Panamax or Suez Max Tanker Line Drawings?

Hello,

I'm new to this forum and I'm looking for data for the hull shapes of large oil tankers. Ultimately, I'm trying to set up a numerical model to calculate the hydrodynamic impacts (ship waves) of large tankers in constricted waterways. In order to do this, I need to construct (likely in AutoCAD) a reasonable representation of a tanker hull.

Does anybody have a line drawing for a large tanker (LOA 250m-ish to 300m-ish) that they'd be willing to share?

Thanks for any help you can give!
Scott

 

If you want a quick and dirty 3d model mesh, go buy a cheap one off turbosquid.
Tanker Ship 3D Models for Download | TurboSquid https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-model/tanker-ship/
Otherwise unless someone is willing to give/sell you a developed hull model, get out SD&C. They are not really that complicated except for the stern which is designed in concert with the prop.

 

Thanks for the reply!

I don't think I want to download a full 3d rendered vessel. I really don't need the detail on the superstructure. Also, I need to make some modifications to the hull for my hydrodynamic model to work as for every x-y point, I can only have one z value. What that means is that I have to trim out any bulbous bow features and I have to make slight tweaks to vertical surfaces (hull sides). I'm thinking instead of trying to modify and existing rendered vessel, it might just be easier to build it up from the line work exactly how I need it.

I'm fine with purchasing a model or line drawing, I just don't know where to buy such stuff. Looks like turbosquid is just 3d models?

Thanks!

 

If you take the bulb out, the wave impact values will likely be higher than they should.

 

Such are the limitations of the model I'm trying to set up. At least with no bulb the results will be more conservative, which is better from a design perspective.

 

Not really. It would result in a more expensive and heavy structure.

 

Gonzo is right here. Only VLCC's and ULCC's tend to have non-bulb bows. You can do that when almost all the drag is wetted surface. And actually, based on your need, an elliptic bow is not the worst case. (Trust me, I looked into what you want to do, near and far field effects of deep draft wakes in constructed waters, about 30 years ago.) You are going to find that the speed combined with the quarter wakes are going to drive the Keulegan–Carpenter number for all sorts of things.

(edit, now that I think about it, its been just at 30...The years go by faster now.)

 

Yeah, it is a challenging subject with some very complex hydrodynamics to capture. I agree that over-conservatism is not a great thing but the key is (hopefully) understanding the degree of uncertainty and over conservatism. In my case, we are typically designing berthing structures and we are trying to compute the vessel mooring (line, bollard and fender) loads and motions generated on a berthed vessel by passing ship in a narrow constricted waterway (think Houston Ship Channel). Often other design parameters will dictate the design and the passing vessel analysis is a check, so if we know that the model results are over conservative but the design still works, we should be OK.

With that said, this is not always the case. There are more sophisticated (read expensive...like $50k+) models out there that will compute the hydrodynamics of the bulbous bow and other "overhanging" features. It may be possible for me to run a comparison with these more sophisticated models to better evaluate the performance difference between the two.

But step one is getting my tanker set up in the model...so, if anyone has any suggestions on where to get line work, please let me know.

Thanks for the great replies.

 

This may be a possibility, they should ha:ve sets of hull lines
Crude Oil Tanker, Ready made,handcrafted,wooden,custom built https://premiershipmodels.us/product/oil-tanker-model-ship/