstikh [1969]; Kho10dilin and Mirokhin [1972]; Morrall [1979, 1980];
Umeda, et at [1999]. A particularly comprehensive programme of capsizing tests in
quartering seas was performed in Canada and reported by Grochowa1ski [1989, 1990,
1993, 1993a, 2000] and by Grochowalski et at [1986]. Also, in Japan systematic tests of
capsizing of fishing vessel models were performed by Tsuchiya et at [1977]; Yamakoshi
et at [1982]. Other model tests of capsizing were also reported: in quartering seas [Kan et
at 1986, 1990, 1994; Kure and Bang 1975], in head seas [Burcher 1990, Hirayama and
Nishimura 1997], in beam seas [Dudziak 1975; Hirayama 1983] and in following seas
[Miller 1975]. Motora, et al [1982a] reported on capsizing experiments with a totally
enclosed lifeboat. Tamiya [1975] performed capsizing tests with box shaped vessels.
Some results of capsizing model tests were submitted to IMO [IMO 1970c, 1977a,
1984b, 1984c, 1990].

The majority of tests of capsizing were with models of fishing vessels mostly small,
because those small vessels were most susceptible to capsizing in heavy seas. Many tests
were planned to explain the possible causes of capsizing of real ships.

6.5.2 General Observations and Guidelines on Model Tests of Capsizing

There are various possibilities for conducting model tests of capsizing, which mainly
depend on the facilities available and on the purpose of the tests. Special wide seakeeping
tanks are available in some ship hydrodynamic laboratories and in other cases seakeeping
tests have to be performed in narrow towing tanks. The tests could be conducted either
with free remote controlled models or with partially captive models. They may be
subjected to the action of waves only or, in some cases, attempts are made to simulate the
wind effect as well.

If capsizing tests are performed in large seakeeping tanks using free remote controlled
models, such tests actually do not differ from those in open waters except that there is no
wind effect. In such tanks, models could be tested at different courses with respect to
waves. Creating an additional heeling moment by shifting transversely small weights in
the model could simulate the wind effect. In some tanks, fans are employed in order to
create wind, but this is rather difficult with a model running at speed.

In towing tanks capsizing tests if the model is moving at certain speeds could be
performed in head, following or quartering seas. For the last case, however, only small
angles of deviation from pure following seas may be tested. When the model is
stationary, then it could be positioned at all angles with respect to oncoming waves, but
there is the problem to restrain the model in the proper position. This problem was
discussed by Shaughnessy et al [1994].
Model Tests afCapsizing 151

The model must be tethered in order

to stay in position, otherwise it will
quickly reposition itself. The authors
recommend using a bungee cord
arrangement and a soft restraint
system to maintain the desired heading
relative to wind and waves. The
recommended tethering arrangement is
shown in fig. 6.12.
If the wind is modelled in the towing
tank, then an important issue is the
proper choice of the model scale in
relation to the tank width. Air motion
generated by a series of fans is not
uniform over the width of the tank, but
the wind profile is more likely to form
as it is shown in fig.6.13. If the model
is too large (scale coefficient small),
then when it is positioned in a beam
wind it will be exposed to a strong
wind in the middle part, but a weaker
and erratic wind at the stem and bow.
When positioned in a head wind the
wind velocity will rapidly diminish
along its length. A model too small
will experience large scale effect.
The measuring apparatus usually is
designed to measure and record model
motions, wave characteristics and
wind velocity if generated.
Shaughnessy, et al [1994] used a
motion analysis system consisting of
a video camera recorder, monitor
and processor for analysing model
motions.
In the experiments performed by Bl ume [Blume and Hattendorf 1984; Blume, 1986],
the models used were self propelled moving along the towing tank and controlled
manually by a helmsman stationed on a subcarriage in front of the main carriage. A
flexible cable from the subcarriage, through which power and commands were
transmitted, was connected to the model. Gyroscopes were used for recording the model
motions. Grochowalski [1989] used a similar arrangement except that the model course
was controlled by an autopilot.
Blume [1993], who performed a series of systematic model tests of capsizing in the
Hamburg Ship Model Basin, pointed out that normal testing of capsizing phenomena in
irregular seas would require extremely long test duration. The tests could be performed
Tests were performed in the towing tank, in irregular waves in following and quartering
seas at a relative course of 30° to the direction of wave propagation. For all models, the
same irregular model seaway (Seaway I) was used and in order to maintain identical
conditions in each repeated run the wave maker was started with exactly the same time
lag after the model run has started. However, in order to investigate the influence of the
ship's length, instead of changing the length of the model and to avoid constructing
costly models of different lengths, which would be expensive, the same models w~re also
tested in a smaller model seaway. These seaways were referred to as Seaway 11 and
Seaway III, having the same ratio of significant wave length to peak period squ~red as
Seaway 1. All seaways became equal in full-scale values for significant wave heights and
peak periods if models were made in different scales. In effect, the behaviour of the
models corresponded to ships of different lengths. This is shown in table 6.5
6.5.4 Systematic Model Tests of Capsizing Carried out in Japan
A number of model tests of capsizing was carried out in Japan as referred to in paragraph
6.5.1. The tests reported were carried out in a systematic way with the aim to improve or
check stability criteria and are referred to below. Tests performed by Yamakoshi, et al
[1982] comprised seven models of fishing vessels of different types: two purse seiners,
two bonito boats, a pair of stem trawlers, a coastal trawler, and a salmon drifter. Main
dimensions of all models are given in table 6.6. All models were approximately 2 m in
length and were tested in a rectangular seakeeping tank that allowed performing runs at
various angles relatively to incoming waves. Models were remote controlled by radio and
motions of models and water elevation on model sides were measured.

During the tests the metacentric height was changed, the freeing ports were kept closed or
open; the model speed was chosen as either normal or half speed. The irregular waves
generated had a significant wave height of about 0.3 m and the spectrum chosen was the
Pierson-Moskowitz type.
Preliminary tests revealed typical modes of capsizing that were: shipping water on deck,
dynamic effect of waves and loss of stability on the wave crest. From the tests it appeared
that shipping water had the most important influence on susceptibility to capsizing and
the ability to clear the water from the deck with freeing ports open radically reduced the
number of runs where capsizing occurred. Table 6.7 shows some results of runs with
model A (purse seiner) at half normal speed.
 Chapter 6

Kan, et al [1986, 1990, 1994]

performed model tests of capsizing
in quartering seas. At least three
models were tested. The main
particulars for them are shown in
Table 6.8. Two of them (models F
and G) were identical in hull form
with the models tested by Blume
[1990] although they were made in a
different scale. Model G was the
model of an imaginary container ship
with V-form cross sections designed
to have small stability variations on
the wave crest while model F, having
V-form cross sections, was designed
to have large stability variations on
the wave crest. Stability
characteristics for both models are
shown in fig. 6.18. The third model
(A) was the model of a large stem
trawler that capsized in the Bering
Sea and the tests performed with the
model were intended to reveal
possible causes of capsizing.
The capsizing tests were carried out
by using radio controlled free
running models in the 80m square
basin of the Ship Research Institute
. fitted with a wave generator. Tests
were performed at different
encounter angles. The authors found
that the most dangerous encounter angle was 20° to 40° as it is seen from fig. 6.19. It was
also found that the danger of capsizing increases as the ship speed increases, while it
decreases with slowing down. Below a certain critical speed the danger of capsizing is
negligible. This is seen from fig 6.20 where capsizing rates at two Froude numbers 0.34
and 0.29 are shown for model F at lowest GMo adopted. At Froude number 0.27, only one
capsizing was observed. In the histograms cases of a very large heel between 40 and 50
degrees are also shown. Cap sizings were always to the leeward side.
Most of the observed capsizings were caused by pure loss of stability, , on the wave crest
and broaching caused some others. Capsizing which might be caused by parametric
resonance was not observed.
The effect of GMo on the danger of capsizing is obvious. Capsizing rates for
GMo = 3.87 cm are shown in fig. 6.20. For the same model F with GMo = 4.56 cm, very
few capsizings were observed and with GMo = 5.26 cm, none. Critical values of GMo as
found by Blume [1990] are, in essence, confirmed.
 Model Tests of Capsizing 157

Umeda, et al [1999] proposed a methodology of checking safety against capsizing by a

series of model tests. This procedure comprises several steps:
• Step 1: preparation of the model, adjustment of the metacentric height (minimal
value),
• Step 2: measurement ofthe roll period and damping coefficients,
• Step 3: runs in still water in order to estimate the relationship between propeller
revolutions and ship speed,
• Step 4: turning test in calm water with the maximum rudder angle and maximum
speed. If the model capsizes, the model speed has to be limited so that the
model does not capsize due to turning only,
• Step 5: testing the drifting model in regular waves. If the model capsizes with wave
steepness 1/7, then wave steepness is reduced in order to find critical wave
steepness at which model does not capsize,
• Step 6: testing model in regular head waves with wave steepness sligtly smaller than
the critical one obtained from the drifting test,
• Step 7: testing model in quartering seas. By repeating runs in quartering seas, it is
possible to identify critical combination of speed, course and wave steepness
for capsizing.

This methodology was applied when testing two models of fishing vessels with the aim to
assess danger of capsizing. Particulars of the models are given in table 6.9. Models were
free running, autopilots controlled and were tested in the manoeuvring and seakeeping
tank of the National Research Institute of Fisheries Engineering, having dimensions of
60x25x3.2 m and fitted with a segmented type wave generator.
Results of the tests performed are compiled in table 6.10. For model A, the minimum
GMo in order to comply with the IMO IS Code is 1.0m (for full-scale vessel), whereas for
model B the critical GMo is 1.65m. From the results obtained, it can be seen that model A
with the GM satisfying the IMO IS Code requirements capsized in quartering seas
whereas model B even at a GM substantially less than required did not capsize. It means
that for this particular model the IS Code slightly overestimates the danger of capsizing.
ModelTestsa/Capsizing 159

On the other hand, if we take into consideration that IMO guidance to the master for
avoiding dangerous situations (MSC/Circ.707) recommends to reduce the Froude number
to 0.3 in heavy quartering seas, then after reducing speed correspondingly, model A did
not capsize even in quartering seas. The hull parameters of both vessels suggest that
vessel A might be slightly more vulnerable to capsizing than vessel B, but this does not
substantiate such differences of results as were revealed in the tests performed. The
reason for such behaviour is not clear and the author suggested that this problem has to be
investigated further

6.5.5 Capsizing Model Tests in Breaking Waves

As it was recognised that breaking waves are particularly dangerous from the point of
view of capsizing, particularly for small vessels, model tests in breaking waves were
performed in several places, e.g. [Balitskaya 1965; Dahle and Kjaerland 1980; Kholodilin
and Tovstikh 1969; Kholodilin and Mirokhin 1972; Morrall 1979, 1980; Ishida and
Takaishi 1990].
With the tide against the wind or in cases where a deep-water wave enters a shallow
bank, the waves become shorter and steeper and ultimately they become breaking waves.
Breaking waves could be created in towing or seakeeping tanks by installing a shallow
200 Chapter 9

By swell, we mean the longest waves generated in a storm. Due to the larger velocity of
crest propagation compared with shorter waves, swell approaches areas outside the
originating wind field. Swell advances a longer distance at the same time than shorter
waves.
Although swell has smaller wave steepness than the shorter waves, it can have
considerable wave height due to its large wave length.
The above formulae and values in table 9.1 demonstrate, that longer waves have a larger
wave period, increasing with the square root of the wavelength. In the next 3 formulae,
the constants are also approximated in the (metric) SI system with g=9.81m/s2:
9.6 Irregular Waves

The natural seaway on the oceans is irregular. It is also referred to as random sea, or as
confused sea. The sea shows rarely a unidirectional, regular sinusoidal wave pattern, but
we observe a mixture of waves of different length, height and direction.
The natural seaway can be decomposed to a sum of partial sinusoidal waves, each having
a relatively small steepness, even for a severe sea. Therefore, the spectral approach with a
sum of partial waves constitutes a valid representation for a random sea.
From careful observation, certain typical or characteristic parameters can be estimated,
such as a significant wave height, period, and direction of progress. St. Denis and Pierson
[1953] introduced a mathematical description of natural seaways. Their work was a
milestone to allow a calculation of random seas and linear ship motion.
The unidirectional, irregular wave pattern 1; is seen as the sum of regular partial waves,
see fig. 9.11 (at =0). From a record of the irregular sea, Fourier analysis can calculate
partial waves. An irregular record can be plotted again as a sum of the partial waves,
according to equation 9.30
9.11 Wave Data from Observations

One of the most extensive data collection of waves was set up by the British National
Physical Laboratory in collaboration with the Meteorological Office, published as
"Ocean Wave Statistics" by Hogben and Lumb [1967]. Ocean data was based on the
meteorological logbooks of voluntary observing ships numbering about 500 ships for all
shipping routes on the oceans. It contained frequency distributions of visually observed
wave heights, periods and directions for 50 sea areas. The wave data reports archived by
a number of member states started in 1949 under the auspices of the World
Meteorological Organisation (WMO).
The succeeding volume is "Global Wave Statistics", published by British Maritime
Technology Limited (BMT), [Hogben, et al. 1986]. The book supplies statistics of ocean
wave climate for the entire globe for 104 areas of the ocean. This improved data is more
reliable because it is based on much larger samples covering longer periods of time.
A huge number of visual observations of both waves and winds reported from ships in
normal service all over the world have been evaluated by a quality enhancing analysis
and data fitting using a computer program. Although the statistics presented relate only to
waves, wind observations have been used to improve the reliability of the wave statistics.
Furthermore, instrumental data from nine stations were used to validate results, e.g.
Ocean Weather Station India (59° N, 19° W) in the North Atlantic.
For each ofthe 104 areas, data was given in tables with the categories:
• Annual and four seasons,
• All directions and 8 directional sectors.
9.12 Wave Climate

Information on wind-generated waves has been based on:

Visual observation
Instrumental buoy measurements
Remote sensing from satellites
Calculation with spectral models using barometric fields and wind field analysis
Although observation has the lowest quality of data, it has the largest statistical data
available. It underestimates the recurrence of heavy storms. Buoy measurement data are
smaller in volume and limited to a small number of years. Satellites and calculation
models will give better information in the near future.
We can speak of a "wave climate" to include the whole wave states at sea. Storms and
waves can be classified into typical structures. Boukhanovsky, et al. [2000] proposed to
apply five storm classes and four wave classes. The storm class depends on the shape of
the wind force versus time. The wave class depends on the shape of the seaway spectrum
versus frequency.
Storm class I is generating waves during limited time
Storm class II is generating a fully developed sea.
Storm classes III, IV, V: combinations of class I and II.
The storm class is characterised by storm duration, time of growth and time of decay. Fig.
9.27 shows the dimensionless wind force versus time. Table 9.9 gives the frequency of
occurrence of the storm shapes and the mean shapes of duration (from measurements in
Sea Environment 215

the Black Sea, [Boukhanovsky, et al. 2000)). While 1 is triangular, II is more trapezoidal
in shape. Storm class III is similar to IV, but the peaks exchanged (not drawn).
Storm class I, with 50% occurrence in the Black Sea, has the largest percentage of the
five storm classes, see table 9.8. Wave class II (wind waves) shows for all classes of wind
and storm the largest percentage.
 217

Chapter 10

Roll Excitation and Influence of Speed and Heading

10.1 Motion Directions of Rigid Body

Natural seaway on the oceans acts on the ship. The ship must respond and carries out
motions due to the seaway excitation. The resulting oscillatory motion of the ship as a
rigid free floating body can be decomposed into six different directions of the motion, the
so-called degrees of freedom (DOF).
The oscillatory ship motion is described by three translatory and by three rotational
degrees of freedom. Fig. 10.1 shows the three translatory motions of the rigid ship body:
surge, sway, and heave, and the three rotational motions: roll, pitch, and yaw. The general
definition is compiled in table 10.1.
226 ChaprerlO

by people running athwartships in unison. As soon as the roll amplitude is large enough,
no more excitation is allowed. The initial roll amplitude for the measured roll decay
should not exceed five degrees.
It is advisable to take the time measurements in the region of large roll velocity to have
clear-cut points for begin and end of the period. This does not mean to measure when the
ship passes exactly the upright position, as this is rarely possible to be estimated
correctly. A fixed landmark for reference when the ship is closer to the upright position is
suggested. When the ship passes the upright position, roll velocity is at the maximum,
and the mark is passed quickly. This method is of particular advantage for large roll
periods.

IMO [1993] gives detailed instructions to the test procedure. IMO requires the time to be
taken for not less than about five complete oscillations. The counting should begin,
contrary to the above proposal, when the ship is at the extreme end of a roll. After
allowing the roll to completely fade away, this operation should be repeated at least twice
more.
Jens [1964] evaluated the accuracy of rolling tests with coasters in the Baltic Sea. He
concluded:
• The accuracy of measured rolling periods decreased with larger roll periods. Even
very small disturbances (from wind, waves, and rudder action) are affecting the
natural roll significantly. The Cr value (see subchapter 10.6) varied for one ship
condition between 0.7 and 0.83, so the statistical deviation of the measurements was
too large. The rolling test should not be used at very small GM values and
corresponding large natural roll periods (in the order of s 10cm and 2': 20s).
• The smaller the GM of the ship is, the more accurate is the application of the
inclination test to measure GM (see chapter 13).
• Distribution of cargo, ballast, and height of deck cargo have a dominant influence on
the Cr value.
IMO allows estimating the stability by means of rolling period tests for small ships of up
to 70 m in length. IMO Resolution A.749(l8) was adopted on 4 November 1993
Roll Excitation and Influence of Speed and Heading 227

(succeeding Appendix 2.1 of IMO Resolution 167, Recommendation on Intact Stability

for Passenger and Cargo Ships under 100 Metres in Length, London 1981). However, the
rolling period test must be seen as a very simplified method, when no other stability
information is available. We want to stress again that To is the period of the free roll and
must not be confused with the rolling period at excitation Tr.
IMO Res. 749(18), London 1993, gives several reasons to disregard determining stability
by means of the rolling period test, or at least the numerical results should be reduced. In
such conditions of low stability, the test could give dangerously large values for GMo,
which are not reliable:
• For a long period of roll, corresponding to a GM ofO.20m or below,
• Inducing the roll by putting over the helm,
• Rolling test in disturbed waters. Quote: Forced oscillations corresponding to the sea
period and differing from the natural period at which the ship seems to move should
be disregarded. End of quotation.
The Weiss formula (equation 10.26) gives GM as a function of
• Natural roll period, To
• beam of the vessel, B
• rolling coefficient, Cr (equ. 10.24).
Application of the Weiss formula requires knowledge of the rolling coefficient Cr. The Cr
value depends on the type of vessel, her loading condition, i.e. in particular on the
distribution of the cargo in the transverse plane. Resolution A.749(18) gives some
statistical values for coasters and fishing boats.
For coasters of normal size, the observed metric Cr -values are:
• (i) empty ship or carrying ballast 0.88
• (ii) ship fully loaded with liquids in tanks
• comprising 20 % of total load 0.78
• comprising 5 % of total load 0.73
This data on coasters is based on extensive measurements in the Baltic Sea, after serious
problems with carrying timber deck cargo had been encountered [Jens, 1964; Thode,
1965].
IMO Resolution A.749(18) (1993) and IMO Circular 707 (1995) present an
approximation formula from statistics (L ship length, B breadth, d draught of the ship
hull, in meters):

However, it must be stressed that for any vessel the Cr -value should rather be determined
directly. In order to estimate the rolling coefficient of the ship, both the inclining
experiment for GM and the rolling period test for To must be carried out at the same
loading condition of the ship. This allows gathering experimental data on the actual Cr-
values of the particular vessel at various loading conditions.
234 ChaprerJO

10.10 GZ-Variation in Longitudinal Waves

A ship in longitudinal seas experiences a completely different shape of the underwater

volume as compared with the ship in still water and in beam seas. The righting moment
of the vessel varies in time with the passing wave. This results in a dynamic excitation of
roll motion.
A first approach is to calculate the GZ curves in different wave positions. The hydrostatic
approach assumes the water particles in the wave not in motion, although the water
surface is elevated according to the wave. Fig. 10.10 shows four different positions of the
wave crest along the ship (drawn with vertical shift to separate lines).
Roll Excitation and Jrifluence of Speed and Heading 235

longitudinal waves. The displacement volume versus ship length is approximated by a

cubic function. Three cross sections according to the rule of Tchebychev represent the
longitudinal buoyancy distribution of the ship in the wave. The longitudinal position of
section 1 is 0.7071 multiplied by half the ship length behind the main section. Section 2 is
the main cross section, and section 3 is located 0.7071 multiplied by half the ship length
before the main section. The three sections represent the after-body, mid-ship, and the
fore-body of the underwater hull, see fig. 10.10. The draught should be chosen according
to the fully loaded condition because the freeboard is smallest. For ships with a small
block coefficient, the ballast condition might be looked at too.
This approach yields sufficient accuracy and serves to understand the influence of the
hull form in the particular wave position. The hydrostatic approach is also fundamental
for an understanding of the parametric roll excitation and resonance as discussed in
chapter 11. The wave length is taken as the length on the waterline of the particular
loading condition [Kastner, 1982]. The wave height-length ratio must decrease with
increasing ship length (L in meter) as expressed in equation (10.46). The formula
corresponds to the 0.1 % occurrence in the North Atlantic. Although wave steepness
decreases, wave height versus length is still increasing. The regular wave has a trochoidal
shape (subchapter 9.1). Fig. 10.12 demonstrates the three sections at a constant heel of 30
degrees.
In the wave crest, the
freeboard amidships reduces
considerably. The freeboard
even becomes negative see
fig. 10.12. Due to the lack of
buoyancy above the deck side
at large heel in the wave crest,
the centre of buoyancy in
heeled condition B~ shifts
towards the centre of gravity
G. This shift of B reduces the
GZ.
At the same time, sections 1
and 3 show an increase in
effective freeboard for the
ship in the wave crest. This
positive effect cannot
counteract the large GZ-
reduction amidships. Thus,
from summing up along the
ship length, the wave crest results in a reduction of the GZ-curve. This reduction is larger
with finer ship shapes designed for large speed at small block coefficient CB. On the
contrary, wave trough amidships results in an increase of the righting lever Gz. The
effective freeboard of the midship section 2 is considerably increased. The overall GZ
reduction in the crest is larger than the gain in the trough. The mean GZ at crest and
236 Chapter10

trough is therefore below the GZ-curve in still water. The overall GZ reduction in the
crest is larger than the gain in the trough.
A detailed calculation for wave lengths from 0.6Ls to 1.75Ls shows the reduction (S-C) of
GZ in the crest C compared with still water (S), see fig. 10.13. The maximum of the GZ
reduction in a crest is not at a wave length equal to ship length, but at a smaller wave
length between 0.75Ls to 0.9Ls for the hull form used [Kastner, 1975]. For easy
comparison of different ships, a wave of ship length is still recommended for the method.
The reason for using frequencies instead of periods is that in following waves we find
conditions where encounter periods become very large, and correspondingly the
encounter frequencies of waves are very small. The information is the same. It is easier to
look at figures such as IE close to or even equal.to zero, than at the corresponding Ie with
values approaching infinity. In stem quartering seas at large ship speed, the encounter
period TE for shorter waves goes to infinity. This means practically, the ship runs with
these waves for a long time. The corresponding/E curves show zero encounter frequency.
In the diagrams, zero heading means following seas. The heading of 45 degrees means
stem quartering seas; 90 degrees, starboard beam seas; 180 degrees, head seas.
From figs. 10.23 and 10.24 it is obvious that for large ship speed, a number of regular
waves coincide at a very narrow frequency band in following and stem quartering seas.

10.13 Wave Group of Two Regular Waves

The linear superposition of partial wave components of a random sea compressed to a

small frequency band by the transformation to the ship can be demonstrated by the
simplest case with two waves of the same amplitude, but a very small difference in
frequency, see figure 10.25. The background can be found in any book on engineering
mechanics, such as "Hiitte" [Czichos, 1991].
10.14 Wave Encounter of a Ship in Irregular Seas

Basically, the same results as above with the single waves can be obtained by
transforming the seaway spectra onto the running ship. Fig. 10.26 shows an example of
an encounter seaway spectrum in following seas. As we recall, see subchapter 9.4, a
seaway spectrum represents the energy of the seaway, distributed over the frequency.
We consider the irregular seaway as a summation of partial regular waves with different
partial wave heights, frequencies, and phases. To transform the irregular seaway pattern
from the ocean onto the ship advancing with the speed V at the heading X, we must
perform the same transformation as shown above for a single regular wave, but now with
all the partial waves which are members of the irregular seas.
St. Denis and Pierson [1953] were the first to present the spectra formulation of the
seaway. It is included in many books on ship hydrodynamics (e.g. Principles of Naval
Architecture, Lewis, [1989]). Kastner [1969, 1970] applied the irregular wave encounter
to the simulation of nonlinear roll resonance in irregular seas. Here, we compile the main
formulae for the spectral transformation.
Roll Excitation and Influence of Speed and Heading 255

The spectral representation has been normalised, i.e. the area under the curve is set equal
to unity. This allows a quick comparison of different seaway spectra and the energy
distribution versus the frequency, independent of the total seaway energy.

10.17 The Bandwidth ofthe Transformed Seaway Spectrum

In figures 10.30 and 10.31, we have seen the energy of the irregular seaway transformed
onto the ship with speed and heading becoming more concentrated on a smaller
frequency band in following and stem quartering seas. In case the total energy of the
seaway spectrum concentrates in a narrower frequency band due to the transformation
onto the advancing ship, the seaway energy within this band must be larger than with the
not yet transformed seaway spectrum, because of the preservation of energy,
At a narrow band of the encounter frequency, all the energy of the particular waves is
going to act upon the ship in the same time sequence. In other words, running a ship in
following or stem quartering seas, closely resembles regular wave excitation, no matter
how irregular or confused the sea is. This appears to be a very strange result. However,
the above equations and the graphical representation show this surprising aspect very
clearly. Following and stem quartering seas are most serious with respect to danger from
capsizing due to the narrow frequency excitation. In case either the natural period or the
half of the natural period coincides with the narrow excitation, a large roll due to
resonance builds up, see subchapter 11.1.2.

10.18 Irregular Time Series of Wave Encounter

The wave encounter in irregular seas is shown in fig. 10.33, calculated with an Excel
program by Skalicky [1998] modified by the author, using the seaway spectrum
according to Bretschneider (chapter 9). Figure 10.33a shows the encounter spectrum in
stem quartering seas at V/T = 3 knls. A random choice of an irregular wave sequence SE
passing the ship is plotted (fig. 1O.33b). Equation (10.77) sums the partial waves by linear
superposition, (10.78) gives the random choice of phase and (10.79) the amplitude of the
components by the seaway spectrum. The time series, SE , shows the typical pattern ofthe
way the ship experiences irregular seas. Fig. 10.33b demonstrates the build-up of wave
 261

Chapter 11

Resonance and Large Roll Motion

11.1 Roll Resonance

A cyclic excitation of the ship as a dynamic system can cause particularly large
amplitudes of the response, depending on the frequency of the excitation with respect to
the natural frequency of the system. The roll amplitude can considerably exceed the
hydrostatic heel at constant heeling moment. The cyclic attenuation of the natural roll is
called resonance.
Damping reduces the resonance peak. Ships generally have small damping values. There
is a frequency range around the resonance peak, where the roll amplitude is still large.
The frequency range with large roll amplitudes is increased when Non-linearity in the roll
response is taken into account.
There are several but basically different mechanical ways leading to roll resonance. In a
seaway, the type of roll resonance excitation depends mainly on the ship heading relative
to the waves. The heading influences the underwater hull shape in the wave.
Extreme roll amplitudes of the rolling shit:>due to her response behaviour can lead to
damage of ship and cargo. The resonant roll, can be excited to very large amplitudes of
the rolling motion, which may not allow the ship to recover. Then the ship is prone to
capsize. Thus resonant roll is extremely dangerous for the ship in severe seas.
In the following subchapters, the main resonance phenomena for the rolling ship are
pointed out. To prevent failure from resonance is an important topic for all engineering
design. The basic mathematical background on the theory of oscillations of a mechanical
system can be found in a number of handbooks on physics, mathematics, dynamics, and
engmeenng.
Here we restrict the derivations to the level we find necessary for a good understanding to
avoid resonance in ship operation. We refer in particular to Klotter, who first presented
the mathematical theory in detail, and whose nomenclature has been widely used in
engineering and presented in handbooks, see e.g. "Hiitte" [Czichos, 1991].
264 Chapter 11

It must be kept in mind, that the above considerations are based solely on the linear (and
uncoupled) differential roll motion equation. Therefore they are only valid for small roll
angles, generally up to 5 degrees. Linear solutions can be applied as a first approach with
later corrections if required.
The non-linear bending of the roll response peak widens this linear range of large
resonance amplitudes, as was pointed out in subchapter 10.9. According to the graph in
fig. 10.9 of chapter 10, the frequency range of large roll in beam seas widens even more,
when

To check resonance according to equation (11.8) can only be a first approach. It must be
evaluated further in case the ship is close to this condition. A wider range below and
above the resonant peak should be considered too. It seems to be reasonable to account
for the amplitudes larger than half the peak value. The non-linear frequency shift of the
maximum roll must be taken into account too. Only if this is the case, we have included
all large amplitudes, which could be dangerous for the ship with respect to resonant
rolling.
In practice, it is important to assume a range of excitation frequency for dangerous
resonant roll in beam seas, to be on the safe side. These considerations are given for
better understanding of the roll behaviour, and they should be applied for forecasting the
ResonanceandLarge Roll Motion 265

expected roll. However, the master always experiences the result of his decisions at sea.
Fortunately, the irregularity of the sea and the wave group phenomenon often allow him
to take further measures in between the wave groups to get out of the resonance zone.
The shipmaster must not be misled when he has survived the first extreme rolls.
In subchapter 11.1.4, the general steps for avoiding roll resonance will be discussed.
Although much research has gone into beam sea resonance, other ship directions to the
waves are even more dangerous with respect to resonant roll. This is due to the reduction
of the restoring capabilities of the ship by the action ofthe sea.

11.1.2 Parametric Roll Resonance in Following and Stern Quartering Seas

There are basically two different ways of large roll excitation. Roll can be excited either
by the external moment d, see equation (11.2). This is most pronounced in beam seas.
The even more important way of resonance excitation depends on the time variation of
the restoring moment. This is due to the action of the wave onto the ship hull. A
particular variation experiences the parameter c on the left-hand side of the roll motion
equation (11.1). Here C44 expresses the so-called spring constant. However, C44 is not
constant any more, but varies in time. It is proportional to the metacentric height GM, see
subchapter 10.9.
As soon as the righting moments of the ship are small, roll can build up even at soft ship
motions with a long period in following and in stem quartering seas (see modes of
capsize in the following subchapter 11.2). The cyclic variation of righting arms in
longitudinal waves is causing a parametric excitation. In resonance condition, the
variation of C44 can lead to capsize. The reduction of righting arms in longitudinal waves
can also lead to capsize due to pure loss of stability. The righting moment is then reduced
considerably and for a sufficiently long time. This can be the case in stem or stem
quartering seas. The pattern of GZ-variation has been described in more detail in Chapter
10.
Resonance from time variations of hydro-mechanic properties of the ship in a seaway, as
given by the parameters on the left-hand side of the roll motion equation (11.1), is called
parametric resonance. The mathematical solutions are given by the Mathieu differential
equation.
Parametric resonance must not only be checked for the direct relationships according to
equations (11.18)-(11.20), but to a wider range of frequencies (or periods, respectively).
With the size of the hydrostatic variations of GZ due to the seaway, and with less
damping, the dangerous resonance range becomes larger and stretches on a larger
frequency range. This must be considered for practical resonance avoidance of a ship at
sea.
We want to stress again that in parametric resonance there is at least one more dangerous
frequency (or period) ratio compared to the resonance in beam seas.
The roll resonance considerations given here can also serve in irregular natural seaways.
The main reason is, that in following and stem quartering seas, all waves with the whole
range of practically existing periods (or wave lengths respectively), transform onto the
moving ship in a very narrow band of encounter frequencies, which closely resembles a
single harmonic wave (see subchapter 10.15, 16, 17).
The simple resonance criteria, as stated above in equation (11.20), can give a good
warning to avoid resonance conditions in longitudinal and quartering seas. This was
proved in capsizing experiments with ship models too. A detailed analysis of the ship
behaviour in quartering seas is given in Chapter 6 of volume 2.
In other words, the Mathieu equation solution found for sinusoidal excitation can be
applied in irregular seas and with extreme roll motion. Resonant roll due to parametric
resonance can also lead to capsizing of the ship, see the next section. The order of steps
by the master to avoid resonance is given in subchapter 11.1.4.

11.1.3 Practical Method to Avoid Roll Resonance

To estimate the roll amplitude for resonance in advance is a tedious procedure. Numerical
simulation depends on many parameters of ship and seaway, which are hard to compile
correctly for the actual situation with sufficient accuracy. Certainly the further
development of measuring systems will improve the situation [Takaishi 2000).
On-line guidance on the bridge during ship operation is required, see recommendations
by IMO in subchapter 14.2.4. Based on the theory of roll motion, on the derivations of
the encounter frequencies (or periods), and on resonance considerations, the current
situation can be checked. When a severe seaway is expected, advance resonance
considerations can assist the master. He has to decide on the best way to ballast and on
best speed and heading to the waves to reduce dangerous resonance.
In case large rolls are already being observed, the reasons can be determined and
measures taken immediately to get out of resonance quickly.
A very simple method to avoid roll resonance, without the need to calculate the roll
motion amplitude, can be stated as follows:
272 Chaprerll

irregular seas? Pierson [1954] states: "What do we really see when we see the sea? What
we see has nothing to do with the properties of a simple harmonic progressive wave."
Figure 11.7 depicts the large range of K from 2kn/s through 3.3kn/s. This is not
surprising considering the many different sea states. Observing a wave group during a
smaller duration as well as the heading may play some role too. This seems to be very
vague, but the task is really not that simple: To find the correct period the ship encounters
the waves from just one observed estimate of the irregular sea! Research on practical
scenarios at sea and feedback from experience are needed to give a clear advice strategy
for different situations. New development of ship-borne wave measuring technique,
based on microwave radar with ship motion compensation, would lead to dramatic
improvements in this area.
The single and the double encounter period should not be nearly equal to the natural roll
period, To.

Some margin around the mean natural period must be considered to be on the safe side.
In beam seas, the margin can account for the frequency shift of the peak roll due to the
nonlinearity of the GZ curve at large roll. In longitudinal (and to some extent in
quartering) seas, the natural roll period varies in a range due to the upper and lower GZ
curve in wave trough and wave crest.
The IMO guidance MSC 707 (see subchapter 14.2.4) avoids many of the above problems
by giving a "dangerous zone" for the V/T parameter from 0.8 through 2.0kn/s within zero
and 45 degrees heading, but also aims for avoiding resonance. Even with the problems
mentioned, checking all the parameters including the encounter period is advisable. The
method of avoiding resonance as discussed here can only assist the master to better
understand the ship behaviour and to give h,ints. Roll is a small frequency band event, so
changes in heading and speed will be very effective. A large advantage: The outcome can
be experienced at once.
Longitudinal and quartering seas must be looked at with respect to parametric (Mathieu)
resonance. Beam sea resonance shows less danger of capsizing at the same loading
condition compared to stern and stern quartering seas, but can cause large acceleration
forces. Head and head quartering shows parametric resonance at larger GM due to the
smaller encounter period, so large roll accelerations are anticipated. Pitch in head seas
allows for a good estimate of the encounter period, TE•
Measures under critical roll conditions to avoid resonance are:
• Change of heading of ship with respect to the waves,
• Reduction of ship speed,
• Changing GM by ballast, when sufficient time is available.
Resonance and Large Roll Motion 277

11.1.6 Taking Notes on Extreme Roll

It is recommended to make notes of the observed large amplitudes of roll, and of the
corresponding ship and seaway conditions, in order to compile experience. This has the
advantage of gathering data on extreme ship behaviour and on the measures taken.
In the following table 11.2, the main topics to be observed in taking notes are evaluated
based on several enquiries, such as University of Applied Sciences, Bremen 1983;
University of Strathclyde 1984; British Maritime Technology, Wallsend 1987. Notes
might be taken directly to some computer file:
278 Chaprerll

11.2 Modes of Capsize in Irregular Seas

11.2.1 Free Running Model Tests to Study Capsize in Irregular Seas

Fortunately, capsizing of a ship in irregular seas is a rare event and may hopefully not
occur during the life of any ship. So it is hardly possible to study the dynamics of
capsizing from full-scale ship disasters in enough detail. Preventing accidents and ship
278 Chaprerll

11.2 Modes of Capsize in Irregular Seas

11.2.1 Free Running Model Tests to Study Capsize in Irregular Seas

Fortunately, capsizing of a ship in irregular seas is a rare event and may hopefully not
occur during the life of any ship. So it is hardly possible to study the dynamics of
capsizing from full-scale ship disasters in enough detail. Preventing accidents and ship
ResonanceandLargeRollMotion 279

losses by proper measures in advance is an important task of responsible ship design and
operation. In order to improve the safety from capsizing by setting up requirements and
recommendations for designing a safe ship and for operating her safely, it is necessary to
know the ship behaviour to be expected in such extreme situations.

Table 11.3 compiles the main origin of severe loads on the ship prone to capsize. The risk
to capsize depends on the particular situation of the ship. Superposition of several factors
causes disaster. To foresee the ship's behaviour, the reaction to all single loads and to
load combinations must be studied in detail.
The theoretical solution of ship dynamics at extreme roll, including capsize in severe
seas, is mathematically rather complicated. During the second half of the late 20th
century, theory was developed tremendously, see volume 2. It seemed natural to conduct
model experiments first, when appropriate theory was not available, in order to establish
the dynamic pattern of capsizing. Model testing is still needed to verify scientific results.
Most promising is the numerical step-by-step calculation in the time domain of the ship
behaviour in irregular seas in all 6 degrees of freedom.
The danger of capsizing by parametric resonance in following regular waves was first
shown theoretically and experimentally by Grim [1951, 1952]. Arndt and Roden [1958]
and Paulling [1961] demonstrated with model measurements the variation of the righting
moment in following seas. To continue studying the influence of irregular sea on the
capsizing phenomenon, extensive experimental work was started with free running ship
models. The test area was a lake or a bay, taking advantage of the natural irregular wind
waves in open waters. We refer to research groups headed by
Wendel in Germany from 1962 to 1970 [Kastner, 1962, 1964a, 1973; Kastner and Roden,
1965; Wendel, 1965];
Kobylinski in Poland from 1963 to 1969, see chapter 6 [Dudziak and Kobylinski, 1969];
Paulling in the U.S.A. from 1970 to1974 [Paulling, et aI, 1972, 1974, 1975];
280 Chaprerll

Yamakoshi and Takaishi [1982], Hamamoto, et al [1996] in Japan.

Free running model experiments formed the basis for including seaway effects into the
stability regulations of the German Navy, see Arndt [1965], Arndt, et al [1982]. Roden
[1962a, 1962b] initiated the method, and Kastner [1962] described the model set-up. First
results were presented at IMO [Kastner and Roden 1965]. Kastner developed the
evaluation [1964a, 1964b, 1967, 1968, 1973a], see subchapter 11.3.
Open water areas have the advantage of allowing ship model tests in irregular seas for a
long distance in the order of 1000 m, even in stem quartering seas. Model basins are
limited in size, even when we consider the largest ones existing. They are either long
narrow basins, mainly for forces and motion in the longitudinal direction to study
propulsion (Hamburg 300 m long, Mitaka, Japan 400m, Rome 454 m, St. Petersburg
656m), or specific seaway basins (Wageningen 60m by 40m, Trondheim 80m by 50m,
NSRDC, U.S.A. 110m by 73m). The advantage of testing in a model basin is the
experimental set-up with defined situations to study extreme behaviour at sea.
Free running model tests in open waters require more logistics than a towing tank, so they
have been reserved for special research projects. They still give good opportunities to
analyse rare extreme ship motion and to teach ship designers and op(:rators, see Loizou,
Milthorpe and Carillo [2000] at STAB2000 on their set-up in Australia. A detailed
analysis of capsizing model tests conducted can be found in Chapter 6.
In the following, we compile the different modes of capsize. Only by a sufficiently large
sample of free running model tests in irregular seas could they have been identified.
Probability considerations formed the basis on the statistical accuracy of model capsizes
by the number and length of test runs to sort out the typical modes from the statistical
distribution of capsizes. See subchapter 11.3.
Based on the outcome of model tests in San Francisco Bay, Paulling, et al [1972, 1974,
1975] identified three different modes of capsize in irregular following and quartering
seas: low cycle resonance, pure loss of stability, broach and capsize.

11.2.2 Capsizing Mode 1: Low Cycle Resonance

Fig. 11.12 shows a recorded capsizing from low cycle resonance in stem quartering sea in
irregular model waves of San Francisco Bay. From parametric rolling in irregular seas,
resonance may build up to large extreme amplitudes with the danger of capsizing.
Tests in S. F. Bay started as far back as 1971 [Paulling, et aI1972, 1974, 1975, Haddara,
et aI1972, Chou, et a11973, Kastner 1973b, 1974, Oakley, et a11974]. They give a good
insight into the basic capsize modes and can now be regarded as classical.
The reduction of righting lever in a following or aft quartering sea at wave crest causes
the ship to heel further under the action of exciting moments from wind and sea. The ship
rights again, due to the increased righting lever in the wave trough, when the wave passes
the ship. The ship in a seaway behaves dynamically, i.e. she starts rolling, and passes the
upright position when returning from the first large roll. If the time of the large roll to the
opposite side coincides with a wave crest passing the vessel, then the ship ends up with
another reduction of righting lever, and consequently with larger roll. Roll amplification
due to the 'timing' of the restoring moment variation with the roll motion is called
Resonanceand Large Roll Motion 283

11.2.3 Capsizing Mode 2: Pure Loss of Stability

Extremely steep waves in following seas combined with small ship stability can lead to
capsize due to a large reduction of the righting lever in a wave crest. This mode 2 is very
dangerous, as it is not anticipated at all by large preceding roll amplitudes. The vessel
might even appear to have almost no motion at all, first staying in the upright position
with little roll. Thus, only knowledge of the dangerous loading condition of the vessel
with too small restoring moment plus the effect of extreme waves is most important to
prevent capsizing. Otherwise it is hard to judge the immanent danger of capsizing early
enough, before the ship is getting into this situation.
Fig. 11.16(i) shows a photograph of the "American Challenger" model during the capsize
mode 2. The large wave crest causing the capsizing has just passed the main ship section.
The main data are as follows: Ship length 158.80Im, model length 5.26m, scale 30.189,
low freeboard for ship fully loaded, freeboard-draught ratio 0.56.
286 Chaprerll

Umeda [1999] notes that reducing ship

speed to Fn = 0.3 in heavy following
and stem quartering seas prevents
capsizing. This is in line with MSC
Circular 707, Guidance to the master,
IMO [1995].
All three mentioned capsizing modes
are not only related to stability and
hydrodynamic characteristics of the
vessel and the power spectrum of the
seaway, but also in particular to ship
speed and heading. Therefore,
resonance avoidance is strongly advised
(see subchapter 11.1.4 and Chapter 14).
Further details on surf-riding are given
in subchapter 6.3 of volume 2.

11.2.5 Detailed Dynamics of Ship Capsize

Nonlinear computer simulation has been developed allowing comparison of test results to
calculation. Details of the dynamic behaviour of a ship in severe seas can also be
analysed. Such simulation consists essentially of a step-by-step solution of the differential
equations of motion in the time domain. Kastner [1979,1982] gave a short account on the
numerical procedure at the STAB Conference. De Kat and Paulling [1989] showed
results of most advanced simulation of irregular ship roll. Numerical simulation can be
seen as a breakthrough in forecasting the expected extreme behaviour of ships and ocean
vehicles, considering the huge progress in computer technology to speed up the required
amount of calculation. It can lead to characterise the motion behaviour of a particular
ship for developing guidelines of safe operation. Progress is underway, in particular, for
Navy ships [McTaggart and de Kat, 2000], and in the German R&D project ROLL-S
[Clauss, et al 2002] for cargo vessels. In the future, ship borne motion simulation to
forecast dangerous situations while at sea can be thought of.
Seakeeping numerical analysis can provide useful information to ship operators in
knowing which combination of speed and heading presents the greatest risk of capsizing.
Promising concepts are being developed, to determine the capsize risk in irregular
seaways, and to develop operational guidance for avoiding conditions likely to cause
capsize. Proposed systems would combine sea state information with a database of
predicted ship motions. Fig. 11.20 gives an example by McTaggart and de Kat [2000]
from a guidance system for a severe seaway (significant wave height 9.5m, peak wave
period 12.4s), representing risk levels of capsizing as predicted for a frigate. The operator
has a wide range of safe speed and heading combinations to avoid the high risk zones.
Further details on polar plots of capsize probability for ship operator guidance is given by
McTaggart et al [2002], where they improved the plot putting head seas upward.
288 Chaprerll

Fig. 11.21 shows results of a non-linear computer simulation [Neves and Valerio, 2000].
The non-linear coupling in regular waves demonstrates the influence of heave and pitch
modes on large roll motion. Plotted is the roll velocity versus the roll angle, which is
conventionally known as the phase diagram. In the example shown, the heading is 15
degrees, the frequency of wave encounter is 0.42 rad/s, wave height is 1.5m, and length
to height ratio of the wave is 17.

Grochowalski [1993, 1997] studied the mechanism of ship capsizing of fishing vessels in
heavy seas in more detail from model experiments using a carriage in a towing tank. He
points out the dangers from bulwark and deck submergence during dynamic motions of a
ship in steep quartering waves. The generated additional force and heeling moment
significantly increases the likelihood of ship capsizing. Grochowalski differentiates
between "water on deck" and "deck in water". Additional heeling moment is generated
by the lateral motion, which is composed of sway and yaw. This creates relative
velocities of the flowing water onto the deck with subsequent dynamic pressure on the
submerged deck surface. Coupled sway and heave create a heeling moment for the deck
in water condition, see also fig. I 1.22.
11.2.6 Videos on Capsizing Model Tests
In addition to a large number of gauges installed in ship models to measure their
behaviour, several films were shot to show the extreme phenomena. With improved
technology, the newer films are better than the earlier ones, when the testing started. The
old film records have been transformed to video, while new ones can be taken directly
with video giving improved sharpness.
Most ofthe following videos have only been available at the specific Institutions for
research and lecturing. However, the 1998 video from Japan is specifically designed to
explain the capsizing phenomena:
• Freighters, coasters, Navy ships, Pl6n/Eckernforde, Germany (1962-1970), Kastner,
Bremen;
• Container ships, S.F. Bay, U.S.A. (1971-1974), Paulling, Berkeley;
• Container ships, Hamburg Model Basin, Germany (1982);
• Tests on fishing boats, Institute for Marine Dynamics, Canada (1993);
• Container ships, Japan Captains Association [1998].
The last three films have narration. The 1998 video from Japan compiles the state of the
art and has been particularly produced to explain the theoretical background of the
capsizing phenomenon. It is strongly recommended for viewing so as to visualise the
extreme roll motion pattern of ships as shown therein.
290 Chaprerll

Specifically designed videos are certainly a good tool for Maritime education and
training, e. g. the examples developed in Sweden and the U.S.A. on the safety of fishing
vessels:
Seavision, a PC-based dynamic stability simulator for fishing vessels. SSPA Maritime
Consulting AB, Goteborg;
Fishing Vessel Stability. Videotape series on safety and survival at sea. North Pacific
Fishing Vessel Owner's Association, Seattle 1996.

11.3 Statistical Precision of Determining the Probability of Capsizing in Random

Seas

11.3.1 How Predictable is Capsizing in Extreme Random Seas?

In studying the capsizing of a ship in a random seaway, we are faced with an event,
which appears rarely and unpredictably, but which must be accounted for in order to
survive at sea. The classic hypothesis testing in statistics applied to the random capsizing
problem enables judging of the accuracy in setting up safety standards. For the ship
operator, it points out the uncertainties to foresee a rare extreme event such as capsizing.
It is not a guarantee for survival when the ship has already mastered extreme waves.
Determining the capsizing probability in random seas requires an enormous amount of
running distance and time in extreme sea conditions, in order to ensure sufficient
statistical precision [Kastner, 1973b, 1975a]. Naturally, a statistic of ship losses cannot
serve as a basis for detailed studies of the extreme motion pattern. Even with model tests
much effort is involved in estimating the actual capsizing safety. Therefore, research has
gone more into studying the parameters, which affect the capsizing, see Krappinger
[1962] and Paulling, et al [1974, 1975]. However, only by the probability approach for
planning of experiments was it possible to detect the particular capsizing modes of ships
in random seas, as described in subchapter 11.2.
Extensive capsizing model tests were
evaluated statistically [Kastner, 1964b,
1973b, 1974]. Numerical simulation allows
random trials with less effort. Fig. 11.23(a)
shows a set of different simulated ship runs
with insufficient stability. Each of the runs
ended with capsize [Kastner, 1969, 1970].
Each run constitutes a single ship voyage
with the same loading condition and ship
speed, at stationary extreme following seas.
Although this is a calculated example of an
unsafe ship, which definitely is going to
capsize, due to different initial conditions of
the model run, with random phase conditions
of the irregular seas, we cannot foresee the
ResonanceandLargeRollMotion 303

combinations of M9 = 23.35.4 = 5184. Based .on theory or similar earlier experiments,

we must choose only the parameter combinations of special interest. As the actual test
runs are performed with one specific ship model, we can use the results of the first runs
for the planning of the remaining combinations to be tested, thus reducing the effort.
The practical results of the above statistical analysis might be summarised as follows:
• It can serve as a tool for planning the amount of experiments and simulations of rare
events like extreme roll and capsizing in order to assure accuracy in a statistical
sense.
• The parameter combinations of experiments must be carefully selected in order to
avoid an intolerable amount of work.
• The largest probability density of the time until capsize (i.e. the largest increase of the
capsizing cumulative probability versus an increment of time) exists in the beginning
of the ship run entering stationary severe seas. In case the ship has insufficient
stability, there is not much time left to take preventive measures. It is advisable to
take measures quickly, early enough, and preferably in advance.
• In case a ship with poor stability in heavy seas has survived some extreme waves and
recovered from severe roll, there is still danger from capsizing in the wave groups to
come.
• There is a danger of misjudging and misinterpreting experienced rare events as being
dominant for the conditions in question. One should not conclude a ship being
completely safe when she survived a few voyages in extreme seas.
• Caution is advisable in considering safety standards for ships with respect to
capsizing from scarce statistical information.
• Probability theory and statistical analysis provide the answers as to why a ship
operator cannot foresee a single extreme event to happen. The inherent probability
laws make every voyage just a new run out of a number of independent voyages.
• Experience of the ship operator with extreme roll in heavy seas cannot give sufficient
knowledge on the possible outcome of a severe situation. Emergency scenarios to
overcome severe situations within the "master's range of judgement" (subchapter
14.1.3) must be developed and trained.
• There is no absolute safety. Design for safer ships, regulations, recommendations,
knowledge based seamanship are the tools to improve the safety status of a ship. The
importance ofthe master's action for survival is clearly demonstrated by the example
given in fig. 10.18 of Chapter 10. The model experiments for survival in extreme
conditions ask for even larger righting moment than required by IMO, although the
IMO intact stability criteria of 1993 have been an enormous progress. This is solely
the responsibility of the master within his "range of judgement" (subchapter 14.1.3).
Lloyd's Register casualty statistics shows yearly total ship losses for all causes between
132 and 266 in the years 1990-1997 [Wragge, 1999]. Statistics has always been used, to
detect causes for a larger frequency of ship losses. Hjort [1993] evaluated the Norwegian
fleet for the period from 1982 to 1991. In the 10 year period, out of 153 total ship losses
304 Chapter 11

were 30 capsizes with an average of 0.069 % of the fleet per year (ships larger than 25
gross tons).
To detect causes, the capsizing rate must be related with the ship type, see table 11.7. For
the dry cargo ships, in 10 of the 12 cases of capsizing, shifting of cargo was the main
cause. The cargo was palletised sacks or plastic bags. Even when stowed as tight as
possible, such cargo may shift in adverse weather. The capsize probability of dry cargo
ships of more than 500 gross tons is very low. Therefore, safety must be improved for
ships of less than 500 gross tons. Hjort suggests that such ships should comply with the
stability criteria without the use of water ballast in the homogeneously loaded departure
condition.

It must be kept in mind that the operational data of table 11.7 are a long-term statistic
over years and includes less severe seas and calm water too. In comparing with table 11.6
and figures 11.29 and 11.30, experiments are designed solely for short-term extremes in
adverse seas.
So-called rational stability criteria try to base safety standards for the stability of ships on
the probability theory. Kobylinski [1997a] gave a detailed overview at the STAB97
Conference. Part 1 of this book details the development of stability regulations. Belenky
[2000] presented a state of the art review of the probabilistic approach. The probability of
capsize is further treated in volume 2.
 305

Chapter 12

Forces due to Roll Motion

12.1 Roll Acceleration

The purpose of merchant shipping is the economic transportation of cargo at sea. For
most ships, cargo constitutes the main portion of the total ship mass. This portion
depends on the particular ship type designed for carrying a specific type of cargo. The
design displacement, Ll, is the sum of the empty ship (mass of light ship mLs) and the
deadweight dw:

Kennell [2001] presented statistics on the mLS III ratio versus deadweight density Pdw.
Most of the ocean-going cargo ships displace 20000 to 60000 LT (I long ton = 1016kg =
1.016 metric ton) with speeds of 15 to 25 knots, with the exception oflarge tankers. They
exhibit a wide variation of deadweight density ranging from about 10 lb/cuft for Ro/Ro
ships to over 50 lb/cuft for tankers, see fig.12.1. The corresponding deadweight mass
fraction dwlLl varies from 0.4 (Ro/Ro) to 0.9 (tanker).
Ship and cargo experience the same motions in a seaway. For a fully loaded very large
crude carrier (VLCC), oscillation of the ship means that the 90% ship portion of cargo
316 Chapter 12

Depicted is the circle path around the assumed rolling centre C. The cargo mass follows
this circle path due to the rolling motion. The cargo on the starboard side experiences the
largest resulting normal-to-deck acceleration force component, P, at the maximum rolling
to starboard. Note that heave is descending on the left graph, while on the right heave is
ascending, fig. 12.11. Note also the opposite tangential direction of the dynamic force
component due to the roll amplitude on either side.

12.5 Approximation of Dynamic Loads on Cargo

Evaluation of the above equations for the three acceleration components depending on
the location in the ship (equations (12.38)-(12.40)) require either detailed motion
calculations of the ship in a seaway, or approximation values. Classification societies
have developed approximation formulae and computer programs for detailed
calculations. Of course, any approximation can be done in quite different ways. So it is
not surprising the formulae found in the literature sometimes differ considerably.
However, when looking at it carefully, one can realise the same background. Each of the
three above equations accounts for five out of six motion degrees of freedom (DOF), see
also example equ. 12.47. Usually only three DOF are taken into consideration.
Therefore, we do not try to compile approximations for the forces acting on the cargo, but
refer to the specific regulations of Classification Societies. To give only a short reference,
Lloyds Register [1998] determines the forces acting in the securing system of containers
for each loading condition and associated set of motions ofthe ship. The following forces
are to be taken into account:
• Static gravity forces,
• Inertial forces generated by accelerations due to roll, pitch and heave motions of the
ship,
• Wind forces
• Force imposed by the securing arrangements,
• Wave impact forces.
When the ship response data is not available, the values for roll, pitch and heave as given
in table 12.5 are used, according to Lloyd's Register [1998], with ship length L = Lpp .
The roll and pitch angle is to be calculated as follows (valid within the range marked by *
in the table):
ForcesduetoRollMotion 319

In fact, this a is not a roll angle at all. It is defined by the ratio of the horizontal and
vertical resultant acceleration force in the transverse plane of the ship. However, with
larger values it certainly shows the increase of transverse acceleration force, which can
cause shifting of cargo. Table 12.7 cites some results of the study of extreme values of
the calculated equivalent angle for risk conditions. The equivalent angle a combines ship
motions and accelerations and can give a good representation to estimate the risk of cargo
shifting in operation.

Ericson, et al [2000] gave the following conclusions:

• Mixed seas result in significantly larger equivalent angles a for a large number of
cases.
• Dominant quartering sea is particularly dangerous.
• The risk estimate of cargo shifting must be based on the individual ship, as substantial
differences in the same sea are possible.
The process of shifting of cargo is very complex. Lashing of cargo to prevent shifting
involves even more problems. Naturally, the type of cargo plays an important role. Cargo
mass, its centre of gravity, the lashing strength and the pretension are main parameters
randomly distributed.
The commonly used quasi-static approach assumes
action of acceleration forces from ship motions in the
centre of gravity of the respective cargo unit as discussed
above. For certain types of cargo, such as trailers, the
cargo unit itself must be treated as a dynamic system.
The time varying load acts as a transverse deflection on
the supporting deck, see fig. 12.14. The dynamic system
must include the lashing structure, symbolised by spring
constant c and damping b. Due to dynamic amplification,
deflection of cargo and lashing forces can differ
substantially from the quasi-static approach. This is in
particular true for trailers. Their centre of gravity is high.
Axes and wheels support the trailer. Anderson, et al
320 Chapter]2

[1984], and Turnbull and Dawson [1983] gave detailed analysis on lashing of trailers.
The friction force of cargo to the deck assists in preventing cargo from shifting.
Accelerations reducing the force normal to the deck, vibrations and slamming impulses
can reduce the friction force and slacken the lashing. Fig. 12.15 depicts coefficients of
friction, defined as the ratio of friction force and
the force normal to the contact surface:

A further problem is the consistency of cargo

lashing. When a single lashing line breaks due to
the larger tautness compared to the other
members of the lashing, the whole load must be
carried by the remaining structure. In such a way,
a kind of zipper effect can break one after the
other and lead to a free shift with severe
consequences.
Cargo shifting and damage to cargo are serious
problems in shipping. They cause considerable
economic loss. Large shift of cargo also
constitutes a risk of capsizing due to the large
heeling moment it develops. Both solid and bulk
cargo can shift. In most cases cargo is considered safe from shifting after some provisions
have been made. World casualty statistics report a large number of capsizes initiated by
shifting of cargo (Lloyd's Register of Shipping [1999]).
A number of parameters affect acceleration forces and damage to cargo:
• Location of cargo unit within the ship, • Internal distribution of mass and
rigidity of cargo unit,
• Preparation of cargo for shipping, (Attach • Dynamic response of coupled
lashing points, internal securing, wrapping), system cargo-ship,
• KG, radii of inertia, ship main dimensions • Roll damping (bilge keel, anti-
and hull form, rolling tanks, fin stabiliser),
• Ballast tanks for adjusting KG, • Wind forces,
• Sea sloshing on cargo, • Slamming and vibrations,
• Meteorological conditions, • Ship operation at sea,
• Routeing, • Avoiding of roll resonance.

12.7 Ships lost after Shifting of Cargo and Corresponding Operational Conditions

Wagner [1979] analysed about 100 accidents. He concluded that 40% were due to too
small stability, whereas in 60% the main cause was shifting of cargo. In a study by Kaps
and Kastner [1985] for the German Ministry of Transport, they pointed out a number of
practical problems in cargo lashing. Shifting of cargo appears generally due to severe
Forcesdue to Roll Motion 321

seaway. Either insufficient stability results in large heel, which can start cargo shifting, or
too large stability leads to too large motion with high transverse accelerations acting on
the cargo. Furthermore, insufficient lashing and too much free space left allows the cargo
to shift.
Kaps and Kastner [1984, 1985, 1985a] evaluated the casualty returns of Lloyd's Register
of Shipping. Only total losses of ships of more than 100 gross tons are considered.
Foundered means loss by capsizing, structural failure, ingress of water. Fig. 12.16 shows
the number of cargo ships foundered after cargo shifted in a 10-year period 1974-1983.
The authors propose that at least half of the large difference between "all ships
foundered" and the ones "foundered after cargo shifted" can be attributed to cargo
shifting as well. They call it a "grey
area" in the statistics. Cargo shifting is
originated by insufficient lashing,
false stowage, and reduced
seaworthiness of the ship. It falls
within the responsibility of the ship's
officer.
The total of ships lost in this 10-year
period were 2923 ships with a total of
about 12 million gross tons (GT), an
average of 4100 GT per ship. Out of
this total, 1094 ships with an average
of 2040 GT fall into the category
"foundered", i.e. 37.4% of all ships
lost, and 18.6% of the total tonnage
lost. Out of this again 738 ships with an average of 2440 GT were dry cargo ships, with
25.3% of the total and 15% of the total tonnage.
As a whole, 130 ships with an average of2180 GT have foundered after cargo shifted (in
a 10 year period!). The authors assume this figure to be very much higher, so a total of
15% of the number of ships or 9% of the total tonnage can be attributed to cargo shifting.
About half the cargo shifted cases reported were bulk cargo, or cargo to be considered as
bulk due to the specific ways of stowage. This large percentage comes close to the
"classical" causes of a ship loss such as collision, grounding and fire. The authors
consider the large share of shifting in the ship losses to be a serious problem. The
dominant role of shipping is the transport of cargo on the oceans, and severe sea
conditions must be overcome.
Imminent operational errors are:
• Wrong handling of tank fluids,
• Insufficient lashing of cargo on deck:,
• Ingress of water not noticed by the master.
Once shifting has started, it reduces ship stability and increases the heel, which in turn
induces further shifting of cargo. Critical types of cargo are steel pallets, dry bulk
including sacks, timber, containers, heavy cargo, and dangerous goods.
322 Chapter]2

Type of cargo and type of ship play an important role. Multipurpose carriers feature
mainly large cargo holds to cope with different cargo, but the space does often not allow
sufficient subdivision. Specialised ships have an advantage. However, even special ship
types such as Ro-Ro ships or container ships need careful attention concerning ship
motions and cargo lashing. An example is the extensive loss and damage to deck stowed
containers of a post-Panamax container ship due to parametric rolling in extreme head
seas [France, et a/2003].
Casualties show the importance of safety management procedures (see Chapter 14) for
prevention of a ship loss or damage to cargo. Critical operational conditions with respect
to shifting of cargo can be identified as follows:
• Lack of time for checking stowage and securing because of mechanised loading at
large capacity,
• Qualification and motivation appear to be at different levels and are sometimes not
adequate,
• Sometimes time pressure prevents a reasonable meteorological navigation,
• Measures to reduce ship motions are not always successful. Adequate knowledge and
assisting tools are not yet always available.
Container ships seem to need improvements in sea behaviour. Stability requirements have
been increased by IMO Resolution A.749 (18) adopted 1993. Kaps and Kastner [1984,
1985, 1985a] defined three typical causes for container ships to operate at adverse
stability:
1. Containers loaded on deck have less weight than assumed in shipyard stability
calculations. The result is a ship with larger GM and GZ values, which makes the ship
stiffer with increased motion accelerations in a seaway.
2. The ship is loaded according to shipyard calculation and corresponds to the
requirements. However, for a fine hull form with small block coefficient, longitudinal
and quartering seas lead to large variations in the righting moment. In severe seas
with the ship in resonance, large motion acceleration can damage lashing and cargo.
3. Containers loaded on deck have too much mass. The sea behaviour is improved
showing softer motions, but the righting moment (GZ curve) is too small. This
condition is critical for capsize.
The above reference to the cargo securing regulations by classification societies is to
show the practical importance of considering the acceleration forces for the cargo
securing. The goal is to cope with the maximum values to be expected. With the progress
of computer programs, a detailed analysis can be carried out for use in ship operation. In
particular, linear assumptions will be replaced by non-linear methods, at least for roll.
The state of the art of the mathematical methods for extreme ship motion is described in
volume 2.
Calculating inertia forces on cargo takes the dynamic behaviour and seakeeping qualities
of the ship into account and allows for better judgement. The numerical approach will
give the ship operator specific data for his decisions, to reduce dynamic loads on cargo
and to operate the ship safely.
 323

Chapter 13

Measurement and Accuracy of Stability Status

13.1 Decision Systems Based on Measurements

13.1.1 Purpose of Stability Measurements

The control of the ship status and sea behaviour by measurements, combined with
evaluation and derivation of characteristic parameters, is going to change observation into
verifiable data. With the growing use of computer - aided measurement and the
application of information technology, supporting decision systems certainly have a
bright future. Still, someone has to make the decision, and the online availability of
reliable data on the ship in operation is a prerequisite at any rate.
It is the strong opinion of the author, that in the near future it will be unthinkable to have
ships without an objective control of the status of ship and cargo and of the impact of the
environment on the ship. This includes controlling the stability status of the vessel. The
supporting tools already available will hopefully be introduced at a faster rate. A
widespread introduction and further. development of supporting systems based on
measurements can be advanced by requirements on ship safety. However, the impetus on
using online measurements comes from economic feasibility and advantage.
To operate a ship safely at sea, the master needs a large number of parameters to base his
decisions on, in correlation with good seamanship. Data supporting his decisions to
prevent damage or loss of ship with regard to ship stability can relate to:
• Hydrostatic properties of the ship,
• Ship loading,
• Control oflashing,
• Weather and environmental forces,
• Hydrodynamic properties ofthe ship,
• Response of ship and structure,
• Planned route.
Shipboard measuring and decision systems assist in the operation of the vessel, but they
also show inconsistencies and discrepancies in shipping procedures. Shipping can be
economised, while safety regulations are included efficiently. A feedback to rational
design standards for the ship in safe and economical operation will result. In such a
324 Chaprer13

system, knowledge of naval architecture, nautical experience, oceanography and

meteorology are considered. The master on the bridge has a large amount of data
available at any moment. An online analysis of data by computer programs is inevitable.
Vessel response prediction in wind and seaway shows the maximum motions to be
expected. Wind and wave forecasts are incorporated. Routeing programs give advice on
how to avoid severe ship motion and the corresponding acceleration acting on the cargo.
Both safety and economy must be considered. Online satellite data transmission allows
updating of routeing results.
There are various shipboard support and monitoring systems, which have demonstrated
their usefulness in avoiding or minimising the damage by heavy weather as well as
increasing the operating safety and efficiency. They are grouped according to the level of
support as follows:
1. Software for calculating mass and centre of gravity of the cargo, ship hydrostatics,
estimating the current loading condition,
2. Loading management systems supported by measurement of ship draught and tank
filling to increase the accuracy of stability estimates,
3. Automatic heel and trim control during loading and unloading,
4. Automatic ship inclining and evaluation,
5. Characteristics of the ship's dynamic behaviour at sea,
6. Measuring approaching waves and dynamic ship response at sea,
7. Roll motion control and roll damping,
8. Control of cargo securing and lashing,
9. Weather routeing which includes the local sea environment and ship conditions,
10. Expert decision systems.
As the number of ship-borne programs assisting the ship operation increases, a clearly
arranged bridge control becomes important. Menu systems show items such as trip plan,
manoeuvres, engine monitoring, energy economy, motion and stability, communication,
alarm and fault diagnosis, and expert system for routeing. Presenting relevant data on
different levels of information is of advantage. With respect to ship motion and stability,
the screen generally depicts ship longitudinal and transverse cross section, actual
draughts, heel and trim, vertical and longitudinal centres of gravity, ship speed and shaft
power, roll periods, heading polar diagram.
Lipis and Salov [1990] compiled many proposals and attempts throughout the late 20th
century by Russia, Germany, Great Britain, Japan, Sweden, and the U.S.A., on the
control of ship stability. They urge for the employment of shipboard diagnostics and
automation equipment to control operational stability.
Arndt [1984] pointed out some cross-references of the different menus by data
interconnection in a ship-borne information system. Roll motion prediction has the input
from load control, sea state, actual ship speed and heading, see fig 13.1.
Ship stability and strength performance coupled with an onboard decision support and
monitoring system ensure that the ship is operated within the permissible safety envelope.
With wider application, actual data accumulated, and long-term probability risk analysis
and cost benefit analysis can lead to practical refinements.
Conventional calculation methods add up inaccuracies in cargo mass, centre of gravity,
and free surfaces. For a modem ship running at the minimum GZ-curve, deviation from
calculation values increases the danger of capsizing. Ship-borne measurements improve
the accuracy of the stability estimate.
Stability regulations ask the ship designer to meet certain minimum requirements
[Kastner, 1986]. They were not set up to show the dangers in shipping operations.
Operational stability needs further information on the situations at sea. With the wider
use of shipboard recording systems, more online data will be available on the bridge
thereby improving stability safety.

13.1.2 Load Computer for Mass Calculations and Hydrostatics

Onboard software assists in routine loading calculations and checking of the floating
condition of the ship. For container ships, they are combined with the loading
information of the containers with respect to weight and position in the ship. Such
programs are efficient tools to speed up the calculations, to increase accuracy and
326 Chaprer13

reliability. They promote the best utilisation of the ship's cargo capacity by means of
accurate cargo planning. Loading conditions can be saved, documented and evaluated
statistically. By verifying stability and strength against relevant criteria before departure,
using such programs improves ship safety.
According to the instructions of the program MARINER [1998], the basic functions refer
to:
• Deadweight and displacement table,
• Stability status,
• Longitudinal strength status,
• Dry bulk cargo weight by draft survey.
To perform these tasks, the following input is required:
• Details of cargo,
• Status of ballast, fuel, oil and fresh water tanks,
• Any miscellaneous or extra items,
• Draft survey by observation.
Loading programs carry out the calculations, save the data, and show results on the
computer screen. The screen layout generally shows the ship profile at the top, including
the ship's name and title of the loading condition. A status panel is constantly updated
during editing, and a graphical summary of the results on ship strength and stability is
shown. The MARINER program shows the following data on the screen and in printed
reports:
• Displacement table,
• Cargo reports,
• Drafts and trim,
• Intact stability curve,
• Shear force diagram,
• Bending moment diagram,
• Torsion diagram,
• Mass of the cargo by draft survey.
Furthermore, the program calculates details with respect to intact ship stability:
• The applicable stability criteria, such as the minimum criteria set by the IMO for all
seagoing conditions ofthe vessel,
• Additional stability criteria, e. g. the grain stability when carrying grain,
• The GZ curve with the GM line, including the effect of free surfaces,
• The required calculated values against the relevant criteria:
GM, area 0-30, area 0-40, area 30-40, max GZ, angle ofmax GZ, down-flooding
angle, limiting KG, grain heeling moment, grain heeling angle, residual area.
Of the many programs in use, we mention Onboard-NAP A [2000]. It serves ship loading,
damage stability and performance predictions onboard passenger ships, Ro-Ro ships, car
ferries, tankers, navy ships, etc. The core technology is shared with the original ship-
oriented design tool for naval architects. For the different types of ships and cargo, the
user can define a cargo database. The same is possible for dangerous goods (IMDG).
NAP A permits onboard calculations of ship hydrostatics and intact stability, damage
Measurement and Accuracy of Stability Status 327

stability analysis, and longitudinal strength. It calculates deadweight and displacement,

free surface moments based on the actual filling of the tank, with the actual trim and list
taken into account. It checks the draft limits and the margin to the approved GM and KG
limiting curves. A user-friendly graphical interface is important. Communication by
satellite or cellular phone was developed to report the actual loading conditions to the
cargo operator on land.
Lewis [2000] reports on his extensive experience using a number of stability programs.
Without a computer program, accurate stability cannot be calculated within the
constraints of a modem trading vessel. Lewis discusses the importance of the provision of
accurate data, the requirements to maintain stability during cargo exchange and the ship's
operation, the consequences to the bridge team and the vessel itself. The stability book
aboard is merely an essential form of reference. Day-to-day stability calculations are
performed on a computer. This includes light ship mass (fuel, ballast, fresh water),
allowance for free surface effect, cargo, persons onboard. Restrictions are time, labour,
ballast, sequence of cargo operations, draft, trim, hull stress. Unfortunately, detailed
cargo information is not always available. The officer's workload is constantly
increasing.
From an operator's point of view, the problems to consider in the future are:
1. Standardisation and compatibility of on-board and shore-base stability programs.
2. Electronic exchange of information, prior to arrival in port and also during the cargo
exchange, to allow pre-calculation of stability and more effective use of time.
3. Real time display of current cargo on board, possibly direct from the crane or via the
terminal weigh-bridge.
4. Electronic exchange directly from the stability program stating the vessel's condition
during a grounding, collision or emergency situation.

13.1.3 Loading Management Supported by Measurements

Whereas the current ship data must often be provided manually, systems have been
developed to measure and transfer parameters directly. Furthermore, load-master
programs are not only doing the calculations with cargo masses, centres of gravity, and
ship data, but are the basis for management decisions with respect to stability.
Onboard-NAP A as mentioned above can be supplemented to allow online interfaces to
tank monitoring systems. A remote sounding or ullage interface of liquid cargo to the
cargo control system is possible. The program also checks the calculated draught
condition against the real status. Sensors can measure the actual draught. Results are
made available to the system through an online interface. The weight-checking menu
calculates correction mass and its longitudinal co-ordinate so that the calculated floating
condition corresponds with the measured one. This method is commonly used on ferry
operations where the car weight is not known, in order to estimate the amount of cargo on
the car deck. ~
Another example on the market is interfacing the loading computer software with an
automatic tank loading control (SCHlFFKO ShipManager and TILSE tank level gauging,
328 Chaprer13

Hamburg, 2000). The consumption of tanks is measured by automatic tank level gauging
with electro-pneumatic or electric transmitters, see fig 13.2.

13.1.4 Automatic Ship Inclining to Measure the Metacentric Height GM

To improve safety at sea, it is important to know the current stability status of the ship.
Loading data is often not reliable or not available at all. Mass of cargo and centre of
gravity can differ from the declaration, or they are unknown and must be assumed. Mass
and centre of gravity of containers can differ considerably from calculation. A large
deviation may exceed the safety margin included in the GZ requirements. As a result,
modem ships designed to operate at the limits of safety may not be safe enough, although
the calculations present them in a favourable light. On the other hand, payload capacity
can be optimised in case the actual stability status of the ship is
known correctly.
The mass of cargo may differ significantly from the values
specified in documents. Lipis and Salov [1990] found that the
average error in the weight of one standard container is as
much as ± 2 tons. Errors in the centre of gravity of cargo units
can be 0.2m to 0.5m. Estimation of ballast can lead to errors in
the metacentric height of up to 0.05m.
To avoid hidden and dangerous discrepancies in calculating the
real ship status, measurements are the only way. After the
tragic capsize of Ro-Ro ferry Herald of Free Enterprise in the
English Channel off Zeebrugge in 1987, with the loss of 193
lives, national authorities asked for weighing all cargo before
loading. To make the ship inclination test mandatory would
improve the situation even better. The measurement by means
of ship inclining includes the combined effects of ship and
cargo with respect to mass and centre of gravity. It gives a reliable answer to which cargo
can still be loaded while remaining within the limits of regulations.
The ship inclining requires recording of four quantities: shifting weight p, transverse shift
e, draft T (to determine displacement mass L1 from the vessel's curves of form), and the
heel increment The metacentric height GM is estimated by the formula:
Measurement and Accuracy of Stability Status 329

• Any small weights in the ship not specifically known.

In order to include the in-service or operational ship inclining (OSI) into the shipping
process effectively, the following basic requirements must be observed:
• The procedure must be surveyed and documented.
• Free heel motion of the ship during the inclination tests must be controlled, and
hampering by mooring lines, bridges, large free surfaces, etc. is not allowed.
• The gauge for heel inclination measurement must be accurate and reliable. Correct
measurement of inclination has to be maintained according to authority requirements.
• Calibration must be repeated in intervals and documented.
• Basic data measured must be stored in such a way that nobody can alter the data.
• The actual testing time must not interfere with the ship loading process and should
not take more than about ten minutes.
Kaps and Kastner [1989] recommended carrying out ship inclining during ship operation
regularly. They showed that using a simple fathom pendulum with a length of O.573m to
measure the heel is accurate enough. For shifting weights, a known cargo unit (e.g.
container), water tanks, or the effect of the changing position of board cranes may be
used. Kaps [1994] analysed practical details of as!.
Since 1973, Halden [1994, 1995] developed the stability test system ISTS, for which he
received the 1994 Sea-Trade Award ofInnovation for the best potential to improve cargo
handling and ship operation. The 3rd system generation of 1996 features new technology
with increased reliability and service-friendliness, while reducing investment costs
considerably. Automatic ship integrated systems certainly have great advantages.
ISTS determines the ship's GM by measuring the hydrostatic reaction due to transverse
shifting of water in heeling tanks. It is a fully stand-alone system, but has an option for
interface with a loading computer. Display, keyboard and a small printer are integrated in
the control panel. The draughts at the perpendiculars, needed to determine the actual ship
displacement can be taken visually and input manually. An optional draught gauge
system connected to the ISTS
measures and transfers directly.
Displacement and KM can be read
from the stability book and put into the
system, or a calculation routine takes
over. Trim and hog/sag influence is
also considered.
High precision level gauges in the U-
tube heeling tank, port and starboard,
measure the heeling angle, see fig
13.3. The level gauges were first based
on echo sounding, while the 3rd
generation employs robust water
pressure gauges.
330 Chapter13

The KG from measurements must be compared to the maximum allowed KG at

departure. The difference in KG is used for deciding on the amount and position of final
cargo and possible changes in ballast. The automatic inclining can be carried out during
loading. The status of GM when leaving port can be determined by consecutive
calculations. Follow up calculations give good results, as only a smaller portion of the
cargo and changes in ship data due to the change in loading are affected.
Warnings are given at critically low stability, disturbance of the test run, and incorrect
tank filling. Operational hints and explanations are included. For ship inclining, the water
in heeling tanks is automatically shifted athwart ship, while the heeling reaction is
measured continuously. The final step is the evaluation ofthe measurements and the data
processing together with a printed protocol. The test is carried out to both sides of the
ship, and the GM is evaluated for all four differences in heel (from upright to heel one
side, heel to upright again, upright to heel the other side, heel to upright again).
For any automatic system, the documentation
and the presentation of results to the ship
operator are important. Here, the heel during
the inclination test is shown on the screen,
together with the evaluated GM, see fig. 13.4.
For RO-RO and container feeder ships,
automatic ship inclining is often combined with
the anti-heeling system during loading and
unloading. One positive side effect of an
automatic inclination system is the training of
ship officers.
During the in service ship inclining, anyone
ballast tank should be either entirely full or
entirely empty. Hatch covers, cranes, etc. must be either in the at sea position or
deviations must be corrected by moment ca.lculation. Mooring lines must be slack in
order to allow a heel of at least two degrees to both sides of the ship. Of course, no
masses of cargo and ballast may be moved during the measurements.
Halden [1995] reports also on automatic ship inclining carried out at sea. To ensure the
reliability of the results, authorities demand comparative measurements beforehand in
typical loading conditions at the pier and immediately afterwards at speed, without any
changes of the ship displacement. This can save operation time when no critically low
stability is expected and excess stability will be used for ballast reduction. Successful
measurements at a ship speed of up to about 10 knots were carried out. During the
measurements, rudder movements should be avoided. Naturally, ship inclining at sea is
restricted to good weather conditions.
ISTS has approval of authorities to carry out inclining at the shipyard as well. This shows
the high accuracy of the system, see subchapter 13.2.9. The ship carries no cargo at
delivery. Therefore the GM is large, requiring a larger accuracy of the heel
measurements. A detailed accuracy analysis is given in subchapter 13.2.
Measurement and Accuracy afStability Status 331

13.1.5 Monitoring of Operational Stability

The trip ofM. V. San Francisco on the North Atlantic in 1934 [Schnadel, et aI, 1936] was
legendary among naval architects. Here, scientists tried to compare theory of ship motion
with reality by in-service measurements. Later, Aertssen [1968], Aertssen and van Sluis
[1972] did prominent work on the evaluation of measured in-service data for ship design.
In those early ship-borne experiments, measured data had to be processed ashore. The
main purpose was research to improve standards and criteria for ship design and
classification.
Hoffman [1976] reported on a large number of ships that were fitted with instruments to
measure primarily stress bending moments, accelerations, pressure, shipping of water,
and slamming. He suggested applying ship-borne measuring systems as an aid for ship
operation too. Hoffman argued that the navigation of a ship in rough water based entirely
on observation was not effective. A display of measured ship response on the bridge
would allow better decisions. Other authors claim, that masters sometimes tend to
overestimate the risks for ship and cargo and reduce speed, as long as they do not have
detailed information on the seaway and ship. To make up for lost time, they try to
increase speed afterwards to keep the planned time of arrival. On the other hand, the
master may not realise the danger due to reduced stability, when there is no objective
measure to guide him.
The purpose of an advanced seaway warning system is fourfold:
• Prevent situations, which may lead to a ship loss,
• Avoid damage to ship and cargo,
• Keep planned arrival time safely,
• Minimise fuel consumption but avoid risks at sea.
Human sensing is limited to motions and accelerations felt by the experienced master, but
other responses such as loading, stresses or pressures cannot be sensed. Damage could
occur before a precaution is exercised. Some effects cannot even be perceived from the
bridge, such as shipping of water on large ships, the slamming impact, and propeller
racing. Important to know in heavy weather are also lateral accelerations due to roll and
sway leading to shifting of cargo, unlashing of containers, and damage to equipment.
Excessive hull stresses due to waves, wave impact, and random hull vibration
(springing), on top of high static stresses due to unusual loading, cannot be detected by
observation.
Consequently, Hoffman [1976] developed his Heavy Weather Damage Avoidance
System (HWDAS). This measuring system used strain gauges installed for vertical
bending and slamming at the main ship section and accelerometers in the fore-body. The
extent of instrumentation largely depends on the type of ship. A bare minimum is,
according to Hoffman, having two strain gauges at mid-ship port and starboard, as such a
response is highly correlated to many other responses. This provides the master with
criteria to determine the level of severity. Close to the bow, a vertical accelerometer
shows the effect of the combined pitch, heave, and roll, while a lateral accelerometer at
the height of the uppermost cargo stowage shows a combination of roll, sway and yaw.
332 Chapter 13

Hoffman suggests an on-board system designed for navigating the ship in rough seas to
include the following features:
• Recording capabilities of some selected response and environmental data,
• On-line processing of the data,
• Prediction and trend capabilities of several responses,
• Criteria for establishing severity of response and warning signals,
• Guidance charts based on pre-calculated data or previously accumulated full-scale
information,
• Manoeuvring analysis to help the captain select ideal course and speed, to minimise
damage, reduce fuel consumption or save time.
The classification society, Germanischer Lloyd, in co-operation with industry, developed
a ship-borne Load and Motion Indicator (LAM I) giving the master objective aid for his
decisions in a seaway [Westram and Hachmann, 1986]. This was part of a large scale
R&D program, "Ship of the Future", aimed at enhancing the bridge operation of modem
cargo vessels. The system evaluates measurements of ship response, and it presents the
actual motion and structural response on a screen on the bridge, see fig. 13.5.

The most important data of the actual ship behaviour is indicated in both the longitudinal
and the main cross section of the ship. The maximum scale corresponds to the maximum
ship motion and load. In the event 50 percent of the design value is exceeded, the signal
colour changes to red. The screen displays (digitally) the value of the maximum within
the last 15 minutes. Shown on the screen were:
Measurement and Accuracy afStability Status 333

• Fore-body impacts,
• Vertical acceleration in the fore-body,
• Stresses in the deck at mid-ship,
• Additional power needed due to the seaway,
• Transverse acceleration in the uppermost container row,
• Roll motion.
Extensive tests on the prototype of the GL system were carried out on board the container
ship "Stuttgart Express" (a ship of the 2nd generation, with a length of 205 meters, later
reconstructed to 230 m) from 1982 to 1985 in the North Atlantic. During this
development phase, the GL system evaluated the signals from fifteen gauges:
• Vertical acceleration • Vertical acceleration • Transverse acceleration
close to the bow, mid-ship, mid-ship,
• Longitudinal • Roll angle, • Pitch angle,
acceleration mid-ship,
• Strain gauge port mid- •
Strain gauge starboard • Strain gauge at hatch
ship, mid-ship, comer starboard,
• Ship speed, • Course ofthe ship, • Wind velocity,
• Wind direction, • Torque ofthe propeller • Propeller revolutions.
shaft,
It turned out that the number of sensors could be reduced considerably. A minimum of
three accelerometers (nos. 1, 2, 3) are sufficient, as data on speed, course, wind and
propulsion are often available on the bridge anyway. With respect to stability of the ship,
roll angle must of course be included. Measured signals are filtered and digitised.
Spectral analysis allows identification of different origin of the response, such as motion
of the rigid ship and the impact of waves on the structure. The minimum digitising rate is
10Hz. A statistical evaluation of a record of at least 15 minutes is recommended for
basic sampling at ship scale.
The single curve on the screen, as shown in fig. 13.5, was developed as an equivalent
combined load and response function, showing the last six hours of operation depicting
the trend. The combined function versus time serves as an indicator of the expected
damage costs when the sustainable load is being exceeded. It comprises the particular
components such as transverse acceleration in the upper container tier, stress in the main
deck, and combination effects of several load components. The combined function also
includes a cost parameter for additional propulsion power required due to the seaway.
The single function allows judging the reduction in efficiency at increasing risk in ship
operation.
Hoffman, et al [2000] reported on the latest results of hull response monitoring systems
(HRMS). They quote the report SSC-401 by the ship structure committee [Slaughter, et
aI, 1997], describing the commercial state of HRMS. Compared with the above early
development, theoretical tools are now more advanced, and the database of full-scale
measurements is more reliable. Several classification societies including GL, LR and
DNV, as well as ship owners have undertaken further research and development of such
systems. The concept is based on processing records of the actual wave spectrum. The
monitoring system implemented some key points:
334 Chaprer13

• The directional seaway is measured by radar based equipment.

• A linear computational model for the hull response with a link to the loading
condition ofthe ship is used.
• Static and dynamic pressure distribution on the hull is calculated based on the
recorded seaway.
• Global and local stresses are calculated.
• Visualisation of results is adaptable to the requirements of the ship operation.
• Prediction of developing seas is possible, including the influence of changing speed
or course.
The primary result of the HMRS is the loading of the hull girder by processing wave data
with a hydrodynamic computational model. The full scale monitoring has been advocated
as to give feedback to the ship designer, to improve cost effectiveness of operational
decisions, and to improve ship safety. Takaishi [2000] also reported on a new ship-borne
wave measuring system.
The revolution in information technology certainly supports further development and
wider use of ship-borne operational guidance systems based on online measurements.

13.1.6 Voyage Data Recorder for Monitoring Casualties

The development of voyage data recorders (VDR) started in Japan in 1972. Further
development followed in Norway in 1980, in the UK by Lloyd's Register in 1983, in
Germany by Germanischer Lloyd in 1987. The VDR is the equivalent to an aircraft's
"black box". VDR stores all safety relevant data of the vessel, with regard to the shipping
environment (wind and wind direction, water depth), and operating conditions (course,
rudder angle, speed, number of revolutions, position lights, engine commands, loading
condition ofthe ship, seaway behaviour of the ship).
With a VDR, one primarily expects to reduce accidents, but feedback to ship design and
shipping operation is also anticipated. Aft~r the tragedy of the ferry "Estonia" in the
Baltic Sea in 1994, in which 852 lives were lost, the European Commission adopted a
range of strict safety conditions for all Ro-Ro ferries and high speed passenger craft
sailing regularly to or from EU ports. The company must guarantee that the master may,
especially in heavy seas, take any action, which in his professional judgement is
necessary for safe navigation and operation. A record of navigational activities and
incidents is to be kept by the master. The master must be provided with appropriate
information of shore-based navigational guidance systems and other information schemes
to assist him. In addition, vessels would have to be fitted with a VDR.
SOLAS 1974/78, specifically treats safety of navigation in Chapter V, and management
for the safe operation of ships in Chapter IX. IMO considers adopting mandatory
requirements on VDR for passenger ships, cargo ships and tankers.

13.1.7 Ship Routeing

Routeing is a modern procedure widely applied. In routeing, the ship is directed along a
specified course to minimise the adverse effects caused by waves and storms (and
current, fog, ice). It is based on medium to long-term prediction of environmental
conditions. The early use was to achieve minimum transit time or minimum fuel
Measurement and Accuracy afStability Status 335

consumption. The great advantage of ship routeing is the general availability and the low
cost. The average time saving is 10 hours crossing the North Atlantic and 18 hours the
Pacific.
A route to minimise deck accelerations or roll angles may also be desired, but requires
specific information on the ship behaviour. To include ship performance and behaviour in
a seaway, response characteristics must be available for any particular ship, including the
effect of loading condition, speed and heading.
Hoffman [1976] suggested combining the routeing service with a ship-borne warning and
guidance system (see subchapter 13.1.5). Local area adaptation corrects the basic route
proposed by the long-term service. Ship-borne on-line routeing based on measurements
of ship response and numerical short-term predictions allow modification of the route. A
measuring system in combination with routeing carries an enormous potential to increase
ship safety while reducing operation costs.
An example described in literature is the ship-borne decision support and monitoring
system by Chen and Sucharski [1993]. The system minimises heavy weather damage and
optimises operational efficiency. The ship-borne system allows calculating ship
behaviour at sea in combination with wave forecasts. Decisions can be based on short -
term seakeeping response and rational criteria rather than on experience alone. The
advance in ship hydrodynamics allows one to base decision systems at sea on rational
grounds and to give objective measures. Chen and Sucharski cite a few problems in
routeing, which are solved by new mathematical tools, such as:
• Uncertainty of the operating environment,
• Replacement of simplified models for ship response by sophisticated programs,
• Uncertainty ofhurnan operators.
 Chapter 13

Chen and Sucharski [1993] proposed a

safety envelope for the ship, i.e. to account
for all possible influences and dangers at
sea. Instead of the proposed routeing advice
by experienced seafarers, they show their
results using an optimisation algorithm. It
generates a least time and least cost route
while satisfying the motion and stress
constraints of the ship. Minor route
modifications and power management result
in significant fuel savings at the same arrival
time. A tactical manoeuvring diagram for
different speed and heading scenarios
depicts roll, pitch, and vertical bow
acceleration.

The routeing system can again be used for

training to acquaint the mariner with the
dangers he would rarely experience himself.
Training for severe situations can reduce
human errors. In an emergency situation,
quick decisions are needed.
The next figures 13.7/8/9 show similar
results to demonstrate the advantages of a
routeing program by Soding [1989].
Measurement and Accurary a/Stability Status 337

13.1.8 Measurement of Actual Ship Stability in Waves

Seaway affects the righting ability of a vessel. However, for the sake of simplicity and
clear definition, stability requirements rely on the righting levers of the ship in still water.
The influence of variations in the GZ values due to the seaway is accounted for by
demanding implicitly larger GZ values.
Efforts have been made to measure the varying restoring moment of the ship at sea. It is
hard to imagine measuring the actual GZ value directly. Arndt, Kastner, Roden [1960],
see also Kastner [1993], showed a possible solution from evaluating measurements of the
roll motion. They plotted the roll acceleration versus the roll angle; see fig.l3.l 0 with an
example of a simulation of a container ship in severe stem random seas.
338 Chapter 13

and Artificial Intelligence (AI). Their system comprises the ship response database (DB),
and the field of activity with the knowledge base (KB). Included is the evaluation of
situations and recognition of conditions within a complex hierarchical structure under the
conditions of incomplete and uncertain information. Actually measured data of the
interaction process of ship and environment is used for the mathematical decisions.
They developed regressive mathematical models for operative control during the flooding
of compartments due to damage, and to control this emergency situation to prevent
sinking and capsizing. This is one of the very early practical applications of artificial
intelligence in ship safety.

13.1.9 Mathematical Decision Systems and Artificial Intelligence

At the symposium on "Intelligent ships - Intelligent Ports" [Bertram, 1999], the current
state of the art and visions for the 21st century were discussed. Bertram states, that the
issue at present is not the unmanned ship, but the "intelligent ship". Provided that
machines should support humans, the rational approach for the intelligent ship is
automation.
Bertram [1999] points out the widespread scepticism towards automation. In his view,
this is justified as little attention was paid to the interaction between man and machine.
We have seen a multitude of machines not fully automated, which are incompatible with
each other and requiring considerable training and reading of lengthy manuals. For
further progress, communication between man and machine is crucial. Enhanced user-
friendliness means user input should be as easy as possible and kept to a minimum. The
man-machine interface must be optimised and should be the same for all machines.
Standards still need to be developed. With overload of information from different
systems, resulting accidents are wrongly considered as "human errors" and blamed on the
crew. Development of integrated systems on the bridge started, for example, in the
German R&D projects SHOPSY (ship operation system, Giitjens, [1996]).
According to Schneiderman [1992], machines are superior to humans in the following
aspects:
• Perform repetitive pre-programmed actions reliably,
• Exert great, highly controlled physical force,
• Monitor pre-specified events, especially infrequent,
• Perform several activities simultaneously,
• Count or measure physical quantities,
• Make rapid and consistent responses to input signals,
• Operate in life-threatening environments.
Humans and computers should work together and assist each other in doing what each
does best. The ship's crew should be supported in the following tasks [Bertram, 1999]:
• Monitoring of machinery and ship,
• Advisory systems for engine maintenance and collision avoidance,
• Emergency response.
Measurement and Accuracy of StabilityStatus 339

In emergency response, the conventional approach relies on human intervention under

crisis conditions to integrate, evaluate and initiate actions. Here, expert systems (ES) can
assist the master by incorporating:
• Early failure detection,
• Event trending and pattern recognition,
• Cross reference functional relations,
• Rapid response to specific ship scenarios.
Expert systems are software packages, which are able to apply expert reasoning, by
diagnosing a situation to reach a conclusion. It contains a knowledge base (KB), which
combines a set of reasoning with the given information. Bertram [1999] points at the
flood of data and information created by various automatic subsystems. Data must be
screened and filtered by the system, performing most tasks locally and informing superior
systems only of the possibility of a malfunction or threat. All information technology
should be used, such as multimedia, advanced displays, voice control and remote
pointing devices. The system must give the human the information needed to make
correct decisions [Hoyle, 1999].
The highest level of automation is found on navy ships. Commercial vessels also see
further applications. The main application on the bridge has been intelligent navigation,
including manoeuvring, collision avoidance and the practice of good seamanship.
The trend goes towards expanding the functions of automation systems using artificial
intelligence (AI). AI considers mathematical tools to learn by experience and to base
logical conclusions on the combination of all accumulated knowledge.
Nechaev [1997] presented a general mathematical approach for the ship as a non-linear
dynamic system operated in a random environment, where the criteria to estimate the ship
stability depend on any number of parameters which are governed by uncertainty and
incompleteness of information. He proposed to use fuzzy logic for the criteria space of
ship stability, to account for the inaccuracies of the input data. The new method proves
particularly effective in the development of intelligence systems for the analysis and
prediction of the behaviour of dynamic systems in extreme situations. The model as given
by Nechaev is shown in fig. 13.11 with the following parameters:
Xl, Xn controlled parameters ofthe outer disturbances
Y1, Yn controlled parameters of the results of interaction of ship and environment
VI, Vp controlling parameters
Z/, Zn uncontrolled factors
R I , Rn practical recommendations
The seakeeping capability of a ship and her safety against capsizing are paramount for
survival at sea. However, small deviations in the parameters of the dynamic system can
result in dramatic changes of the final outcome, in particular, at minimal stability were
the ship is close to capsize. Using probabilistic methods with fuzzy logic, this can be
accounted for in the outcome of any simulation.
A simulation procedure relies on the adequacy of the mathematical model for the
particular problem. The nonlinear ship dynamics in the extreme seas gives a wide field of
research. A mathematical model, whether a hydrodynamic numerical system or a neural
network, can be supplemented by observed and measured online data. Actual data on the
Measurement and Accuracy of Stability Status 341

13.1.10 Economic Advantages of Stability Control Systems

Experience has shown considerable savings from routeing with only minor route
modification and power management. Risk of damage is reduced, while significant fuel
savings can be achieved [S6ding, 1989; Chen and Sucharski, 1993]. With respect to
measuring the stability status, one can also expect better safety and economic advantages
from using automated systems. For example, the ISTS system described above to
measure GM is installed on a large number of ships, mainly on container ships, feeder
vessels, Ro-Ro vessels, and on container vessels without hatch covers. Here, the
advantages can be shown not only as improvement of safety, but in economic terms such
as:
• Use offull deadweight capacity of the ship,
• Optimising the amount of ballast water needed,
• Knowledge on ship GM with good accuracy and reliability.
In stability calculations, the vertical centre of gravity within one container generally is
assumed to be at 0.45 of the container height. The actual vertical centre of gravity may on
average be as low as 0.393 of the container height, which in the case of a Panamax
container vessel results in a difference of 14 cm in the vertical centre of the total
container loaded mass. This difference amounts to 420 t of ballast water needed or saved
[Halden, 1994].
Kaps [Kaps and Kastner, 1989] gives a rough estimate of the annual fuel savings by
reduction of ballast water needed;
342 Chapter 13

13.2 Accuracy of the Estimation of Ship Stability Status

Shipping experience has shown the need for a higher degree of accuracy for ship stability
calculations, assisted by ship borne inclining experiments. So far IMO gives only a
marginal note on the in-service inclination test in Chapter 2 of Resolution A.749(18)
[IMO 1993]. It is well known, however, that large inaccuracies of the in-service status
can more than offset the inherent safety margins of stability criteria set by authorities.
Therefore, the Operational Ship Inclining experiment (OSI) for the ship in service is a
practical tool for the ship operator to improve accuracy of stability estimates. It is
advisable to analyse the measuring errors of the inclination test. After giving insight into
the proper use of gauges, and into proper evaluation of measurements of actual ship
stability in operation, some hints are given here with respect to achieving reliable results.

13.2.1 Historical Background

The development of directly measuring the ship's status of stability started in Great
Britain in the 19th century. The first to suggest inclining ships before departure was Sir
Archibald Denny [1887], thoroughly documented in his presentation at the RINA
Meeting in London.
More than half a century later in Germany, it was planned to test different inclination
recorders for inclining of ships to be delivered at the shipyard, and additionally in port for
the ship in service. It is still quite enlightening to read Horn's [1953] remarks on the
difficulties to measure the ship's heel at small angles accurately. Horn recommended
measurements with a shorter pendulum, combined with a recording device to store heel
versus time.
Wendel [1958] took up again the idea of using ship inclining in operation. He concluded
that the standard moment calculations were not accurate enough for limiting states of ship
stability, due to insufficient knowledge of mass and centre of gravity for the large number
of partial loads. Wendel also stressed the advantage of being able to measure the
metacentric height ofthe vessel during loading and unloading before leaving port.
Subsequently, Wendel's group at the Universities of Hanover and Hamburg developed a
special apparatus in co-operation with industry. It was mainly based on an automatic
inclining procedure, with electro-mechanical measurement of the draught, pumping of
water in special heeling tanks, supplemented by a mechanical analogue computer for
evaluation, and with it central display on the bridge, see several reports, e.g. Hebecker
[1958]. Again, a wide spread introduction of the operational ship inclining experiment
(OSI) was not established at that time.
More than 100 years after Denny, Kaps and Kastner [1989, 1990] revived this idea again.
The reasoning on the need to apply the ship inclining for the ship in operation still was
the same. The development of new ship types and of new ways of loading had even
hastened the need for an experimental check. We can observe the tendency, to operate
closer to the stability limits set by authorities. At present, considering new technology, a
breakthrough in the wide application of ship-borne measurements is imminent.
Measurement and Accuracy of Stability Status 343

Halden [1994] developed modem practical equipment to carry out and to analyse OSI
automatically, see subchapter 13.1.4. However, international requirements to make the
operational ship inclining mandatory are still missing. It can be anticipated, that
permanent stability control as an additional measure of safety will be a future must for all
ships. Operational ship inclining (aS I) results in economic advantage such as more
efficient loading of the ship and expected reduction in damage. Economy is the main
driving force to improve operational stability and safety.

13.2.2 Basic Requirements for a Measuring System in Ship Inclining

In order to analyse the practical aspects of operational ship inclining (OSI), Kaps and
Kastner [1989] carried out a number of operational inclination tests with container
vessels in port.
The main goal of OSI is to supply the officer with a simple procedure. OSI must comply
with the following general requirements:
1. Reliable and correct measurements,
2. Clear and uniform directions for the procedure,
3. Guidelines to cope with external disturbances and allowable limits of environmental
effects,
4. Inclusion into the ship loading process,
5. Whole procedure short in time,
6. Definition of decision structure based on the results from OSI,
7. Adjustment of computer software in order to correct calculated GZ-curves according
to OSI results,
8. Uniform documentation and evidence of OSI,
9. No need for high technology tools, to foster introduction even in old ships,
10. Full automation with processor evaluation using modem information technology.

13.2.3 Theory of Ship Inclining Measurements with a Pendulum

The formula for evaluating the ship inclining experiment is:
Numerical evaluation of the RAO of a pendulum (according to equation 13.15 and fig.
13.17) is shown in table 13.2 and fig. 13.18. Additionally, in fig. 13.19, Tr is the
parameter, and Y12 is plotted versus the natural frequency of the pendulum. Larger natural
frequency means smaller pendulum length [p, For large roll periods (15s.and 20s shown),
i.e. a tender ship, the deflection ofthe pendulum follows directly the ship rolL This is the
effect mentioned in the IMO Stability Resolution 749(18) [1993] that the pendulum may
not settle down, if the ship is rolling due to swelL
For Tr = 10s ship roll, the pendulum response increases with a longer pendulum. With 5s
roll, the response approaches the resonance with a longer pendulum. At resonance, no
reading is possible. For Tr smaller than 2s, a very long pendulum of more than 10m is not
affected at all by the rolL
Measurement and Accuracy of Stability Status 349

13.2.6 Laboratory Testing of Gauge Accuracy

In the Bremen Ship Hydro-Mechanic Laboratory, a static test bench and a dynamic
swing-table were developed [Kaps and Kastner, 1989], to measure the accuracy of gauges
and recorders.
The static bench consists of a triangular platform with a length of 3m, supported on three
points. With a fine gear, the platform can be tilted. The resolution is at least lO'3deg, i.e. a
factor 10 more accurate than the required gauge resolution.
For the dynamic response, the gauge is fastened to the swing-table. A forced sinusoidal
roll motion is controlled electronically. By a mechanical gear, it covers the low frequency
range from 0.05 Hz to 1 Hz. This corresponds to a period from 20 sec to 1 sec. The roll
amplitude can be chosen in 5-degree intervals up to 30 degrees. The suspension point of
the gauge at the swing-table can be varied from +0.5m through -0.5m.
Measured RAO and phase shift has been compared to calculation with the above
equations. The purpose of the static and dynamic testing procedures is to allow an
objective evaluation of different heel gauges. A standard testing procedure in the
laboratory has been developed, and different inclining recorders of the market have been
analysed experimentally.
For a detailed OSI analysis, digital storage of heel versus time is advisable. The record
documents the heel sequence and superimposed roll, if any. For a printout, scales of 10 or
20 s/cm and 0.2 or 0.4 deg/cm are best. Fourier analysis to estimate the frequency pattern
is advised when searching for source and magnitude of any disturbance.

13.2.7 Measuring Errors

Any numerical value of a measured (or calculated) quantity can only approximate the real
quantity. Each estimated value is considered a random sample from the basic set of
possible data. Statistical parameters of the samples allow describing the degree of
approximation to the real set of dlJ,ta.
Measuring errors in the statistical sense are the deviations of the measured value x from
the true value X They can be expressed as absolute and as relative errors.
Absolute error:
Measurement and Accuracy a/Stability Status 355

optimum length ought to be chosen to allow enough reading resolution, and at the same
time reduce any dynamic effects. In case the pendulum is in resonance, damping of the
pendulum alone cannot correct the measuring error (see subchapter 13.2.4).

13.2.11 IMO Requirements for Ship Inclining Test

According to Resolution 749(18) [IMO, 1993], every passenger ship regardless of size
and every cargo ship of 24m and upwards should be inclined upon its completion. The
test is adaptable for ships with lengths below 24m if special precautions are taken to
ensure the accuracy of the test procedure-. The test upon completion is the shipyard
inclining (SYI). IMO does not give recommendations on how to carry out operational
ship inclining (OSI), although the in-service inclination test has been mentioned in
subchapter 2.1 (stability booklet) of Resolution 749(18) [IMO, 1993]. In Chapter 7, the
Resolution refers to the shipyard inclining (SYI) only. However, ship status and use of
the inclining are completely different for SYI and OS1. SYI is carried out once with the
empty ship at delivery to determine the basic KG for the light ship to be used for further
stability calculations. In periodic intervals not exceeding 5 years, passenger ships should
be re-inclined whenever, in comparison with the approved stability information, a
deviation from the light-ship displacement exceeding 2% or a deviation of the
longitudinal centre of gravity exceeding 1% of L is found, or anticipated.
On the contrary, OSI is carried out with the loaded ship in service. The aim is to be
repeated regularly for any change in the loading condition. Therefore, recommendations
for the shipyard inclining (SYI) cannot be transferred directly to ship operation (OSI).
In Annex I of Resolution 749(18), IMO gives detailed guidance for the conduct of an
inclining test upon completion (SYI). It shows the traditional set-up of SYI testing. The
pendulum wire should be piano wire or other monofilament material. A trough filled with
356 Cfwpter 13

a liquid should be provided to dampen oscillations of the pendulum. The pendulums may
be placed in any location on the ship, longitudinally and transversely.
Both SYI and OSI must be carried out with the ship in still water, with all lines being
slack, with the ship free of the pier and camels. The importance of good mooring
arrangements cannot be overemphasised. It is good practice to supplement the bow and
stem lines with two spring lines as long as practical.
IMO recommends a length of the pendulum between 4m and 6m. The length should be
long enough to give a measured deflection of at least 15cm. This will require a pendulum
length of at least 3m, when considering a 3 degrees heel increment. The deflections larger
than l5cm for a length of equal or more than 3 m in table 13.3 are marked bold.
However, IMO warns on the use of an excessively long pendulum on a tender ship. The
long pendulum may not settle down, and the accuracy would be questionable (see the
above derivation on the dynamic response ofa pendulum in subchapter 13.2.4).

The typical inclination is to be between two and three degrees, but, in no case, should the
maximum angle of heel be greater than f01.\rdegrees. For larger ships, a one degree heel
increment is accepted. With the inclining mass, p, in the initial position for the upright
ship, one-half degree is acceptable, according to IMO.
Tables 13.2 and 13.3 vary the length of the pendulum in multiples of 0.573 m. A reading
length of 0.573m has the advantage of a lcm reading corresponding to a 1 degree angle
measurement. The Bremen tests with container ships [Kaps and Kastner, 1989] have
shown that this length is sufficient. For the practical use in as I, a pendulum length of
1.146 m is recommended (marked bold in table 13.3). Here a 1cm reading corresponds to
0.5 degree. Careful reading allows an accuracy ofO.2mm= 0.01 degree.

13.2.12 Conclusions on Heel Measurement with Pendulum

• A cord pendulum of 1.146 m reading length is recommended for the operational ship
inclining experiment (OSI). This is different from use at shipyard (SYI), where IMO
recommends a length of 4m to 6m.
• A gauge with an electric output is of advantage. It allows time recording of the heel
and online numerical evaluation.
• Loading programs must allow input from operational ship inclining as!.
Measurement and Accuracy afStability Status 357

• OSI improves information to the master on the stability status .

• OSI must follow a reliable procedure.
The typical parameters of ship inclining are compiled in table 13.4, based on accuracy
tests and on consideration of error transmission. A clear distinction is made between
operational ship inclining (OSI) and shipyard inclining upon delivery (SYI).
Table 13.4 Recommended inclining parameters of OSI and SYI
 359

Chapter 14

Safety Management and Operational Requirements

14.1 Safety Management of Ship Stability

14.1.1 Need to Introduce a Ship Stability Management System

Sufficient stability is most important for operating a ship safely. Stability of a ship at sea
depends very much on the actions taken by the master. The safe operation of the ship
needs a thorough knowledge of the current loading status of the ship, of the ship
behaviour in extreme seas, and of the best ways to cope with dangerous situations [Kaps
and Kastner, 1984]. There may even be rare situations, where relying on the minimum
required stability during ship operations is not sufficient at all.
Intact stability of the ship is a vital element in the shipboard consideration of safety and
environmental protection. Proper management of ship's stability is a key shipboard
operation. To prevent capsizing in severe seas, there are a number of problems:
• Capsizing is a rare extreme event, so direct experience can rarely be available.
• The risk of capsizing is hidden and can hardly be foreseen.
• A quick reaction is needed in case of danger from capsizing.
• Decisions under pressure with a lack oftime cause human errors with severe
consequences.
Hoffinan [1976] pointed out the state of the art. Quote: The navigation ofa ship in rough
seas demands comprehensive judgement from the navigator to assume full control of the
ship's operation, usually this is done by the master. The response of the ship to the
environment encountered is often a question of trial and error, and the limited guessing
exercised by the master is usually based on visual observation of the sea state and the
meteorological conditions.
Special shipboard guidance is needed for the operation of a ship in rough weather. There
is a need for objective information on wave height and period, which the ship encounters.
Furthermore, depending on size, loading and design, ships behave quite differently in the
same seaway. The ship capabilities to cope with the seaway in her specific loading
condition must be made available to the master.
New computing capabilities, coupled with risk assessment techniques, can be utilised in
defining the chain of events that end up in extreme roll and even capsize. These
360 Chapter 14

techniques can provide improvements in safety through design, operator guidance,

training, and life-cycle management [Alman, et aI, 1999].

14.1.2 Tools of an Efficient Stability Management

The methods of assessing stability of the ship in service can be subdivided into
preparations before departure and into control while at sea. For sailing in heavy weather,
special precautions must be taken. The probability of failure and the operability of the
ship are subject to the favourable influence of seamanship actions. It is logical to
subdivide actions taken before severe conditions are encountered, and those once severe
conditions are encountered. Prior action is avoidance of severe weather, proper ballasting
of the ship, lashing of cargo, and making sure what the current stability of the ship is.
Once the ship is in heavy weather, short-term measures are avoidance of resonance and
of reduced stability in a wave crest, see subchapter 14.2.4 on guidance to the master.
Decisions can be based on current data of ship and environment when supported by on-
line measurements. The inclination test was discussed in Chapter 13.
To cope with rare extreme situations, guidelines for stability management and the
development of typical scenarios can assist the master. Severe situations actually
experienced can be evaluated accordingly.
It must be kept in mind, that ship stability in still water generally serves as a reference.
Dynamic effects and environmental factors are implemented in modifying the simple GZ
criteria. This is a debatable method. New forms of criteria reflecting the ship dynamics in
waves may be encouraged in the future, see the discussion at STAB 96 and at lMO
[Francescutto 2002]. To relate every influence on stability in terms of the familiar GZ
curve in still water, simply does not show the operator the corresponding situation at sea.
In addition to the mandatory ISM code (International Safety management), discussed in
subchapter 14.2.5, more detailed guidelines on managing ship stability can be useful. In
order to cope with the problems of ensuring !>afetyat sea, a strict regime on control of all
stability aspects while in service must be practised. IMO has discussed a proposal on the
management of ship's stability [IMO 2000a]. This proposal was to serve as an aid for the
operator to focus on problems on shipboard stability management. However, the IMO
sub-committee could not agree on a final document, as it does not want to regulate too
much and feels this must be left to the practice of the ship operator. In subchapter 14.2.3,
the main topics of this proposal are discussed.

14.1.3 The Master's Range of Judgement for Operational Stability Assessment

The minimum requirements on ship stability are deterministic, while the real sea
behaviour follows probabilistic laws. The acceptance criteria of stability are based on the
righting capability of the ship, and it is often taken for granted that the demand from
environmental forces and moments will be less.
Wendel [1965] introduced the moment balancing of heeling and righting moments.
Wendel's method was applied to set up the stability requirements of the German Navy.
Arndt, et al [1982] gave a detailed report. Although there is a good Navy experience with
balancing, requirements in merchant shipping adhere to the still water GZ curve alone.
SafetyManagementand OperationalRequirements 361

For the future, the best way is seen in defining so-called rational stability criteria, based
on the actual conditions of the ship in the particular environment [Kobylinski, 2000].
This is a field under discussion among experts, and certainly not to be resolved
completely in the near future. In a workshop on information to the master at the
International Conference STAB 94, Rakhmanin stated:
• Stability is a key factor ensuring ship safety.
• The shipmaster bears the ultimate responsibility for the ship's fate and lives aboard.
• Any system of standard requirements is far from ideal and cannot guarantee 100%
level of safety. This stands for the master's knowledge, experience and skill, and may
playa decisive role for ship survival.
The shipowner has to provide the ship with the Loading and Stability Manual, where the
hydrostatic parameters of typical loading conditions are compiled, see subchapter 14.2.2.
It seems natural, that masters take the GZ-curve the ship was designed for by naval
architects as measures for their operational condition of stability. However, the minimum
requirements do not show the assumptions at which the minimum set values were
derived. This has a dangerous drawback, when the ship encounters extremely severe
environmental conditions at sea. The minimum GZ-curve allowed does not guarantee safe
ship at any rate, see also Kobylinski [2000].
The inadequacy of common design criteria on ship stability to include the role of human
factors in marine regulations was expressed by Cleary [1994], quote:

1. Regulations assume knowledgeable humans, but humans often assume that any
marine craft that has been "approved" is so well protected that the operator can test
it to the limit.
2. The output of a naval architect is in a form, which shows how well the design meets
minimum rules. But that output is not intelligent information for operators.
3. The trend to avoid "stopping the ship" at any cost affects operation. It affects ship
systems safety, and it affects ship 's actual level of safety.
4. The IMO trend is to be driven by consensus.
5. Video training is proposed as a tool, which includes the limits of safety.
It is dangerous to rely on the mandatory minimum
when more is needed in an extreme situation.
Kastner [1986] proposed to define a safety margin
of operational stability. This margin is needed
additionally to the required minimum to cope with
extreme situations. Running the ship in an extreme
situation with an additional safety margin depends
on the master. We call it the master's range of
judgement, see fig. 14.1. This expression points
out the need to act responsibly in severe seas,
rather than relying on given standards.
Fig. 14.1 shows the probability density of the GZ
at 30 degrees of heel as might be needed during a
voyage, compared to a deterministic single value
 Chapter 14

required by authorities. The larger values of GZ

may be needed very rarely. Extreme conditions
need thoughtful navigation by the master.
Provisions include avoiding severe situations at all
times by e.g. ship routeing, by changing ballast in
advance, by changing speed and heading. Fig.
14.2 compares the needed and existing GZ30 of a
container ship to demonstrate the importance of
the master's range of judgement.
A workshop at STAB 94 concluded, that although
economics drives companies to operate at
minimum safety levels imposed by law, those
levels should be exceeded for certain although rare
but severe situations.

14.1.4 Seakeeping Guidance and Survivability Criteria

Stability information available to the ship operator is generally still based on ship
hydrostatics. Although dynamic ship characteristics are part of the background leading to
improved stability criteria [IMO, 1993], no specific reference is made. Guidance on
stability safety management, see section 14.2, and the development of typical scenarios
for the ship are recommended [Hoffman, 1976, Kastner, 1986], see also chapter 2 of
volume 2.
Development of scenarios with options for the master cannot give easy answers. The
process is essentially one of trial and error [Hoffinan, 1976]. The master expects
correcting an unsatisfactory condition at sea, without leading to a substantial worsening
of another condition. Guidance as to the relative merits is useful, such as on resonance
avoidance (subchapters 11.1.3 and .4). The direction of travel of the storm, the available
power, the ability to steer the ship at reduced speeds can affect the decision.
The appropriate reaction to potential danger will always need the know-how, experience
and logic of the master faced with a decision to minimise adverse heavy weather
conditions. Guidance charts on the expected ship response have been proposed. The
charts must be simple to understand, and be based on a theoretical calculation for specific
ships. Kuo in his discussion to McTaggart and de Kat [2000] expressed fears that use of
graphs and tables in adverse weather may be counterproductive. In his view, any
guidance must act as a "second opinion" to the experienced ship captain. Fig. 14.3 shows
the safety region of a container ship for all combinations of ship speed and heading at
constant Beaufort [Hoffman 1976]. The safety region is defined by a number of different
ship motion criteria, such as vertical acceleration at the F.P., slamming, deck wetness at
the F.P., vertical-bending moment at the main section, propeller top emersion, lateral
acceleration, rolling amplitude. Comparing different wind velocities, fig. 14.3 shows the
extreme reduction of the safe zones from Beaufort 8 to Bft. 10.
SafetyManagementand OperationalRequirements 365

parameters, the loading condition with draught and stability, the sea region, and the
season of navigation. Their calculation scheme can be used for operational decisions on a
quantitative basis with regard to weather restrictions.
The authors point at the operational stability of a ship in various real life situations.
Operational stability is significantly defined by the ability of the master to load and
control the vessel, to observe the characteristics of the ship design, and to act in
dangerous sea conditions.
What seems to be a very basic principle in the Russian regulations is the possibility to
assign restrictions to ships not satisfying an unrestricted region of navigation. There are
five categories with two control parameters: the permissible distance from a place of
refuge and the allowable height of waves with a 3% probability exceeding the level of
8.5m to 305m.

Seaworthiness is defined by various characteristics such as loss of speed, deck wetness,

slamming, propeller racing, decrease of manoeuvrability. Rolling is calculated in
connection with possible shifting of cargo. To support stability management and to
account for the human element, a supplement to the stability booklet is provided aboard.
This supplement contains information on the safe modes of ship operation in the form of
polar diagrams. The software SAFESEA is provided. Polar diagrams indicate the safe and
the dangerous zones on the screen. The calculation procedures are supported by
measurements. Table 14.1 compiles the set-up of the onboard system.
 In a systematic study on the ship
response in severe seas by
Papanikolaou, et al [2000], the authors
point at the improvement of bulk-
carrier safety by operational measures.
The calculations proved that stem
quartering seas are most dangerous
with respect to the ship's stability and
might lead to capsize. For four types of
bulk-carriers ranging from 150m to
280m at about 15kn maximum speed,
roll response peaks up at higher speeds.
Fig. 14.8 depicts the significant
amplitudes of the calculated roll for the
handysize bulker with 152.40m length.
A "seakeeping information booklet"
can serve as guidance for avoiding
dangerous situations in extreme
weather conditions and was proposed
by the authors to IMO in 1998.
Operational measures such as weather
routeing, change of speed and heading
appear to be most effective.
Of particular concern is the stability
safety of fishing vessels. Statistics
show a drastic increase with human
error as the main cause due to excessive
ship motion reducing the level of
attention of the crew [Boccodamo, et al
2000]. Boccodamo, et al calculated the
limiting wave height versus the wave
period to be critical for the incidence of
motion induced interruptions for the
work on deck in fishing operations.
Therefore, too large a OM leading to
bad seakeeping characteristics is not
advised.
SafetyManagementand OperationalRequirements 367

Nabergoj, et al [2000] investigated loss of stability, parametric roll resonance, and

broaching to for fishing vessels with a series of experiments. It is interesting to note that
the amplitudes of parametric roll are sensitive to the rolling motion excitation threshold ...
According to Basin [1969], the threshold is given by the intensity of stability modulation
as the ratio of GM variation in waves versus the still water GM:

Here is the non-dimensional roll damping (parameter D in chapter 10). The authors
conclude that limitations in ao by ship hull design can improve the roll behaviour, when
limiting parametric roll to about 17 degrees.

To control operational stability, interactive computer software has been developed. An

example is given by He, et al [2000] with their program CapeBoat. Important is the user-
friendly graphical interface. The program includes a stability safety database with storing
the maximum roll angles and time histories, computed under different sea and operating
conditions.

Alman, et al [1999] reported new computing abilities coupled to risk assessment

techniques in defining the chain of events that can lead to capsize. These techniques
provide improvements in safety through design, operator guidance, training, and life-
cycle management.

Results of German federally funded co-operative research were presented at the STG
summer meeting in Gdansk 2001. Cramer and KrUger [2001] reported on numerical
simulation methods to predict large roll angles. This becomes important for Ro/Ro and
Ro/Pax vessels, characterised by high values of initial metacentric heights, so the
seakeeping behaviour becomes more and more important. Pereira, et al [200 I] reported
on nonlinear simulation techniques for ship motions in six degrees of freedom. They use
a strip method converting the hydrodynamic coefficients obtained in the frequency
domain to be converted for the use in the time simulation. In the Hamburg model basin,
Blume and Brink [2001] set up model testing for validating the prediction of extreme roll
up to capsizing. Clauss, et al [2002] report on deterministic seekeeping model tests for
the analysis of extreme roll and capsizes. The federally funded program ROLL-S further
develops numerical methods for simulating ship motions in extreme seas. The target is to
design safer ships with reduced risk from capsizing.

Computer assistance with numerical methods of seakeeping guidance and survivability

criteria can give the ship operator an objective tool for making decisions. When risks and
the expected downtime of avoiding severe conditions are identified, the improved safety
and the expected savings will allow operating the ship both safely and economically, (see
also subchapter 11.2.5).
368 Chapter 14

14.2 Guidelines on the In-Service Ship Stability

14.2.1 Purpose of Guidelines for Operational Stability

Ship operational stability can be divided into four parts of shipboard action:
• To ensure compliance with the minimum standards on hydrostatic stability during
loading and unloading before departure,
• To keep control of free surfaces, fuel consumption and ballast at sea,
• To ensure proper lashing and securing of cargo,
• To limit excessive ship motion at sea and to prevent capsizing.
The code of intact stability for all types of ships, IMO Resolution A.749 (18) was
adopted in 1993, with later Amendments [IMO 1999]. The preparation took many years
of research and discussion. The code contains some requirements on the ship operation
too. In chapter 2.3 on general precautions against capsizing, it reads: Compliance with the
stability criteria does not ensure immunity against capsizing, regardless of the
circumstances, or absolve the master from his responsibilities. Masters should therefore
exercise prudent and good seamanship, having regard to the season of the year, weather
forecasts and the navigational zone, and should take the appropriate action as to speed
and course warranted by the prevailing circumstances.
Chapter 2.5 of IMO Res. A.749 (18) refers to operational procedures related to weather
conditions. Quote: Special attention should be paid when a ship is sailing in following or
quartering seas because dangerous phenomena such as parametric resonance, broaching
to, reduction of stability on the wave crest, and excessive rolling may occur singularly, in
sequence or simultaneously in a multiple combination, creating a threat of capsize.
Particularly dangerous is the situation when the wavelength is in the order of 1.0 to 1.5
ship 's length. A ship 's speed and/or course should be altered appropriately to avoid the
above mentioned phenomena.
Ensuring sufficient ship stability is a key task in ship operation, not just a matter of
regulations for minimum standards. The safe handling of ships with respect to stability
must cover so many topics and different situations, that it requires an educated and
experienced ship officer. It is certainly a large step forward for improving stability safety
by IMO acknowledging the importance of operational stability in resolution A.749(18).
Guidelines as proposed by Kaps in a contribution to IMO [IMO 2000a] compiled the
state of the art. The aspects common to all types should be addressed in a specific
guidance to be provided by the shipping company:
1. Care for and monitoring of the ship's water tight and weather tight integrity,
2. Control of KGc in the course of cargo, ballast or bunker operations (index c includes
corrections for free surfaces),
3. Avoidance of transverse shifting of masses, such as cargo or heavy items of
equipment,
4. Avoidance oflarge liquid surfaces,
5. Preparedness for corrective measures to mitigate detrimental effects on stability,
6. Keeping of records for control and reference (e.g. light ship characteristics).
Safety Management and Operational Requirements 369

14.2.2 Loading and Stability Manual

Each ship should be provided with a Loading and Stability Manual (stability booklet),
generally developed by the shipyard, and approved by the administration. IMO has
discussed standardising this manual, (see [IMO 1998]). It must contain sufficient
information to enable the master to operate the ship safely. This manual should comply
with the model developed by IMO in MSC/Circular 920. The general purpose is to
provide all necessary information to the master for the proper loading and ballasting of
the ship for the control of stability, draught, and structural integrity.
For evaluating displacement, draughts and stability, a recommended form sheet for
manual moment calculation of stability and trim is provided, together with a form for
calculating and plotting of the righting lever curve. However, care should be taken on the
scale of the GZ-axis to be comparable for different loading conditions.
The Model Loading and Stability Manual by IMO [1998] includes chapters on:
• Operation of the ship;
• Typical approved loading conditions;
• Control of stability, trim and longitudinal strength;
• Technical information with respect to:
Capacity plan,
Cargo space information,
Tank space information,
Hydrostatic particulars,
Light ship particulars,
Load line particulars,
Stability limits,
Longitudinal strength criteria,
Other operating restrictions.
Stability limits are generally given in the form of a limiting KG curve for the maximum
permissible KG depending on the draught.
The latter operating restrictions are extremely important. They include:
• Restrictions to high initial stability with regard to securing of deck cargoes, in
particular containers (reference to the cargo-securing manual),
• Stability and trim requirements with regard to damage control (reference to the
damage control plan),
• Restrictions with regard to shiphandling in heavy weather [IMO, 1995], (see the next
subchapter 14.2.3).
Finally, the Model Loading and Stability Manual should contain useful reference
information such as:
• Inclining test report (see above chapter 13 on measuring the stability status for the
ship in service, OSI),
• Intact stability criteria.
370 Chapter 14

14.2.3 Guidelines on the Management of Ship Stability

The management of stability may differ considerably among ship types and trade
patterns.
The above mentioned (in subchapter 14.1.2) presentation of guidelines on the
management of ship's stability is meant as an aid to focus on the problems involved
[IMO 2000a]. The proposal comprises the following topics:
• Assessment of stability before departure (section 3), see above subchapter 14.2.2,
• Control of stability while at sea (section 4),
• Measures before and during heavy weather (section 5),
• Training requirements (section 10).
In appendices, practical recommendations are given on:
• Simplified draught survey,
• Measurement of stability by in-service inclining test (see above Chapter 13),
• Measurement of stability by observing natural periods of roll (see above subchapter
10.6),
• Adaptation of test results for assessing final conditions.

Methods of Assessment of Stability before Departure

The methods of stability assessment refer to the minimum stability requirements. They
include additional criteria for certain types of cargo or modes of operation, as given in the
Intact Stability Code (Resolution IMO A.749 (18)). Deviations of the ship status from the
required values can lead to severe danger for the ship. It is important to reduce
uncertainties in the assessment before leaving port. We have three levels of assessment,
at increasing accuracy:
Comparing the intended loading plan with similar conditions where stability is known.
Individual calculation of masses and moments. of cargo distribution and tank filling (mass
and centre of gravity of cargo and tank fillings must be available with sufficient accuracy,
and computer programs will facilitate the method).
Measurement of stability by an in-service inclining test, or by observation via the
observed natural period of roll is applied. Measurement is the most accurate method.
When carried out during the loading process, it needs further adaptation to the final state
at departure, and to the worst condition during the voyage.

Sailing in Heavy Weather

Fuel consumption, ballast, water absorption of cargo, and icing, must of course be
controlled while at sea. All cargo should be properly stowed and secured, in accordance
with the code of safe practice for cargo stowage and securing.
In severe weather, the speed of the ship should be reduced, and/or the course changed, if
excessive rolling, propeller emergence, shipping of water on deck, or heavy slamming
occurs. Water trapping in deck wells should be avoided. Special attention should be paid
when the ship is travelling in following or stem quartering seas. Dangerous dynamic
Safety Management and Operational Requirements 371

phenomena such as parametric resonance, broaching to, reduction of stability on the wave
crest can occur and lead to danger from capsizing, see the next section.

14.2.4 Guidance to the Master for Avoiding Dangerous Situations in Following and
Quartering seas
First, national authorities started to
include basic recommendations on
avoidance of resonance in stability
requirements [BMV, 1984]. Takaishi
[1994], Takaishi et al [1997] developed
the technical background and objectives
of new international IMO guidelines
approved in 1995. This MSC 707
guidance to the master for avoiding
dangerous situations in following and
quartering seas [IMO 1995] consists of
four parts:

• Explanation of dangerous ship response in following and quartering seas

(a) surf-riding and broaching to;
(b) reduction of intact stability on the wave crest amidships;
(c) synchronous rolling motion;
(d) parametric rolling motion;
• Dangerous conditions with respect to navigation
(a) the ship approaches to the phase velocity ofthe waves, causing mainly:
- surf-riding and broaching to,
- reduction of intact stability on the wave crest amidships.
(b) ship speed approaches group velocity of the waves, causing mainly:
- reduction of intact stability,
- synchronous rolling,
- parametric rolling.
• Procedure to avoid dangerous situations
Ship speed and heading must be changed to avoid the dangerous zone for
(c) surf-riding, fig. 14.10;
(d) high wave group, fig. 14.11: 0.8 < V/T(knot/s) < 2.0;
(e) synchronous and parametric rolling, fig. 14.11: TE or 2 TE not equal Tr.
• Necessary data for the operation
(a) significant wave height;
(b) mean wave period, or wave length;
(c) wave direction relative to ship course;
(d) ship speed;
(e) ship course with respect to the waves (heading angle);
The following figures give the graphs as contained in MSC Circular 707.
m ~u

advice to the master will eventually provide the solution in developing a set of detailed
criteria for each potentially dangerous situation. However, any attempt to offer precise
guidance may fail, due to the complexity of real situations at sea. Guidance must provide
operators with a more general understanding, e.g. where risky combinations of speed and
heading exist (see paper and discussion by Alman, et al [1999]).

14.2.5 International Safety Management Code (ISM)

IMO adopted Resolution A.741 (18) on the International management code for the safe
operation of ships and for pollution prevention in 1993 [IMO, ISM Code 1994]. For
ferries, the code was implemented in July 1996, for passenger ships, tankers and chemical
carriers in July 1998, and for general cargo ships and drilling rigs by July 2002. The ISM
code has also been adopted by the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
(SOLAS), with the new Chapter IX: Management for the Safe Operation of Ships.
In most cases, more than one problem contributes to a disaster. Dolling [2000] compiles
examples of operational negligence:
• Seamen on duty do not act properly,
• Decision competence not clear,
• Loss of time due to delay of action,
• Shiphandling not adequate,
• Control of ship condition not satisfactory,
• Crew is not aware of the technical limitations of the ship,
• The owner is reluctant to fix known deficiencies in the ship operation,
• Technical equipment for improving safety is not installed, unless it is mandatory.
The purpose of the ISM code is to provide an international standard for the safe
management and operation of ships and for pollution prevention. The theoretical
framework is formed by three elements [Zharen and Duncan, 1994]:
1. Definitions, objectives, and functional requirements,
2. Safety and environmental protection policy,
3. Company responsibilities and authority.
The shipping company must establish procedures for key shipboard operations
concerning the safety of the ship and the prevention of pollution. Safety audits must be
carried out and certified by independent surveyors, and a certificate for the ship must be
issued by the administration of the flag states or the respective classification societies.
Maintenance of the ship and equipment should also be assured.
The main topics in the ISM code are the emergency preparedness by establishing
procedures and programs for drill and exercises (section 8), to ensure that the master is
properly qualified for command, and is given the necessary support to perform his duties
safely (section 6). Responsibilities and authority aboard the ship must be defined, and a
person ashore having direct access to the highest level of company management must be
designated to provide a link between the company and those on board, to ensure the safe
Safety Management and OperationalRequirements 379

operation of the ship (section 4). The master's responsibility and authority is particularly
defined (section 5), in particular implementing the policy, motivating the crew, issuing
instructions, verifying that requirements are observed, and reviewing the safety
management system (SMS) for the ship.
In the short term, legislators expect the IMO code to give a significant contribution to
establishing an effective compliance regime for the mandatory requirements and the non-
mandatory codes, guides, and standards in shipping [Knudsen, 1993]. At a later stage,
safety management in shipping may develop to levels where all factors to safety and
protection of the environment are subject to adequate management control.
The ISM code is certainly a large step forward towards improving safety procedure in
shipping operation. Now, the shipping company must set up a safety and environmental
protection policy, which describes how the objectives will be achieved. A main
advantage of the ISM code for safer shipping can be seen in the requirement of
identifying risks and establishing safeguards. It is mandatory to continuously improve
safety management skills of personnel. However, systematic identification of hazards and
specific risk analysis methodology are not required by the Code [Knudsen, 1993].

14.3 The Human Factor. Maritime Education and Training

Assurance on the quality of ship and equipment and setting up management schemes will
only work, when the responsible persons involved in shipping contribute with knowledge
and experience. IMO has put a lot of effort into regulations and guidelines supporting
personnel development. In 1997, IMO adopted Resolution A.850 (20) [IMO 1997b] on
human element vision, principles and goals for the organisation. IMO acknowledges the
close relationship between the human elements and safety. Quote: The human element is
a complex multi-dimensional issue that affects maritime safety and marine environmental
protection. It involves the entire spectrum of human activities performed by ships crews,
shore-based management, regulatory bodies, recognised organisations, shipyards,
legislators, and other relevant parties, all of whom need to co-operate to address the
human element effectively.
One of the goals with respect to maritime education and training (MET) is, quote: to
provide material to educate seafarers so as to increase their knowledge and awareness of
the impact of human element issues on safe ship operations, to help them to do the right
thing.
Statistical analysis of marine accidents demonstrates that the human element is involved
considerably. Boniface and Bea [1996] cite the UK P&I Club analysis of the claims in
1993 and estimated human errors to be the primary cause of 62% of those accidents.
Around 60 percent of accident claims are directly due to human error, a further 30
percent are indirectly related to human error too, by failure of components designed and
operated by human beings [Kuo, 2000].
There are mainly two sources of malfunction due to wrong operation of complicated
technical systems. One is negligence and laxness in handling the system, the other is
overload and pressure. Fig. 14.18 shows the probability density of human errors versus
380 Chapter 14

the intensity of stressors [Salvendy, 1987]. The human errors have a flat minimum in a
wide range of stressors, where persons can cope with all demands. However, when the
culture of operating the system is too lax, the probability of human errors increases. The
same reduced ability to find the right decisions results in overload and pressure on
persons.
Personnel selection, training, experience and support have a positive effect. They
decrease the probability of human errors considerably.
There is no clear-cut definition of the term "human factors". An evident definition by
Gregory [1987] is: "Human factors concern the efficiency of persons in their working
environment. "
Kuo [2000] presented a thorough
study on the impact of human
factors on ship stability. For
practical applications, he defines
as follows: "The term human
factors is concerned with the
interfacing of a set of personal
capabilities and characteristics
with a combination of hardware,
software, working environment
and organisational culture in the
effective performance ofa task."
In both interpretations the main
aspect of human factors is the connection of two distinct groups. They connect persons,
described by their capabilities and their performance, with a complicated technical
system.
The impact of human factors on safe ship operation is considerable. This is particularly
true with respect to stability. Kuo [2000] gives some important points to be looked at:
• Standard procedures may sometimes not be appropriate and may be difficult to
implement, thus leading to accidents.
• Information may not be communicated correctly among multilingual and
multicultural crews.
• Emphasis on training with practical demonstrations, group exercises and training
software is advised.
• Assigning specific responsibilities to clearly designated individuals is a prerequisite.
In identifying human factors contributing to accidents, we speak of "human errors". Kuo
[2000] cites two opposing views. "Nothing can be done about it because it involves
human beings, or, human errors must and can be eliminated." A realistic option is
certainly to recognise the different natures of human beings, and trying to minimise the
probability of the occurrence of human errors and impact by appropriate methods.
Human errors are associated with human actions, omissions and neglect. Their impact
can be extremely serious. Kuo [2000] ends up with three levels of human error:
Saftty Management and Operational Requirements 381

I. Skill-based
Tasks are carried out on a routine basis, but concentration may fail.
2. Rule-based
Here procedures are often carried out from experience of training. A good rule can be
misused, or a poor rule is implemented, or the appropriate rule not applied at all.
3. Knowledge-based
Here the solution must be worked out, as previously applied methods are
inappropriate. This level is often associated with unexpected emergency situations.
Furthermore, Kuo identifies twelve factors that can lead to human errors, such as:
Attitude, communication, concentration, confidence, experience, human limitations,
information, management, procedure, time constraints, tiredness, training. He suggests
selecting only three of the most significant factors to apply an analytical decision analysis
method. This will overcome most of the deficiencies. His so-called safety case concept
includes a methodology to address the most relevant factors. The first step is to analyse
the problem, then to set up a safety management system incorporating the best way to
manage safety [Kuo, 1998]. This concept is particularly good for considering situations
or systems for which there is little previous experience, and for problems associated with
human factors. Part of the safety case concept analysis is:
• Hazard identification (what aspects of a system can go wrong),
• Risk assessment (what are the chances and effects of the hazards),
• Risk reduction,
• Emergency preparedness (what to do if a severe situation arises).
Improved methods in management, engineering and operation are needed to reduce the
probability of human errors. The reduction of human errors by personnel training,
experience and support is shown in fig. 14.18.
Boniface and Bea [1996] reviewed the key principles in human performance
methodologies. They developed a human error modelling system, named Human Error
Risk Reduction Operating System (HERROS), to provide insights and solutions at all
stages of the life cycle of a ship.
IMO [1995a] revised the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification
and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW). It is to be seen as an international maritime
training guide. Still, operational decisions that have influence upon capsizing are left to
the discretion of the captain, as Dahle [1993] complained. STCW quotes specifically, that
training of ship and engine officers should give them knowledge on the calculation of
intact stability, and on the safe stowage and handling of cargo. Instructions on how to
handle the ship in severe conditions with minimum stability are considered important.
Miller and Paitl [2001] report on the U.S. fishing vessel-training suite. It includes a
training document "Best practices guide to vessel stability", supported by an interactive
stability trainer. This trainer is a free floating, scaled fishing vessel which replicates
actual operating conditions such as sloshing liquid, loading catch, lifting operations, and
icing conditions.
The backbone of proper shiphandling is Maritime education and training (MET). An
important role in international enhancement is played by the World Maritime University
(WMU) in Malmo/Sweden, founded on behalf ofIMO in 1983 [Weinstein, 1996].
382 Chapter14

14.4 Operational Stability in the Future- A Wishful Forecast

There is widespread agreement on the need to improve stability and safety of ships. It has
been recognised that better information to the master is important. Improvements in the
area of human factors must be co-ordinated with research on maritime safety regulations.
Grochowalski, et al suggested [1994], making a distinction between "stability" and
"stability safety". Stability safety depends on the ship characteristics and on ship
operation, which must be optimised together, while stability alone, is just a feature of the
ship to resist capsizing.
To stress the importance of ship operation on the ability of the ship in service to prevent
capsize and to reduce damage from rolling and roll acceleration, the term operational
stability has been used throughout this book. The main concern of safe operation with
respect to intact stability is to avoid severe situations such as synchronous and parametric
rolling, surf riding, and broaching, and to give provisions for survival.
The inclusion of ship dynamics to assess operational stability beyond the conventional
hydrostatic approach will improve taking vital action in advance. General application and
further development of the tools now available in operational stability of ships and ocean
vehicles will contribute substantially to safer shipping in the near future.
The main topics of operational stability are currently at different stages of development
and implementation and are compiled as follows:
1. Management of stability and safety with reference to the ship type and mission,
supported by performance based intact stability criteria,
2. Automatic estimate of ship static stability status continuously,
3. Ship-borne measurement equipment on behaviour at sea,
4. Numerical time domain simulation of dynamic ship behaviour with reliable computer
programs allowing study, training and forecast on adverse seakeeping scenarios,
5. Short-term routeing assisted by sea data evaluation from ship-borne gauges and from
satellites,
6. Storage of black box data on extreme events and decisions taken (voyage data
recorder VDR),
7. Risk analysis and development of risk oriented scenarios for survival in heavy seas,
8. Reduction of human errors by mandatory assistance using onboard computer systems,
but responsibility stays with the master,
9. Maritime education and training (MET) using modem tools such as video, virtual
reality systems, numerical simulators, computer feedback trainers, and physical
models for demonstration of risk scenarios,
10. Steady transfer of research and feedback among operators, designers, administrators
and scientists.
 383

References
Aage, C. (1971). "Wind coefficients for nine ship models", Hydro-ag Aerodynamisk
Laboratorium, Lyngby, Report No.A-3.
Abicht W. (1972). "Die Sicherheit der Schiffe im nachlaufenden unregelmaessigen
Seegang", Schiffbautechnik, Vol. 19.
Abicht, W., Kastner, S. and Wendel, K. (1977). "Stability of ships, safety from capsizing,
and remarks on subdivision and freeboard", WEMT, London.
Adelfang, St. J. (1969). "Measurements of atmospheric turbulence a few meters above
the sea surface with a three component thrust anemometer", New York University,
Geophysic Lab. TR-69-3.
Aertssen G.: (1968). "Labouring of a ship in rough seas with special emphasis on fast
ships", SNAME, Spring Meeting.
Aertssen, G. and van Sluis, M. F. (1972). "Service performance and sea-keeping trials on
a large container ship", RINA, London.
Airy, G. B. (1845). "Tides and waves", in Encyclopedia Metropolitana, p. 192.
Alderman, G. (1972). "Samuel Plimsoll and the shipping interest", Editors R. Craig, D.
Charles Newton Abbot.
Alman, P.R., Minnick, P. V., Sheinberg, R. and Thomas III, W., L. (1999). "Dynamic
capsize vulnerability: reducing the hidden operational risk", SNAME Transactions, Vol.
107.
Amersdorffer, R. (1998). "Parametrisch erregte Rollbewegungen in liingslaufendem
Seegang" Schiff & Hafen, No. 10/98 and No. 11/98, Hamburg.
Anderson, T. (1923) "Der Einfluss der Schiffsform auf die Stabilitaet von
Passagierschiffen", Schiffbau, p.114.
Anderson, P. Niileksela, M. and Sjobris, A. (1984) "Road trailer suitable for sea
transportation", Mariterm III report, Mariterm AB, Goteborg.
Arndt B., and Roden S. (1958). Stabilitiit bei vor- und achterlichem Seegang",
Schiffstechnik, Vol. 5, No 29, Hamburg.
Arndt, B., Kastner, S. and Roden, S. (1960). "Stabilitiitsmessung auf Schiffen", Hansa,
No. 47/48, Hamburg.
Arndt, B. (1965). "Ausarbeitung einer Stabilitiitsvorschrift fur die Bundesmarine",
Transactions STG, Vo1.59, p.594.
Arndt, B., Brandl H. and Vogt K. (1982). "20 Years of experience - stability regulations
of the West-German Navy". Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International Conference on Stability
of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo, p.765.
384

Arndt, B. (1984). "Marine computers for ship handling and ship operation", IMAEM,
Athens.
Attwood, E.L. (1796 - 98). "Disquisition on the stability of ships" Phil. Transactions of
the Royal Society, London.
Avotin, P.G. (1940). "About the changes of inclining moment caused by wind with the
inclination of the ship". Sudostroenie, No II (in Russian).
Balitskaya, E. O. (1965). "Some results on the ship behaviour in shallow breaking
waves", Transactions of Russian Register Shipping "Theoretical and Practical Problems
of Stability and Survivability", Transport, Moscow-Leningrad, pp.147-165 (in Russian).
Basin, A. M. (1969). "Ship motions", Transport, Moscow (in Russian).
Beck, R.F. and Reed, A. M. (2001). "Modem computational methods for ships in
seaway", SNAME Transactions, Vol. 109, pp. 1-48.
Belenky, V. L. (1993). "On a probabilistic balance of IMO stability regulations",
Technical University of Gdansk, Report of Dept. of Ship Hydromechanics No 6/93.
Belenky V. L. (1995). "Analysis of probabilistic balance ofIMO stability regulation by
piecewise linear method", Marine Technology Transactions, Polish Academy of
Sciences, Branch in Gdansk, Vol. 6, p 5-55.
Belenky, V. L. (2000). "Probabilistic Approach for Intact Stability Standards", SNAME
Transactions , Vol. 108 pp. 123-146.
Benjamin, L. (1913-1914). "Ueber das Mass der Stabilitiit des Schiffe", Schiffbau, p. 255.
Bertram, V. (editor): (1999). "Intelligent ships - intelligent ports", Report No. 598,
Technische Universitiit Hamburg-Harburg, Hamburg.
de Beurs (1957). "Speed and pitching" Holland.
Bhattacharyya, R. (1978). "Dynamics of marine vehicles", Whiley, New York.
Bickel, P. J. (1971) "Mathematical Statistics". Holden-Day, San Francisco.
Bird, H. and Odabasi, A. Y. (1975). "State of art: past, present and future", Proc. of
STAB 75: 1st International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles,
Glasgow.
Bemouilli, Daniel. (1757). "La maniere de diminuer Ie plus qu'il est possible de roulis et
tangage d 'un navire", Prix de I' Academie des Sciences, Paris.
Bemouilli, Jean (1714). "Essay d'une nouvelle theorie de la manoeuvre des vaisseaux",
Basle.
Bielanski, J. (1994) Ship rolling under action of beam wind and sea as a background of
comparison IMO stability criteria, Proc. of OTRADNOE'93: International Workshop on
the Problems of Physical and Mathematical Stability Modelling, Vo!.2, Paper No 7,
Kaliningrad Institute of Technology, Kaliningrad.
Blume, P. and Hattendorf, H. G. (1982). "An investigation on intact stability offast cargo
liners", Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, Tokyo.
References 385

Blume, P. and Hattendorff, H. G. (1983). "Stabilitat und Kentersicherheit modemer

Handelsschiffe", HSV A report no. S 165/83, Hamburg.
Blume. P. and Hattendorf, H. G. (1984). "Ergebnisse von systematischen
Modellversuchen zur Kentersicherheit". Transactions STG, Vol. 78.
Blume, P. and Hattendorff, H. G. (1984a). "Stability and safety against capsizing of
modem ship design (abridged version)", HSV A report, Hamburg Model Basin, Hamburg.
Blume, P. (1986). "The safety against capsizing in relation to seaway properties in model
tests". Proc. of STAB '86: 3rd International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles Vol. I, Gdansk, pp. 83-91.
Blume, P. (1990). "On the influence of variation of righting levers in waves on stability
requirements", Proc. of STAB '90: 4th International Conference on Stability of Ships and
Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2, Naples.
Blume, P. (1993). "On capsize model testing", Proc. of us Cost Guard Vessel Stability
Symposium, US Coast Guard Academy, New London, Connecticut pp. 53-59.
Blume, P. and Brink, K. (2001). "Model tests for the validation of extreme roll motion
prediction", STG summer meeting, Gdansk.
BMV (1984) (Bundesminister flir Verkehr). "Bekanntmachung iiber die Anwendung der
Stabilitatsvorschriften flir Frachtschiffe, Fahrgastschiffe und Sonderfahrzeuge" vom 24.
Oktober 1984, Hamburg.
Boniface, D. E., and Bea, R. G. (1996). "Assessing the risks of and countermeasures for
human and organisational error" SNAME Transactions, Vol. 104, pp. 157-177.
Boccodamo, G., Cassella, P. and Scamardella, A. (2000). "Stability, operability and
working conditions onboard fishing vessels", Proc. of STAB '2000: 7th International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1, Launceston, Tasmania, pp.
32-51.
Boese, P. (1969). "Steuem eines Schiffes im schweren achterlichen Seegang",
Transactions STG, Hamburg.
Boroday, I. K. and Rakhrnanin, N.N. (1975). "State of art on studies on capsizing of an
intact ship in stormy weather conditions", Proc. of 14th ITTC, VolA, Ottawa.
Bouguer, Paul (1746). "Traite du navire, de sa construction et ses mouvements", Paris.
Boukhanovsky, A. V., Degtyarev, A. 8., Lopatoukhin, L. J. and Rozhkov, Y. V. (2000)
"Stable states of wave climate: Applications for risk estimation", Proc. of STAB'2000:
7th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2,
Launceston, Tasmania, pp. 831-846.
Bretschneider, C. L. (1952). "The generation and decay of wind waves in deep water",
Trans. American Geophys. Union, Vol. 33, No 3.
Bretschneider, C. L.:(1961). "A one-dimensional gravity wave spectrum", Ocean Wave
Spectra, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Brown, D.K. (1981). "HMS CAPTAIN. Design authority and stability". Historical group,
RINA.
386

Bruhn, S. (1927). "The safety of ships against capsizing". Shipbuilding and Shipping
Record, s.528 .•
Buckley, W. H. (1994). "Stability criteria: development ofa first principle methodology",
Proc. of STAB '94: 5th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, Melbourne, Florida.
Buckley, W. H. (1997). "Critical capsizing criteria in survivability seaways", Proc. of
International Conference "Design and Operation for Abnormal Conditions ", RlNA
London.
Burcher, R. K. (1990). "Experiments into capsize of ships in head seas", Proc. of
STAB '90: 4th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles,
Naples.
Caldeira-Saraiva, F. (1986). "A stability criterion for ships using Lyapunov's method",
Proc. of Safeship Conference.
Caldwell, 1.8. (1986). "Prospects ofa rational approach to marine safety", Proc. of the 4th
International Shipbuilding and Ocean Engineering Conference, Helsinki.
Cartwright, D. E. and Longuet-Higgins, M. S. (1956). "The statistical distribution of the
maxima of a random function", Proc. of Royal Soc. Series A, Vol. 237, London.
Chou, S. J., et al (1973). "Capsizing experiments in San Francisco Bay". Annual Report
1973 Dept. of Naval Architecture, University of California Berkeley.
de Chapman, Frederic (1768). "Architectura navalis mercatoria", Stockholm.
Chen, H. and Sucharski, D. (1993). "The role of shipboard decision support systems and
instrumentation in enhancing marine safety", Proc. of us Cost Guard Vessel Stability
Symposium, US Coast Guard Academy, New London, Connecticut, pp. 228-241.
Chung- Tu Teng, Timpe, G. and Palao, I. M. (1994). "The development of design waves
and wave spectra for use in ocean structure design", SNAME Transactions, Vol. 102,
pp.475-499 ..
Cleary, W. A. (1975). "Marine stability criteria", Proc. of STAB 75: 1st International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Glasgow.
Cleary, W. A. and Letourneau, R. M. (1986). "Design - regulations", Proc. of STAB '86:
3rd International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2, Gdansk,
pp. 179-188.
Cleary, W. A. (1994). "Human factors in marine regulation", ", Workshop on human
factors, synopsis by the moderator S. Allen STAB'94: 5th International Conference on
Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Melbourne, Florida.
Clauss, G., Lehmann, E. and Ostergaard, C. (1992). "Offshore structures: conceptual
design and hydromechanics". Springer, Berlin.
Clauss, G., Hennig, J., Kiihnlein W., Brink K. E. and Cramer, H. (2002). "Analysis of
extreme roll motions in severe seas with embedded rough wave sequences for the
development of safer ships with reduced capsizing risk", Transactions STG, Hamburg.
Cowley, J. (1988). "Passenger ship legislation". IME Conference, IMAS'88, London.
References 387

Cox J.R. (1976). "Fishing vessel safety". Transactions RINA.

Cramer, H. and Krueger, S. (2001). "Numerical capsize simulations and consequences for
ship design", STG summer meeting, Gdansk.
Crudu, L., Nabergoj, R., Obreja, D.C. and Trincas, G. (1994), "Ship stability in following
waves. Theoretical and experimental investigations", Proc. of STAB '94: 5th International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1. Melbourne, Florida.
th
Czichos, H., editor. (1991). "Hiitte. Die Grundlagen der Ingenieurwissenschaften", (29
ed.) Springer-Verlag, New York Berlin Heidelberg.
Dahle, E. A. and Kjaerland, O. (1980). "The capsizing of MIS HELLAND HANSEN",
Naval Architect, RINA, Vol. 122, pp. 51-70.
Dahle, E. A. and Nedrelid, T. (1982). "Stability criteria for vessels operating in a
seaway", Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International Conference on Stability of Ships and
Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo.
Dahle, E. A. (1993). "Qualification, education and training" Proc. of us Cost Guard
Vessel Stability Symposium, US Coast Guard Academy, New London, Connecticut,
pp.242-249.
Dahlmann, W. (1953). "2ur Betriebsstabilitat der Schiffe", Schiff und Hafen, No 6,
Hamburg.
Davenport, A. G. (1964) "Note on the distribution of the largest value of a random
function with application to gust loading". Proc. of Royal Soc.
Denny, A. (1887). "On the practical application of stability calculations", Transactions
INA.
th
Derret, D. R. (1996) Ship stability for masters and mates. 4 edition, Butterworth-
Heinemann.
DHI (1981). "Deutsches Hydrographisches Institut: Handbuch des Atlantischen Ozeans",
No. 2057, Hamburg.
Dillingham, J. T. and Falzarano, J. M. (1986) "Three dimensional numerical simulation
of green water on deck". Proc. of STAB '86: 3rd International Conference on Stability of
Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. I, Gdansk, pp. 57-64.
Dorin V. S., Nikolaev E. P. and Rakhrnanin N. N. (1975) "On dangerous situations
fraught with capsizing", Proc. of STAB '75: 1st International Conference on Stability of
Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Paper 5, Glasgow.
Dolling, W. (2000). "Anspruch Technik contra Factor Mensch", Transactions STG,
Hamburg.
Dudziak, J. (1963). "Analysis of the relative value ofthe criteria regarding the stability of
fishing vessels", FAO Stability Meeting, Gdansk.
Dudziak, J. and Kobylinski, L. (1969). Model tests of ship stability and seakeeping
qualities in open water. IMCO, doc. STAB/INF 51.
388

Dudziak, J. (1975). "Safety ofa vessel in beam sea" Proc. of STAB '75: 1st International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Glasgow.

Drzemalla, F. (1999). Assignment, Ship Hydromechanic Lab., Hochschule Bremen.

Eickschen, A. (1989). "Analyse der Winke1messung beim Krangungsversuch", Diploma
thesis, Ship Hydromechanic Laboratory, Hochschule Bremen.
Ericson, A., Person, J. and Rutgerson O. (1997). "On the use of formal safety assessment
when analyzing the risk for cargo shift in rough seas", Proc. of RINA International
Conference on Design and Operation for Abnormal Conditions, Glasgow.
Ericson, A., Jianbo, H. and Rutgersson, O. (2000) "Mixed seas and cargo shifting
onboard" Proc. of STAB '2000: 7th International Conference on Stability of Ships and
Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2, Launceston, Tasmania, pp. 802-818.
Euler, Leonhard (1749)." Scientia Navalis", Saint-Petersbourg.
Faltinsen, O. M. (1990). "Sea loads on ships and offshore structures", Cambridge
University Press.
Faulkner, D. (1981). "A semi-probabilistic approach to the design of marine structures",
Extreme Loads Symposium.
Faulkner, D. and Buckley, W.H. (1997). "Critical survival conditions for ship design",
International Conference on Design and Operation for Abnormal Conditions, RINA
London.
Fidgerald RP., Grant Mcd.M: (1991). "A practical methodology for risk assessment of
offshore installations", Offshore Operations Post Piper Alpha Conference, IME/RINA.
Filipowicz E., Garnuszewski M: (1960). "Universal measure of stability" III Scientific
Session of Shipbuilders, Gdansk. (in Polish).
Firsov, G.A. (1946). "Formula for calculation of the heeling moment of the ship in steady
turning circle". Isvestia Akademii Nauk; Otdelenie Tekhnicheskih Nauk, Russian
Academy of Science, No.5, p.679-682, (in Russian).
France, W.N., Levandou, M., Treakle, T. W., Paulling, J.R., Michel, R. K. and Moore, C.
(2003). "An investigation of head seas parametric rolling and its influence on Container
Lashing Systems", Marine Technology, Vol. 40, No.1.
Francescutto, A. (2002). "Intact stability - the way ahead", Proceeding of 6th
International Ship Stability Workshop, Webb Institute, New York.
Francescutto, A. and Bulian, G. (2002). "Nonlinear and stochastic aspects of parametric
rolling modelling", Proceeding of 6th International Ship Stability Workshop, Webb
Institute, New York.
Froude, W. (1955): "Observations and suggestions on the subject of determining by
experiment the resistance of ships. The papers of William Froude, 1810-1879", Trans.,
1NA.
Gatjens, H. J. (1996). "Ship machinery automation", Its report, Hamburg University,
Hamburg.
References 389

Germanischer Lloyd (1998). "Safe shipping in heavy seas", Research project GL-SSISS,
BMBF, Hamburg.
Gleijeses, M. (1945). "Architettura navale", Editrice Politecnica S.A, Napoli EPSA.
Gloystein,1. F. (1984). "Sicheres und Okonomisches Stauen von Containern", Handbuch
der Werften, Vol. XVII, Hamburg.
Gregory, R. L. (1987). "Oxford companion to the mind", Oxford University Press.
Grim, O. (1951). "Das Schiff in von achtern mitlaufender See", Transactions STG
Hamburg.
Grim, O. (1952). "Rollschwingungen, Stabilitiit und Sicherheit im Seegang",
Schiffstechnik, No. I, Schiffahrts-Verlag Hansa, Hamburg.
Grochowalski, S., Rask, I. and Soderberg, P. (1986). "An experimental technique for
investigation into physics of ship capsizing". Proc. of STAB'86: 3rd International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2, Addendum I, Gdansk.
Grochowalski, S. (1989). "Investigation into the physics of ship capsizing by combined
captive and free-running model tests", Transactions SNAME, Vol. 97, pp. 169-212.
Grochowalski, S. (1990). "Hydrodynamic phenomenon generated by bulwark
submergence and its influence on ship susceptibility to capsizing", Proc. of STAB '90: 4th
International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2, Naples.
Grochowalski, S. (1993). "Effect of bulwark and deck edge submergence in dynamics of
ship capsizing", Proc. of us Cost Guard Vessel Stability Symposium, US Coast Guard
Academy, New London, Connecticut, pp.94-109.
Grochowalski, S. (1993a). "Ship in quartering seas - a case which determines stability
safety", Proc. of OTRADNOE'93: International Workshop on the Problems of Physical
and Mathematical Stability Modelling, Vol. 2, Paper No 12, Kaliningrad Institute of
Technology, Kaliningrad.
Grochowalski, S., Archibald, J. B., Connolly, F. J. and Lee, C. K. (1994). "Operational
factors in stability safety of ships in heavy seas" Proc. of STAB'94: 5th International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 4, Melbourne, Florida.
Grochowalski, S.: (1997). "Experimental investigation of the hydrodynamic forces and
pressure distribution on the submerged part of deck in wave", NRC/IMD Report No TR-
1997-09.
Gumbel, E. 1. (1958). "Statistics of extremes". Columbia University Press.
Haddara M. R., Kastner S., Magel L. F., Paulling J. R., Perez y Perez, L. and Wood, P. D.
(1972). "Capsizing experiments with a model of a fast cargo liner in San Francisco Bay",
Dept. of Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard, Technical Report.
Halden, H. (1994). "Messung im praktischen Schiffsbetrieb: H6here Sicherheit und mehr
Payload", Schiff & Hafen, No 12, Hamburg.
Halden, H. (1995). "Yard inclining test done in less than 10 min", MER, September.
390

Halebsky M. (1989). "System safety engineering as applied to ship design", Marine

Technology, Vol.26, No 3, pp. 245-251.
Hamamoto, M. et al (1996) "Model experiment of ship capsize in astern seas". Journal of
the Soc. of Nav. Arch. of Japan, vol. 179.
Hasselmann, K. (1973), "Measurements of wind-wave growth and swell decay during the
Joint North Sea Wave Project (JONSW AP)". Dt. Hydrogr. Z. Reihe A (8) 12.
Hasselmann, K., et al (1976). "A parametric wave prediction model". J Phys.
Oceanography, Vol. 6, No 2.
Hattendorf, (1974). "Handbuch der Werften XII", Verlag Hansa, Hamburg.
Hebecker, O. (1958). "StabilitatsmeBgerate von Prof. K. Wendel", Schiff und Hafen,
Hamburg.
Henricson, W. A.(1980). "Assessing intact stability", Marine Technology, Vol. 17, No 2,
pp.163-173.
Herner, H. and Rusch, K. (1952). "Die Theorie des Schiffes". 6th edition, Fachbuchverlag
GmbH, Leipzig.
Hjort, G. (1993). "Intact stability - lessons learned from accidents". Proc. of us Cost
Guard Vessel Stability Symposium, US Coast Guard Academy, New London,
Connecticut, pp. 273-277.
Hoffman, D. (1976). "The impact of seakeeping on ship operations", Marine Technology,
Vol. 13, No.3, pp. 241-262.
Hoffman, D., Rathje H. and Derda, T. (2000). "Development and implementation of hull
response monitoring systems for ship operation", STG, Hamburg.
Hogben, N. and Lumb, F. E. (1967). "Ocean wave statistics". Her Majesty's Stationary
Office, London.
Hogben, N., Dacunha, N. M. C. and Oliver, G.F. (1986). "Global wave statistics".
Compiled and edited by British Maritime Technology Ltd, Unwin Brothers.
Holt, C. F. (1925). "Stability and seaworthiness", Transactions INA.
Hooke, N. (1989). "Modem shipping disasters 1968-1987". Lloyd's of London Press Ltd.
Hormann, H. (1982). "Judgement of stability - questions to be solved. A contribution
from the point of view of approving authority". Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo.
Horn, F., Siichting, W., Klindwort, E. and Hebecker, O. (1953). "Erkenntnisse und
Erfahrungen auf dem Gebiet der Schiffsstabilitat", STG, Hamburg.
Hoyle, S. (1999). "The autonomic ship. Intelligent Ships - Intelligent Ports". Report No.
598, Technische Universitat Hamburg-Harburg, Hamburg.
Hua, 1. and Rutgersson, O. (1994). "A study of the dynamic stability of a RoRo-ship in
Waves". Proc. ofSTAB'94: 5th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, Vol. I, Melbourne, Florida.
References 391

Huang, Z. J. and Hsiung, C. C. (1996). "Nonlinear shallow-water flow on deck", Journal

of Ship Research, Vol. 40, No 4, pp. 303-315.
Hutchison, B. L. (1981). Risk and operability analysis in the marine environment".
Transactions SNAME, Vol. 89, pp. 127-154.
Hutchison, B. L. (1986). "Cargo mechanics-application of seakeeping-revisited ", Marine
Technology, Vo1.23, pp. 230-241.
Hutchison, B. L. (1990). "Seakeeping studies: A status report", Transactions SNAME,
Vol. 98, pp. 263-317.
Ishida, S. and Takaishi, Y. (1990) "A capsizing experiment of a small fishing boat in
breaking waves". Proc. of STAB '90: 4th International Conference on Stability of Ships
and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1, Naples.
Japan Captains' Association (1998). "Ship handling in following seas, how to avoid
dangerous following seas", Video.
Jens, 1. (1964). "Stabilitiits- und Rollschwingungsuntersuchungen mit
Kiistenmotorschiffen". Hansa, Vol. 101, No 14 Jahrgang, Hamburg, p. 1419.
Jens, J. (1965) "Nationale Stabilitiitsvorschriften und Stabilitiitsnormen", Schiff und
Hafen Vol. 17.
Jens, J. and Kobylinski, L. (1982). "IMO activities in respect of international
requirements for the stability of ships", Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International Conference
on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo.
Johow-Foerster (1928). "Hilfsbuch fuer den Schiffbau", Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Kan, M. Saruta, T. and Okuyama T. (1986). "Model experiments on capsizing of a large
stem trawler", Proc. of STAB '86: 3rd International Conference on Stability of Ships and
Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1, Gdansk, pp. 107-111.
Kan, M., Saruta, T., Taguchi, H., YasuIlQ, M. and Takaishi, Y. (1990). "Model tests on
capsizing of a ship in quartering waves", Proc. of STAB '90: 4th International Conference
on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Naples.
Kan, M., Saruta, T. and Taguchi, H. (1994). "Comparative model tests on capsizing of
ships in quartering seas", Proc. of STAB '94: 5th International Conference on Stability of
Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 3, Melbourne, Florida.
Kaps, H. (1983). "Ladungssicherheit auf Seeschiffen", Up to date, No 28, SfS Seamen's
Welfare, Hamburg.
Kaps, H. and Kastner, S. (1983). "On safe shipping of cargo". Lectures at WMU,
MET(N) course, 1983/2001, Malmo.
Kaps, H. and Kastner, S. (1984). "On the physical and operational background of cargo
securing aboard ships". report BMV (Bundesminister ftir Verkehr), Hochschule Bremen.
Kaps, H. and Kastner, S. (1985). "Safe stowage and securing of cargo, cargo units and
vehicles", IMO BC26/4/7, London.
 394

Mathematical Stability Modelling, Kaliningrad Institute of Technology, Vol. 2, Paper 3,

Kaliningrad.
Kawashima, R., Yamakoshi, Y. and Amagai, K. (1982) "Safety of fishing vessel by
means of experiments in wind and waves" Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo.
Kennell, C. (2001). "On the nature of the transport factor component Tfship." Marine
Technology, Vol. 38, No.2, pp. 106-111.
Kimura, N., Amagai K. and Hokimoto, T. (2000) "Estimation of dynamic rolling
response of small fishing vessels in fishing operations using a neural network model",
Proc. of STAB '2000: 7th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, Vol. 2, Launceston, Tasmania, pp. 861-867(b).
Knudsen, R. (1993), "Safety management". Proc. of us Cost Guard Vessel Stability
Symposium, New London, Connecticut, pp. 208-220.
Kholodilin, A. N. and Tovstikh, E.V. (1969). "The model experiments for the stability of
small ships on erupting waves". Proc. 12th ITTC, Rome, pp. 795-797.
Kobylinski, L. (1964). "On the international standards of stability of ships",
Budownictwo Okretowe No 8 and 9, (in Polish).
Kobylinski, L. (1970). "Conception of conducting ship model experiments in open
waters". Scientific papers of the Technical University of Gdansk, Shipbuilding XVIII,
No.157.
Kobylinski, L. and Maksymiuk, W. (1971). "Simplified stability criteria for small fishing
vessels", Scientific Reports of Gdansk Technical University, No 167, (in Polish).
Kobylinski, L. (1972). "Concept and evaluation of the system of stability criteria of
IMO", Zesz. Problemowe Techniki Okretowej, Z.l, (in Polish).
Kobylinski, L. (1975). "Rational stability crit~ria and probability of capsizing" Proc. of
STAB '75: 1st International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles,
Glasgow.
Kobylinski, L. (1984). "Safety of ships against capsizing", Proc. of Athens '84: 3rd
International Congress on Marine Technology, Vol. 1. Athens.
Kobylinski, L. (1989). "System of safety against capsizing", Rostock Symposium.
Kobylinski, L. (1990). "On the possibility of establishing rational stability criteria", Proc.
of STAB '90: 4th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol.
2, Naples, p.501.
Kobylinski, L. (1993). "System approach to safety against capsizing", Proc. of
OTRADNOYE'93: International Workshop on the Problems of Physical and
Mathematical Stability Modelling, Kaliningrad Institute of Technology, Vol. I, Paper I
Kaliningrad.
Kobylinski, L. (1993a). "Concept of model tests of capsizing of ships". Technical
University of Gdansk, Dept. of Ship Hydrodynamics, Report No. 2/93.
References 395

Kobylinski, L. (1994). "Workshop on probability in stability. Summary of discussion",

Proc. of STAB '94: 5th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, Vol. 6, Melbourne, Florida.
Kobylinski, L. (1997). "Rational approach to ship safety requirements ". Marine
Technology II, ODRA 97 Conference, Szczecin.
Kobylinski L. (1997a): "Assessment ofsafe stability in operation" Proc. of STAB '97: 6th
International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1 Varna, pp.
181-189.
Kobylinski, L. (2000). "Stability standards - future outlook", Proc. of STAB '2000: 7th
International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1 Launceston,
Tasmania, pp. 52-61.
van Koten, H.(1976). "Fatigue analysis of marine structures". Proc. of BOSS'76,
Trondheim.
Krappinger, O. (1962). "On capsizing criteria" SchifJstechnik, Hamburg (in German).
Krappinger, O. (1964). "Freibord und Freibordvorschrift". Transactions STG, p.27.
Krappinger, O. (1967). "Die quantitative Beriicksichtigung der Sicherheit und
Zuverlaessigkeit bei der Konstruktion von Schiffen". Transactions STG, Vol. 61, p. 314.
Krappinger, O. and Sharma, S. D. (1974). "Sicherheit in der Schiffstechnik",
Transactions STG, Vol. 68.
Krappinger, 0., Morrall, A., Motora, S., van Oortmersen, G., Burcher, R.K. and
Kobylinski L. (1984). "On stability testing and correlation". Proc. 17-th ITTC, Vol. 2
Goteborg, p. 367.
Krappinger, O. and Hormann, H. (1984). "Kentersicherheit. Problemstellung und
L6sungsansatze." Transactions STG, Vol. 78, p .205.
Krylov, A. N. (1958). "Selected papers", Published by Academy of Science of the USSR,
Moscow, (in Russian).
Kuo, C. and Welaya, Y. (1981). "A review of intact ship stability research and criteria".
Ocean Engineering, p.65.
Kuo, C. (1998). "Managing ship safety", LLP Ltd., ISBN 1-85978-841-6.
Kuo, C. (2000). "The impact of human factors on ship stability", Proc. of STAB '2000:
7th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1,
Launceston, Tasmania, pp. 4-22.
Kure, K. and Bang C. J. (1975). "The ultimate half roll", Proc. of STAB '75: 1st
International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Glasgow.
Kuteynikov, M. A. and Lipis, V. B. (2000) "On indices of ships' operational
seaworthiness", Proc. of STAB '2000: 7th International Conference on Stability of Ships
and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1, Launceston, Tasmania, pp.176-189.
396

Lavrentyev V. M. (1951). "Standardisation of the stability of tugs on the basis of the

jerking of the tow". Transactions of Central Maritime Institute (TSNIIMF), No.8, (in
Russian).
Lee, Ai-Kuo and Adee, B. (1994). "Numerical analysis ofa vessel's dynamic responses
with water trapped on deck", Proc. ofSTAB'94: 5th International Conference on Stability
of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, vol. 2, Melbourne, Florida.
Lewis, E. V. (Editor) (1989). "Principles of Naval Architecture. Second Revision",
SNAME.
Lewis, J. (2000). "Stability data: a Master's view", Froc. of STAB'2000: 7th
International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 1, Launceston,
Tasmania, pp. 23-31.
Lloyd's Register of Shipping (1998). "Rules and regulations for the classification of
ships. Freight container securing arrangements", Part 3, Chapter 14, (January) London.
Lloyd's Register of Shipping ( 1999). "World casualty statistics", London.
Lipis, V. B. and Salov, V. Y. (1990). "Problem of the stability control of transport ships
in operation", Proc. of STAB'90: 4th International Conference on Stability of Ships and
Ocean Vehicles, Naples.
Longuet-Higgins, M. S. and Cokelet, E. D. (1976). "The calculation of steep gravity
waves", Proc. of BOSS76, Trondheim.
Lugovsky, V. V. (1963). "On stability standards of merchant sea-going ships in various
countries", Morskoy Transport publishing, Moscow (in Russian).
Lugovsky, V. V. (1963a). "New method of estimation of stipulated amplitude of rolling
of transport ships in stability standards", Transactions of Russian Register Shipping
"Theoretical and Practical Problems of Stability and Survivability of Sea Vessels", pp. 3-
45 (in Russian).
Loizou, R., Milthorpe, J. and Smith, W. (2000). "A feasibility study of open water ship
motion model testing on Lake George", Proc. of STAB '2000: 7th International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2, Launceston, Tasmania.
pp. 739-750.
Loukakis, T. A. (1970.) "Extreme wave heights and ship response in a seaway". MIT,
Naval Architecture Dept., Report 70-5.
MARINER (1998) "Multipoint loading instrument user manual for bulk ship and
container ship", licensed to World Maritime University, Baron & Dunworth Pty Ltd.
Mc Taggart, K. (1993) "Risk analysis of intact ship capsizing" Froc. of us Cost Guard
Vessel Stability Symposium, US Coast Guard Academy, New London, Connecticut,
pp.160-175.
Mc Taggart K. and De Kat, 1. O. (2000) "Capsize risk of intact frigates in irregular seas"
Transcations SNAME, Vol. 108, pp. 147-177.
References 397

Mc Taggart, K., Carnie, P., Witzke D., Maze, R. (2002). "Capsize probability plots for
ship operator guidance", Proceeding of 6th International Ship Stability Workshop, Webb
Institute, New York.
Miller E. R. (1975). "A scale model investigation of the intact stability of towing and
fishing vessels". Proc. of STAB '75: 1st International Conference on Stability of Ships
and Ocean Vehicles, Glasgow.
Miller, T. C. and Paid, G. J. (2001). "A vessel is its own best lifeboat: Prevention of
casualties through education", Marine Technology, Vol. 38, No.1, pp. 26-30.
Minorsky, N. (1948). "Modem trends in nonlinear mechanics", in "Advances in applied
mechanics", Vol. I, Academic Press Inc. New York.
Michell, J. H. (1893). "On the highest waves in water", Phil. Mag., 5th Series 36,
pp.430-437.
Morrall, A. (1975). "A water-on-deck stability criterion for fishing vessels", National
Physical Laboratory, Ship TM 428.
Morrall, A. (1979). "Capsizing of small trawlers, RINA Spring meeting", Paper 12.
Morrall, A. (1980). "The GAUL disaster: an investigation into the loss of a large stem
trawler", RINA.
Morrall, A. (1982). "Philosophical aspects of assessing ship stability", Proc. of STAB '82:
2nd International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles Tokyo.
Moseley, M., (1850). "On the dynamical stability and on the oscillations of floating
bodies", London.
Motora, S., Shimamoto, S. and Fujino, M. (1982a) "Capsizing experiments on a totally
enclosed life boat" Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International Conference on Stability of Ships
and Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo.
Nabergoj, R., Rakhmanin, N. N., Trincas, G. and Messina, G. (2000). "A methodology to
provide guidelines for increasing operating safety of fishing vessels", Proc. of
STAB'2000: 7th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol.
1, Launceston, Tasmania, pp. 160-175.
Nadeinski, V. P. and Jens, 1. E. L. (1968). "Stability of fishing vessels" Transactions
RINA.
Nechaev, Yu. 1. (1992). "Full scale test of ship-board expert system for decision making
in extreme situations". Proc. of 3rd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2,
(in Russian).
Nechaev, Yu. 1. (1996). "Ship-borne intelligence systems, conception and the special
features of information, calculation and measuring technology" Proc. of CRF'96: 3rd
International Conference in Commemoration of the 300-th Anniversary of Creating
Russian Fleet by Peter the Great, St. Petersburg.
Nechaev, Yu. 1. (1997). "Standardisation of stability: Problems and perspectives", Proc.
of STAB '97: 6th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles
Vol. 2, Varna, pp. 39-45.
398

Nechaev, Yu. I. and Degtyarev, A. B. (2000). "Account of peculiarities of ship's

nonlinear dynamics in seaworthiness estimation in real time intelligence systems". Proc.
of STAB '2000: 7th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles,
V01.2, Launceston, Tasmania, pp. 688-701.
Neves, M. A. S., Perez, N. A. and Lorca, O. M. (2002). "Experimental analysis on
parametric resonance for two fishing vessels in head seas", Proceeding of 6th
International Ship Stability Workshop, Webb Institute, New York.
Niedermair, J. S. (1936). "Further development in the stability and rolling of ships".
Transactions SNAME ,Vol. 44, pp. 418-442.
Nogid, L. M. (1934). "Stability standards of trawlers and their theoretical basis".
Transaction of Society of Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Research Institute (VNIITOSS,
later Krylov Research Institute), Vol. I, No.1 (in Russian).
Norrby, R. (1964). "Stability problems of coastal vessels", International Shipbuilding
Progress, Vol. II.
Oakley, O. H., Paulling, J. R., and Wood, P. D. (1974). "Ship motions and capsizing in
astern seas", Proc., 10th Symp. on Naval Hydrodynamics, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Ochi, M.K. (1990). "Turbulent winds and forces for consideration of stability of marine
systems" Proc. of STAB '90: 4th International Conference on Stability of Ships and
Ocean Vehicles, Naples.
Onboard - NAPA (2000). "The Naval Architectural Package", Technical description,
Helsinki.
Orlov, D. A. (1965). "Some explanations and recommendations on performing
calculations of the loading plan of ships carrying bulk cargoes", Transactions of Russian
Register Shipping "Theoretical and Practical Problems of Stability and Survivability of
Sea Vessels", pp. 215-224 (in Russian).
Papanikolaou, A., Gratsos, G., Boulougouris; E. and Eliopoulou, E. (2000). "Operational
measures for avoiding dangerous situations in extreme weather conditions", Proc. of
STAB '2000: 7th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles
Vol. I, pp. 137-148.
Paulling, 1. R. (1961). "The transverse stability of a ship in a longitudinal seaway".
Journal of Ship Research, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 37-49.
Paulling, J. R., Kastner, S. and Schaffran, S. (197011971). "Capsizing experiments with a
model of a fast cargo liner in San Francisco Bay", Final Report to US Coast Guard, Dept.
of Naval Architecture, University of Cali fomi a, Berkeley.
Paulling, J. R., Kastner, S. and Schaff ran, S. (1972). "Experimental studies of capsizing
of intact ships in heavy seas".US Coast Guard, Technical Report. (Also IMO Doc.
STABI7,1973).
Paulling, J. R., Oakley O.H., and Wood, P. D. (1974). Ship motions and capsizing in
astern seas. Proc. 10th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, ACR-204, Office of Naval
Research, MIT.
References 399

Paul ling, J. R., Oakley O.H., and Wood, P. D. (1975). "Ship capsizing in heavy seas: the
correlation of theory and experiments", Proc. of STAB '75: ist international Conference
on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Glasgow.
Pereira, R, Puntigliano, F. and Bertram, V. (2001). "Nonlinear simulation of capsizing of
undamaged ships in seaways". STG summer meeting, Gdansk.
Petkovic, J. (1964). "Beaufort wind scale and calculated numerical values of wind speed
and wind pressure curves above sea level", international Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. II,
No 117.
Phillips, S. R (1986). "Determining the roll stability of a vessel using Lyapunov
methods", Safeship Coriference.
Pierson, W. J. and Moskowitz, L. (1963). "A proposed spectral form for fully developed
wind seas", Technical report for U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office, New York University
(also J Geophys. Res., Vol. 59, No. 24, 1964).
Pierson, W. J. (1993). "Ship stability in heavy weather: the real situation and models
thereof', Proc. of us Cost Guard Vessel Stability Symposium, US Coast Guard Academy,
New London, Connecticut, pp. 79-93.
Plaza, F. and Petrov, A. A. (1986). "Further IMO activities in the development of
international requirements for the stability of ships".,Proc. of STAB '86: 3rd international
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2, Gdansk, pp. 7-12.
Plaza, F. and Semenov, V. Y. (1990). "Latest work of the International Maritime
Organization related to the stability of ships", Proc. of STAB '90: 4th International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Naples.
Plaza, F. and Petrov, A. A. (1994). "Development of requirements on intact and damage
stability of ships", ProG. of STAB '94: 5th International Conference on Stability of Ships
and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. I, Melbourne, Florida.
Pierrottet, E.A. (1935). "Standard of stability for ships". Transactions INA.
Prandtl, L. (1931). "Fuhrer durch die Stromungslehre", Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig.
Prandtl, L. (1952). "Essentials of fluid mechanics", Hafner Publishing Company, New
York.
Price, W.G. and Bishop, R. E. D. (1974) "Probabilistic theory of ship dynamics",
Chapman and Hall, London.
Rahola, J. (1935). "The judging of the stability of ships", Transactions INA.
Rahola, J. (1939). "The judging of the stability of ships and the determination of the
minimum amount of stability", Ph.D. Thesis, Helsinki.
Rainey, R C. T, Thompson, J. M. T., Tam, G. W. and Noble, P. G. (1990). "The transient
capsize diagram - a route to soundly-based new stability regulations", Proc. of STAB '90:
4th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Naples.
Rainey, R. C. T. and Thompson, 1. M. T. (1991). "The transient capsize diagram - a new
method of quantifying stability in waves", Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 35, No.1,
pp. 58-62.
400

Rakhmanin, N. N. (1982). "Constant heeling forces and their effect upon the stability"
Proc. of STAB'82: 2nd International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, Tokyo.
Rakhmanin N. N., Hormann, H., Morrall, A., Bird, H., Cleary, W. A. and Helas, G.
(1982). "Panel discussion 1" Philosophy and Research", Proc. of STAB'82: 2nd
International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo.
Rakhmanin N. N. (1989). "Dynamics of ships with a well in a seaway", Proc. of
PRADS'89: 4th International Conference on Practical Design and Mobile Units, Varna.
Reed, E. 1. (1868). "On the stability of monitors under canvas". Transactions INA, Vol. 9,
London.
Renilson, M. (1994) "Contribution to workshop on manoeuvring and survival in storm
seas", Proc. of STAB '94: 5th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, Melbourne, Florida.
Renilson, M. (1997) "A note on the capsizing of Vessels in Following and Quartering
Seas". Oceanic Engineering International, Vol. 1, No.1, St. John's, Newfoundland.
Richter, K. (1981) "Seegang als Grundlage fUr die Ermittlung von hydrodynamischen
Lasten", Transactions STG, Hamburg.
Rimington, C.B. (1991) "Safety assessment in offshore major hazard industries",
Offshore Operations Post Piper Alpha Conference, IME/RlNA.
Roden, S. (1962). "Welche Ergebnisse liefern Kenterversuche mit Modellen".
Schiffstechnik, Vol. 9, No 48, Hamburg.
Roden, S. (1962a). "Modellversuche in natuerlichem Seegang" Transactions STG, Vol.
56, Hamburg.
Roren, E. M. Q. and Fumes, O. (1976). "State of the art, behaviour of structures and
structural design", Proc. of BOSS '76, NIT, Trondheim.
Sarchin, T. H. and Goldberg, L. L. (1962). "Stability and buoyancy criteria for US naval
ships", Transactions SNAME, Vol.70, pp. 418-458.
Salvendy (editor) (1987). "Handbook of human factors", John Wiley and Sons, New
York.
Schnadel, Horn, Weinblum, Weiss and von den Steinen: (1936). "Hochseemessfahrt",
Transactions STG, Berlin.
Schneiderman, B. (1992). "Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human
computer interaction". Addison-Wesley.
Semenov-Tian-Schansky, V. V., Blyagoveschensky, S. N. and Kholodilin, A. N. (1969).
"Ship motions", Sudostroenie publishing, Leningrad.
Securius, P. (2000). "Der risikobasierte Ansatz fur die Bewertung der Schiffssicherheit",
Transactions STG, Hamburg.
References 401

Sevastianov, N. B. (1968). "Contemporary state of the art on stability regulation of

fishing vessels", Proc. of 3rd Scientific Conference for the Development of Fishing
Industry of Socialist Countries, Leningrad (in Russian).
Sevastianov, N. B. (1970). "Stability of fishing vessels", Sudostroenie publishing,
Leningrad (in Russian).
Sevastianov, N. B. (1992). "Reliability integral and its interpretation in the task of
stability estimation". International Workshop on Safety Problems Related to Stability of
Ships, Ilawa.
Sevastianov, N. B. (1993). 'Theoretical and practical models for probabilistic estimation
of vessels stability" Proc. of OTRADNOYEY3: International Workshop on the Problems
of Physical and Mathematical Stability Modelling, Vol. 1, Paper 5, Kaliningrad Institute
of Technology, Kaliningrad.
Shaughnessy, 1., Nehrling, B. C. and Compton R. H. (1994). "Some observations on
experimental techniques for modelling ship stability in wind and waves". Proc. of
STAB'94: 5th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 3,
Melbourne, Florida.
Shin, C. 1. (1990). "The prediction of deck wetness in oblique waves and effects of
shipping water on stability of ships", Proc. of STAB '90: 4th International Conference on
Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Naples.
Sizov, V. G. (1958). "On the stability of ships transporting bulk cargoes". Sudostroenie,
No.6, Leningrad (in Russian).
Skalicky, A. (1998). "Seegangsspektrum", Assignment, Hochschule Bremen.
Skinner, N. E. (1951). "The safety of small ships". Transactions INA.
Slaughter, S. B., Cheung, M. c., Sucharski, D. and Cowper, B. (1997). "State of the art in
hull response monitoring systems", SSC report 401.
Soding, H. (1989) "Contribution to report of Sonderforschungsbereich" SFB 98:
Sicherheit und Wirtschaftlichkeit groBer und schneller Schiffe. Hamburg and Hannover.
Spencer, 1. S. (1990). "Consideration for operational stability" Proc. of STAB '90: 4th
International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Naples.
Spouge, J. (1996) "Safety assessment of passenger/Ro- Ro vessels", International
Conference on the Safety of Passengers in Ro-Ro Vessels, RlNA, London.
St. Denis, M. and Pierson W. 1. (1953). "On the motions of ships in confused seas",
Transactions SNAME Vol. 61.
STAB'90 Panel discussion (1990). "Operational safety and avoidance of accidents",
Proc. of STAB'90: 4th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, Naples.
Starr, C. (1969). "Social benefit versus technological risk", Science, Vol. 165, p. 1232.
Stokes, G. G. (1849). Transactions Cambridge Phil. Soc., p. 441.
402

Stokes, G. G. (1880). "Mathematical and Physical papers". Vol. 1, 314, Cambridge

University Press.
Svedrup, H. O. and Munk, W. H. (1947). "Wind, sea, swell: theory of relations for
forecasting", Hydrographic Office Publication 60l.
Takaishi, Y. (1975). "Experimental technique for studying stability of ships achieved in
the ship research institute". Proc. of STAB '75: I st International Conference on Stability
of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Glasgow.
Takaishi, Y. (1982). "Consideration of the dangerous situations leading to capsize of
ships in waves", Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International Conference on Stability of Ships
and Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo.
Takaishi, Y. (1994). "IMO guidance to the masters for avoiding dangerous situations in
following and quartering seas", Workshop on Manoeuvring and survival in storm seas,
synopsis by the moderator 1. O. de Kat STAB '94: 5th International Conference on
Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Melbourne, Florida.
Takaishi, Y., Matsuda, K. and Watanabe, K. (1997). "Probability to encounter high run of
waves in the dangerous zone shown on the operational guidance/lMO for following and
quartering seas", Proc. of STAB '97: 6th International Conference on Stability of Ships
and Ocean Vehicles Conference, Vol. I Varna, pp. 173-179.
Takaishi, Y. (2000). "Development of an onboard system to execute the operational
guidance in following and quartering seas", Workshop D, STAB '2000: 7th International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles Conference, Launceston, Tasmania.
Tamiya, S. (1975). "Capsize experiments of box shaped vessels". Proc. of STAB '75: I st
International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Glasgow.
The Naval Architect (1999). "Analysis of responses to questionnaire at RINA", Seminar
1998.
Thode, H. (1964). "Die Rollzeitmessung auf See", Hansa, Vol. 101, No 14, Hamburg.
Thode, H. (1965). "Rollzeitmessung und Stabilitiit", Hansa, Vol. 102, No. 18, Hamburg.
Thompson, G. and Tope, J. E. (1970). "International considerations of intact stability
standards", Transactions RINA, Vol. 112, pp. 43-67.
Tsuchiya, T., Kawashima, R., Takaishi, Y. and Yamakoshi, Y. (1977) "Capsizing
experiments of fishing vessels in heavy seas", Proc. of PRADS'77: International
Conference on Practical Design and Mobile Units, Tokyo.
Turnbull, S. R. and Dawson, D. (1983). "Investigations into the securing of cargo with
special reference to roll on 1 roll off ships", Dept. of Engineering, University of
Lancaster, (also IMO BC 3/4/3, London 19~5).
Umeda, N. (1994). "Operational stability in following and quartering seas - a proposed
guidance and its validation", Proc. of STAB '94: 5th International Coriference on Stability
of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Vol. 2, Melbourne, Florida.
Umeda, N. (1999). "Nonlinear Dynamics on Ship Capsize due to Broaching in Following
and Quartering Seas", Journal of Marine Science and Technology, Vol. 4, pp. 16-26.
References 403

Umeda, N., Matsuda, A., Hamamoto, M. and Suzuki, S. (1999). "Stability assessment for
intact ships in the light of model experiments", Journal of Marine Science and
Technology, VolA, pp. 45-57.
Vassalos, D. (1999). "Shaping ship safety: the face of the future", Marine Technology,
Vol. 36, No 2, pp. 61-76.
Vogt, K. (1988). "Stabilitatsvorschrift fUr Schiffe/Boote der Bundeswehr", Handbuch der
Werften, Schiffahrtsverlag Hansa, Vol. 19, Hamburg.
Voitkunsky, Y. J. (editor) (1985). "Handbook on Ship Hydrodynamics", (Vols. 1-3)
Sudostroenie publishing, Leningrad, (in Russian).
Wagner, D. (1979). "Stabilitats- und Kenterunfalle der letzten Jahre", Hansa, No.4,
Hamburg.
Wehausen, J. V. and Laitone E. V. (1960). "Surface waves", Handbuch der Physik,
Vo1.9, Springer, Berlin, p. 446-778.
Weinblum, G. (1952). "Die kunftige Entwicklung des Schiffes im Lichte der
Schiffstheorie", Hansa, vol. 89, Hamburg.
Weinstein, K. (1996). "Education and training for maritime management: The role of the
World Maritime University",. Symposium by Carl Duisberg Gesellschaft, Bremen.
WeiB, G. (1953). "Erfahrungen mit der Stabilitatspriifung durch Rollversuche", Hansa,
Vol. 90, Hamburg.
Wendel, K. (1950). "Wann kentert ein Schiff?", Hansa, Vol. 87, Hamburg.
Wendel, K. (1958). "Sicherheit gegen Kentem", VDI Journal, Vol. 100, No 32,
Dusseldorf.
Wendel, K. and Platzoeder, W. (1958). "Der Untergang des Segelschulschiffes "Pamir"",
Hansa, vol. 95, Hamburg.
Wendel, K. (1959). "Safety from capsizing", Fishing Boats of the World: 2 Sea
Behaviour, Second Fishing Boats Congress, FAO, Rome.
Wendel, K. (1965). "Bemessung und Uberwachung der Stabilitat", Transactions STG,
Hamburg.
Wendel, K., Abicht, W. and Kastner, S. (1972). "Gutachten Heraklion", If'S report,
Schrift No 2193, Universitat Hamburg.
Westram, A. and Hachmann D. (1986). "Seegangswamgerat als instrumentelle
Entscheidungshilfe fur die SchiffsfUhrung im Seegang", Messtechnische Briefe, Vol. 22,
Hottinger, Darmstadt.
Wiegel, R. L. (1964). "Oceanographical engineering", Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
New Jersey.
Wieghardt, K. (1972). "Zum Windprofile ueber See", SchifJstechnik, V01.19, No 96.
Wragge, F. (1999). "Automation, manning and safe ship operation", 100 years STG,
Berlin.
404

WU, 1. (1982). "Wind stress coefficient over sea surface from breeze to hurricane",
Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol.87.
Yamakoshi, Y., Takaishi, Y., Kan, M., Yashino, T. and Tsuchiya, T. (1982). "Model
experiments on capsize of fishing boats in waves", Proc. of STAB '82: 2nd International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Tokyo.
Zharen, W.M. and Duncan W. (1994). "Environmental risk assessment and management
in the maritime industry. The Interaction with ISO 9000, ISM, and ISM management
systems", Transactions SNAME, Vol. 102, pp. 137-164.

References on International Documents

Documents IMO

IMO, (1962). "Establishment of working groups", Resolution: document STAB 114.

IMO, (1963). "Intact stability casualty record", Document IS II/12.
IMO, (1964). "Report on the national requirements for intact stability of ships",
Submitted by Soviet Union, Document IS 1II/3.
IMO, (1965). "Analysis of intact stability casualty records", Submitted by Poland,
Documents IS IV/11 and IS IV/14.
IMO, (1965a). Kastner, S. and Roden, S. "A new method at model scale for the study of
the behaviour of ships, particularly their capsizing in natural model seaway" Document
STAB/INF.25 ..
IMO, (1966). "Analysis of intact stability casualty records of cargo and passenger
vessels", Joint report submitted by Federal Republic of Germany and Poland, Document
IS V1I3.
IMO, (1966a). "Analysis of intact stability record of fishing vessels", Joint report
Submitted by the Federal Republic of Germany and Poland, Document PFV IV/2.
IMO, (1966b). "Analysis of intact stability casualty records of fishing vessels",
Submitted by Federal Republic of Germany, Document PFV IV/2/Add I.
IMO, (1966c). Rakhmanin, N. N. "On the dynamic stability of a ship with water on
deck", Submitted by Soviet Union, Document STAB/INF.27.
IMO (1966d). "Analysis of the application of various stability criteria to fishing vessels,
Pt. I" Submitted by Poland, Document PFV IV/14
IMO, (1967). "Analysis of the application of various stability criteria of fishing vessels.
Part II", Submitted by Poland, Document PFV V1I24.
Rtiferences on International Documents 405

IMO, (1968). "Analysis of simplified formulae for judgement of stability of fishing

vessels". Submitted by Poland, Document PFV VI/8.
lMO, (1968a). "Simplified stability criteria for decked fishing vessels under 30 m in
length", Submitted by Poland, Documents PFV VIII/12 and PFV IX/4/l.
IMO, (1969). Dudziak, J. and Kobylinski, L. "Model tests of ship stability and
seakeeping qualities in open water", Submitted by Poland, Document STAB/INF/51.
IMO, (1969a). "Results of experimental investigation of ship motions and the possibility
of capsizing of an undamaged low built vessel in regular waves", Submitted by Soviet
Union, Document PFV IX/3/2.
IMO, (1970). "Evaluation of possible trapping of water on deck due to rolling motion in
an irregular seaway", Submitted by Soviet Union, Document PFV X/6/l.
IMO, (1970a). "Joint ad hoc group for the study of external forces affecting ships",
Report of the 3rd session, Document EF III/13.
IMO, (1970b). "Model tests on the behaviour of a fishing vessel in beam waves in the
natural environment", Submitted by Poland, Documents PFV/x/8 and PFV/X/8/Add.1.
IMO, (1970c). "Systematic model tests", Submitted by the United Kingdom, Document
STAB XI/5/l.
IMO, (1973). "Improved stability criteria - effect of water trapping on deck on
pseudostatic angles of heel", Submitted by Poland. Document PFV XIII/6/l.
IMO, (1973a). "Improved stability criteria", Submitted by Denmark. Doc. STAB XV/9/1.
IMO, (1973b). Rakhmanin, N. N. and Sevastianov, N. B. "On modem concepts of
freeboard standardisation", Submitted by Soviet Union, Document PFV XIV/4/2.
IMO, (1975-1990). Reports of the Working Group on Intact Stability., Doc.: STAB
XVII/WP.4; STAB XVIII/WP.6; STAB XIX/WP.6; STAB XX/WP.3; STAB
XXII/WP.8; STAB XXIII/WP.3; WP.5; STAB XXIV/WP.7; STAB XXV/WP.3; STAB
XXVI/WP.8; STAB 27/WP.3; SLF 28/WP.4, WP 4/Add I, WP. 4/Add 2; SLF 29/WP.7;
SLF 30/WP.7, WP. 7/Add I; SLF 31/WP.; SLF 32/WP.
IMO, (1977). "Revised Netherlands weather criterion", Submitted by the Netherlands,
Document STAB XX/4.
IMO, (1977a). "Intact stability criteria", Submitted by Denmark, Document STAB XX
(unofficial).
IMO, (1978). "Intact stability. General philosophy for ships of all types", Submitted by
Poland, Document STAB XXII/6.
IMO, (1979). "Intact stability. General philosophy for ships of all types", Submitted by
Soviet Union, Document STAB XXIII/4.
IMO, (1979a). "Stability of ships in ballast condition. Weather criteria", Submitted by
Japan, Document STAB XXIV/4.
IMO, (1984). "Intact stability. Other matters. Stability in breaking waves", Submitted by
Norway, Document SLF 29/4.
406

IMO, (1984a). "Intact stability. Report of the ad hoc working group", Document SLF
29/WP.7.
IMO, (1984b). "Report on stability and safety against capsizing of modern ship design",
Submitted by Federal Republic of Germany, Document SLF/34.
IMO, (1985). "Analysis of intact stability casualty records", Submitted by Poland,
Documents SLF 30/4/4 and SLF/38.
IMO, (1988). Krempa, J. "Heeling a trawler when its fishing gear fastens on an
underwater obstacle", Submitted by Poland, Document SLF 33/INF.17.
IMO, (1990). "Intact stability. Ship capsizing in quartering seas", Submitted by Canada,
Document SLF 34/INF.1O.
IMO, (1997). "Revision of the HSC Code: Formal safety assessment. trial application to
high-speed passenger catamaran vessel", Final Report, Submitted by the United
Kingdom, Document DE 41/INF.7.
IMO, (1999). Amendments to the code on intact stability for all types of ships covered by
IMO instruments, IMO Res. MSC.75(69), London.
IMO, (2002). "Report to the Maritime Safety Committee", Document SLF 45/14
IMO, (2002a). "Remarks concerning the weather criterion", Submitted by Germany,
Document SLF 45/6/3.
IMO, (2002b). "Weather criterion for large passenger ships", Submitted by Italy,
Document SLF 45/6/5

Documents of other International Organisations

Food and Agricultural Organisation of United Nations, (1963) Fishing Vessels Stability
Meeting, Gdansk. .
International Towing Tank Conference ITTC, (2002) The Specialist Committee on
Prediction of Extreme Motions and Capsizing, Final Report and Recommendations to the
23rd ITTC

Stability Requirements of Various Countries

Canada, (1969). "Stability requirements for small ships", IMO Document IS II/WP.2.
France, (1963). "Prescription relatives a la stabilite des navires", IMO Doc IS II / WP.3
Greece, (1963). "Stability requirements for ships", IMO Document IS II/WP.16.
Italy, (1963). "Stability requirements for ships. IMO Document IS II/WP.17.
Japan, (1959). Yamagata, M. "Standard of stability adopted in Japan", Transactions INA.
Japan, (1963). "Stability requirements for ships", IMO, Documents IS II/WP. 5.
References on International Documents 407

Poland, (1957). "Standards of stability of sea-going ships ", Polski Rejestr Statkow,
Gdansk.
Poland, (1982) "Rules for construction and classification of sea-going ships" Polski
Rejestr Statkow, Gdansk.
USA, (1926). "Stability and Loading of Ships", Dept. of Commerce, US Bureau of
Standards.
USA, (1959-63). Rules and Regulations for Passenger Vessels (1962) for Small
Passenger Vessels (1961), for Cargo and Miscellaneous Vessels (1959), for Tank Vessels
(1962)". United States Coast Guard, Treasury Department. Also IMO (1963), Document
IS II/WP.10, 11, 12 and 13.
USSR, (1948). "Interim standards of stability for merchant sea-going vessels and
coasters", Register of Shipping of the USSR, Morskoi Transport, Moscow.
USSR, (1961). "Standards of stability of sea-going vessels and floating cranes", Register
of Shipping of the USSR, also IMO (1988) Document SLF 33/INFA.
 409

Subject Index

i\ccuracy,226, 353, 355, 357 Dangerous situation, 39, 75, 122, 123,
Artificial intelligence (AI), 338, 339 124,159,174,359,366,371
Automatic ship inclining, 330 Decision system, 323, 335
Deck-in-water
Bandwidth, 256, 258 effect, 163
Beam seas, 228, 231, 232 heeling moment, 163,288
Beaufort, 191, 192 Degrees of freedom, 217, 220
Breadth parameter, 205, 209 Disaster, 187
Breaking waves Discrimination analysis, 95,101
model tests, 159 Displacement, 11, 14
Bretschneider spectrum, 204 Double-pendulum, 344
Broaching, 149 Downtime, 363, 364, 367
Buoyancy force, 11, 12, 20 Dynamic
heel angle, 18, 89
response, 343, 347, 348,349,356
Capsize index, 364
stability, 7,12,18,41,92
Capsizing, 186
stability arm (lever), 13, 17
angle, 17, 18
modes, 265, 280
Education and training, 188
probability, 52,101,110,115,117,
128,152,167,290,301 Emergency response, 339
rate, 291, 294, 304 Emergency situations, 178
Casualty, 184 Encounter
records, 8,31,94,95,101,110,117, frequency, 243, 248,252
124 period, 239
spectrum, 247,251, 254, 270, 282
statistics, 320
Centre of buoyancy, 75, 136 Error
Centre of gravity, 19,28,57,59,70, 112 transmission, 343, 350, 351, 357, 358
Container ship, 180 type I, 299
Coupled equation, 219 type II, 299, 302
Coupling, 266, 288 Excitation, 218, 228
Criterion (criteria) external, 218, 228
parametric, 228, 235,265
space, 339
Cross-curves of stability, 13,22 Expert system, 324, 339
Crowding of passengers, 28, 41, 50, 62
Ferry, 186
Damage stability, 5, 6, 36 Fishing vessel, 288, 290
Folding frequency, 254
410
Free surface effect, 43, 49, 59
Freeboard,4, 13,67, 133, 164
Free-trim method, 14
Friction force, 320
Froude number, 237, 249, 256, 285
Generalised metacentric height, 12, 13
Gravity force, 11,59,307
Gravity waves, 191, 197
Greenwater, 66
Guide-lines, 177
Heading angle, 239
Heeling moment, 15, 17,20,28,57,
150,180,181,182,183,187
anchor cable, 75
crowding of passengers, 62
deck-in-water, 163
fishing gear, 75
free surface, 59
greenwater, 66, 67
icing, 61
shifting of cargo, 65
suspended loads, 70
towing, 73, 74
turning, 70, 71
wind, 77,83,84,139
Human error, 379
Human factor, 379
Hydrostatics, 178
Ice accretion, 43, 45, 61, 62
Inclination test, 271
Inertia force, 312
Inertia mass moment, 221
Information technology, 178, 188
Initial metacentric height, 11,43,49,
136,137
Initial stability, 10, 11
Intact stability, 39, 43
Intelligence system, 337, 339
Irregular waves, 201, 206
encounter spectrum, 247, 251, 254,
270,282
group, 237,258,270,282
significant height, 212
spectrum, 202, 204, 206, 257
swell,212,215
ISM code, 360, 378, 379
Knowledge base, 338, 339
Large roll, 219, 226, 228, 257
Lashing of cargo, 187
Load lines, 4, 6
°
Longitudinal stability, 1
Loose goods, 64, 65
Loss of stability, 113, 114, 131
76, Management system, 359
Marine environment, 191
Maritime education and training (MET),
379
Mathieu equation, 265, 272
Measurement, 323, 328, 329, 342, 353,
354,356
Measuring error, 342, 349, 350, 351,355
Metacentre, 10, 11, 12
Metacentric height, 7, 10, 11, 13,22,27,
28,31,32,43,59,152,265,273
Metacentric radius, 10, 11, 22, 60
Model tests (experiments), 9, 51, 52, 83,
117,133,134,138,139,161,174
breaking waves, 159
following seas, 164
methodology, 133
open waters, 142, 143, 144, 145, 147
Quartering seas, 156
seakeeping/towing tanks, 149, 150,
153,155,157
Moment balance, 187
Motion stability, 113
criterion, 113
Lyapunov theory, 113
Natural roll period, 223
Navigation, 359, 362, 365, 371
Neural network, 339, 340
Nonlinearity, 272
Non-linearity, 261, 264, 271
Subject Index 411

moments curve, 58
Operational Risk, 9, 34, 85,128,131,146,170
error, 321 assessment, 188, 359, 367
restrictions, 364 function, 125, 174
ship inclining (OS1), 329, 343, 355, Roll
357 acceleration, 306, 312
stability, 178, 183, 186 amplitude, 42, 86, 88
Oscillatory ship motion, 217 coefficient, 225, 227, 312
damping, 223, 230,231
Partial wave, 243, 248, 258 decay, 223, 224
Pendulum, 329, 344, 347, 348, 354, 356 equation, 220
Phase angle, 230, 250 excitation, 228
Potential energy, 179, 182, 183 experiment, 271
Probabilistic approach, 9, 52, 111, 168 inertia, 220
Probability distribution linear, 220, 228, 230
binomial, 293 motion, 177
Poisson, 293, 294 parametric, 371
Rayleigh, 207 restoring, 221
Pseudostatic angle, 68 small, 230
Pure loss of stability, 147, 149, 156, 164 synchronous, 371
velocity, 306
Ro-Ro ship, 186
Quartering seas, 228, 257
Routeing/Routing, 324, 334, 335, 336,
341
Radius of gyration, 221, 225
Random sea, 201
Safety
Random trials, 290, 296
assessment, 168, 170
Range of judgement, 361
envelope, 324, 336
RAO, 345, 347, 349
management, 322, 362, 379, 381
Rare event, 178, 278, 293, 294, 302
margin, 47, 268
Reaction, 218
measures, 178
Reading range, 348
region, 362
Regression analysis, 104
Scenarios, 183,360,374,382
Reliability analysis, 170
Seaway spectrum, 202, 204, 206, 254,
Resonance, 183, 186, 187
256,257
low cycle, 280, 282
Securing, 306,309, 316, 320
parametric, 228
Securing of cargo, 309
Response, 261, 287
Shifting of cargo, 63, 65, 181, 183, 186,
Reynolds number, 135, 136
319,320
Righting
Ship losses, 184
arm (lever), 11, 12,26,48,59,93,
Ship operation, 177, 178, 183
153,154,221,235
Ship-fixed direction, 309
arm of form, 12
Shipyard inclining (SY1), 355
arm of weight, 12
Short-term statistic, 202
arms curve, 13, 14, 153
Simulation, 247
moment, 12, 15, 17, 18,20,46,57,
SOLAS Convention, 5, 6, 49
180,221
412

Spring constant, 265 Upsetting moment, 15, 16, 17, 18

Stability, 5, 7,10,12,96,101,114,124,
167, 173
Water absorption, 62
accident, 29, 114, 130, 131
Water-on-deck,66
classical definition, 10
Wave
criteria, 27, 37, 43, 46,52, 125, 167,
celerity, 197, 199
168,174,177,183,186
climate, 214
dynamic, 7, 12, 18,41,92
crest, 229, 234, 257
initial, 10
dispersion, 199
longitudinal, 10
energy, 202
longitudinal seas, 14,234,238
group, 237, 247, 258, 270, 282
manual, 369
height, 197,203,207,211
operational, 178, 183, 186
length, 195, 197, 198
pure loss, 147, 149, 156, 164
number, 198
requirements, 178
orbital motion, 193, 197, 200
standards, 6, 8, 9, 29, 32, 36, 52, 57,
ordinate, 201
77,86,93, 104, 112, 133, 149
period, 197, 198,204
static, 11, 12, 13, 98
phase velocity, 197, 198, 199
test system, 329
significant height, 212
transverse, 10
slope, 229, 230
Stable and unstable equilibria, 179
slope amplitude, 229
Static stability, 34, 147
spectrum, 202, 203, 204,206
Static stability arm (lever), 13,27,98,
steepness, 195, 197,235
147
swell, 200
Statistics, 184, 185
trough, 234
Stowage, 321
Weather criterion, 32,40,42, 58, 77,89
Strouha1 number, 135, 138
Weber number, 135
Subdivision, 5, 6, 36, 112
Weiss formula, 225, 227
Survivability, 362, 367
Wind, 191, 192
Suspended loads, 70
gust, 42, 50, 192
heeling moment, 27, 28, 45, 46, 77,
Tank level gauging, 327
83,84, 139, 163
Time series, 257 pressure, 28, 42, 43,50, 78, 81, 90
Torremolinos Convention, 38, 43 profile, 192
Transfer function, 230 spectrum, 192, 193
Transverse stability, 10 velocity, 28, 43, 78, 89, 151
Trochoid, 194, 195
Tuning factor, 230, 233