Efforts are being made to improve the safety of vessels that load cargoes that can liquefy, writes Michael King.
Existing regulations on the certification of dangerous cargoes need to be more stringently followed, and more effort should be taken to refine those regulations by the IMO’s relevant committees, according to the International Association of Dry Cargo Shipowners (Intercargo).
As previously reported in DCI, a number of vessels and their crew have been lost after loading cargoes that were subsequently suspected of liquefying. Iron ore fines have been identified as a particularly problematic cargo, with a number of vessels encountering difficulties with liquefaction after loading the cargo, most notably in India during the monsoon season. Nickel ore is also now coming under the microscope after it was linked to a string of casualties and major loss of life late last year on the trade from Indonesia to China.
The loading of both cargoes is covered by the mandatory application of the International Maritime Solid Bulk Cargoes (IMSBC) Code which classifies them as Group A cargoes, that is, cargoes that can liquefy if shipped at a moisture content in excess of their Transportable Moisture Limit (TML) as specified by the Code.
But since the IMSBC Code because mandatory, common problems identified by Intercargo members with its correct implementation include using cargo trade names and not the
Bulk Cargo Shipping Name (BCSN), mixing up cargo group types so it is not clear whether the cargo being loaded comes under Group A of the IMSBC Code and is therefore prone to liquefaction, and the incorrect declaration of the cargo’s Transportable Moisture Limit (TML). Intercargo and others are particularly concerned about the latter mistake and how to address it.
“The real problem in the industry is the difficulties experienced obtaining accurate shipper’s declarations for many cargoes in many parts of the world and controlling the moisture content so that it remains at a safe level when it is loaded,” said Ian Harrison, Intercargo technical director. “The solution is to ensure that cargoes are presented for loading in a safe condition with the actual moisture content less than the TML.”
Sometimes that is easier said than done, however.The TML should be measured and confirmed before loading.To avoid liquefaction during the voyage, a ship’s master should then only load cargoes with a moisture content below the TML. However, in remote areas measurement facilities might not be available at the load port, and even a simple rain shower before loading can suddenly change the moisture content and render part of the cargo liable to liquefaction. Intercargo has also questioned the credibility of the competent TML testing authorities in some countries.
The consequences of failing to meet all the requirements of the Code were in evidence late last year when 44 seafarers lost their lives within 39 days in three casualties: Jian Fu Star (27 October: 13 fatalities); Nasco Diamond (10 November: 21 fatalities) and Hong Wei (3 December: 10 fatalities). Each of the casualties involved the shipment of nickel ore loaded in Indonesia and heading for China. And all sank in waters off Taiwan or southern Japan in reportedly moderate weather and sea conditions.
Unlike nickel supplies from the Philippines — another major supplier — nickel ore from Indonesia is of a higher grade, but its clay-type quality tends to mean it has a higher moisture content which is exacerbated by the tropical climate, leaving the cargo even more prone to liquefaction than it might otherwise be. All of this makes the measurement of TML both hugely important to crew and vessel safety.
“The safe transport of dry bulk cargoes depends on many parties fulfilling their obligations in a safe and professional manner and the weak link in recent casualties has been the control of the moisture content which is the responsibility of the shipper, and which should be overseen by the competent authority at the port of loading,” said Harrison. “In some areas we do see efforts being made to improve the situation, but serious problems remain and the current situation is not sustainable.”
He believes more regulatory strengthening could help the situation on the ground.“It is in the interest of all parties to facilitate safe trade in dry bulk commodities and responsibilities must be reasserted and strengthened to effectively enforce the provisions of SOLAS [International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea] and the IMSBC Code,” he said. “Intercargo continues to work closely with industry partners, P&I clubs and the insurance industry to bring this about.”
To that end, Harrison said he expected changes to the Code to be put forward at the next session of the IMO Subcommittee on Dangerous Goods, Solid Cargoes and Containers (DSC) in late September.
“Like any Code or regulation there is room for improvement as more experience is gained in practice. The Code recognizes this and provides for updates every two years,” he added.
“Many papers have been submitted, including by Intercargo, to IMO for consideration at the next DSC Sub-committee proposing new schedules for cargoes and discussing many associated issues including liquefaction — so yes we do expect changes.”
However, Italy-based classification society Rina has come up with an alternative solution for owners who are not happy to rely on shipper declarations as a guarantee that the cargo being loaded is safe. Rina’s ‘IMSBC-A Notation’ outlines design modifications for bulk carriers which allow the safe shipment of Group A cargoes such as nickel ore irrespective of TML.
“Rina has observed that there are difficulties in measuring the actual moisture content of cargoes and that it is sensitive to local weather,” said Dino Cervetto, head of technical services at Rina.” That is why we propose a solution with this notation which makes carriage safe even without a precise evaluation of the moisture content.”
The Notation can be assigned to ships specially constructed or specially fitted for the carriage of Group A cargoes having actual moisture content in excess of their TML. It integrates the criteria of the IMSBC Code with detailed technical criteria relevant to stability and hull strength, not least the design and positioning of permanent or temporary longitudinal bulkheads or other sub divisions. These must adequately provide for not only the restraint of the immense forces generated by the flow movement of high-density bulk cargoes, but also for the need to
limit the free surfaces that develop when a cargo liquefies, and reduce to an acceptable safe level the potential heeling movements arising out of a transverse cargo flow across the cargo space.
The Notation also covers how the elements of the ship’s structure bounding cargo spaces should be strengthened.The stability of the vessel is reassessed and the righting lever curve recalculated considering the cargo as liquid and there are also increased damage stability requirements. The master is also supplied with a special booklet and information on carrying cargoes in excess of their TML.
Rina estimates the cost of converting a Supramax bulk carrier at approximately $3m and claims the process will not impact the vessel’s competitiveness for cargo.
“For a typical Supramax, two additional bulkheads are normally to be fitted in each hold where the carriage of nickel ore is foreseen,” said Cervetto. “This means an extra weight ranging from about 1,000 to 2,000 tonnes, depending on the number of holds involved.This does not affect in a significant way the ship deadweight capacity, but reduces the cargo volume.
“However, taking into account the high density of nickel ore, the volume capacity of the cargo hold is sufficient to load the ship to her maximum draft, that allows the shipment of the original deadweight, reduced just by the extra weight of the additional bulkheads.”
Owners are already examining the commercial potential of design changes under the Notation. “We are presently in contact with several Chinese owners who are designing modifications to their bulk carriers to make them adequate for the carriage of nickel ore at any moisture content,” said Cervetto. “These ships will have the Notation assigned. Positive replies have also been obtained from some [Flag] Administrations and P&Is.
“The main benefits are to avoid to missing a cargo or a voyage, or losing the ship. Using Rina’s standards ships would be safe even if the cargo liquefied. Vessels would no longer have to rely on potentially unreliable moisture tests at the load port to determine if the cargo is safe to load or not.
Although the classification society mainly focused on the dangers of nickel ore when developing the notation, iron ore fine liquefaction as classified under Group A of the IMSBC Code is also covered under the Notation.
“Rina believes it is quite correct that IMO leaves some issues to the satisfaction of administrations, which enables industry, aided by class, to develop different ways to arrive at the right goal. IMO sets the safety standard, we find ways to achieve it,” concluded Cervetto.
Harrison welcomed the move by Rina but said it would be far better for the industry overall if TML declarations were instead made 100% accurate instead or redesigning vessels on the basis that TML testing cannot be trusted in some areas. “The real problem in the industry is the difficulties experienced obtaining accurate shipper’s declarations for many cargoes in many parts of the world,” he said.
“The solution is to ensure that cargoes are presented for loading in a safe condition with the actual moisture content less than the TML.”
Again, Rina is looking at ways to step up to the plate with a solution, according to Cervetto. He told DCI that the difficulty many owners and masters had encountered in attempting to measure TML correctly might be addressed by the society in the future. “We are considering a service as an independent third party to oversee and verify the moisture content for those owners who do not adopt the new notation,” he said.
 
 
Intershield®803Plus adds to hold integrity improving overall safety
A new super tough cargo hold coating from International Paint has been specifically developed to combat ‘shooting’ damage — a little-acknowledged loading phenomenon that could compromise a bulk carrier’s safety.
While the sharp economic downturn experienced at the end of 2008 was reflected in a sharp dip in global coal exports, the International Energy Agency projects significant increases in the trade of both steam and coking coal in the years ahead.
IEA’s 2009 estimates, which use 2007 as its base year, project total world trade as coal rising from 923.8mt (million short tonnes) in 2007, to 1,032.8mt in 2015, and to 1,208.5mt by 2030.
Exporters in Australia, South Africa and South America, in that order, are projected as being responsible for practically all of this growth.
Economic conditions from late 2008 caused some nascent plans to expand export facilities to be shelved or delayed, while the number of idle bulk carriers off leading coal ports became a feature of the malaise. However, a variety of future importing needs, including the lack of domestic sources in South Korea and Japan, India’s energetic heavy industrial expansion, and the coming shut down of coal production in Germany, suggest IEA projections are sound.
The concentration of growth in three key exporting markets, which by 2030 are expected to account for over 60% of all world coal exports combined, calls for the development of high throughput exporting facilities. While not subject to the same just in time demands as ports serving liner trades, these facilities must be able to
turn around even the largest dry bulk carriers in the minimum time, in order to service the industrial supply chain.
Without going into the development plans of individual export facilities (for reasons that will become clear), such ambitions rest on integrated bulk handling facilities equipped with high storage, blending and load out capacities.
In an increasing number of instances, the high feed rates demand conveyor belt delivery to shoreside loaders to ensure homogenization, a constant reclaim/load-out rate, and the flexibility to reclaim from different stockpiles within a coal yard, particularly where a customer may require a fast modification of the blending ratio. In such circumstances, loaders can be delivering harsh and
corrosive cargoes into a given hold at rates exceeding 3,000tph (tonnes per hour).
 
LOADING ISSUES
For some, the 2004 International Maritime Organization (IMO) decision to allow single hull bulkers to continue in operation, where double hull tankers were to become mandatory, was not progressive. At IMO, however, the consensus has been that the strictures placed on tanker operators were not appropriate for bulkers, so long as they were maintained to high standards.
Behind such a view lies other guidance critical to bulker standards and safety. The Code of Practice for the Safe Loading and Unloading of Bulk Carriers (BLU Code), adopted as recommended practice by the IMO Assembly in 1997, emphasized stress and damage imposed by cargo handling throughout the life of a ship as a possible contributory cause of structural failure of bulk carriers, leading to casualties and losses. Its purpose was to provide guidance to ship masters of bulk
Close up: high-speed loading actual damage in service.
carriers, terminal operators and other parties for the safe handling, loading and unloading of solid bulk cargoes.
The BLU Code represented IMO’s response to casualty rates in the dry bulk carrier sector through the 1990s, and was initially driven by the high profile sinking of the Derbyshire in 1991. However, today, some wonder whether the hard lessons learned in even higher profile cases in the tanker sector that led to the advent of the Performance Standard for Protective Coatings, such as Erika and Prestige, have been realized across the entire dry bulk sector.
 
SHOOTING DAMAGE
With loading rates of coal via high speed belt conveyors, for example, exceeding 3,000tph, there is considerable potential for damage to cargo holds, should loading be unnecessarily concentrated in one spot, for example. In such instances, impact energies result in potential ‘shooting’ damage to the cargo holds. Effectively the cargo can be blasted or ‘shot’ (hence the term) at the bulkheads of a hold, causing potential coating detachment. It has been estimated that cargo can strike the coating at 30km/h and it has also been likened to grit blasting. Leading marine coatings supplier International Paint has spent
several years researching the effects of shooting damage after requests from quality shipowners. According to Rob Taylor, International Paint Bulk Carrier Marketing Manager:“Facilities where conveyor belt loading is utilized will be increasingly in demand. Whilst the concept of shooting damage is not known by all owners and operators (and some just see it as an occupational hazard anyway) many have raised the issue with us.”
Taylor said that the phenomenon occurs when loaders project coal at right angles to the bulkhead and the impact fractures and detaches coatings over a short period, leading to loss of steel protection and subsequent corrosion. Often these areas of damage are high on the bulkhead and are therefore difficult to repair in service.
It can be difficult to gauge the detrimental effect on the longevity of a cargo hold coating from shooting damage. In principle, cargo should be sprayed around the hold to help avoid impact damage but frequently loaders remain static for a time before being rotated and this is when damage can occur.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that standard products can show detachment after just one loading cycle. True abrasion resistant products will of course be more resilient, but their lifetime will also be affected. Some suggest that, even here, longevity can be reduced by up to 50%.
Once suffering this form of impact damage, owners and operators are faced with more frequent repair, increased costs and potential downtime of their vessels.
In response, International Paint has for some years offered Intershield®803, a specially developed cargo hold coating toughened to withstand the harsh environment of holds.
 
TOUGH AND TOUGHER
Among the more forward-looking ship operators to have used the product is Seven Seas Maritime Ltd, which has applied the coating to the cargo holds on two bulk carriers – Atlantica and Arcadia. According to G. Proestos, Seven Seas Maritime Technical Manager:“In the three years experience with Intershield®803 we are happy with the performance.”
Other highly reputable owners agree, among them Fairsky. According to owner’s representative P. Perakis:“We are very satisfied with the performance of the cargo holds of all seven vessels coated with Intershield®803 which typically carry coal, coke, grain and occasionally minerals”.
The launch of Intershield®803 by no means represented the end of development work in this sector for International Paint, however. In 2010, the company launched Intershield®803Plus, a newly formulated coating for the bulk carrier market which is reckoned to be International Paint’s toughest and most impact resistant cargo hold coating for the marine sector to date.
According to Taylor: “We decided to address the problem around three years ago with the aim to develop a coating which was more resistant to impact damage. Our first task was to develop an internal test method to simulate the shooting damage we had observed at impact speeds of up to 30km per hour. Following 12 months of development, the high speed loading simulator was born. We believe that this equipment can reproduce impact damage representative of in-service conditions. We then used this method in our product development work to test candidate formulations against the specification we had targeted. Part of the product development also included field testing by way of test patches in cargo holds and monitoring actual in-service performance. This data also assisted in verifying our test method.
 
SMOOTH TO THE TOUCH
“Our technical team estimated impact energy during the process of high speed conveyor belt loading and our internal test has been developed to correlate with impact at such speeds. Coating damage observed internally is very similar in nature to actual damage we have seen in cargo holds. Very often we have seen an ‘erosive’ effect of such impact on a coating. Here, the surface of the coating appears intact but, in fact, there has been a latent impairment at the substrate/coating interface and total
detachment of the coating can quickly follow.” The newly formulated Intershield®803Plus is an ultra high
performance two pack abrasion resistant epoxy coating. Suitable for use as a cargo hold coating at the maintenance and repair stage, the coating can be applied to surfaces prepared to Sa2 (ISO 8501-1 2007). It is certified for carriage of grain and FDA- compliant for dry foodstuffs.
Though specifically formulated to resist impact damage, it also exhibits superior general abrasion resistance, as well as good corrosion protection,VOC compliance with 75% volume solids, fast drying times and all year round workability. The product has a smooth surface for easy cleaning.
Intershield®803Plus hard dries in six hours at 25°C, although it can be applied at temperatures down to 5°C. Fast loading times for cargoes such as coal, iron ore and bauxite are critical to reduce vessel downtime. Intershield®803Plus is ready for loading in seven days at 25°C.
According to Taylor: “Internal testing has shown Intershield®803Plus to outperform other cargo hold coatings for impact resistance. This level of performance will deliver extended coating life and asset protection.” Indeed, using the high speed loader simulator, International Paint said that where a standard anti abrasion pure epoxy product would experience 46% paint loss (by weight), areas covered with Intershield®803Plus experienced a mere 3% paint loss.
Taylor said:“We regard Intershield®803Plus as our toughest ever cargo hold coating which we believe will provide the ultimate defence against cargo hold damage.”
 
 
Safety standards – the means to improve bulk carriers safety
Casualty statistics show that “during a period of 25 years between 1982 and 2007, there were 419 bulk carriers lost, along with nearly 2,000 lives”1.    Jan Jankowski, Polish Register of Shipping reports. The next few years showed a falling trend in bulk carrier casualties, however, these figures leapt in 20092, 3. INTERCARGO statistics indicate that about 30% of bulk carrier total losses were caused by failure of ship structure or her equipment4. The marine environment and ship operation are the root causes of the majority of casualties.
The above indicates that safety regulations binding today are not fully harmonized with the sea environment and ship operation. Traditionally, safety regulations are developed in
reaction to casualties, thus following an inductive approach (reasoning from specific to general).
The inductive approach, according to the principles of logic, assumes the occurrence of exemptions that cause the need to modify the existing state. With time, the number of exemptions leads to the proliferation of regulations and the number of control bodies, which the maritime industry finds difficult to stand for. These unintentional side effects bring adverse consequences to safety concerns.
In response to a series of catastrophes at sea, the IMO Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) started to develop Goal Based Standards (GBS) — a five-tier system, introducing a hierarchy to the regulatory system.
The problem of quantifying functional requirements has led to the concept of safety level approach (SLA). This approach assumes that goals of Tier I take the form of risk defined (eg. probability of failure and fatality) safety objectives for ship, cargo, passengers, crew, environment, etc. and that these safety
objectives are achieved when Tier II ship functions (such as manoeuvrability, seakeeping performance, stability and floatability, ship strength and fire protection), satisfy the risk level set for each function.
The verified class rules (Tier IV), which are to meet the functional requirements and consequently the set goals, transpose the set safety level to ships. The safety level (probability of failure), expressed as a requirement for each ship function, can be determined with use of a risk model — a fault tree with mathematical models describing basic events. This technique assumes, on the grounds of both experienced and potential sinking scenarios, the failure states of the ship structure (the system), which comprises sequential and parallel combinations of basic events (failure modes), contributing to the undesired event.
An example of a bulk carrier function is her strength, with the ship sinking as the undesired event, and the ship structure with the possible sequential combination of the basic events (scenarios) as the system. The bulk carrier casualties studied have led to identifying the following scenarios of bulk carrier losses due to structure failures: y failure of the side and progressive collapse of bulkheads due to sloshing in flooded holds; y collapse of the first hatch cover due to green seas and progressive collapse of the bulkheads; y loss of ultimate strength of hull girder; and y failure of structures associated with high loading rate; where the failure originating in still port waters and progressing under wave loads generated at sea causes further structure damage and the sinking of the ship. However, this scenario is not as yet fully identified and requires further investigations.
Scenario events are described by deterministic and probabilistic mathematical models that enable the ship sinking probability rate to be computed for particular scenarios ending in the undesired event — the sinking of a ship due to structure failure.
The computations of failure probability for a bulk carrier that sank in 2000 show that: y the side frames installed between rigid tanks were the weakest parts of the ship structure and the probability of collapse was at the level of 10-1; y the most probable scenario of ship sinking was the loss of side integrity, followed by the collapse of the bulkhead due to sloshing and progressive ship flooding that led to the sinking of the bulk carrier; and y the calculated probability of ship loss due to her structure failure was Pr(SL)/23 = 2.6 103/year (the ship sank after 23 years
of operation), which is high for this particular ship. To evaluate the current safety level of bulk carriers’ strength
using the risk model, all subclasses of their structures and the number of ships in the subclasses should be taken into account. Therefore, the work volume requires cooperation of all players involved in safety assurance at sea.
The current safety level of bulk carriers’ strength, based on the ten yearlong statistics of bulker losses in the population of 4,700 ships, is Pr(SL)/10 > 6.2 104/year.
Shortcomings in ship structure safety standards for ensuring safety at sea may result in ships being launched with inbuilt flaws. These in turn generate problems in ship operation, which are usually assigned to poor ship maintenance. Maintenance is obviously important, however, the core factor of “quality of ship safety assurance” lies with ship construction safety criteria and resultant safety standards.
The criteria should be derived for the events dictated by the fault tree and developed for failure modes. In effect only events
crucial for safety will be identified and accounted for, thus, eliminating proliferation of regulations and controls. Computer programs used in the process of ship’s designing will need to account for physical and probabilistic theories to determine the criteria parameters.
The five-tier GBS system and the risk model for each ship’s function constitute the deductive approach to the ship’s safety regulation development (reasoning from general to specific) and therefore, if correctly applied, will exclude (at the assumed probability rate) ominous exemptions.
The GBS — SLA and risk models (fault trees and mathematical theories used to describe basic events) will harmonize the developed safety regulations with the marine
environment and ship operation, as they account for the actual sea waving and loading conditions encountered during a ship’s entire lifecycle.
 
 
Good quality hold coatings reduce the need for maintenance and improve safety
Damages to cargo hold coatings from hard, active, angular cargoes (coal, petcoke, bauxite, sulphur, aggregates and ores) can impose high repair costs on owners and operators of bulk carriers, writes Michael Aamodt, Product Manager, Group Marine Marketing, Hempel A/S.
There are five properties that are important for cargo hold coating performance: abrasion resistance, impact resistance, flexibility, hardness and Tg (glass transition temperature). All of these properties are highly important for the coating’s mechanical resistance to limit corrosion, maintain the structural
integrity and safety of the ship, and to keep coating maintenance work at a minimum.
Epoxy coatings may have good impact and abrasion resistance, but do not work well as a cargo hold coating. This can be due to several reasons: the coating lacks flexibility so it cracks upon impact; slow hardness development means hard cargoes can damage freshly applied paint; the polymer binder in the paint has too low Tg so that high temperatures in the cargo hold soften the coating and make it more susceptible to impact and abrasion damages. In other words, a cargo hold coating that is not optimized with regards to all five properties will receive more and earlier damages than necessary.
All coatings in cargo holds will suffer mechanical damages — in particular on the hopper, lower stool and hold frames due to loading or offloading of cargoes — no matter how strong the coating is. The physical damage inflicted in cargo hold coatings by grabs, bobcats, bulldozers or shooting cargoes are relatively localized and are repaired with touch-up coating by the ship crew. Sometimes, though, the damage inflicted is so severe that it deforms the steel itself and then replacement could be needed. However, the large majority of damage to a cargo hold coating on the corrugated bulkhead, hopper sides, and hold frames comes from angular cargoes scratching, rubbing and gauging (by settling cargo) during voyage. These effects are heightened if the transported cargo is warm.
To prevent damages from cargo gauging, the five mentioned coating properties need to be optimal. Damages from cargo gouging can become so extensive that resulting corrosion requires a full re-blasting or sweep blasting and recoating in large areas of the cargo hold. For a low-performing cargo hold coating, this type of repair will already be needed at the first dry-docking. An ultra-high-performing cargo hold coating — like HEMPADUR ULTRA-STRENGTH 47500 with its Tg above 60°C and excellent coal cargo resistance — can extend major repairs beyond several dry-dockings, provided
the dry docking interval is 30 to 36 months.
After several years’ extensive testing — both at external test institutes and with in-house, state-of- the-art coal cargo-resistance test rig — Hempel’s newest and most advanced cargo hold coating, HEMPADUR ULTRA-STRENGTH 47500, was launched on the market in 2009. This award-winning cargo hold coating is tailor made to provide the market’s best abrasion and impact resistance against hard, warm, angular cargoes like coal.The coated test panels seen here were tested in the coal cargo test rig and exposed to coal with up to 300kPa pressure and 50°C.
Under such tough test conditions, HEMPADUR ULTRA-STRENGTH 47500 coating received only cosmetic damages from the coal, while lower- performing cargo hold coatings were totally removed, exposing the underlying coating or even the steel surface. This test provides a good simulation of the actual damages inflicted on a cargo hold coating in service.
The coating has had a tremendous success in the market, bringing ship owners and operators extended repair intervals and reduced maintenance cost. HEMPADUR ULTRA- STRENGTH 47500 is built on well-known HEMPADUR MULTI- STRENGTH 4575 technology and further improved to bring ship owners more profit from the revenue earning space of their vessels. Clearly, from a ship owner/operator point of view, there can be significant cost savings by upgrading from a low- performing coating to an ultra-high performing cargo hold coating for bulk carrier vessels. Cost savings come from the use of less paint for repairs, less surface preparation and painting, shorter off-hire time and less time before carrying the first hard cargo after the repairs. Upgrading your cargo hold coating to HEMPADUR ULTRA-STRENGTH 47500 means a potentially swift return on investment as the initial outlay may be earned back by the vessel’s first dry-docking. Because the coating is harder and glossier, it is also easier to clean between changing cargoes, leading to further cost savings during operation.
In November last year, the HEMPADUR ULTRA-STRENGTH 47500 coating won the ‘Innovative Technology Award’ at the IBJ Awards 2010 and more than two million square meters of cargo holds on 70 bulkers have been coated with this coating the last two years. More than 80% of the coating has been delivered for bulkers drydocking in Asia-Pacific and China. Hempel is currently supplying HEMPADUR ULTRA-STRENGTH 47500 for 20 bulker new buildings in Korea, China,Taiwan and the Philippines. For three of these new buildings Hempel is supplying 150,000 litres of HEMPADUR ULTRA-STRENGTH 47500 for three 205,000dwt bulk carriers at Hanjin Shipyard in the Philippines.
 
 
Hydrex provides underwater maintenance services to the bulk industry
Hydrex was established in Antwerp in 1974 by Boud van Rompay. The company specializes in tough and difficult jobs as well as regular, routine maintenance and repairs. Hydrex has built a reputation as a major underwater repair and replacement specialist in the world.
Hydrex offers turnkey underwater repair solutions to shipowners. Its multidisciplinary team can help shipowners find the best solution for any problem encountered with their ship below the water line. It can immediately mobilize its diver/technicians to any location around the globe to carry out necessary repair work without the need to drydock.
The services offered range from an inspection of an external condition and any required maintenance work all the way through to highly technical major repairs or replacements of a ship’s external underwater equipment and machinery. Repairs to thrusters, propellers, rudders, stern tube seals, damaged or corroded hulls and all other underwater services are carried out by professional teams qualified to perform complex technical tasks underwater while the vessel is in-situ.
Maintenance work — like the replacement of anodes that are worn out — can easily be carried out without any interference with the vessel’s sailing schedule. Hydrex’s technical personnel work closely together with owners, managers and supervisors. All procedures and techniques used are fully approved by the major classification societies.
All the projects Hydrex undertake are engineered and carried out in close co-operation with the customer and any third party
suppliers. They begin with evaluating the feasibility of an underwater repair, continue through design and construction of customized equipment and go all the way through to successful execution of the repair or replacement and subsequent follow- up. Hydrex takes on, organizes and executes the entire job, start to finish, relieving the customer of all the hassle of co-ordination, planning and supervision.
Because of the nature of repair work, it is often necessary for solutions to difficult problems to be worked out in a short time period, sometimes even after an operation has already started. This can only be done successfully by people who have familiarity with such challenges and the relevant know-how to resolve these technical difficulties. This is why Hydrex has a technical department capable of executing all the required planning, an in-house Research & Development department that can take care of the engineering aspect of an operation and diver/technicians that are trained and qualified to perform the full range of required class-approved repair procedures in even the harshest conditions. Hydrex has found that an effective, competent team is the only way to consistently achieve a high quality result in the short periods of time usually available to ships with a tight schedule to maintain.
Over the years Hydrex has sent highly trained diving teams to virtually every part of the world. The company has built up an ever-expanding worldwide network of support bases, enabling it to provide fast service at reasonable costs. Besides these support bases, Hydrex has offices in the Tampa Bay Area (U.S.A.), Algeciras (Spain), Mumbai and Visakhapatnam (India), Port Gentil (Gabon) and Vancouver (Canada).
All Hydrex offices have fully operational fast response centres where an extensive range of state-of-the-art equipment is available at all times for immediate deployment with the company’s skilled diver/technician teams to wherever they are needed.
 
PROPELLER REPAIRS IN ALL POSSIBLE CONDITIONS
In its quest to provide cost-effective services to customers, Hydrex developed procedures to address different kinds of damage to propellers. This research led to the design of the Hydrex cold straightening machine, which was first used in 2002. By taking advantage of this technique damaged blades can be straightened underwater, allowing the ship to return to commercial operations without the need to drydock. A new model of the straightening machine was recently put into practice. It is compatible with the existing model and is used to restore more severely bent propeller blades to their original condition.
If the damage is beyond repair, the damaged blade will be cropped, along with a corresponding section of the opposite blade, by Hydrex’s team to restore the hydrodynamic balance. This kind of repair is carried out with
the propeller blade cutting equipment developed by the Hydrex research department in 1985.
 
DEVELOPMENT OF THE COFFERDAM TECHNOLOGY
Hydrex was the first company ever to use a prefabricated cofferdam, introduced as early as 1979 and used to carry out repairs to the Lunar Venture. By 1983 the technology was in use to perform insert repairs in double bottom tanks. The company has advanced this concept extensively over the last 30 years, along with the technology to ensure that fast, professional and high quality work can be done while the vessel is in-situ and even while continuing normal ship operations. For its innovative work in this field Hydrex won the 2002 Lloyd’s List SMM Award in the category of ‘Innovation in Naval Shipbuilding and Marine Technology’.
 
IN-SITU BOW THRUSTER OPERATIONS
At the time of the award, these techniques were applied mainly to the repair and replacement of bow thrusters. Using steel mobdocks (mobile mini dry docks) to seal off the thruster tunnel, with an access shaft protruding above the water, work teams accessed the tunnel and from there could work on the thruster in complete safety.
Hydrex has since then developed this technology further using lightweight flexible mobdocks. These modernized mobdocks, which are designed to be easily transported around the world, are used to close off the thruster tunnel on both sides, allowing divers to work in a dry environment around the unit and enabling them to reinstall the propeller blades of an overhauled thruster inside the thruster tunnel after the unit has been secured.They can also replace the blades or seals and perform repair work on a specific part without removing the unit. All of this is accomplished without the need to drydock the vessel.
 
UNDERWATER STERN TUBE SEAL REPAIRS
In the summer of 1996, Hydrex divers carried out an underwater face seal replacement on a ro/ro vessel. Face seal replacements had been carried out by
Hydrex’s divers in the Antwerp workshop, but now they were able to actually perform this task while in the water. Since then Hydrex has constantly worked to advance the techniques used for stern tube seal repairs.
At the end of 1999 Hydrex started working on injections with lip type stern tube seals. In 2000 Hydrex carried out tests for wet bonding on lip type seals. These tests showed that wet bonding could only give an 80% result compared with dry bonding. Instead of giving up on
replacing lip type seals underwater, Hydrex developed a procedure which avoids wet bonding but still accomplishes successful underwater seal repairs.
In 2002 the flexible mobdock was further developed so that a similar dry underwater working environment could be created around a stern tube seal assembly to facilitate repair work on the assembly and enable the replacement of damaged seals in-situ. This technique has since been refined and used on numerous stern tube seal repairs around the world.
In the last few years Hydrex divers have used the flexible mobdock technique for both bow thruster and stern tube seal repairs on numerous occasions during operations around the world. The company’s success with these types of repairs earned it the prestigious Ship Repair and Conversion Award at Lloyd’s List Global Awards 2009.
 
PERMANENT UNDERWATER RUDDER REPAIRS
The latest development of the flexible mobdock technique allows Hydrex to also perform permanent repairs on any type of rudder while the vessel remains at anchorage and cargo operations can continue. Permanent underwater rudder repairs were hitherto not possible and ships had to drydock in cases where a major defect was found. The newly designed equipment is lightweight and can be mobilized very rapidly using Hydrex special flight containers for worldwide delivery of this new service.
Hydrex continues to invest in the research necessary to keep evolving the available repair techniques along with continual training and development of its engineers and diver/technicians. This is done to offer customers the most efficient solution, whether the required services involve the inspection of a vessel’s external condition and any required maintenance work or highly technical major repairs and replacements of a ship’s external underwater equipment and machinery.
 
 
 
Karara Mining cites ‘safety’ as reason for selecting Cavotec’s MoorMasterTM
Cavotec’s automated mooring technology, MoorMasterTM, has been selected by Australian mining company, Karara Mining Ltd., for use at its dedicated iron ore handling facility at the Port of Geraldton in Western Australia.
“Safety and sea conditions are the two major considerations with this project; issues that MoorMasterTM is uniquely equipped to handle. Cavotec looks forward to working closely with Karara to ensure the successful execution of this project,” says Cavotec CEO, Ottonel Popesco.
Karara Mining Ltd. has ordered 12 MoorMasterTM MM200D units, for use at its dedicated bulk handling facility at the Port of Geraldton to minimize the serious safety risk of mooring lines parting. All MoorMasterTM MM200D units are specially designed for use at bulk terminals.
Situated some 400km north of Perth, the Port of Geraldton is one of Australia’s busiest regional ports. The port has historically been one of Australia’s larger grain export ports and today, more than half the port’s exports are generated from minerals and iron ore.
MoorMasterTM is a vacuum-based automated mooring technology that eliminates the need for conventional mooring lines. Remote controlled vacuum pads recessed in, or mounted on, the quayside, moor and release vessels in seconds.
The system offers improved safety, improved operational efficiency and the potential for infrastructure savings. MoorMasterTM is also in use at two other bulk handling applications in Western Australia. Fourteen MoorMasterTM
MM200B units have recently been commissioned at the Port Hedland Port Authority, and Cavotec has recently delivered eight MM200D units to Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd, a subsidiary of Anglo- Australian mining group Rio Tinto, for the Dampier Fuel Supply Wharf in the Port of Dampier.
MoorMasterTM is an increasingly accepted and widely adopted technology that has performed more than 40,000 mooring operations, with a 100% safety record, at ferry, bulk handling, ro-ro, container and lock applications around the world.
 
 
Ever-harsher environments present a challenge to ship operators worldwide
Ship operators around the world continue to look towards operating within ever harsher environments, in order to maximize the global economic opportunities. However, Ian Fraser, Director at BMT ARGOSS believes that seafarers need to be given the opportunity to enhance their knowledge in order to better understand the effects of these challenging environmental conditions. Such an approach will ensure that both the vessel and the personnel are equipped to minimize the real safety risks at sea, by experimenting within a safe virtual environment.
The difference in the look and feel of a 10ft and 20ft wave onboard a ship is quite obvious. However, what is often not so obvious is the impact such loads are having on the hull structure and future performance of the vessel. Without fully appreciating these effects, many vessels will operate at the edge or even outside of their original limitations which can not only cause unnecessary maintenance, but increase the possibility of accidents occurring.
Combining the organization’s metocean capabilities with its vessel manoeuvring simulator, PC Rembrandt, BMT ARGOSS is able to equip seafarers with the necessary knowledge to better understand their environment and the effect unfavourable weather conditions can have on the vessels they are operating — all of which will help to optimize operability and maintenance and minimize safety risks.
Utilizing advanced in-house operational, numerical modelling at global, regional and local scales, together with satellite observations and in-situ real-time measurements, BMT ARGOSS provides high-quality meteorological, wave, current and water level hindcasting services through its comprehensive databases spanning the past 20 years. It also provides forecasting services for the next ten days. In the very near future, by combining the data sourced through this comprehensive service with PC Rembrandt’s manoeuvring simulation capabilities, BMT ARGOSS will be able to replicate a particular environment and operation at sea in a controlled, virtual world. By monitoring virtual hull stress and machinery performance, a full picture of an operational scenario can be generated, recorded, reviewed and analysed so that real insight into the potential deterioration of the ship can be experienced.
Traditionally used to assess port navigation and analyse mooring load and collision events, PC Rembrandt sources the vessel’s characteristics including profile, hydrodynamic features and the type of cargo it’s carrying. This information is then integrated with the in-house metocean data for the geographical areas in which the ship is likely to operate in. Using mathematical simulations, a controlled environment is created. Ship- or shore-based, this PC-based ship-handling and manoeuvring simulator could then provide the user with a greater understanding of when the operational limits of the vessel are being reached or even exceeded, so that the necessary precautions are taken before the vessel is then taken out to sea in a real life situation.
The advantages of creating awareness of anticipated conditions and vessel performance in a safe virtual environment will be borne out in improved operating safety and reduced ship maintenance. Awareness of the effects that a small course correction could be making to reduced or increased hull fatigue provides seafarers with valuable insight into their real operational scenarios.The simulated conditional environment can also be explored to better understand the probability of serious unseen damage in extreme conditions. This type of virtual exploration with real vessel characteristics and reliable metocean and weather predictions can be used to support the development and understanding of safety cases, design requirements and operational risk assessment.
Another useful output is the creation of an exciting learning environment. The use of simulation techniques with visual impact can motivate learning and firmly embed the ideas, principles and concepts being taught. This enriched form of training breeds new thoughts and opportunities that drive developments for the future. It also helps seafarers to better understand the safety and maintenance requirements needed to meet evermore demanding vessel operations.
 
 
Solas XII/12 compliance plus operational benefits
When it comes to Water Ingress Alarm Systems (WIAS) it might be assumed that since they are a regulatory requirement and an integral part of every bulk ship’s essential equipment little more could be added to improve these IACS prescriptive devices. However one supplier has been active in developing systems beyond the basic IACS requirements. The latest offering from PSM now provides operators a low cost remote data connection facility to its very successful BulkSafe® WIAS system. Why?
PSM believes it has come up with a real safety benefit to the industry by combining its successful BulkSafe® WIAS with its latest ClearView® software such that vessel operators will get a real time message delivered to their desk, or via text message, should a critical alarm or pre-warning be activated on board the vessel. An advance warning to operators or safety services may be sufficient to avoid a potential serious incident which is, of course, the intention of the SOLAS WIAS regulation.    It is a salutary reminder that the most recent figures for incidents from the bulker industry show little improvement in 2009 compared to 1999 before the current regulation was implemented. Common sense suggests the more people who can be alerted of a situation in advance the better the chance of averting it before it becomes a crisis. Currently the regulation does not require the WIAS to provide any remote alerting facility or connection to the SSAS, for example. However, PSM believes that it has taken a lead in this by providing a method of near-instantaneous transmissions of critical alarms, plus routine data can also be sent on-line through an email format and via a low-cost routing of satellite and/or broadband.
The advantage to safety may be clear, but PSM is keen to promote the real operational benefits too. Ensuring the WIAS system is remotely checked and fully functional well before PSC inspection can save time and turnaround delays. If parts or maintenance of the system is required, such aspects would be resolved well ahead. PSM states that its BulkSafe® system has always had a unique remote test facility permitting a full function test at any time and condition of lading (holds full or empty). With the ClearView® option operators can routinely see a live and on-line ‘system healthy’ condition of the whole BulkSafe® system ensuring the vessel’s readiness for WIAS port inspections. This is not removing duties from the vessel but ensuring operators have a thorough picture of on-board condition.
Does all this come at a hefty price? Not so, claims the manufacturer. With its 30 years history of marine instrumentation PSM is fully aware of the current financial constraints within the industry. Managing director Geoff Taylor describes it thus:“The technology of our latest environmental monitor, ClearView®, transfers directly to our well-proven BulkSafe® WIAS and we are proud to be able to offer this considerable advance to both safety and operational efficiency at a quite moderate additional investment over the compulsory SOLAS requirement. For a win-win in the current cost sensitive bulk sector the ClearView® option can be even made available on a low cost direct lease, or as part of an LRIT or communications lease contract. Considering the improvement in
personnel safety and vessel security we are confident that owners and managers will also very quickly see the cost benefits in operations of the entire vessel. Since the remote data acquisition is not limited to the WIAS function the ClearView® system could, for example monitor bunker operations and make validations of weight and gravity at the time of delivery. Fuel efficiency can be monitored during a voyage or data may be reviewed retrospectively on the embedded comprehensive spreadsheets. Environmental issues such as oily-water overboard discharge worries can be a thing of the past. Having undergone several years of tightly monitored working trials ClearView® has now achieved USCG and Department of Justice compliance to monitor all ODME functions, automatically provide an
Oil Record Book log and can even prevent accidental illegal discharge by geofence lockout.”
He continued:“After the success of the US Coast Guard’s two-year closely monitored trials on board five vessels operated by Nordic Tankers A/S, we were delighted to reproduce here an extract of an announcement in the Danish press by Clipper Corporate Compliance Manager, Capt. Benny Nielsen in which he states:‘We have with ClearView installed a magnificent and unique tool enabling us constantly to check how the vessels with the equipment installed handle and treat oil containing slop/ waste. And not just that,’ he adds. ‘It is not only a tool to check the crew’s handling, but it also works the other way round as it protects the crew if any questions on keeping the MARPOL Rules are raised. With ClearView we have a precise tool and log to prove what has exactly been done on board’.”
It appears the story does not end there because PSM has made further advances to their its BulkSafe® WIAS system. With its latest offering, the cost of cabling, pipework and installation will be much reduced by the introduction of its latest Type approved MODBUS digital sensors. The manufacturers claim that digital systems provide high reliability and a greater degree of self-checking, further enhancing PSM’s unique ‘check-from-the- deck’ test feature.