The Naval Architect February 2008

Feature 3 | FInlAnD’S MArIne InDuStrIeS
Performance is key to design
Performance-based design criteria bring the freedom of radical thinking to
the naval architect, according to Deltamarin.
‘
In recent years, the risk- and for fire technical analysis and evacuation analysis is highly recommended for all
performance-based approach has simulations are today available for the passenger vessels, both newbuildings
resulted in new possibilities for preliminary project stage.’ and ships in operation. ‘With simulation,
designing ships,’ Markku Miinala, project According to Mr Miinala, similar bottle-necks and sensitivity analysis of
manager at Deltamarin told The Naval regulations on lifesaving appliances the effect of the number of people in
Architect. ‘This trend has also resulted and other safety features are being various areas along the escape routes can
in the development of new tools for implemented. be calculated as well as the evacuation
designing and analysing the validity of The new SOLAS Chapter II-1 damage time.’
the ship design at a very preliminary stability regulations will enter into force Other new regulations underway are
design stage.’ from the beginning of year 2009. These the revised Intact Stability Code, Goal-
In the case of the IMO’s design and new probabilistic regulations will leave based New Ship Construction Standards,
arrangement regulations on fire safety, out the B/5 and other prescriptive rules. and Safe Return to Port. This last
alternative designs are now possible The new rules will basically look into a set regulation stems from concern over how
according to SOLAS, as long as they are of different damage lengths and depths, to arrange safe evacuation from today’s
proven to fulfil or exceed the requirements giving numbers 1 or 0 depending on big passenger vessels. The conclusion
in the SOLAS regulations through whether the ship survives. If the resulting has been that the ship itself is the safest
detailed engineering safety analysis. Mr summarised index is sufficiently high, the lifeboat. ‘This implies that there is, in the
Miinala noted that alternative design has regulation is fulfilled. case of an accident, sufficient redundancy
to be applied where the maximum fire ‘This gives the naval architect more of the vessel to guarantee that it can
zone length is 48m or a fire zone area is freedom in arranging subdivision, arrange for safe space for the passengers
1600m
2
; otherwise they would be difficult bulkheads, and deck heights,’ Mr Miinala and that it can, with own machinery,
to achieve. noted. return to a port,’ Mr Miinala said. The
‘The new approach really allows for Regarding the Recommendation on regulation is to enter into force on 1 July
new modern designs,’ he noted. ‘Risk level Passenger Evacuation Analysis, Mr 2010 and applies to vessel newbuildings
analysis models have to be done, and if Miinala noted that the regulation today with a length of or above 120m.
the analysis shows the same or lower risks requires evacuation analysis calculations ‘This is a typical performance-based
with an alternative design compared to a to be done for ro-ro passenger vessels regulation, as performance criteria
rule-based design, it can be approved. To either as simplified or as an advanced which have to be fulfilled after flooding
be able to carry out the alternative design evacuation analysis in the form of a are defined. The principle is that if
approach for large spaces, efficient tools simulation. Carrying out advanced one watertight compartment is lost,
the vessel’s functionality has to be
maintained, and the vessel shall be able
to return to port,’ Mr Miinala said. The
regulation also requires safe return to
port in the case of the loss of one A-class
fire compartment.
Systems for transportation to
be available after damage include
propulsion steering and steering control,
navigational systems, systems for fill,
transfer, and service of fuel oil. The speed
of the vessel is not determined. ‘In the
A case study on the implications of
the loss of the forward engineroom on
a modern cruiseship. Analysis done
using Deltamarin’s Intelligent 3D System
Coordination Model.
78 The Naval Architect February 2008
NA Feb 08 - p78+79.indd 78 05/02/2008 09:50:37
Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 | Page 12 | Page 13 | Page 14 | Page 15 | Page 16 | Page 17 | Page 18 | Page 19 | Page 20 | Page 21 | Page 22 | Page 23 | Page 24 | Page 25 | Page 26 | Page 27 | Page 28 | Page 29 | Page 30 | Page 31 | Page 32 | Page 33 | Page 34 | Page 35 | Page 36 | Page 37 | Page 38 | Page 39 | Page 40 | Page 41 | Page 42 | Page 43 | Page 44 | Page 45 | Page 46 | Page 47 | Page 48 | Page 49 | Page 50 | Page 51 | Page 52 | Page 53 | Page 54 | Page 55 | Page 56 | Page 57 | Page 58 | Page 59 | Page 60 | Page 61 | Page 62 | Page 63 | Page 64 | Page 65 | Page 66 | Page 67 | Page 68 | Page 69 | Page 70 | Page 71 | Page 72 | Page 73 | Page 74 | Page 75 | Page 76 | Page 77 | Page 78 | Page 79 | Page 80 | Page 81 | Page 82 | Page 83 | Page 84 | Page 85 | Page 86 | Page 87 | Page 88 | Page 89 | Page 90 | Page 91 | Page 92 | Page 93 | Page 94 | Page 95 | Page 96 | Page 97 | Page 98 | Page 99 | Page 100 | Page 101 | Page 102 | Page 103 | Page 104 | Page 105 | Page 106 | Page 107 | Page 108 | Page 109 | Page 110 | Page 111 | Page 112 | Page 113 | Page 114 | Page 115 | Page 116 | Page 117 | Page 118 | Page 119 | Page 120