Stability Calculation of Ropax

Discussion in 'Stability' started by eng.naval, May 11, 2009.

  1. eng.naval
    Joined: Aug 2008
    Posts: 24
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Egypt

    eng.naval Junior Member

    I'm doing an intact stability calculations of a RO-PAX.
    Now, my question is on what depth do I perform stability calculations.
    because a ro-ro or a ro-pax has two decks:

    1- The main deck, which Floodable length calculations are carried
    2- The superior deck

    Now. on which deck or depth do I perform my stability calculations for this ship.

    I'll be very thankful if anyone would help.


     
  2. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 7,773
    Likes: 1,678, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    If you are doing "Intact Stability", it doesn't matter.

    "Depth" is not an input.
     
  3. Guillermo
    Joined: Mar 2005
    Posts: 3,644
    Likes: 189, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2247
    Location: Pontevedra, Spain

    Guillermo Ingeniero Naval

    I think eg.naval is asking what are the 'closed volumes' he has to use to calculate the KN values and, of course that depends on what deck he is considering, thus influencing the available freeboard and so the ultimate stability. As I have not experience with RO-PAX, I cannot say much more.

    Cheers.
     
  4. eng.naval
    Joined: Aug 2008
    Posts: 24
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Egypt

    eng.naval Junior Member

    Yes Guillermo, this is exactly what I'm talking about, Nevertheless the depth will also make a difference when I start to heel the ship and taking offsets to plot GZ Curve. Although i'm not doing that hand calculations.I'm using MAXSURF, so i've already done the model with the superior deck, and when I did floodable calculations I entered the offsets of the margin line(which is at the MAIN DECK) maually, but with stability I was confused to use the superior deck or redo the model to the main deck and calculate stability.
    I wish somebody can help on that.
     
  5. Guillermo
    Joined: Mar 2005
    Posts: 3,644
    Likes: 189, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2247
    Location: Pontevedra, Spain

    Guillermo Ingeniero Naval

    In my opinion, if you can consider the volume between the two decks as watertight, then you may use the superior deck for intact stability calculations, as it happens with twin decked stern trawlers.

    Cheers.
     
  6. eng.naval
    Joined: Aug 2008
    Posts: 24
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Egypt

    eng.naval Junior Member

    Actually yes it's watertight.But, the problem is that the ramp starts from the main deck and of course it's watertight and secured during the voyage, but some professors disagree because this particular thing which got me confused,
    Thank you Guillermo.
     
  7. Guillermo
    Joined: Mar 2005
    Posts: 3,644
    Likes: 189, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2247
    Location: Pontevedra, Spain

    Guillermo Ingeniero Naval

    I think that concern is related with the development of the rules since the sinking of the Estonia. New flooded stability criteria have been released, but I think this doesn't affect to the static intact stability calculations up to the superior deck if ramps and bows are truly watertight.

    I hope someone else with more knowledge on this kind of ships can pop up here and tell us.

    Cheers.
     
  8. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 7,773
    Likes: 1,678, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    eng.naval

    You are beginning to mix two separate issues.

    You refer to "..stability calculations.."
    As i noted for Intact, it doesn't matter, since the watertight deck is the watertight envelope for the stability calculation.
    You latter post you say "...and when I did floodable calculations .."
    Which means you are doing Damage stability calculations.

    The rules have nothing to do with what your prof's say. The rule is the rule.

    "...the problem is that the ramp starts from the main deck and of course it's watertight .."

    If it is watertight (as defined by SOLAS) there is no debate. You define the hull along the watertight envelope.

    What you prof's are debating is an operational issue and has nothing to do with your analysis.
     
  9. eng.naval
    Joined: Aug 2008
    Posts: 24
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Egypt

    eng.naval Junior Member

    Thanks Ad Hoc and thank you Guillermo.
    You were very helpful.
    If it's possible I have only one more question to ask.
    In what rule book can I find this part about Intact Stability calculations.I have LR, SOLAS and GL and I couldn't find any regulations which cover this part.I wonder if there's any book that contain this part.
    Thanks again
     
  10. Guillermo
    Joined: Mar 2005
    Posts: 3,644
    Likes: 189, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2247
    Location: Pontevedra, Spain

    Guillermo Ingeniero Naval


  11. eng.naval
    Joined: Aug 2008
    Posts: 24
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Egypt

    eng.naval Junior Member

    Thanks Guillermo
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.