Presented at

ASCE Ports 98
Long Beach, CA, March 8 - 11. 1998

Computer Mooring Load Analysis to

Improve Port Operations and Safety
John F. Flory, Stephen P. Banfield, Dr. Alan Ractliffe
Tension Technology International
Abstract
Mooring analysis of a vessel alongside a pier usually involves a number of non-linear
mooring lines, extending at different vectors in both the horizontal and vertical planes, with
elastic fenders, acted upon by wind, current, and sometimes other forces, which may vary in time
and direction. Computer programs are now available which can quickly and accurately analyze
such complex mooring arrangements.
In this paper, a number of example cases, calculated by a mooring analysis computer
program, are used to demonstrate that the characteristics, qualities, and arrangements of the lines
can greatly affect the mooring line tensions experienced at a pier.
Introduction
A vessel's mooring arrangement is seldom a concern, until a gust of wind, a passing ship, or
inattention to changes in tide or freeboard causes mooring line failure and sudden vessel
movement. Such an accident can result in costly damage to cargo handling equipment or other
nearby vessels and structures, oil or chemical pollution, and personnel injuries and fatalities.
Proper analysis of the adequacy of a vessel's mooring gear, a pier's mooring points, and the
mooring arrangement can significantly reduce the likelihood of such mooring accidents. Some
ports which handle hazardous materials, such as LPG, require such an analysis for each vessel
mooring. Other ports simply prescribe the use of a minimum number of mooring lines, without
concern for the character, quality or arrangement of those lines.
In this paper, a typical large-tanker mooring is analyzed with variations of the number, type,
and arrangement of mooring lines. Cases are compared in which winch-mounted wire mooring
lines are used together auxiliary synthetic fiber lines. Cases involving several alternative
synthetic fiber ropes are examined. Finally, several variations of mooring bollard positions are
evaluated.
Mooring Analysis Simplified
Figure 1 shows a simplified mooring arrangement, comprised of bow and stern breast lines,
spring lines, and fenders. With only four mooring lines, the analysis involves six unknowns the
mooring line forces and the fender reactions. Only three force and moment summation equations
can be written. The vector and elasticity of each mooring line must also be considered. Thus a
complete, proper solution of even this simplified mooring arrangement is not an easy matter.
Real vessel mooring arrangements usually have many mooring lines. If fender deflection is
considered, the solution becomes more complicated. The solution becomes very complex if

non-linear mooring line elasticity is included. Thus the typical mooring arrangement is too
complex to be properly analyzed by hand.
Computer programs are now available which can perform a complete mooring analysis of
even a complex system in a few minutes on a personal computer. One such mooring analysis
computer program is the Optimoor program, developed by Tension Technology International.
The Optimoor Mooring Analysis Program
Within Optimoor, the vessel is defined by its dimensions as well as by data on fairlead
positions and mooring line size and material. Based on the mooring line information, Optimoor
determines the appropriate break strength and non-linear force-extension characteristics. The
berth is defined by data on mooring point positions and fender characteristics. These data are
entered in spread-sheet-like screens and stored in files, which are then used in setting up
analyses cases.
The Optimoor user defines a mooring analysis case by calling up the vessel and the berth
files and describing which vessel lines are connected to which mooring points on the pier. Wind
and current velocities and directions are then entered. Optimoor contains appropriate wind and
current force and moment coefficients for typical vessels, and additional data files can be
prepared as necessary. Tide table data can be entered, and then used to determine tidal currents
as well as tide elevation with time.
As data is entered or updated, the program calculates the resulting mooring line loads due to
the wind and current conditions and state of tide. Wind and current velocities can be increased to
check limiting conditions. The wind vector can be swept through 360/ to determine the most
severe direction. Mooring line pretensions can also be varied.
A mooring analysis can be set up based on the vessel's arrival and departure times and
corresponding drafts and trims. Tide elevation and current information can be input or called
from an existing data file. Optimoor can then perform a mooring analysis over time, predicting
the effects of changes of draft, trim, tide, and tidal current on mooring line tensions. This
technique can be used to determine when mooring lines may need to be tended and also to plan
the best way to tend the lines in order to minimize the need for further mooring line tending.
Example Mooring Arrangement Analyses
The following examples involve a 250,000 dwt tanker moored alongside a pier. The vessel
length is 330 m (1080 ft) between perpendiculars. Its beam is 52m (170 ft), and its molded depth
is 24 m (79 ft). In the example cases, the vessel has a draft of 6 m (20 ft) and a trim of 5 m (16.4
ft) by the stern. This particular tanker is used because it was used in several mooring analyses
examples in the Oil Companies International Marine Forum Guidelines and Recommendations
for the Safe Mooring of Large Ships at Piers and Sea Islands.(1) The mooring forces calculated
by Optimoor are compared with those OCIMF examples in a previous paper.(2)
The mooring arrangement which is used in these analyses is shown in Figure 2. The
bollards, other than those used for spring lines, are positioned 38 m (125 ft) back from the fender
face. Later, the case of 53 m (175 ft) bollard setback is examined. The bollards for the bow and
stern lines are positioned substantially ahead and abeam of the moored vessel. Later, a case in
which these bollards positioned essentially in line with the bow and stern is examined.
In these examples, the forcing environment is a 60 kt wind pushing the moored tanker off
the pier combined with a 3 kt current from ahead. This corresponds with the criteria given in the
OCIMF Guidelines. Note that these guidelines apply to mooring gear onboard the vessel and do
not necessarily apply to mooring analysis of a particular pier. The pier should normally be
designed and outfitted in accordance with the most severe environment which is expected at the
site.

All-Wire Cases
Case 1, 14 Wire Mooring Lines Alone
In Case 1 the vessel is moored by 14 wires, arranged as 2 head lines, 3 forward breast lines,
2 forward springs, 2 aft springs, 3 aft breast lines, and 2 stern lines. The wires are 45 mm (1-
in.) diameter steel with fiber core, with a rated break strength of 52.9 GN (235 kip). Each line is
pretensioned to 2.2 GN (10 kip).
In the case tables at the end of this paper, connection designates the number of the vessel
line and the letter of the shore mooring point to which it is attached. Thus for example, 5-C
indicates that line 5 is attached to mooring point C. The spring lines are not shown in the tables,
because in these examples they were only lightly tensioned.
Line 8-G is tensioned to 58% of the rated breaking strength of the wires. This exceeds the
55% maximum mooring line tension criteria permitted by OCIMF. Thus this is probably an
unacceptable situation.
The common solution is to require the use of auxiliary lines. Here the term auxiliary refers
to lines other than winch-mounted mooring lines which are deployed on bitts to provide
additional mooring capacity.
Case 2, 14 Wire Mooring Lines plus 4 Wire Auxiliary Lines
In Case 2, four additional wire ropes are deployed as auxiliary lines. These are mounted on
bitts near the edge of the deck and run essentially in parallel with the breast lines. Auxiliary lines
11-D and 12-D are forward breast lines, and auxiliary lines 19-G and 20-G are aft breast lines.
Because the wire auxiliary lines are relatively short, as compared to the winch-mounted
wires, they are more heavily loaded. In this arrangement the most highly loaded line, 11-D, is
tensioned to only 45% of its breaking strength.
Wire and Synthetic Mixed-Line Cases
Figure 3 shows typical load-extension curves for wire rope and several types of synthetic
fiber rope. These curves are for broken-in ropes which have been cycled a few times to a modest
load. Steel wire rope extends about 1% when loaded to 50% of its new breaking strength. Ropes
made of high-modulus fibers extend about twice as much as steel wire rope. Broken-in
polypropylene and polyester ropes typically extend about 6% at 50% of new breaking strength.
At 50% strength, nylon rope typically extends between 12% to 15%, depending on other
variables.
Case 3, 14 Wire Mooring Lines with 4 Polypropylene Auxiliary Lines
Polypropylene rope is frequently used as auxiliary mooring lines. Polypropylene rope is
light-weight, is easy to handle, and it floats, but it is relatively low in strength.
In Case 3, the auxiliary lines are 75 mm (3 in.} diameter polypropylene rope, with a rated
break strength of 24 GN (107 kip). Four auxiliary polypropylene lines are used in the same
arrangement as was used with the auxiliary wires in Case 2. These are lines 11-D, 12-D, 19-G
and 20-G.
In Case 1, wires without auxiliary lines, the most highly tensioned line was 8-H. Through
the use of these polypropylene auxiliary lines, the load in that line was reduced by 4.2 GN (19
kip), a relative reduction of 14%. Similar tension reductions are achieved in several other breast
lines.
Note that the polypropylene ropes are only lightly loaded. These polypropylene auxiliary
lines are generally tensioned to only about 25% of the tension in the adjacent wire breast lines.

This is because the polypropylene ropes are much more elastic than the wires. Thus they are not
very effective in reducing mooring tensions.
Use of High-Modulus Fiber Ropes
High performance fiber ropes are now sometimes used for mooring lines. The fiber
materials used in these ropes are much stronger and also stiffer than the conventional
rope-making fibers nylon, polyester, and polypropylene. Examples of such materials are aramid
(duPont "Kevlar" and Akzo Nobel "Twaron") and high-modulus polyethylene (HMPE) (Allied
"Spectra" and DSM "Dyneema"). Because they are much stiffer, the ropes made of this new
class of fibers are called high-modulus fiber ropes. (3)
These high-modulus fiber ropes are almost as strong as wire ropes of the same size, and they
are also almost as stiff. At 50% of new break strength, wire rope extends about 1%, and
broken-in high-modulus fiber rope extends about 2%.
Case 4, 14 Wire Mooring Lines with 4 High-Modulus Auxiliary Lines
Case 4 illustrates the use of high-modulus fiber rope in place of polypropylene in the above
example. The high-modulus fiber auxiliary lines are used in the same positions as the auxiliary
lines in the preceding examples. And as before, they are pretensioned to 2.2 GN (10 kip).
The resulting maximum line tensions are much less than with polypropylene auxiliary lines.
The tension in line 8-H, which was overloaded in Case 1, is reduced by 10.4 GN (46 kip), a 35%
relative reduction in tension.
Note that tensions are relatively equally distributed among the various lines, including the
high-modulus fiber auxiliary lines. The maximum line tensions in this case are lower than those
of Case 2 where wire auxiliary lines were used. The high-modulus lines, which are about twice
as elastic as the wire auxiliary lines, are not as greatly affected by the relatively short leads from
the bitts to the shore mooring points.
Use of Synthetic Fiber Mooring Lines
Case 5, All High-Modulus Fiber Mooring Lines and Auxiliary Lines
Some vessels now use high-modulus fiber rope instead of wire rope as winch-mounted
mooring lines. The principal advantage is the lighter weight, which requires a smaller deck crew
to handle the lines and also reduces the chances of injuries. Other advantages are; the
high-modulus fiber ropes do not corrode, do not require greasing, and generally last longer than
wire ropes in typical service. But the high-modulus fiber ropes cost more than conventional fiber
ropes and much more than wire ropes of the same strength.
In Case 5, 14 high modulus fiber ropes are mounted on winches in place of the wires, and 4
additional high modulus fiber ropes are deployed as auxiliary mooring lines. The high modulus
fiber ropes have a rated breaking strength of 56.7 GN (252 kip), slightly greater than the wires
which they replace. This strength could represent either aramid or HMPE rope of approximately
50 mm (2 in.) diameter.
Compared to Case 2, in which wire rope was used in the same arrangement, the line tensions
are very similar. Compared to Case 4, in which wire was used as mooring lines and
high-modulus fiber rope was used only as auxiliary lines, the maximum tensions are about the
same, but now the relatively short auxiliary lines are more highly tensioned and the tensions in
the winch-mounted mooring high- modulus lines are less.

Case 6, 14 High-Modulus Fiber Mooring Lines Alone

What would happen if only the 14 winch-mounted high-modulus fiber ropes were used,
without the use of auxiliary lines? With only 14 high-modulus fiber mooring lines, the maximum
tensions are within the OCIMF 55% limitation criteria.
This is in contrast to Case 1, with wire mooring lines, in which line 12-H was tensioned to
58% of its rated breaking strength. This is because the tensions were more equally shared among
the more elastic high-modulus fiber lines.
Case 7, 18 Nylon Mooring Lines
Nylon rope is much more elastic than wire rope and high-modulus fiber rope. In some mooring
and towing applications, this is a desirable property. But it is generally undesirable where the
motions of the moored vessel must be restricted. Case 7 shows what happens when nylon is used
for all of the mooring and auxiliary lines.
The line loads in this all-nylon 18 line case are similar to those for the all-high-modulus 18
line Case 5 above. However, the vessel motions are much greater. The moored vessel shifts
forward 3.4 m (11 ft) and moves out almost 6.1 m (20 ft) from the berth. These vessel motions
would be unacceptable for a tanker connected by hoses or loading arms to a terminal and would
probably be unacceptable in other applications.
Case 8, 18 Polypropylene Mooring Lines
Some vessels are equipped only with polypropylene mooring lines. Polypropylene fiber
ropes are relatively inexpensive. However, they are also weak compared with other conventional
fiber (nylon and polyester) ropes of the same size and with wire rope and high-modulus fiber
rope of the sizes typically used as vessel mooring lines.
The following case illustrates the use of 18 polypropylene ropes in the example situation
discussed here. The vessel movement is much greater than with wire or with high-modulus fiber
rope, although it is not as great as with nylon.
The mooring line tensions are similar to those of the above all-high-modulus fiber and nylon
rope cases. But because the polypropylene rope is not as strong, several auxiliary lines are
tensioned to over 90% of the rated break strength and others are tensioned to over 80%. Several
breast lines are tensioned to over 70% of the rated break strength. Tensions in a number of other
mooring lines exceed the 55% criteria. Clearly, this is an unacceptable situation, even though a
total of 18 mooring lines are used.
Changes in Mooring Line Arrangement
Thus far only the effects of changing the types and numbers of mooring lines have been
considered. What if the mooring line arrangement is changed?
Case 9, 14 Wire Mooring Lines, Bow and Stern Lines to Alternative Mooring Points
As shown in Figure 3, two additional mooring points are available on the pier. These
bollards B and I are positioned such that bow and stern lines respectively will be essentially
perpendicular to the vessel. Case 9 shows the 14 wire mooring lines of Case 1with the bow and
stern lines run to these alternative mooring points.
In this case, none of the mooring lines exceed the OCIMF 55% line tension limitation
criteria. The bow lines and also the stern lines now act essentially as breast lines, more
effectively sharing the force of the broadside wind, and thus relieving tensions from the other
breast lines. The spring lines still serve to resist the longitudinal force due to the 3 kt current.

Case 10, 14 Wire Mooring Lines, Change in Bollard Set-Back Distance

In all of the above examples, the bollards (except spring-line bollards) were positioned at
38.1 m (125 ft) back from the fender face. What happens if this bollard set-back distance is
altered? In Case 10 these bollards are moved back to positions which are 53.4 m (175 ft) from
the fender face. The 14 wire mooring lines are placed on the same bollards as in Case 1.
In this case, none of the mooring lines exceeds the 55% OCIMF criteria. In all of the above
examples, the maximum tensions would be less if the bollards were moved back. Conversely, if
the mooring bollards were moved closer to the pier face, the maximum tensions would be
greater. This is because the longer mooring lines provide greater elasticity which better shares
mooring loads.
Discussion
Many ports establish criteria for a minimum number of mooring lines, without regard to the
character, quality, or arrangement of the mooring lines which might be employed by a particular
vessel. This practice does not necessarily guarantee an adequate mooring.
Case 1 illustrated a situation in which 14 wire mooring lines were not adequate, meaning
that the OCIMF 55% maximum line tension criteria was exceeded. In Case 2, an additional 4
wire auxiliary lines made the situation acceptable.
Case 9 and also Case 10 demonstrated how repositioning the original 14 wire lines achieved
an acceptable mooring arrangement. Case 6 demonstrated how 14 high-modulus fiber mooring
lines in the original arrangement provided an acceptable mooring situation. Thus 14 lines are
sufficient in some circumstances.
Case 3 demonstrated how the use of 4 polypropylene auxiliary lines turned Case 1 into an
acceptable situation. The use of 4 high-modulus fiber auxiliary lines in Case 5 created an even
better situation.
In Case 7, 18 nylon lines would be judged acceptable by the maximum tension criteria.
However, the greater elasticity of these nylon lines permit excessive vessel movement. In Case
8, a total of 18 polypropylene lines was not sufficient, because the break strength of at least one
of these lines was exceeded. Thus specifying a minimum of 18 mooring lines does not always
ensure an adequate mooring.
These example cases demonstrate that each particular mooring situation should be
individually analyzed to determine its acceptability, instead of simply specifying a general
criteria without considering the character, quality, or arrangement of the mooring lines. In some
cases, 14 lines alone was sufficient, and the additional auxiliary lines were not necessary. In
other cases, even 18 lines was not sufficient.

References:
1. OCIMF, Guidelines and Recommendations for the Safe Mooring of Large Ships at Piers and Sea Islands,
Witherby & Co., London, 1978.
2. Flory, J.F. and A. Ractliffe, "Mooring Arrangement Management by Computer", 1994 Ship Operations,
Management, and Economics Symposium, SNAME, Jersey City, NY, 1994.
3. Flory, J.F., H.A. McKenna, and M.R. Parsey, "Fiber Ropes for Ocean Engineering in the 21st Century", pp
934-947,Proceedings of Civil Engineering In the Oceans V, ASCE, New York, Nov. 1992

Figure 1

Solving a simple mooring system with two breast lines, two spring lines, and two
fenders, requires three equations for six unknowns.

Figure 2

Vessel Mooring Arrangement Used In These Examples

Figure 3.

Typical Wire and Synthetic Fiber Rope Load-Extension Curves

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

5-C

6-H

7-H

Stern Lines

8-H

9-J

10-J

Mooring line wire wire wire wire wire

wire wire wire wire wire

Tension,
GN

21.8 18.2 27.9 27.2 29.5

24.1 23.6 30.4 23.8 23.2

% of
Strength

41% 34% 53% 51% 55%

46% 45% 58% 45% 44%

Vessel Shift: 0.24 m forward, 0.73 m out, 0.1 N to port

Case 1 - Base Case, 14 Wire Mooring Lines (4 spring lines not shown)

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

5-C 11-D 12-D 19-G 20-G 6-H

7-H

Stern Lines

8-H

9-J

10-J

Mooring line wire wire wire wire wire wire wire wire wire wire wire wire wire wire
Tension,
GN

11.9

8.6

19.8 18.4 19.6 23.8 23.0 19.8 18.6 18.6 13.7 16.4 20.7 19.6

% of
Strength

23% 16% 37% 35% 45% 43% 43% 37% 35% 27% 26% 31% 39% 37%
Vessel Shift: 0.44 m forward, 0..40 m , 0.1 N to port

Case 2 - 14 Wire Mooring Lines with 4 Additional Wire Auxiliary Lines

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

Stern Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

5-C 11-D 12-D 19.G 20.G 6-H

7-H

8-H

9-J

10-J

Mooring
line

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

Tension,
GN

19.1 15.8 25.4 24.8 26.6

% of
Strength

36% 30% 48% 47% 50% 28% 28% 26% 26% 40% 39% 49% 42% 41%

6.8

6.8

6.3

6.3

21.2 20.7 11.0 22.5 21.6

Vessel Shift: 0.30 m forward, 0.61 m out, 0.1 N to port

Case 3 - 14 Wire Mooring Lines with 4 Polypropylene Auxiliary Lines

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

Stern Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

5-C 11-D 12-D 19-G 20-G 6-H

7-H

8-H

9-J

10-J

Mooring
line

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

Tension,
GN

14.8 11.7 21.4 20.5 21.8 18.0 17.3 15.3 14.6 16.6 16.4 20.2 20.5 19.6

% of
Strength

28% 22% 41% 39% 41% 32% 31% 27% 26% 32% 31% 38% 39% 37%

HM

HM

HM

HM

wire

Vessel Shift: 0.34 m forward, 0.46 m out, 0.1 N to port

Case 4 - 14 Wire Mooring Lines with 4 High-Modulus Fiber Auxiliary Lines

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

Stern Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

5-C 11-D 12-D 19-G 20-G 6-H

7-H

8-H

9-J

10-J

Mooring
line

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

Tension,
GN

11.7

8.6

19.4 18.2 19.4 24.8 23.6 20.5 19.4 14.0 13.5 16.6 19.6 18.4

% of
Strength

21% 15% 34% 32% 34% 44% 42% 36% 34% 25% 24% 29% 35% 33%

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

Vessel Shift: 0.67 m forward, 0.76 m out, 0.1 N to port

Case 5 - 14 High-Modulus Fiber Lines with 4 High-Modulus Fiber Auxiliary Lines

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

Stern Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

5-C

6-H

7-H

8-H

9-J

10-J

Mooring
line

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

HM

Tension,
GN

20.7 16.9 28.6 27.4 30.2

23.6 23.0 31.0 23.0 22.9

% of
Strength

37% 30% 50% 48% 53%

42% 41% 55% 42% 41%

Vessel Shift: 0.43 m forward, 1.21 m out, 0.1 N to port

Case 6 - 14 High-Modulus Fiber Mooring Lines without Auxiliary Lines

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

2-A

3-C

4-C

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

5-C 11-D 12-D 19-G 20-G 6-H

7-H

8-H

Stern Lines

Connection

1-A

9-J

10-J

Mooring
line

Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo Nylo
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n

Tension,
GN

12.4 10.6 16.0 15.8 17.1 23.0 22.3 20.9 20.2 14.2 14.0 17.6 14.8 14.4

% of
Strength

24% 20% 31% 30% 33% 44% 43% 40% 39% 27% 27% 34% 29% 27%
Vessel Shift: 3.35 m forward, 5.98 m out, 0.3 N to port

Case 7 - 14 Nylon Mooring Lines with 4 Nylon Auxiliary Lines

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

5-C 11-D 12-D 19-G 20-G 6-H

7-H

8-H

Stern Lines
9-J

10-J

Mooring
line

Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly. Poly.

Tension,
GN

12.6 10.6 16.4 16.0 17.3 22.7 22.0 20.7 20.0 14.4 14.2 17.6 15.5 14.8

% of
Strength

52% 44% 68% 66% 72% 94% 92% 86% 83% 60% 58% 73% 64% 62%
Vessel Shift: 2.5 m forward, 4.54 m out, 0.2 N to port

Case 8 - 14 Polypropylene Mooring Lines with 4 Polypropylene Auxiliary Lines

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

Stern Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

5-C

6-H

7-H

8-H

9-J

10-J

Mooring
line

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

Tension,
GN

24.8 25.2 20.0 19.6 20.9

20.9 20.7 25.9 25.0 23.4

% of
Strength

47% 47% 38% 37% 40%

40% 39% 49% 47% 44%

Vessel Shift: 0.21 m forward, 0.52 m out, 0.0 N to port

Case 9 - 14 Wire Mooring Lines with Bow and Stern Lines Repositioned

Bow Lines Fwd. Breast Lines

Auxiliary Lines

Aft Breast Lines

Stern Lines

Connection

1-A

2-A

3-C

4-C

5-C

6-H

7-H

8-H

9-J

10-J

Mooring
line

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

wire

Tension,
GN

21.6 19.6 25.0 24.8 26.8

23.4 23.2 28.8 22.5 21.6

% of
Strength

41% 37% 47% 47% 50%

44% 44% 54% 43% 41%

Vessel Shift: 0.18 m forward, 0.73 m out, 0.0 N to port

Case 10 - 14 Wire Mooring Lines with Bollards Moved Further Back