Acronyms and Glossary

Acronyms

A, A-Index Attained subdivision indexAIS Automatic Identification SystemALARP As Low As Reasonably PracticableANN Artificial Neural NetworkARPA Automatic Radar Plotting AidsASET Available Safe Egress TimeBDDs Binary Decision DiagramsCAF Cost of Averting a FatalityCATS Cost to Avert one Tonne of Spilt OilCEN Comite Europeen de Normalisation/European Committee for

StandardizationCFD Computational Fluid DynamicsCLIA Cruise Lines International Association, http://www.cruising.org/COMSAR Communication and Search and Rescue (IMO sub-committee)DALY Disability Adjusted Life YearDE Design and Equipment (IMO sub-committee)DNV Det Norske VeritasDOF Degrees of freedomECDIS Electronic Chart Display and Information SystemEU European UnionFEC Fractional Effective ConcentrationFED Fractional Effective DoseFEM Finite Element MethodFMEA Failure Mode and Effects AnalysisFORM First-Order Reliability MethodFRP Fibre Reinforced PlasticsFSA Formal Safety AssessmentFTA Fault Tree AnalysisFTS Fault Tree SynthesisGA Genetic Algorithms

359

360 Acronyms and Glossary

GBS Goal Based StandardsGCAF Gross Cost of Averting A FatalityGL Germanischer LloydGRP Glass fibre Reinforced PlasticsGUI Graphical User InterfaceHazId Hazard IdentificationHAZOP Hazard and Operability StudiesHiP-HOPS Hierarchically Performed Hazard Origin and Propagation StudiesHLA Helicopter Landing AreaHSC High-Speed CraftHSE Health & Safety Executive (UK),

http://www.hse.gov.uk/IACS International Association of Classification Societies,

http://www.iacs.org.uk/ICAF Implied Costs of Averting a statistical Fatality

(term now replaced by NCAF)ICCL International Council of Cruise Lines (now CLIA)IMF International Monetary FundIMO International Maritime Organization (IMO), http://www.imo.org/INTERCARGO International Association of Dry Cargo Shipowners,

http://www.intercargo.orgISM International Safety Management (ISM) CodeISO International Organization for StandardizationISPSC International Ship and Port Security CodeITTC International Towing Tank ConferenceLMIS Lloyds Maritime Information SystemsMCA Maritime and Coastguard Agency (UK)MCDM Multi-Criteria Decision MakingMEPC Marine Environment Protection Committee (IMO committee)MES Marine Evacuation SystemMFZ Main Fire ZoneMSC Maritime Safety Committee (IMO committee)MVZ Main Vertical ZoneNCAF Net Costs of Averting a FatalityNRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US)OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentOFM Operator Function ModelOPA Oil Pollution Act (US)PLL Potential Loss of LifePoE Panel of Experts (Appointed provisional sub-committee for as-

sessing ship’s damage stability, IMO-MSC, 1994–1995)PSA Probabilistic Safety AssessmentPSC Port State ControlPVC PolyvinylchlorideQRA Quantitative Risk Analysis

Acronyms and Glossary 361

QRD Qualitative Design ReviewR, R-Index Required subdivision indexRBD Risk-Based DesignRCO Risk Control OptionRFR Required Freight RateRID Regulatory Impact DiagramsRINA Registro Italiano NAvaleRO Recognized OrganizationsRPN Risk Priority NumberRSET Required Safe Egress TimeSAVANT Systems AVailability ANalysis ToolSCF Ship Construction FileSLA Safety Level ApproachSLF Sub-committee on Stability and Load lines and on Fishing

vessels (IMO sub-committee)SMS Safety Management SystemSRA Structural Reliability AnalysisUN United NationsVOF Volume of Fluid (CFD numerical method)WB World BankWIG Wing-In-Ground effect craft

Glossary∗

Accident An unintended event involving fatality, injury, ship loss or damage, otherproperty loss or damage, or environmental damage.

Accident category A designation of accidents reported in statistical tables accordingto their nature, e.g. fire, collision, grounding, etc.

Accident scenario A sequence of events from the initiating event to one of the finalstages.

Consequence The outcome of an accident.

Frequency The number of occurrences per unit time (e.g. per year).

Generic model A set of functions common to all ships or areas under consideration.

Hazard A potential to threaten human life, health, property or the environment.

Initiating event The first of a sequence of events leading to a hazardous situationor accident.

Risk The combination of the frequency and the severity of the consequence.

∗(Reference: International Maritime Organization, MSC 83/INF.2)

362 Acronyms and Glossary

Risk contribution tree (RCT) The combination of all fault trees and event treesthat constitute the (RCT)

Risk control measure A means of controlling a single element of risk

Risk control option (RCO) A combination of risk control measures

Risk evaluation criteria Criteria used to evaluate the acceptability/tolerability ofrisk.

Main Maritime International Conventions – IMO

MARPOL Convention

The MARPOL Convention (International Convention for the Prevention of Pol-lution from Ships) is the main international convention covering the preventionof pollution of the marine environment by ships from operational or accidentalcauses. It is a combination of two treaties adopted at IMO in 1973 and 1978 re-spectively. MARPOL was continuously updated by amendments through the years(http://www.imo.org/Conventions/).

SOLAS Convention

The SOLAS Convention (International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea) inits successive forms is generally regarded as the most important of all internationaltreaties concerning the safety of merchant ships. The first version was internation-ally adopted in 1914, in response to the Titanic disaster, the second in 1929, thethird in 1948, and the fourth in 1960. The 1960 Convention was the first majortask for IMO after the Organization’s creation. SOLAS was continually updated byamendments through the years (http://www.imo.org/Conventions/).

ICLL Convention

The first ICLL Convention (International Convention on Load Lines), adopted in1930, was based on the principle of reserve buoyancy, although it was recognizedthen that the freeboard should also ensure adequate stability and avoid excessivestress on the ship’s hull as a result of overloading. Thus, limitations on the draughtto which a ship may be loaded make a significant contribution to her safety. Theselimits are given in the form of freeboards, which constitute, besides external weath-ertight and watertight integrity, the main objective of this Convention. As otherconventions, it was continually updated at IMO by amendments through the years(http://www.imo.org/Conventions/).

Acronyms and Glossary 363

STCW Convention

The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watch-keeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978, as amended, sets qualification standards formasters, officers and watch personnel on seagoing merchant ships. STCW wasadopted in 1978 by conference at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) inLondon, and entered into force in 1984. The Convention was significantly amendedin 1995.

Authors Biography

Carlos Guedes Soares is Professor and Head of the NavalArchitecture and Marine Engineering Department and the Cen-tre for Marine Technology and Engineering of Instituto SuperiorTecnico, Lisbon. He has post-graduate degrees from the MIT, theNTNU and the TU Lisbon and about 30 years experience in teach-ing and research work in the fields of structural analysis and de-sign, of dynamics and hydrodynamics and on probabilistic mod-elling for application in risk and reliability analysis. He has been

involved in about 50 European projects, co-ordinating 9 of them, and also co-ordinated about 10 national projects. He has published about 650 papers in interna-tional journals, books and conferences, is co-editor of scientific journals and mem-ber of several international organisations.

Andrzej Jasionowski graduated from the Technical Universityof Gdansk (MEng, 1997), and University of Strathclyde (PhD,2002). He is engaged as Technical Manager of the Ship Stabil-ity Research Centre, Universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde, andDirector of Safety At Sea Ltd, Glasgow, Scotland. His main inter-ests comprise ship hydrodynamics, damaged ship dynamics, sta-bility, risk assessment, inductive inference, plausible reasoning,modelling uncertainty, numerical algorithms development, philos-

ophy of safety. He is author/co-author of 35 journal and conference papers, 50 othercontract reports.

Jørgen Juncher Jensen is Professor of Marine Engineering atthe Department of Mechanical Engineering, Section of CoastalMaritime and Structural Engineering, DTU, where he is leading aresearch group dealing with wave induced stochastic load and re-sponse processes for marine structures. He has been at DTU since1973 and has received various awards (e.g. Bronze Medal fromRoyal Society of Naval Architects, London, Gold Medal from the

365

366 Authors Biography

Alexander Foss Foundation and the Statoil Prize). He has been involved in severalEU sponsored project as well as national projects and has authorized about 150papers.

Jeppe Skovbakke Juhl, Special advisor, holds a position of navalarchitect at the Danish Maritime Authority with responsibility forimplementation of international rules and regulations into Dan-ish maritime legislation. For the last couples of years, he has rep-resented the Danish Maritime Authority in several national andinternational forums, such as IMO and EU, and has furthermorebeen appointed as technical representative to projects under the

auspices of the Nordic Council of Ministers. His key competencies are ship stabilityand maritime risk assessments. Moreover he has participated in several EU-projectsand other international work.

Mr. Dag McGeorge qualified as a naval architect from NTNU inNorway in 1989 and now holds the position of Principal Engineerat Det Norske Veritas. He has 15 years of working experience inproject management, research and development, innovation andconsultancy mainly related to maritime, naval and offshore activi-ties with focus on the use of advanced and lightweight materials inload-bearing structural applications. He was project manager and

technical coordinator of a large collaborative European R&D project on compositesin superstructures of naval ships (EUCLID RTP3.21) and is now leading SAFE-DOR’s subproject on risk based design of composite superstructures.

Apostolos D. Papanikolaou studied Naval Architecture & MarineEngineering at the Technical University of Berlin, where he alsoreceived his Dr.-Ing. and Habilitation degrees. He is Professor ofShip Design in the School of Naval Architecture and Marine Engi-neering of the National Technical University of Athens and Direc-tor of the Ship Design Laboratory. His educational, research and

professional activities cover a broad area of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineer-ing and are documented in about 400 technical publications. He was and is PrincipalInvestigator of a long series of EU or nationally funded research projects regardingthe design and optimization of conventional and unconventional ships, the hydrody-namic analysis and assessment of the calm water performance and the seakeepingbehavior of ships, the stability and safety of ships and regulatory developments.

Authors Biography 367

Esa Poylio is Project Engineer in the Concept Design departmentof Deltamarin Contracting Ltd. He graduated as Naval Architect(B.Sc) from the Technical Institute of Turku in 1980. During theperiod 1980–1984 he worked in the steel design department and1984–1990 in the Project Design Department of Elomatic Oy.From 1990 he has been working in the Concept Design depart-ment of Deltamarin as Project Engineer and Project Manager of

design of various ship types. In his 28 years in engineering, Mr Poylio has gaineda vast experience in ship design and design project management and has becomefamiliar with safety related international rules and regulations.

Pierre C Sames holds the current position of Senior Vice Presi-dent Strategic Research and Development at Germanischer Lloyd.He is responsible for coordinating all technical research and devel-opment projects of GL. He is chairman of the SAFEDOR SteeringCommittee. His previous experience includes research into hydro-dynamic extreme loads and risk analysis. He joined GL in 1995after studying naval architecture in Hamburg.

Rolf Skjong (PhD) is currently chief scientist in Det Norske Ver-itas Research and Innovation. He is Chairman of the InternationalAssociation of Classification Societies (IACS) Expert Group onFormal Safety Assessment and Chairman of the European Safetyand Reliability Association (ESRA) group on Safety in MarineTransportation. He has 25+ years of experience in risk assessmentand reliability analysis, project planning, optimisation, rules andregulations, design and approval. He is a Specialist in Structural

Reliability Analysis and Formal Safety Assessment, and is representing Norway inthe International Maritime Organisation on risk issues. He has been member of var-ious national and international scientific/steering committees. As project managerhe is/has been responsible of a large number of Strategic Research Projects and in-ternational joint industry projects e.g. EU projects for maritime, off-shore, processand aerospace industries. He has published 100+ journal and conference papers.

Dracos Vassalos is Professor of Maritime Safety in the Depart-ment of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, a joint De-partment of the Universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde, and theDirector of the Ship Stability Research Centre (SSRC), a world-leading centre of excellence on ship stability and safety. His mottois “safety enhancement through innovation”, an idea he has pur-sued single-mindedly in a career that spans over 30 years in

industry and academia, promoting the use of scientific approaches in dealing withmaritime safety. He has been instrumental in helping to create a critical mass in

368 Authors Biography

the research community on safety, through a series of initiatives that made SSRCthe focus of active international collaboration. He travels the world over promotingmaritime safety, lectures and publishes widely, with some 400 technical publica-tions to his credit and a string of prizes and awards, including some 100+ ma-jor research contracts. He served as Chair of the STAB Conferences and Work-shops (1996–2006), Chair of the ITTC Stability Committee in Waves (1996–2002),Chair of WEGEMT (the European Association of Universities in Marine Technol-ogy 1999–2001). Currently, Professor Vassalos is Chairman of the InternationalStanding Committee of the “Design for Safety” Conference, a theme instigated andpromulgated by SSRC. He is also a long-standing member of the UK delegation toIMO for ship stability.

Index

Abandonment studies, Evi, 55Acceptable risk, 11, 354Acceptance criteria, 189Acceptance criterion philosophies

cost-effectiveness, 169risk acceptance criteria for ship functions,

168risk balance, 169–170risk evaluation criteria at IMO, 168

AENEAS, 299Alternative approval methods, 155Alternative design, 68

approach, 71, 72and arrangements, 164process, 180

ANSYS CFX, 264Approval in principle statement, 172Approval matrix

categorization of technology, 182explanatory notes, 183quantified risk assessment, 183semi-quantitative risk assessment, 183

Artificial neural networks (ANN), 227, 230ASET (Available Safe Egress Time), 57As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP),

115, 123, 168criterion, 115

Assessment and approval of risk-based shipdesign, 170

approval of design, 172

Bayesian Network, 196, 215, 216drawback, 217

Bayesian Network analysis, 217, 219Bernoulli theorem, 253Binary Decision Diagrams (BDDs), 206Bulk carrier safety, 8, 106, 108, 114, 131Bulkhead deck submergence and progressive

flooding, 82

Capsize band, 37CAPSIM, 260Casualty threshold, 84–85Certificates documentation, 172Cognitive task analysis, 222Collisions and groundings

damage after collision, 226–231collision network, 230–231data used for training ANN, 227–229validation of neural network, 229

factors influencing causation probabilityBayesian network of collision model,

224collision scenario, 223detailed collision approach, 223–224grounding model approach, 224–226human and organizational errors,

220–221human error evaluation, 221–223reported causes, 219–220

risk model for obtaining causationprobability, 213–219

Bayesian networks, 215–219causation probabilities, 219fault tree, 214traditional approach, 214–215weighing factors for headings, 219

Compensation effect, 84Concept design description, drawings and

documents, 171Cost of Averting a Fatality (CAF), 168Cost of Averting a Ton of oil Spilt (CATS), 168Critical wave episodes, 276, 279, 285

Damage after collision, 226–231accuracy of penetration prediction, 229data for ships, 230grounding network results, 227illustration, 228

369

370 Index

inputs to artificial neural network, 228predicted penetration, 230

Damage stability regulations, 146probabilistic standards of, 166

Design alternativesalternatives, 141, 331–332

principle characteristics, 332alternative zero spill tanker, 334–336

Design for Safety, 9Designing damage tolerant ship systems, 50Diffraction forces, 251Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs),

122, 1373D panel method, 249

Electronic Chart Display and InformationSystem (ECDIS), 112

Environmental impacts from shippingactivities, 139

Environmental risk assessment, 139Equivalence principle, 68

See also Alternative designEquivalent Fatalities, 122Equivalent Passenger Ship Regulations, 102Equivalent provisions, 163, 164EU-funded projects

CRASHCOASTER, EU-funded project, 15DEXTREMEL, EU-funded project, 15FIRE EXIT, EU-funded project, 15HARDER, EU-funded project, 4, 15MEPDESIGN, EU-funded project, 15NEREUS, EU-funded project, 15POP&C, EU-funded project, 15ROROPROB, EU-funded project, 15SAFECRAFTS, EU-funded project, 15SAFEDOR, EU-funded project, 15 and

othersSAFER EURORO I, EU-funded project, 15SAFER EURORO II, EU-funded project,

15SAFETY FIRST, EU-funded project, 15VRSHIPS-ROPAX2000, EU-funded

project, 15Evacuability, 59, 60, 61Evacuability Index, 55

in fire scenarios, 56–58human injury analyses, 58speed reduction factor, 57temperature at 1.5m height from floor

level, 57in flooding scenarios, 55–56and rescue analysis, 54–55

Evacuation completion curve, 347Evacuation dynamics (ED), 290–291

Evacuation process, 54of passenger ships, 289

Event tree analysis, 215EVI, 296EXODUS, 298

Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA),7, 167

Failure probability, 189Fatality count, 274–275Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), 198, 215Fault tree synthesis process, 200Fibre reinforced plastic (FRP), 304Fire

containers and cargo spaceBayesian network representing fire in

container, 267Bayesian risk model for cargo fire,

267–270fire simulations, 265–267incident frequencies of occurrence, 270temperature on cargo, 265

in containers and cargo space, 264–270probability distribution, 91risk analysis, 270–275

main probabilities for fire QRA, 271passenger cabin and public space fire

scenario, 272principle, 270soot, 274velocities and temperatures, 273

Fire design scenarioalternative design, 72, 73

and arrangements iteration, 70alternative design approach, 71, 72non-fire scenario, 73prescriptive design, 74restaurant design parameters, 70

Fire hazards, effect of, 69Fire risk model

fire ignition modelfrequency of occurrence, 47

overview, 45post-ignition models

failure of first aid, 47, 48failure of insulation, 49–50fire dynamics modelling, 47fire spread into adjacent spaces, 49–50impact of first-aid on fire energy time

line, 48injury/fatalities, 50standard fire time line, 49

relative frequency of occurrence, 46for space, 44

Index 371

Fire risk screening, 43Fire safety analysis, 87–88

escalation, 89incidence, 88risk, 89

First Order Reliability Methods (FORM), 232,279, 280

First Order Second Momentapproaches, 235

Floodingbenchmark studies

numerical and experimental levels ofwater, 259

survival boundaries, 258, 259and fire, risk from, 92intermediate stages of, 256modeling ship flooding

floodwater dynamics, 254–256inflow/outflow, 253–254progressive flooding, 256–257

modelling damaged ship dynamics, 248equations of motion, 248–250external forces, 252potential forces, 250–251viscous forces, 251–252

modelling sea environment, 245–247parameters and characteristics of numerical

models, 246probability distribution, 90structure of damaged ship dynamics

numerical models, 246Flooding design scenario

consequence analysis, 64cumulative dA(risk), 66design iteration for collision damage, 63identification of critical, 66, 67time evolution of collision damage

scenario, 67Flooding/fire evacuation models, 55Flooding survivability analysis, 74–75

statutory assessmentplatform optimisation process, 76, 77“unguided” subdivision, 76

vulnerability assessmentdistribution of relative contribution, 80example cruise vessel subdivision,

78, 79particulars of example cruise vessel, 77typical model, 80

Fluid dynamics methods, 255F-N curves, diagram, 34, 93, 345

FN risk evaluation criteria, 128for passenger Ro/Ro ships, 132

Formal Safety Assessment (FSA), 8, 10,99, 101

guidelines, 100decision parameters, 121–122

methods, 114process, 115

FORM procedure, 280Fractional Effective Dose (FED), 57FREDYN, 277Froude-Krylov forces, 251FSA for bulk carriers

decision making, 108decision-making related to double side

skin, 111–112individual (annual) risk per ship-type, 107initial studies, 106risk control options and decisions, 108–111

double side skin for new bulk carriers,108

forecastle for new bulk carriers, 110societal risk of bulk carrier and container

vessel accidents, 107studies at IMO, 106–108

Functional requirements, 118

Genetic Algorithms (GA), 316GL-SIMBEL, 277Goal based approach, 146Goal-based Standards (GBS), 10, 97,

98, 116working group, 191

Goal-setting approach, 19Grid based techniques, 296Grim’s effective wave, 277Gross Cost of Averting a Fatality (GCAF), 133Grounding model approach, 224–226

Bayesian network, 226collision network results, 225model for calculating, 225

Group risk, 127

HARDER EU-funded project, 4, 15Hazid investigation, 172Helicopter landing area (HLA), 104High level FSA, 113

studies, 8HiP-HOPS, 199, 210

components’ failure modes, classes of,202–203

HUGIN, 264Human errors, 220

factors, 221Hybrid approaches, 296–297

372 Index

Impulse response function method, 251Indirect goal based approach, 98Individual risk, 123

for crews, 126criteria, 124–125in industries and activities, 125

Individual risk evaluation criteria, 123, 126Intact stability

first-order reliability method applied waveloads

design point and reliability index,280–281

mean out-crossing rates and exceedanceprobabilities, 282–283

numerical example, 283–285coefficients in analytical approxima-

tions, 283GZ curves, 283parametric roll in regular wave, 283particulars of container ship, 283reliability index as function of limiting

roll angle, 286roll motion of ship, 276–280

Interactive fiction, 293Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

(IPCC), 141Interim Guidelines, IMO, 7, 104International Association of Dry Cargo

Shipowners (INTERCARGO), 108International Maritime Organization (IMO),

2, 97decision-making process, 100evacuation analysis, 54goal-based standards, 117Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), 99Rule-making Process, 99

International Monetary Fund (IMF), 136International Safety Management (ISM)

code, 191documentation, 191

International Ship and Port Security (ISPS)Code, 102

LAMP, 277Large passenger vessel (case story)

building blocks of risk-based designadvanced evacuation simulation, 59–61fire risk assessment, 68–69flooding risk assessment, 61–62

early implementation resultsfire safety analysis, 87–88flooding survivability analysis, 74–87safety level, 88–89

Life Quality Index Criterion, 135

Lightweight composite sandwich RoPaxsuperstructure

benefits of risk based design, 313weights and new-build costs of steel

design, 313developing novel risk-based design

acceptance criteria, 307base design, 306features of risk based design, 306–307risk based design process, 306–307superstructure modules, 305

discussion, 313–314fire risk assessment

fire simulations, 309full scale fire test trial, 310resistance test, 310, 311small scale fire tests, 309

results of fire risk assessmentestimated effect of RCOs, 312

sandwich form of construction, 304

Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA), 99Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), 102MEPDesign project, 56Mesoscopic modeling, 294, 298Methods and tools

system failure, 197–211analysis phase, 206automated safety analysis and

optimization tool, 209conversion of fault trees, 207example system and fragments, 204failure annotations, 203mechanically constructed fault tree, 205methodology, 200–201modeling phase, 201–203optimisation phase, 207–209synthesis of fault trees from system

model, 201synthesis phase, 204–206tool support, 209–211

Monte Carlo simulation – collision andgrounding

automation of process, 38–40probability distributions, 42sampling, 42set up, 41

Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM), 319Multi-free surface effect

intermediate stages of flooding, 81–82Mustering, evacuation and rescue

shipboard evacuation problem, 289–297concept of evacuability, 290initial conditions, 290

Index 373

macroscopic modeling, 296mesoscopic modeling, 294–295microscopic modeling, 296–297modeling human behaviour, 291modeling ship environment, 290multi-agent modeling, 292–294passenger mustering/evacuation process

modeling, 292path-planning algorithm, 294simulation of evacuation, 291, 294

tools for simulation and analysis ofpassenger

AENEAS, 299EVI, 297–298EXODUS, 298–299

Net Cost of Averting a Fatality (NCAF),106, 134

Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC), 97

Numerical methods, 257

Observed Evidence, 269Occupational risk, 124Operator function model (OFM), task analysis,

221Organisational errors, 221

Pareto-Optimal Design Alternatives (PODAs),319

Pareto optimality, 144Pareto-optimal set, 319Performance-based approach, 43Performance-based methods for fire

safety, 68Platform optimisation process, 76, 77Port State Control-file/design details, 172Post-accident systems availability analysis,

50–52Potential damping, 251Potential Loss of Life (PLL), 35, 109Probabilistic models, 235Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA), 98Probability of fire spread, 50PROBAN, 279, 281Process map, 171Progressive flooding, 256PROTEUS3, 40, 55, 61–62, 77, 80

Qualitative Design Review (QRD), 270Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA), 26, 270

Radiation forces, 251Random choice method, 251

Risk-based Design (RBD) applicationconcept of design study

challenges, 322–323safety goals, 322

design optimisation procedure, 319–320implemented tanker design optimisation

procedure, 320design optimization case study

implementation of optimizationprocedure, 329

implemented optimization constraintsand assumptions, 327

implemented optimization objectives,327

optimisation variables, 328parameters defining cargo tanks, 326pareto-optimal design alternatives,

330–331resulting design alternatives, 331–336risk-based tanker design optimization,

330search domain, 330search of design resultant domains,

329–330tank configuration layouts, 324

economic impact study, 337, 341environmental impact study, 337–338holistic ship design optimization, 317–318innovative tanker designs and increased,

challenges, 338–339overview of design problem, 323–324pareto optimal design alternatives, 340

performance comparison, 341reference vessel, 320–322

Regulatory frameworkdecision parameters, 121–122discussion on FSA

methods, 114open issues, 114process, 115risk acceptance criteria, 115work, 113

environmental risk evaluation criteria,138–141

emissions and discharges from ships,140

global economic mitigation potential,142

Formal Safety Assessmentapplication-general, 100historical background, 98–99purpose, 99–100

FSA, illustration of, 101future, 170

374 Index

general procedure for establishing riskcriteria at lower level, 147

Goal Based Standardsdefinition, 117framework, 117functional requirements, 118–120goals, 117–118

risk acceptancemethods to justify criteria, 120–121

risk-based approaches, 145–147emissions relationship, 146

risk criteria for use, 143–145risk evaluation criteria,

122–123Regulatory Impact Diagram (RID), 104Regulatory system, 98Reliability Index, 232–233, 280–281, 282,

283, 285, 286Reliability models, 188, 208, 211Required Freight Rate (RFR), 317Resolution A.265 (VIII), 4Risk acceptance criteria, 3, 5, 11, 12, 84,

101, 106, 110, 114, 115–120, 122,143–145, 147, 168, 175, 188, 190,270, 307

for ship functions, 168Risk analysis

guidelines for, 188of ship systems, 188techniques, 98

Risk assessmentanalysis and detailed documentation, 172and FSA, development of

bulk carriers, 106–112decision parameters, 121–122helicopter landing area on cruise ships

as safety measure, 104–105high speed craft, 104ongoing FSA on electronic chart

display and information system,112–113

‘Solo Watch-keeping During Period ofDarkness,’ 103

Risk-based approaches, 2, 145alternative design

and arrangement for fire safety, 6for oil tankers, 6–7

formal safety assessment, 8offshore industry, 4–5probabilistic damage stability, 3–4regulatory developments, 9–10research activities, 9special craft, 7–8structural reliability analysis, 5–6

Risk-based approval, 159, 175, 177acceptance of alternative design

acceptance criterion philosophies, 167future regulations for alternative

designs, 165high-speed-craft code requirements,

167safety equivalent provisions, 163–164SOLAS II-1 related to damage stability,

165–166SOLAS II-2/17 related to fire safety,

164–165SOLAS 2009 replacing SOLAS 90,

166–167approval flow diagram, 158, 160approval of ship systems, 185–190

acceptance, 186–190risk-based ship system approval flow

diagram, 187approval procedure, need for,

155–157design envelope, 157flow chart, 181–182motivation and enabling technologies, 156novel approval process, 161operating risk-based approved ship

documentation, 190–191inspection, 192International Safety Management Code,

191owner’s inspection, 193

present approval process, 158–159process, 159–163requirements to documentation, 179–185

approval matrix, 182–185risk-based design and associated approval,

175–178key steps for normal projects, 177key steps in risk-based design and, 178

rules and regulations, 179–180stakeholders in approval process

design and construction phase, 171–172operational phase, 172–175

Risk Based Design (RBD), 59, 97and approval

design framework and tools, 12–13elements, need for, 12linking, 10–11qualified engineers, 13regulatory framework, 12working together, 11–12

enhanced design process, 3framework, 27inspection of, 192

Index 375

methodological approachship design process, 20–25

operation of, 190optimisation, 156owner’s inspection, 193philosophy, 156positive and negative sides to rule-

compliance, 22principles, 26–28process, 306–307safety performance parameters, 21societal expectations and economic

attractions, 1–2toolbox of engineer, 13variants of, 156

Risk Based Regulation, 98Risk based regulatory regimes, 143, 144Risk-based ship system approval process,

185, 186Risk Control Option (RCO), 98, 264, 305

cost effective, 305implementation of, 73

Risk conversion factors, 127Risk evaluation criteria, 98, 121–122

background, 123–124, 127–128CAFs in use, 134comparison with historical data, 126–127cost benefit and cost effectiveness

assessment, 132–136cost of averting fatalities, 133, 136example of disability adjusted life years

gained, 138examples of criteria and comparison with

data, 130–132FN curves, 130–131individual fatality risk, 126individual risk criteria, 124–126method, 128–130net cost of averting fatality criteria, 135purpose, 123, 127risk of injuries and ill health, 136–138third parties, 132

Risk evaluation of ships, 9Risk integration

annual frequency of occurrence, 93, 94probability distribution, 91, 92, 94

Risk model, 186components of, 45

Risk of design, 11Risk Priority Number (RPN), 198ROLLS, 277RSET (Required Safe Egress Time), 57Rule-challenge, 156Runge-Kutta method, 250

Safe return to port, 10decision making in flooding-related

casualties, 87flooding-related

casualty classification, 86functional requirements classification,

86Safety assessment process, 27, 28

previous, 101Safety Case Regime for ships, 143Safety equivalence, 3, 156

See also Rule-challengeSafety goals, 28

definition, 28specific technical, 29top-level, 28

Safety Level Approach (SLA), 10Safety levels and acceptance criteria, 169Safety Management System (SMS), 172Safety-related functional requirements, 30Safety study, 162SAVANT (Systems Availability Analysis

Tool), 51Self-regulatory approach, 5Ship Construction File (SCF), 161, 172, 191Ship design process

contemporary developments, 32–34casualty threshold concept, 33IMO framework, 32risk-based design implementation

(safety level), 34safe return to port, 32–33scope of work, 33

risk-based design, 26–31design decision-making, 30–31functional requirements, 30high level framework, 27identification of critical design

scenarios, 29identification of hazards, 29and innovation, 26making, 31safety assessment procedure, 28structural links of design scenarios, 30

rules-based design, 20–25collision risk containment, 23“common sense” approach to ship

design, 24design decision-making shift, 25design input, 21design solution envelopes, 25high-level conventional design

process, 20rules vs. experience, 23

376 Index

safety considerations, 21total risk (safety level), 34–36

concept of “capsize band,” 37evacuation and rescue analysis, 54–57fire safety analysis, 43–50flooding survivability analysis, 36–42post-accident systems availability

analysis, 50–54principal hazards, 36time to capsize and evacuation time, 38

Ship functionsrisk and, 186systems and, 188

Ship Stability Research Centre (SSRC), 60Simulating fluid dynamics method, 256Social force methods, 296Societal risk evaluation criteria, 122, 127

acceptable level of risk, 127See also Individual risk evaluation criteria

SOLAS, 144–145SOLAS Chapter II-2, regulation 18

methods for fire safety, 160SOLAS 90 damage stability requirements, 166SOLAS regulations, 3Specific risk control option, 122Speed reduction factor, 56Stakeholders, in design and operation, 171State-of-the-art design methodology, 18Statutory requirements, 179Strip theory/3D panel method, 251Structural failure

Ferry-Borges model, 240

load combination, 238–241probabilistic modelling

of still water induced loads, 235–236of strength of ship structures, 233–235wave induced load effects, 236–238

reliability of accidentally damagedstructures, 241–242

values of load combination factors, 241Structural reliability methods, 5–6, 106,

232, 233Subdivision of Ships, 102Systems dependency tree, 52, 53

Time-invariant methods, 232Time to capsize, 38

cumulative probability distribution, 84time-domain simulation, 83

Top down process, 98Transient and intermediate flooding, 256

numerical simulation, 81, 82Trial Applications, 77

Univariate geometric distribution – collisioncumulative marginal probability

distribution, 40cumulative probability function, 39estimating time to capsize, 38–40

Utility functions, 331

World Bank (WB), 136

Zone methods, 264