design guidelines for inland ships
Post on 06-Jul-2018
219 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
1/142
Buenos Aires, 18-09-2015
Workshop on DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR INLAND
WATERWAYS (PIANC INCOM WG 141)
Bernhard Söhngen
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
www.baw.de
1. Presentations held at the Workshop
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 3
Bernhard Söhngen (Germany): Introduction to WG 141 approach and findings (45 min.)
Otto Koedijk (The Netherlands): Classification of waterways, design vessel and data needed (25 min.)
Jean-Marc Deplaix (France): Existing waterways with special respect to China and ease ofnavigation (30 min.)
Katja Rettemeier, Bernhard Söhngen (Germany): Recommendations of WG 141 concerning fairway
design in canals and rivers (30 min.)
Jose Iribarren (Spain): Examples for comparative variant analysis in using ship handling simulatorswith special respect to assess ease quality and human factor (30 min.)
Lunch break
Katrien Eloot (Belgium): Appl ication of WG 141 approach including full bridge ship handlingsimulators for Class Va-vessels to the Upper-Seascheldt (ca. 35 min.)
Bernhard Söhngen (Germany): Appl ication of WG 141 approach including elaboration of field data and fast time simulation forClass Va-vessel passing narrow Jagstfeld Bridge in the German Neckar River (ca. 40 min).
Pierre-Jean Pompee (France): Channel types with special respect to speed, power used and easequality (40 min.)
Feedback from the participants and final discussion – ca. 20 min.
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
2/142
www.baw.de
Content
1. Presentations held at the Workshop
2. Terms of reference of WG 141
3. WG 141: Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways
4. Content of the future report with examples
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 2
www.baw.de
Motivation:
There is a need for revised guidelinesbecause of
• larger, but better equipped inland
vessels,• better on-board information systems and
• better simulation methods.
2. Terms of reference of WG 141
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 4
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
3/142
www.baw.de
2. Terms of reference of WG 141
Main Tasks:
• Consider actual dimensions of vessels
according to international standards
• Take into account the demands of
climate change and ecology
• Consider influences of wind effects,
visibility, currents
• Refer to all relevant PIANC publications,
especially to MarCom WG 49
Class Vb
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 5
www.baw.de
2. Terms of reference of WG 141
We will focus on
• modern vessels
• dimensions of
fairways
• lock approaches
• turning basins
• berthing places
• bridge openings
Class Va
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 6
Defining lower limits of navigational
space based on nautical aspects only
supports economical, environmental
and climate change aspects
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
4/142
www.baw.de
3. WG 141: Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways
Katja Rettemeier,
Ministry of Traffic,
Germany
Jose Iribarren,
SIPORT, Spain
Pierre-Jean Pompee,
VNF, France
Otto Koedijk,
Reijkswaterstaat,
The Netherlands
Ji Lan, Shanghai
Waterway
Engineering, China
Bernhard Söhngen
BAW, Germany
Katrien Eloot, Flanders
Hydraulics, Belgium
Ismael Verdugo,
SIPORT, Spain
Interim meeting, May 2012, SIPORT, Madrid, Spain
12th meeting, July 2015, DST, Duisburg
“Hard Core”of WG 141
Jean-Marc Deplaix,
COCOM,
France
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 8
www.baw.de
Katja Rettemeier,Ministry of Traffic,
Germany
Jose Iribarren,
SIPORT, Spain
Pierre-Jean Pompee,
VNF, France
Otto Koedijk,
Reijkswaterstaat,
The Netherlands
Ji Lan, Shanghai
Waterway
Engineering, China
Bernhard Söhngen
BAW, Germany
Katrien Eloot, Flanders
Hydraulics, Belgium
Ismael Verdugo,
SIPORT, Spain
Interim meeting, May 2012, SIPORT, Madrid, Spain
12th meeting, July 2015, DST, Duisburg
“Hard Core”of WG 141
Jean-Marc Deplaix,
COCOM,
France
3. WG 141: Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways
WG 141 consists of governmental
experts and consultants concerning
planning and maintenance of
waterway infrastructure, users and
developers of ship handling
simulators and skippers
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 9
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
5/142
www.baw.de
4. Content of the future report with examples
1. INTRODUCTION
2. DISCUSSION OF EXISTING GUIDELINES
3. DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING WATERWAYS – PRACTICE
4. TECHNICAL INFORMATION5. CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE QUALITY
6. RECOMMENDED STEPS IN WATERWAY DESIGN
7. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SPECIAL DESIGN ASPECTS (dimensions of
canals, fairways in rivers, junctions, turning basins, bridge openings, lock
approaches, berthing and waiting areas, harbour entrances)
8. CONCLUSIONS
9. APPENDIVCES
EXISTING GUIDELINES
PRACTICAL EXAMPLES
EASE QUALITY EXAMPLES
APPLICATION EXAMPLES
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 10
www.baw.de
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
Contribution
of WG 141
report to the
planning
process of
waterway
infrastructure
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 11
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
6/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
Contribution
of WG 141
report to the
planning
process ofwaterway
infrastructure
Our report can (clearly) not support all the usual steps in planning
of a waterway infrastructure, but it supports one of the most
important aspects: The safety and ease of navigation!
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 12
www.baw.de
Chapter 2: DISCUSSION OF EXISTING GUIDELINES
Country BLA/B LLA/L
China 3.5 - 4.5 (s) 3.5 - 4.0
7.0 (d) 3.0 - 3.5*
Dutch 2.2 (s) 1.0 - 1.2
French 2.9 (s) 0.5
Germany
3 - 4 (s)
2.2
Example lock approach
breadth BLA and length LLA
(double locks, upper harbour)
River BLA/BLLA/L
Main 2.8 (d) , 1.8 (s) ~ 2.5Neckar 8.3 (t), 2.6 (d),
2.3 (s)0.7 – 1.4
Nederrijn
(Lek)2.9 (s) 6.3 (s)
Maas 8.2 (t), 4.9 (d),9.4 (s)
4.3 (t), 3.3 (d)4.6 (s)
Average
8.3 (t), 3.6 (d),
4.1 (s)
3.5 (t,d,s)
d = double lock, s = single lock, t = triple lock
Data from guidelines
Data from practice
The data vary widely!It seems that especially the lock approach
lengths were chosen according to the
available space (as long as feasible), not the
necessary space.
LLA
BLA
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 13
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
7/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 2: DISCUSSION OF EXISTING GUIDELINES
Example lock approach
breadth BLA and length LLA
(double locks, upper harbour)
LLA
BLA
Lock approach widths and lengths
depend on each other, depending on
the “driving style”.
• Stopping in front of the lock in anapproach requires a wider
entrance, but reduced lengths!
• If the pilot is forced to stop inside
the approach, BLA can be smaller,
but LLA longer!
Caution if one uses the smallest
dimensions each for length and
width e.g. from existing
guidelines!
ou e oc s, upper ar our
B
Nevertheless, one needs concrete waterway dimensions at least for preliminary
design, that means, before a detailed study can start, because simulation or scale
model tests need the geometry and the flow field of the lock approach!
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 14
www.baw.de
Chapter 3: DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING
WATERWAYS – PRACTICE (example fairway in rivers)
• Fairway data from different rivers, interpreted as to be limited by buoys
• Interpretation according to usual usage one-lane or two-lane
• US data according to model tests
• Calculated fairway width according to guidelines for comparison
Practical data replace data from guidelines because there are only few information available
• There was no
significant
influence of flow
velocity
detectable, apartfrom US guidelines
• The influence of
curvature was
significant and
about the same as
for empty vessels
according to Dutchguidelines
n=2 3 4
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 15
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
8/142
www.baw.de
• Classification of reference vessels
• Design relevant properties of waterway types
• Design relevant aspects of driving dynamics
“Driving Dynamics
of Inland Vessels”
(soon available in
English)
Association for
European Inland
Navigation and
Waterways
Chapter 4: TECHNICAL INFORMATION
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 16
www.baw.de
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
Why? • Different boundary conditions in our waterways(vessels, environment, waterway properties) lead to
different s&e qualities
• Different international guidelines reflect these different
boundary conditions and so, demand for different s&e
standards
• There are several rational reasons speaking e.g. for
higher necessary or lower acceptable standards
designation
A nearly unrestricted
driveB moderate to
strongly restricted
drive
C strongly restricted
drive
How? • Definition of three different ease qualities (standards)
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 17
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
9/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
Why? • Different boundary conditions in our waterways(vessels, environment, waterway properties) lead to
different s&e qualities
• Different international guidelines reflect these different
boundary conditions and so, demand for different s&estandards
• There are several rational reasons speaking e.g. for a
higher necessary or lower acceptable standards
How? • Definition of three different ease qualities (standards)
• Concept Design (simplified approach):
• All the recommended waterway dimensions are
assigned to ease qualities B
w
W = 4 B W = 3 B
Example fairway widthin straight canals
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 18
www.baw.de
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
Why? • Different boundary conditions in our waterways(vessels, environment, waterway properties) lead to
different s&e qualities
• Different international guidelines reflect these different
boundary conditions and so, demand for different s&e
standards
• There are several rational reasons speaking e.g. for a
higher necessary or lower acceptable standards
How? • Definition of three different ease qualities (standards)
• Concept Design (simplified approach):
• All the recommended waterway dimensions are
assigned to ease qualities
• A scoring system helps to define the necessary
ease quality for design – and thus, the
appropriate waterway dimension, e.g. W=4B in
case of ease quality between A and B
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 19
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
10/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
Why? • Different boundary conditions in our waterways(vessels, environment, waterway properties) lead to
different s&e qualities
• Different international guidelines reflect these different
boundary conditions and so, demand for different s&estandards
• There are several rational reasons speaking e.g. for a
higher necessary or lower acceptable standards
How? • Definition of three different ease qualities (standards)
• Concept Design (simplified approach):
• All the recommended waterway dimensions are
assigned to ease qualities
• A scoring system helps to define the necessaryease quality for design – and thus, the
appropriate waterway dimension, e.g. W=4B in
case of ease quality between A and B
• Concept Design sim
•
e ine the necess r es gn an t us, t e
ppropr ate waterway mens on, e.g. =
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 20
www.baw.de
approach):
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
How?
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 21
(8) Determine the decisive design case,
e.g. the one with the largest necessary
waterway dimensions
(2) Assess the necessary s&e quali ty for
design (“dc”) with the simplified approach
Compare s&e scores of (2) and (3)
and modify if necessary the ease
reference case
(3) Choose an ease reference case
(“erc”), having the same s&e quality
as “dc”(check applying the simplified &
detailed approach)
(4) Check the sensitivity of the ease scores
of “pnc” and “erc”
(6) Perform the design, using the ConceptDesign Method, the Practice Approach
and/or the Detailed Design Method and
compare the results Go back to (1), (2) and (3) if the decisive
design case was initially not clear
(1) Analyze the s&e quality of the present
nautical condition(s) (“pnc”) with thesimplified approach
(5) Specify the aspired ease standards for
the design case
Adapt the weighting factors of the simplifiedand detailed s&e approach if necessary
Results: s&e quality, especially for the
decisive design cases
(7) Check ease quality of “dc” and “erc”
with the detailed approach: Should be the
same!
simplified detaileds&e approach
2 Assess the s&e quali ty or
ease reference caseChoose an
(“erc ing the same”), hav s&e quality
as “dc ck applying the simplified &che
roachdetailed a
ase quality of dc” and erc”
tailed approach: Should be the
) Check the sensi
o
or
design (“dc”) with the simplified approach
(7) Check
with the d
same!
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
11/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
How? • Case by Case Design (detailed approach):
• Relevant results from simulations or field
data will be transferred into appropriate s&e
scores and matched to a comprehensive score
Group Subgroup Characteristic value from simulations
E x p l o i t a t i o n
o f
r e s o u r c e s
Waterway
related
Percentage of permitted speed
Percentage of critical speed
Bank distance
Swept area width
Vessel related Main rudder angle
Percentage of bow thruster power used
Percentage of main power usage
D r i v i n g
d i f f i c u l t y
a n d
h a n d i c a p s
Human related
Number of rudder actions (incl. bow thruster)per minute
Standard deviation of swept area width
Vessel related Standard deviation of rpm
Standard deviation of main rudder angles
Rudder angular velocity
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 22
www.baw.de
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
How? • Case by Case Design (detailed approach):
• All the results of simulations or field data will
be transferred into appropriate s&e scores
and matched to a comprehensive score
Significant
rudder angle,
e.g. 20
Usual peak value,
e.g. 30
Rudder angle producing
max. crosswise force,
e.g. 45 for twin rudders
Geometrically max.rudder angle of the
design vessel
The score can be chosenaccording to the ease scoresof the simplified approach
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 23
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
12/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
How? • Case by Case Design (detailed approach):
• All the results of simulations or field data will
be transferred into appropriate s&e scores
and matched to a comprehensive score
Time series of rudder angles Time series of
ease scores
Transformation
into ease
scores
The average ease score inthe time interval of interestdefines an ease quality o flevel B (in our example)
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 24
www.baw.de
Chapter 5: CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY AND EASE
How? • Case by Case Design (detailed approach):
• All the results of simulations or field data will
be transferred into appropriate s&e scores
and matched to a comprehensive score
Time series of rudder angles Time series of
ease scores
Transformation
into ease
scores
The average ease score inthe time interval of interestdefines an ease quality o flevel B (in our example)
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 25
an matc e to a co
Time
e
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
13/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 6: RECOMMENDED (3) DESIGN STEPS
Concept Design
• Choose appropriate s&e quality
• Perform the design e.g.
concerning necessary fairway
width by adding the “basic
width” + increments• Check applicability limits
Compare results
from Concept
and PracticePractice Approach
• Use practical data provided
by WG 141 comparable to
design case considered
• Use data from previous or
similar projects
• Check application limits
Use national guidelines if
available and applicable
Use international
guidelines if applicable
and accepted instead
Finalize Design
If Concept Design
and Practice deliver
reliable results
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 26
www.baw.de
Chapter 6: RECOMMENDED (3) DESIGN STEPS
Concept Design
• Choose appropriate s&e quality
• Perform the design e.g.
concerning necessary fairway
width by adding the “basic
width” + increments
• Check applicability limits
Compare resultsfrom Concept
and PracticePractice Approach
• Use practical data provided
by WG 141 comparable to
design case considered
• Use data from previous or
similar projects
• Check application limits
Use national guidelines if
available and applicable
Use international
guidelines if applicable
and accepted instead
Finalize Design
If Concept Design
and Practice deliver
reliable results
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 27
BLABLA
flow towards
weir
LLA
approach flow
velocity vFlow
Still
water
average crosswise
flow velocity vc
cross-
flow
zone
L
B
Sailing fast relative to water (requires stoppinginside lock approach and thus longer LLA):
Assuming vFlow/vSW 0.3
BLA (one lane) 2B + bc 2.6 B
Data from guidelinesConcept Design
Example lockapproach width
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
14/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 6: RECOMMENDED (3) DESIGN STEPS
Concept Design
• Choose appropriate s&e quality
• Perform the design e.g.
concerning necessary fairway
width by adding the “basic
width” + increments• Check applicability limits
Compare results
from Concept
and PracticePractice Approach
• Use practical data provided
by WG 141 comparable to
design case considered
• Use data from previous or
similar projects
• Check application limits
Use national guidelines if
available and applicable
Use international
guidelines if applicable
and accepted instead
Finalize Design
If Concept Design
and Practice deliver
reliable results
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 28
BLA
flow towards
weir
LLA
approach flow
velocity vFlow
Still
water
average crosswise
flow velocity vc
cross-
flow
zone
L
B
Sailing fast relative to water (requires stoppinginside lock approach and thus longer LLA):
Assuming vFlow/vSW 0.3
BLA (one lane) 2B + bc 2.6 B
Data from guidelinesConcept Design
Example lockapproach width
C
r
If
a
r
li
i
ous or
cts
application limits
Data from guid
ractice Approac
se p-flow
g
www.baw.de
Chapter 6: RECOMMENDED (3) DESIGN STEPS
Concept Design
• Choose appropriate s&e quality
• Perform the design e.g.
concerning necessary fairway
width by adding the “basic
width” + increments
• Check applicability limits
Compare resultsfrom Concept
and PracticePractice Approach
• Use practice data provided
by WG 141 comparable to
design case considered
• Use data from previous or
similar projects
• Check application limits
Use national guidelines if
available and applicable
Use international
guidelines if applicable
and accepted instead
Finalize Design
If application limits
are exceeded (e.g.
if flow velocity is
too high) or if there
are other good
arguments for a
Case by Case Study
Detailed Design
• Choice of method & modelling,
• Performance of the detaileddesign study
• Interpretation of results
• Check of decisive design cases
• Feedback to planners
Compare results
from all 3 methods
+ preliminary
projects
If Concept Design
and Practice deliver
reliable results
If the results are
resilient
Use Concept Design as preliminary design
bathymetry and flow field for the detailed design
Concept Design
• Choose appropriate s&e quality
• Perform the design e.g.
concerning necessary fairway
width by adding the “basic
width” + increments
• Check applicability limits
Compare resultsfrom Concept
and Practiceractice Approach
• Use practice data provided
y WG 141 comparable to
design case considered
• Use data from previous or
similar ro ects
Use national guidelines if
available and applicable
Use international
guidelines if applicable
and accepted instead
If Concept Design
and Practice deliver
reliable results
Check application limits
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 29
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
15/142
www.baw.de
(1) Prepare and check data basis
(2) Check modelling capacity
(6) Choose the ease reference
case “erc” (may also be identical
to “pnc”)
(8) Simulate the design case “dc”,
analyse the ease quality, compare itwith “erc” and adjust “dc” if necessary
(3) Perform simulations for thepresent nautical conditions
“pnc”
(9) Interpret 1st the simulations,
using differences between “dc”
and ”pnc”, use the result of (8) as
a 2nd approach, use 3rd the simu-
lations directly (absolute values)and account for 4th experiences
Modelling
Calibration
M o d e l V e r i f i c a t i o n
Comparative analysis
(4) Choose the verification
reference case “vrc” (may be
identical to “pnc”)(5) Simulate the verification
reference case “vrc” and
compare it with field data
(7) Simulate “erc” and adjust if
necessary the “s&e” approach
Interpretation
Support to check modelling
capability and s&e approach
Excursus: Application of simulation techniques
Application of s&e
approach
(8) Simulate the design case “dc”,
analyse the ease quality, compare itwith “erc and adjust “dc” if necessary
(7) Simulate “erc” and adjust if
necessary the “s&e” approach
(6) Choose the ease reference
case “erc (may also be identical
to “pnc”)
Comparative
considerations
(9) Interpret 1s the simulations,
using differences between “dc”
and ”pnc”, use the result of (8) as
a 2n approach, use 3r the simu-
lations directly (absolute values)and account for 4th experiences
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 30
www.baw.de
GMS Hanna Krieger , coupled in front of pusher Vogel
Gryff, simulating a üGMS
28 m net width in draught
depth between foundations
24 m net width in headroom
Ship positions of GMS, approximately mean water
level (MW)
Excursus: Application of simulation techniques (fast time)
Example German Neckar River: Future
passage of narrow Jagstfeld Bridge by
135 m long Class b vessels
Application of field data for
analysing the present nautical
conditions, to check the modelling
capacity and to define the ease
reference case: here empty GMS at
highest navigable stage!
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 31
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
16/142
www.baw.de
“erc” “dc”
All the scores of “dc” are a bit lower than those for
“erc”, but not very much! Therefore, widening
of the fairway does not seem to be
absolutely necessary (only wind)!
Excursus: Application of simulation techniques (fast time)
lutely necessary (only wi
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 32
www.baw.de
What about keeping safety margins between
bridge piers and not using the entire installed
bow thruster power (42%)?
Excursus: Application of simulation techniques (fast time)
Keeping safety
margins between
bridge piers
8 m
exceedingof safety
margins
downstream
of thebridge
Taking extra widths into account for
instabilities & human factor and wind
increments (Dutch “rule of thumb” 0.05 L)
one ends up with 17 m necessary widening!
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 33
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
17/142
www.baw.de
(1) Prepare and check data basis
(2) Check modelling capacity
(6) Choose the ease reference
case “erc” (may also be identical
to “pnc”)
(8) Simulate the design case “dc”,
analyse the ease quality, compare itwith “erc” and adjust “dc” if necessary
(3) Perform simulations for thepresent nautical conditions
“pnc”
(9) Interpret 1st the simulations,
using differences between “dc”
and ”pnc”, use the result of (8) as
a 2nd approach, use 3rd the simu-
lations directly (absolute values)and account for 4th experiences
Modelling
Calibration
M o d e l V e r i f i c a t i o n
Comparative analysis
(4) Choose the verification
reference case “vrc” (may be
identical to “pnc”)(5) Simulate the verification
reference case “vrc” and
compare it with field data
(7) Simulate “erc” and adjust if
necessary the “s&e” approach
Interpretation
Support to check modelling
capability and s&e approach
Excursus: Application of simulation techniques
Concept Design -routing methods
hoose the ease reference
erc (may also be identical
to “pnc”)
n
Choose the verification
rence case “vrc” (may be
identical to “pnc”)
t to check modelling
lity and s&e approach
(8) Simulate the design case “dc”,
analyse the easewi “
(9) In
usin
and ”
rati
(4)
f
po
abi
oachr
i
a 2n ap
lations dand acc
, mpare itand adjust “dc” if necessary
ary the “s&e”
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 34
www.baw.de
Generally recommended
steps in waterway design
Excursus: Application of simulation techniques
Generall recommen
steps in water
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 35
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
18/142
www.baw.de
Chapter 7: SPECIAL RECOMMENDATIONS (example)
7.2 Canal cross section and fairway width7.2.1 Definition7.2.2 Scaling parameters7.2.3 Precision and data needed (check lists)
7.2.4 Concept Design with respect to s&e7.2.5 Extensions by adding increments7.2.6 Review international guidelines7.2.7 Practice examples7.2.8 Detailed design7.2.9 Recommended additional information
Bank impact from bow and main thruster and “body contact”
Model tests at DST in a very narrow canal (OHW); ES
(9,5x85, camera), ballasted (0,7/1,8), meets GMS
(11,45; 2,5/2,5), 2,2 m net space in draught depth
ow
x ens ons y a ng ncremeReview internationaPractice e
onal information
an mpact rom
Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways (PIANC INCOM WG 141), Bernhard Söhngen
SMART RIVERS 2015, 09.09.2015 Page 38
Bundesanstalt für Wasserbau
76187 Karlsruhe, Germany
www.baw.de
Thank you for your attention
For further questions do not hesitate to contact:
Prof. Dr. Bernhard Söhngen
bernhard.soehngen@baw.de
phone: 0049-721-9726-4600
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Paper 34 - Workshop on Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways, Introduction to WG 141 Approach and Findings
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
19/142
5/10/2015
1
Otto Koedijk MSc
Rijkswaterstaat WVL / TU Delft
The role of classification and
reference vessels in the design of inland
waterways for commercial vessels –
Pianc WG 141. Paper No. 21
Buenos Aires, Argentina, 7-11 September 2015
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Introduction (1)
• Speaker :
• Otto C. Koedijk MSc, Netherlands
• Former professional captain (inland + sea)
• Senior advisor Rijkswaterstaat WVL,
waterway design (from traffic point of view)
• Lecturer TU Delft, Ports and Waterways
• Pianc: member of Pianc Commission
InCom and WG’s 141 & 179
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
20/142
5/10/2015
2
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Introduction (2)
• Subject: the role of classification and
reference vessels in the design of inland
waterways for commercial vessels
• Use of reference vessel and classification
• Classification: the example of Europe
• Reference vessel: concept and use
• Design of inland waterways
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Use of reference vessel andclassification
• Designing an inland waterway ->
first determine vesseltypes and –dimensions
• How to determine them?
-> by using the appropriate classification (if
available)
-> by selecting the appropriate reference- or
design vessel
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
21/142
5/10/2015
3
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Classification: the European
example (1)• History of the European (CEMT)
classification
-> 1879 standardisation started in France:
9000 km canal built for Peniche ship type
(38.5 x 5.05 m)
-> 20th century Germany Dortmund-Ems
canal (73.0 x 8.20m) and Rhein-Hernecanal (85 x 9.50 m)
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Classification: the Europeanexample (2)
• From 1954 on, European transport
Ministers resoluted on a European
classification (CEMT)
• Current CEMT classification is from 1992
-> CEMT ’92 based on Pianc WG 9 report
‘Standardization of Inland Waterway’s Dimensions’
-> CEMT ‘54 no provisions for push convoys
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
22/142
5/10/2015
4
5-10-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2013”
1992
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Pianc WG 179: l’histoire serépe`te
• CEMT ‘92 no provisions for larger
motorvessels (e.g. 135 x 17 m) and
coupled units
• Misunderstandigs exist among the
different countries• I wrote the ToR; Pianc WG 179 started in
June 2015 and can still use participants!
• WG 179 same approach as WG 9
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
23/142
5/10/2015
5
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Reference vessel – starting
point for design• Reference vessel: biggest vessel in a
certain waterway class
• If there are different ship types, a
reference vessel should be determined for
each category
• In Europe, categories are motorvessels,
pushed convoys and coupled units• Example of 1st category in next slide:
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Characteristics of referencemotor cargo vessels
• Source table below: Dutch Guidelines for Waterways 2011
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
24/142
5/10/2015
6
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Lack of classification
• If no classification is available, the
region/country should construct one, e.g.
by drawing a squatter diagram from the
existing fleet and clustering it in logical
classes.
• This is what Rijkswaterstaat did in 2002
and 2010 (see next slides).
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2013”
FLEET OF MOTORVESSELS IN 2002, PLOTTED AFTER LENGTH (HORIZONTAL AXIS) AND
BEAM (VERTICAL AXIS)
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
25/142
5/10/2015
7
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2013”
RWS 2010
Classification (left part)
Source: Dutch
Guidelines for
Waterways 2011
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2013”
RWS 2010 Classification(right part)
Source: Dutch Guidelines
for Waterways 2011
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
26/142
5/10/2015
8
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Choice for reference vessel
• primarily based on the horizontal
dimensions, with the ships beam as most
important factor
• is to be made by the administrator of the
fairway. He can choose for different
dimensions than the class if thisrepresents the studied fairway better
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Design of waterway
• Having selected the proper reference
vessel, the waterway can be designed by
using guidelines (if available) and, in
specific cases, ship handling simulators
• This process is treated by others in this
Workshop, given by WG 141
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
27/142
5/10/2015
9
08-09-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Completion
• References• 1. European Conference of Ministers of Transport CEMT/ECMT), Athens 11 – 12 June 1992,
Resolution No. 92/2 on new classification of inland waterways (including reccomendations and
notes for table). .
• 2. Pianc Working Group no. 9, 1990, Standardization of Inland Waterway’s.
• 3. Brolsma, J.U. and K. Roelse 2011, Waterway Guidelines 2011 (meant for waterway
design from a vessel traffic perspective), Rijkswaterstaat Dienst Verkeer en Scheepvaart.
(http://www.rijkswaterstaat.nl/en/images/Waterway%20guidelines%202011_tcm224-320740.pdf)
• Questions?
• Thank you for your attention!
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
28/142
5/10/2015
1
DEPLAIX J.-M.
Member, Cooperation Commission (CoCom) of PIANC
EXISTING WATERWAYS
with special respect of CHINA, &
EASE OF NAVIGATION
Buenos Aires, Argentina, 7-11 September 2015
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Dutch waterways total 6 105 km,
spread as follows as regards size
Craft size ITF
Class length (km)
of which
leisure
network
3 000 t andover
Vb andover
751
108
1 500-2 999 t
Va
1297
512
1 000-1 499 t IV 741 324
650-999 t III 259 165
400-649 t II 1091 686
250-399 t I 511 405
below 250 t 0 1455 1455
TOTAL 6105 3655
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
29/142
5/10/2015
2
10/5/2015
The WAAL River is the largest arm of the Rhine inthe Netherlands; it flows for 87km towards Rotterdam
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Width is 150 m by 2.80 m (depth) below the water level of OLR
(agreed lowest water level). Target minimal width is 170 m.
The Waal is navigated by 116.000 commercial vesselsannually in 4-lane traffic. Reference vessel is a push convoy VIc
(6 barges) with draught of 4.00 m.
10/5/2015
AMSTERDAM-RHINE CANAL
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
This large canal aims at being the continuation of
the Waal, and accepts the same 6 barges tows than
the Waal and the Rhine in Germany. It has a traffic
of 70.000 vessels/year
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
30/142
5/10/2015
3
10/5/2015
JULIANA CANAL
The Juliana Canal is being improved for longer craft,from Class Va/Via (135x14m) to Vb/Vib (185x14m),
which also involves widening the canal, and lengthening
the locks, both underway. Traffic is 22.000 vessels/year
North-South Emden-Maastricht route is being improved
to ITF Vb (185x11,40m)“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
IJSSEL• The IJssel is a branch of the river Rhine and flows
northerly from Arnhem over 120 km to the Iake
IJsselmeer.
The channel width in the IJssel varies from 40x2.5m
(upper part) up to 60x2.8m (lower part), yet it is
navigated by 36.000 commercial vessels/year
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
31/142
5/10/2015
4
10/5/2015
GERMANY
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Craft size ITF Class length
(km)
3 000 t and over Vb and over 2993
1 500-2 999 t Va 1002
1 000-1 499 t
IV
1781
650-999 t III 233
400-649 t II 252
250-399 t I 404
below 250 t 0 1012
TOTAL 7675
Germany has the longest network in Western Europe
The main waterway is the Rhine, which has large characteristics,
except at some narrow stretches (Gebirge, Lorelei, etc.). Other
rivers are the Main, the Mosel and the Neckar, in the Rhine basin,
and the Elbe, closer to Berlin
10/5/2015
RHINEThe Rhine is navigated over 900km, out of which 740km in
Germany. Traffic is 135.000 craft/year at the border.
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
River
Rhine drive
Section km direction length (m) beam (m) depth width Radius width
287-334 up&downstream 270/193 22,9 3,00
334-344 up&downs tream 193 22,9 2,10
344-359,8 up&downstream 193 22,9
359,8-424 up&downstream 193/153b
22,9/34,35b
424-508 up&downstream 193/153b
22,9/34,35b
508-540,2 up&downstream 193/153b
22,9/34,35b 1560 120
540,2 - upstream 186,5/193c 22,9
556 downstream 116,5/193c
22,90/12,50c
556 - upstream 186,5/193c 22,9
564,3 downstream 116,5/193c
22,90/12,50c
564,3 upstream 269,50e
22,9d,e
763 downstream 193e
34,35d,e
763 upstream 269,50e
22,9d,e
863 downstream 193e
34,35d,e
Self-propelled vessels can be upto 135x22,80m everywhere on the Rhine, except
during droughts or floods at the Lorelei (110m)
670 92
600
(Lorelei) 120
92
120
120
120
150
150
push tows
guaranteed
fairway (m)
1,90
2,10
curvature of
worst bend (m)
1260 88
2,10
88
2,80 1430 150
2,50 670 150
2,10
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
32/142
5/10/2015
5
10/5/2015
Mittellandkanal
This canal links the Ruhr region on the Rhine withBerlin.
Since reunification it is being improved to its new
characteristics, for design craft of
185x11.5x2.80m. Its traffic is around 22Mt“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
FRANCEWith more than 8 000 km, French network was
the longest of Europe, but most of it is composed
of small Freycinet canals (250t capacity) or
unused.
Many waterways are not used anymore for goods
transportation and are not reported in recent statistics.
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Craft size ITF Class length (km)
3 000 t and over Vb and over 1420
1 500-2 999 t
Va
343
1 000-1 499 t IV 118
650-999 t III 126
400-649 t II 85
250-399 t I 2742
below 250 t 0 162
TOTAL 4996
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
33/142
5/10/2015
6
10/5/2015
The main waterway is the Seine River, passing through Paris. Its
traffic is around 22 Mt.
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Since there are few shallow parts, the guaranteed depth is
only 1.15 times the design draught. On most of the route,
depth is over 5 m.
The canalized Deule River is part of the Seine
Scheldt project. It is located between Lille and the
Belgium
border.
The design channel (navigation rectangle) is
34x4m. for craft 185x11,45m, with 3 m draught.
Its traffic is 5.2 Mt
10/5/2015
DEULE WATERWAY
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
34/142
5/10/2015
7
10/5/2015
BELGIUM
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Although its territory is small, Belgium has a relatively large network, and 60%
of it belong to Class IV and beyond
Craft size
ITF Class
length
(km)
3 000 t and over
Vb and
over 252
1 500-2 999 t Va 248
1 000-1 499 t IV 431
650-999 t III 0
400-649 t II 216
250-399 t
I
338
below 250 t 0 31
TOTAL
1516
The main inland waterway is the Albert Canal, linking Liège with the port of
Antwerp. The main rivers are the Meuse, upstream from Liège, and the Scheldt,
canalized upstream of Gent, and tidal between Gent and Antwerp.
10/5/2015
ALBERT CANAL
It is being widened to the new cross section of
102x72x5 m, with locks 24 m wide. Its traffic is in
the range of 40 Mt.
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
This 130 km canal is quite large, with locks 200x24 m,
enabling pushed convoys 196x12,5x3,40 m to pass,
except at some places.
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
35/142
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
36/142
5/10/2015
9
10/5/2015
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
Fairway dimensions seem restricted compared to Europe. But in
fact the river is much larger, the Corps of Engineers is bound to
maintain and dredge a channel, yet nature provides more.
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Mississippi River[m]
Shallow draught fleet used Guaranteed
fairway
length beam draught depth width
Head of Passes, LA
to New Orleans, LA 540
86,0
13
13,7
228,6
New Orleans, LA to
Baton Rouge, LA
480 86,0 13 13,7 152,4
Baton Rouge, LA
to Cairo, IL 480 75,0 2,7+ 3,65 91,5
Cairo, IL
to St. Louis, MO 360 32,0 2,7 2,7 91,5
St. Louis, MO to
Minneapolis, MN
180 32,0 2,7 2,7 91,5
10/5/2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
Baton Rouge, LA
to Cairo, IL 480 75,0 2,7+ 3,65 91,5
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
37/142
5/10/2015
10
10/5/2015
476x64m and 355x85.3m in a 91m channel !“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Baton Rouge, LA
to Cairo, IL 480 75,0 2,7+ 3,65 91,5
10/5/2015
TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE
The Tenn-Tom waterway is a divide canal
linking 2 basins
The cut canal on the divide is 3,65 m deep
and 85 m wide. Trafic is around 7Mt
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
38/142
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
39/142
5/10/2015
12
10/5/2015
CHINESE CLASSIFICATION
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
CHINESE CLASSIFICATION
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
40/142
5/10/2015
13
10/5/2015
Why is it useful to have a
detailed Classification ?• If you compare only the depth,
• Both waterways are equal !
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
38 barges counted for zero ?• If you insist on a guaranteed
depth as sole criteria, this river,
Orinoco, would rank very low,
with less than 1.5m of
guaranteed depth, but is nearly
equal to Mississippi during thenavigation season
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
41/142
5/10/2015
14
10/5/2015
HUMAN FACTOR ALSO has to be taken into
account. The chairman of our working group is
using these results to prove the point:
These graphs show
the swept area width
of a manually steered
craft (top) and that
made with autopilot
(below)
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
Another important factor is speed: in USA, they
round the bends slowly, even « Heeling » to pass
safely in a sandy river
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
42/142
5/10/2015
15
10/5/2015
SAFETY & EASE
These are the various factors influencing waterway design
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
(Waterway related criteria)
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
43/142
5/10/2015
16
10/5/2015
There are two different ways to
use the left table: If you look at
an existing waterway, a smallfairway width describes a poor
waterway, while for design a
narrow fairway requires a
better design on all other
counts, a better ease.
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
• In thinking of a new design (Design case), a high quality waterway (A) will be
indicated when most criteria are in the red column, with few green, to prepare
for possible dangers. Accordingly, lower standards B and C may be
accepted, when more green show in the analysis, with more safety ensured.
• However, if observing an existing waterway (Analysis case), things are
reverse, and green arguments denote a good waterway, while red arguments
denote dangerous parts of the network. Here are some examples:
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
44/142
5/10/2015
17
10/5/2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
45/142
5/10/2015
18
10/5/2015
These figures of traffic are the same as in the Dutch
Guidelines and may have to be adjusted in other countriesThey sum traffic in both driving directions.
Leasure traffic is also to be accounted for, as it dramatically
impacts the ease of navigation for commercial vessels
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
46/142
5/10/2015
19
10/5/2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
47/142
5/10/2015
20
10/5/2015
OTHER FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR
GUIDELINES OR CLASSIFICATION
• All this attention to “Ease related to Safety” is mostly an attention to actual
circumstances. Like any complex structure, Guidelines are the result of conflictingconstraints, criteria and elements. Here are some other factors to which attention
should be paid.
• INTERNAL CONSTRAINTS: TYPE 0F WATERWAY AND LEVEL
0F TRAFFIC
• Type of Waterways: we shall see in detail.
• Degrees of roughness of the water bodies (canals, rivers, lakes, estuaries, open sea);
• Level of traffic expected. less stringent criteria on a waterway with little traffic; better
profitability in the economic calculations; such an approach was approved by PIANC
at its Centenary congress in 1985, at the request of the UNESCAP secretariat, then
represented by the author.
• Existing waterways used by craft larger than classification would point to. Thus three
levels of design appear appropriate: one for existing infrastructure, one for future
waterways of low traffic and one for future waterways of high traffic. This is link
between craft and waterway characteristics.
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
OTHER FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR
GUIDELINES OR CLASSIFICATION
• AN EXTERNAL CONSTRAINT: AVERAGE SHIPMENT SIZE
• Each flow of traffic, each commodity has its requisites. Each customer likes to have
his deliveries tailored to his needs, while each fleet operator wants to have the largest
unit shipment size; however one cannot force upon a customer 5,000 tonnes of
goods at one time if he has no storage space, if the commodity does not permit long
storage or if it has a relatively high value. The cost of prolonged storage often
outweighs the savings offered by large shipments.
• So the service must be frequent enough to suit the customer, and shipment size is
the result of a trade-off between the financial costs and the transport cost; IWT ischeaper if it involves for instance ten trips of 1,000 tonnes rather than 100 trips of 100
tonnes, but in a global, logistics perspective this may not be so for the customer.
• This over —riding consideration obliged to have craft of varied dimensions, barred
networks to be completely uniform, and led to a graded classification to encompass
all cases.
• TECHNICAL RESPONSE : FR0M CUSTOM BUILT CRAFT TO MULTI-MODAL
INTEGRATION
• Thus the average shipment size is a variable external to the technical design of a
waterway. To solve this difficulty, craft were traditionally designed to match this
average capacity; or they would also have sub-divisions, either holds or hatches,
which could be isolated and devoted to one commodity or one customer
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
48/142
5/10/2015
21
10/5/2015
OTHER FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR
GUIDELINES OR CLASSIFICATION
• The recent tendency to multimodal integration led to introducing handling units of the
appropriate size, be it internal containers (5 tonnes), ISO container (20 to 30 tonnes),LASH barges (350 tonnes), or even Danube-Seabee barges (800—1000 tonnes).
• IWT can accept a spectrum of shipment sizes, from 5 tonnes up to 80,000 tonnes in
the United States, and 32,000 tonnes in China, Brasil or Argentina, but at the same
time the craft sizes show less dispersion: containers are consolidated in one barge,
while the above large shipment in America is made up of 60 x 1250 tonnes barges in
a convoy.
• Thus integration, through the pushing technique, offer another alternative, by
combining small unit craft and a much bigger global convoy capacity. It retains the
economy of scale of a large power plant while barges are of adapted, smaller size.
• So the criteria of the number of craft in the moving unit, and of the modularity of the
respective craft have been incorporated in the ITF classification (former CEMT
classification).
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
OTHER FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR
GUIDELINES OR CLASSIFICATION
• DETERMINATION OF CLASSES: DEADWEIGHT OR CRAFT DIMENSION?
• Actually these two approaches complement each other. Reference to deadweight is
more adapted to describing an existing, diverse network, while reference to the craft
dimensions is most useful in the planning of networks.
• One could say that classification using craft dimensions as a base are adapted to the
national planning of waterways, while reference to deadweight intervals is more
suited for an international classification aiming at describing networks in more than
one country.
• Countries like Russia and China, enjoying the first and second longest waterwaynetworks in the world, have developed complex classifications which incorporate both
approaches, because they must at the same time describe their very diverse
networks, and plan the upgrading or construction of new waterways and fleet. As can
be seen in Annex, the ITF classification, although less precise, has evolved and has a
structure similar to that of Russia or China.
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
49/142
5/10/2015
22
10/5/2015
That is why a long analysis is needed to
deal with any waterway“SMART RIVERS 2015”
10/5/2015
Thanks for your attention
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
50/142
www.bmvi.de
Workshop “Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways” Paper 101 - ApplyingConcept Design Method – Practice Approach – Case by Case Design
PIANC – INCOM WG 141
Katja Rettemeier & Bernhard Söhngen
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Buenos Aires, 18-09-2015
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Wide variety of boundary conditions
determining the design
Variety in bathymetric and flow conditions
Variety in traffic density, vessel types
Variety in tradition of shipping
Variety in safety and ease demands …
Limited information available
Rivers (in general) and high flow velocities
Special dimensions as harbor intakes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yangtze-Ships.JPG
Yangtze, China
General Approach in Inland Waterway Design
It is not appropriate to give one specific number for
designing a waterway dimension. WG 141 provides
process recommendations instead (3 step approach)!
„Binnenschiffahrt in Köln“ von Rolf Heinrich, Köln. Lizenziert unter CC BY 3.0 über
Wikimedia Commons -https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Binnenschiffahrt_in_K%C3%B6ln.jpg#/media/File:
Binnenschiffahrt_in_K%C3%B6ln.jpg
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
51/142
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
52/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Classification reflects each country‘s fleet
Class DWT (t) Design vessel [m]length beam draught
I 250-400 38,5 5.05 2.5
II 400-650 50-55 6.6 2.6
III 650-1000 67-85 8.2 2.7
IVa 1000-1500 80-105 9.5 3.0
IVb 1250-1450 170-185 9.5 3.0
Va 1500-3000 110-135 11.4 3.5
Vb 3200-6000 170-190 11.4 3.5-4.0
European CEMT
Class Va Vessel
Class IV Convoy
„Freudenberg Main“ von Presse03 - Eigenes Werk. Lizenziert unter CC BY-SA 3.0 über
Wikimedia Commons - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Freudenberg_Main.jpg#/media/File:Freudenberg_Main.jpg
Main, Freudenberg, D
„Main Stadtprozelten“ von Presse03 - Eigenes Werk. Lizenziert unter CC BY-SA 3.0 über W ikimedia Commons -https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Main_Stadtprozelten.JPG#/media/File:Main_Stadtprozelten.JPG
Main, Stadtprozelten, D
Category of Driving(assumption)
actual case: Cat. B
Moderate to strongly restricted drive
design case: Cat. C
Strongly restricted drive (short distance)
165 x 9,6 x 2,5
110 x 11,45 x 2,8
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
E.g. China‘s approach for rivers is based on
specific relations for:
• Swept area width• Bank Clearance
• Passing Distance
• But for restricted curvature radii only
US and German Guidelines take constant (from
vessel type independent) increments for:
• Bank Clearance
• Passing Distance
Dutch Guidelines:
• Distinguish normal & narrow profile
• Take wind increment into account
• Account for high traffic density
http://www.wsa-braunschweig.wsv.de/wasserstrassen/MLK/
„Chinesisches contbinnenschiff“ von Henryvb in der Wikipedia auf Deutsch. Lizenziertunter CC BY-SA 3.0 über Wikimedia Commons -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chinesisches_contbinnenschiff.JPG#/media/File:Chinesisches_contbinnenschiff.JPG
Existing guidelines use partly very different approaches
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
53/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Existing guidelines use partly very different approaches
E.g. China‘s approach for rivers is based on
specific relations for:
• Swept area width
• Bank Clearance
• Passing Distance
• But for restricted curvature radii only
US and German Guidelines take constant (from
vessel type independent) increments for:
• Bank Clearance
• Passing Distance
Dutch Guidelines:
• Distinguish normal & narrow profile
• Take wind increment into account
• Account for high traffic density
http://www.wsa-braunschweig.wsv.de/wasserstrassen/MLK/
„Chinesisches contbinnenschiff“ von Henryvb in der Wikipedia auf Deutsch. Lizenziert
unter CC BY-SA 3.0 über Wikimedia Commons -https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chinesisches_contbinnenschiff.JPG#/media/File:
Chinesisches_contbinnenschiff.JPG
i
‘
en b in der Wikipedia auf Deutsch. Lizenziert
e r
n Guideline
ype independent)
• an earance
• ass ng stance
. .
specific rel
•
ass r s
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Fairway design in Canals:
Concept Design Method
Ship (BxLxD) two-lane one-laneDrivingquality
F/B D/d n F/B D/d category
China
Canal
Average(Class III – VII)
4,4 1,3 7 - - A-B
ChinaChannel
Average(Class II – VII)
4,4 1,4 6-7 - - A-B
ChinaRiver
Average(Class I – VII)
4,4 1,2 - 2,3 1,2 A-B
Dutchnormal
11.45x185x3.5 4.0 1.4 8.7 2 1.3 A-B
Dutchnarrow
11.45x185x2.8 3.0 1.3 6.7 - - B-C
France 11.45x185x2.5 3.1 1.4 5.8 - - B-C
Germany 11.45x185x2.8 3.3 1.4 5.6 1.8 1.4 B-C
Russia 16.5x135x3.5 2.6 1.3 - 1.5 1.3 C
US River 10.7x59.5x2.7 ~3.3 ~1.3 ~4.9 ~2.2 1.3 B-C
Relative waterway dimensions from guidelines
http://www.wna-helmstedt.wsv.de/projekte/mittellandkanal/allgemeines/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canal_%28China%29
Mittellandkanal, Wolfsburg, D
Jiangnan Canal, Yangtze, CH
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
54/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Outline of the Design Case: Side Canal
[m]
actual
situation design case
canal profile vertical and sloped 1:3
driving one lane one lane
wind condition
3-4 Bf
flow velocity [m/s]
0.5
design vessel
CEMT Class Va Vb (length-extended Va)
traffic density [vessel/a]
11000
11000
quality of navigation B C
length 105 135 beam 11.45 11.45
draught
2.70
2.70
squat
0.30
0.30
Cf (turning point) loaded(bow thruster) - empty
0.8 - 1.0 0.8 – 1.0
fairway dimension
net width in 3 m depth 28.0 28.0 depth/draught
1.3
1.3
water depth
3.5
3.5
radius 685 685
extra width in curves
loaded / empty 5.1 / 7.9
8.3 / 13.0
Neckar, Pleidelsheim Canal
28 m
Locks shall be
extended.
But what is in the
reaches between?
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
1. Step: Look at national Guidelines
Check of applicability
Fairway design in Canals: Concept Design Method
0.5 m/s
[m]
actualsituation
designcase
canal profile
vertical and sloped 1:3
driving one lane one lane
wind condition
3-4 Bf
flow velocity [m/s] 0.5
design vessel
CEMT Class
Va
Vb
traffic density [vessel/a] 11000 11000
quality of navigation
B
C
length
105
135
beam 11.45 11.45
draught 2.70 2.70
squat
0.30
0.30
Cf (turning point) loaded
(bow thruster) - empty 0.8 - 1.0
0.8 – 1.0
fairway dimension
net width in 3 m depth 28.0 28.0
depth/draught
1.3
1.3
water depth
3.5
3.5
radius 685 685
extra width in curves
loaded / empty 5.1 / 7.9
8.3 / 13.0
> 500 m< 1.4 (not applicable, but not far from threshold)
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
55/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
1. Step: Look at national Guidelines
Check of applicability
Fairway in straight section (RT-profile, Germany)
Fairway design in Canals: Concept Design Method
[m]
actual
situation
design
case
canal profile
vertical and sloped 1:3
driving one lane one lane
wind condition
3-4 Bf
flow velocity [m/s] 0.5
design vessel
CEMT Class
Va
Vb
traffic density [vessel/a] 11000 11000
quality of navigation
B
C
length
105
135
beam 11.45 11.45
draught 2.70 2.70
squat
0.30
0.30
Cf (turning point) loaded
(bow thruster) - empty 0.8 - 1.0
0.8 – 1.0
fairway dimension
net width in 3 m depth 28.0 28.0
depth/draught
1.3
1.3
water depth
3.5
3.5
radius 685 685
extra width in curves
loaded / empty 5.1 / 7.9
8.3 / 13.0
[m] canal water table width
fairway width indynamic draught
including safety distancesand instabilities
depth two-lane one-lane two-lane one-lane
rectangular-trapezoidal-section (1:3)
4
48.5
33.2
39.0
23.9
< 28 m
dynamic draught,
loaded (3 m here)
actual: 28 m
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
1. Step: Look at national Guidelines
Check of applicability
Fairway in straight section (RT-profile, Germany)
Fairway design in Canals: Concept Design Method
[m]
actualsituation
designcase
canal profile
vertical and sloped 1:3
driving one lane one lane
wind condition
3-4 Bf
flow velocity [m/s] 0.5
design vessel
CEMT Class
Va
Vb
traffic density [vessel/a] 11000 11000
quality of navigation
B
C
length
105
135
beam 11.45 11.45
draught 2.70 2.70
squat
0.30
0.30
Cf (turning point) loaded
(bow thruster) - empty 0.8 - 1.0
0.8 - 1.0
fairway dimension
net width in 3 m depth 28.0 28.0
depth/draught
1.3
1.3
water depth
3.5
3.5
radius 685 685
extra width in curves
loaded / empty 5.1 / 7.9
8.3 / 13.0
[m] canal water table width
fairway width indynamic draught
including safety distancesand instabilities
depth two-lane one-lane two-lane one-lane
rectangular-trapezoidal-section (1:3)
4 48.5 33.2 39.0 23.9
dynamic draught,
loaded (3 m here)
Increments in curves (Germany)
22
actual: 23.9 + 5.1 = 29 m 28 m (threshold)
design: 23.9 + 8.3 = 32.2 m (too small)
actual: 28 m
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
56/142
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
57/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Fairway design in Canals: Concept Design Method
3. Step: Increments
No indication for any other increments
4. Step: Verify Design Case
Field data under good environment
conditions show that the available
space maybe just enough.
But one “has to pay it” by very slow
vessel speeds severe bank and bed
impact from thrusters!
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
„Mosel Schubverband“ von Schreibkraft - Eigene Aufnahme. Lizenziert unter CC-by-sa
3.0/de über Wikipedia -https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Mosel_Schubverband.jpg#/media/File:Mosel_Schubver
band.jpg
Mosel, D
"Loreley von Spitznack". Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Loreley_von_Spitznack.jpg#/media/File:Loreley_von_Spitznack.jpg
Rhine, Lorelei, D
Fairway Design – Free Flowing River: Practice Approach
Procedure
Little information available in national guidelines
Compare practice examples with care:
A river is a very complex system
Safe Navigation
Seems possible even in case of narrow conditions
Restrictive licensing and efficient techniques
Difference to Canals
F/B larger account for cross flow, turbulence Canals include safety distance to banks –
river data don’t
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
58/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Outline of the Design Case: Free Flowing River
Rhine River at Speyer
Push to units:185 x 22.8 m
sailing
upstream
(R = 800 m)
sailing
downstream(R = 900 m)
Class Vb vessel (length-
extended GMS) sailing
ups tream (R = 600 m) - data
from Class Va
Class Vb unit
sailing
downstream (R =
1000 m)
[m] actualsituation
design case
water body free flowing river
flow velocity [m/s] 1.7 1.7
river bottom
gravel
design vessel
CEMT Class
VIb
Vb
traffic density [vessel/a]
30.000
30.000
quality of navigation
B
A
max. length 195 135/185
max. beam 22.8 11.45
draught (1.6) 1.8 – 3.5 (1.6) 1.8 – 3.5
squat
0.30
0.30
existing fairway dimensions
width
92
92
depth/draught
1.4 – 4.7
1.4 – 4.7
depth (GlW-HSW) 2.5 – 7.5 2.5 – 7.5
radius 825 (average) 825 (average)
width/beam
4.0
8.0
length2/(radius*beam) 2.0 1.9 – 3.6,average 2.8
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Fairway Design – Free Flowing River: Practice Approach
Fairway Width
Permission: Up to 195 m long and 22.8 m wide
push tow units in all possible traffic situations!
Meetings / overtaking of two of those vessels will be
avoided in practice – only one-lane traffic realistic
Design question: Which frequent traffic situation is
just acceptable, assuming ease quality A
Design case considered: Class Vb (135 m long
GMS) meets Class Vb push tow unit (185x11.45)
[m] actualsituation
design case
water body free flowing river
flow velocity [m/s]
1.7
1.7river bottom
gravel
design vessel
CEMT Class
VIb
Vb
traffic density [vessel/a]
30.000
30.000
quality of navigation
B
A
max. length 195 135/185
max. beam 22.8 11.45
draught (1.6) 1.8 – 3.5 (1.6) 1.8 – 3.5
squat
0.30
0.30
existing fairway dimensions
width 92 92
depth/draught 1.4 – 4.7 1.4 – 4.7
depth (GlW-HSW) 2.5 – 7.5 2.5 – 7.5
radius 825 (average) 825 (average)
width/beam
4.0
8.0
length2/(radius*beam)
2.0
1.9 – 3.6,average 2.8
Discrepancy between permission and practice!
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
59/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Fairway Design – Free Flowing River: Practice Approach
Fairway Width (meetings)[m]
actualsituation
design case
water body free flowing river
flow velocity [m/s] 1.7 1.7
river bottom
gravel
design vessel
CEMT Class
VIb
Vb
traffic density [vessel/a]
30.000
30.000
quality of navigation
at least C
A
max. length 195 135/185
max. beam 22.8 11.45
draught (1.6) 1.8 – 3.5 (1.6) 1.8 – 3.5
squat
0.30
0.30
existing fairway dimensions
width 92 92
depth/draught 1.4 – 4.7 1.4 – 4.7
depth (GlW-HSW)
2.5 – 7.5
2.5 – 7.5
radius 825 (average) 825 (average)
width/beam
4.0
8.0
length2/(radius*beam) 2.0 1.9 – 3.6,average 2.8
Actual: The ease quality of the permitted situation is not acceptable avoided in practice
Design: Ease quality will be A as specified!
4.0
2.0
8.0
2.8
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Fairway Design – Free Flowing River: Practice Approach
Under Keel Clearance
d/D = 1.3 good quality of driving
Min. dynamic underkeel clearance 2.5 m
(depth at GlW ) – 1.8 m (usual draught at GlW)
– 0.3 m (squat) 0.4 m
Safe navigation demands 0.5 m clearance for
effective bow thrusters usage 0.4 m
A safe navigation (bow thruster usage possible in case
of tricky situations) seems to be possible even if largedraughts will be chosen
[m] actualsituation
design case
water body free flowing river
flow velocity [m/s]
1.7
1.7river bottom
gravel
design vessel
CEMT Class
VIb
Vb
traffic density [vessel/a]
30.000
30.000
quality of navigation
at least C
A
max. length 195 135/185
max. beam 22.8 11.45
draught (1.6) 1.8 – 3.5 (1.6) 1.8 – 3.5
squat
0.30
0.30
existing fairway dimensions
width 92 92
depth/draught 1.4 – 4.7 1.4 – 4.7
depth (GlW-HSW) 2.5 – 7.5 2.5 – 7.5
radius 825 (average) 825 (average)
width/beam
4.0
8.0
length2/(radius*beam)
2.0
1.9 – 3.6,average 2.8
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
60/142
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
61/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Fairway Design - Lock Approach: 3-Step Design Method
Concept Design Method
1. German Guidelines
[m]
actual
situation
design
case
Lock double lock
wind condition 3-4 Bf
Cross flow [m/s] < 0.3 m/s
design vessel
CEMT Class
Va
Vb
(extended Va)
traffic density[vessel/a]
5.000 5.000
quality of navigation
B
C
length
105
135
beam
11.45
11.45
draught 2.70 2.70
Lock approach
width relation B/b 4.4 4.4
harbour width 50 50total length relation 1.3
1.2
total length
130
160 by design
straight section L/l
1.0
1.0 by design
straight Section
100
130 by design
entrance funnel L/l 0.3 0.2
entrance funnel 30 30
min depth 3.5 3.5
safety margin 5.0
4.0
German Guidelines cannot be met in our example!
s = 5.0 m safety distance between lanes
straight section > 1.5 LVessel (1.0 LConvoy)
Inlet > 110 (80)
Bw = 12.0 m width
of waiting area
Approach Channel > 2.8 L
mooring area > 2.0 L
c > 5.0 m mole width
s = 5.0 m safety lane
Bl – width of lock =12.5 m
> 64 m
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
[m]
actual
situation
design
case
Lock double lock
wind condition 3-4 Bf
Cross flow [m/s] < 0.3 m/s
design vessel
CEMT Class
Va
Vb
(extended Va)
traffic density[vessel/a]
5.000 5.000
quality of navigation
B
C
length
105
135
beam
11.45
11.45
draught 2.70 2.70
Lock approach
width relation B/b 4.4 4.4
harbour width 50 50
total length relation 1.3
1.2
total length
130
160 by design
straight section L/l
1.0
1.0 by design
straight Section 100 130 by design
entrance funnel L/l 0.3 0.2
entrance funnel
30
30
min depth 3.5 3.5
safety margin 5.0
4.0
Lock Approach BLA/b LLA/l
China3.5 - 4.5 (s) 3.5 - 4.0
7.0 (d) 3.0 - 3.5*
Dutch 2.2 (s) 1.0 - 1.2
French 2.9 (s) 0.5*
Germany3.0 - 4.0 (s)
2.84.5 - 6.0 (d)
Fairway Design - Lock Approach: 3-Step Design Method
Concept Design Method
2. Compare different guidelines
German Guidelines reflect driving category A.
Practice Examples show driving category down to C.
Data from
different
guidelines and
practice cover
existing widths
and lengths! River B/b (u) B/b (l) L/l (u) L/l (l)
Main 2.8 (d)1.8 (s)
2.8 (d)2.4 (s)
~ 2.5
Neckar 8.3 (t)2.6 (d)2.3 (s)
4.2 (t)2.5 (d)2.0 (s)
0.7 –
1.4
1.0 –
2.1
Practice Approach
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
62/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Fairway Design - Lock Approach: 3-Step Design Method
Detailed Design (approach channel)
Application routing
method with cF
from numerous filed
data
Placing vessel symbols
tangential at turning point
along the route
The 135 m long Class Vb vessel
stays inside existing fairway.
Only a little widening justupstream of the lock approach
seems to be necessary.
No further investigations needed
concerning upper harbor!
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Conclusion
All three design cases considered
show the general applicability of theproposed design method:
Concept Design Method should be the first step
and the best choice in case if applicable
guidelines are available
Practice Approach especially helps to get better
understanding and for comparing results
Detailed Design uses Practice Approach as a
starting point
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fd/20040711181710_Mississippi_Memphis_Ausschnitt.jpg/1200px-
20040711181710_Mississippi_Memphis_Ausschnitt.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/2011_03_11_Elbe_Schubverband _DSCI0197_k.JPG
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
63/142
Smart Rivers 2015 – Applying 3 –Step Design Method (PIANC-INCOM WG 141) Dr. Katja Rettemeier, BMVI
Recommandation
Look at the approach with great careand experience:
Quality of driving and aspects of traffic are
important
Qualification of Designer:
Good understanding of nautical aspects
Experience in water engineering to select
correct boundary conditions …
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fd/20040711181710_Mississippi_Memphis_Ausschnitt.jpg/1200px-
20040711181710_Mississippi_Memphis_Ausschnitt.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/2011_03_11_Elbe_Schubverband _DSCI0197_k.JPG
www.bmvi.de
Workshop “Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways”
Paper 101 - ApplyingConcept Design Method – Practice Approach – Case by Case Design
Thank you for your attention
For further questions do not hesitate to contact:Dr.-Ing. Katja Rettemeier
Bundesministerium für Verkehr
und digitale Infrastruktur (BMVI)
Invalidenstraße 44
D-10115 Berlin
Katja.Rettemeier@bmvbs.bund.de
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
64/142
5/10/2015
Comparative variant analysis in using ship
handling simulators with special respectto assess ease quality and human factorIribarren, Jose R.
Cal, Carlos Atienza, Raul Verdugo, Ismael
SMART RIVERS 2015 - Buenos Aires, Argentina, 7-11 September 2015
“SMART RIVERS 2015”
Introduction
Speaker: Jose R. Iribarren
Naval Architect (Politechnic University Madrid, Spain) Director General Siport21, Port and Navigation Consultants 1999
Real-Time Simulation Center
Design and Operation of Ports and Fairways
33 countries (Latam, Europe, Africa, Asia)
Previous: Ministry of Public Works, Port and Coastal Research CenterCEDEX
PIANC member. Several WG (20, 24, 27, 49, 141, 171)
Spain: no inland navigation. Experience other countries
Need to learn. Transfer and adapt criteria
5-10-2015 “SMART RIVERS 2015”
-
8/17/2019 Design Guidelines for Inland Ships
65/142
5/10/2015
Introduction
Incom WG141 “Design Guidelines for Inland Waterways”
Review of existing guidelines
Conceptual Design - supported by general guidelines and empirical data
Detailed Design - using more precise formulae or simulation models
Resulting dimensions linked to operation conditions (water level,current fields, wind conditions, …) and type of vessels (dimensions,propulsion and steering)
Characterize “safety and ease” levels of the fairway, both for presentand future operation conditions
Simulation: useful tool to analyze and establish this equilibrium
Evaluation method for simulation runs
Case studies:
approach to lock-gates
effect of cross currents
“SMART RIVERS 2015” 5-10-2015
Safety and Ease Approach
Reasons to categorize ease quality
Differences in existing and recommended waterway dimensions in nationalguidelines
Each waterway system has specific features > accepted minimumdimensions of waterway infrastructure are derived
Safety and Ease of navigation conditions: different from country to countryor from waterway to waterway
Safety of navigation should be always ensured
WG 141 decided to distinguish differ
top related