...
【24h】

Development of 115K Tanker Adopting Baltic Ice Class 1A

机译:采用波罗的海1A级115K油轮的研制

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

There are very few numbers of 115K FPP (Fixed Pitch Propulsion) tankers for the Baltic ice class 1A, because the minimum power requirement of FMA (Finnish-Swedish Maritime Association) results in quite a large engine power and the 40 m breadth is out of calculation range of FMA minimum power requirements. The shipyard has no choice except the increment of the engine power to satisfy FMA minimum power requirement of FMA Rule. In addition, the operation cost, efficiency of hull form and its building cost may not be attractive to the ship owners. To solve these problems, the experience of ice breaking tanker development and the ice tank test results were adopted. The main idea to reduce the ice resistance is to decrease the waterline angle at design load waterline. The implicit aims of the main idea are to reduce the ice-clearing force. Two hull forms were developed to satisfy the rule corresponding to the Baltic Ice class 1A. Two ice tank tests and one towing tank test were performed at MARC (Kvaener-Masa Arctic Research Center) and SSMB (Samsung Ship Model Basin) facilities, respectively. The purposes of these tests in two different model basins were to verify the performance in ice and open water respectively. The Hull 2 shows less speed loss than the Hull 1 in open water but the tests revealed the Hull 2 to have a very good ice clearing ability. Finally the Hull 2 satisfied the Baltic ice class 1A. The merit of this hull form is to use the same engine capacity and no major design changes in hull form and other related designs. The hull structure, however, has to be changed according to the ice class grade. The several combinations of different engine type and size with her propeller were applied to obtain the suitable set of engine and propeller. These results reveal that smaller engine and the present propeller can satisfy the Baltic ice class 1A based on ice model test results. The differences of two hull form development methods, ice model test and analysis methods, application skill of different engines and propellers will be described in this paper.
机译:波罗的海1A级冰上使用的115K FPP(固定螺距推进)油轮数量很少,因为FMA(芬兰-瑞典海事协会)的最低功率要求导致相当大的发动机功率,而40 m的宽度超出了FMA最低功率要求的计算范围。船厂别无选择,只有增加发动机功率以满足FMA Rule的FMA最低功率要求。另外,操作成本,船体形式的效率及其建造成本可能对船东没有吸引力。为了解决这些问题,采用了破冰船发展的经验和冰罐的测试结果。降低抗冰性的主要思想是减小设计载荷水线处的水线角度。主要思想的隐含目的是减少清除冰的力量。开发了两种船体形式以满足与波罗的海冰1A级相对应的规则。分别在MARC(克瓦纳-马萨北极研究中心)和SSMB(三星船模盆地)设施进行了两次冰罐试验和一个拖曳罐试验。在两个不同的模型盆地中进行这些测试的目的是分别验证在冰和开阔水域中的性能。船体2在开阔水域中显示出比船体1更低的速度损失,但测试表明,船体2具有很好的除冰能力。最终,船体2满足了波罗的海冰级1A。这种船体形式的优点是使用相同的发动机容量,并且船体形式和其他相关设计没有重大设计更改。但是,必须根据冰级等级更改船体结构。几种不同类型和尺寸的发动机及其螺旋桨的组合被应用于获得合适的发动机和螺旋桨组。这些结果表明,基于冰模型测试结果,较小的发动机和现有的螺旋桨可以满足波罗的海冰级1A的要求。本文将介绍两种船体形式开发方法,冰模型测试和分析方法的差异,不同发动机和螺旋桨的应用技巧。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号