See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309212544

Tanker Ship Structural Analysis for Intact and Damage Cases

Conference Paper · October 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 2,085

4 authors, including:

Iraklis Lazakis Gerasimos Theotokatos

University of Strathclyde University of Strathclyde
113 PUBLICATIONS 2,021 CITATIONS 163 PUBLICATIONS 2,587 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Evangelos Boulougouris
University of Strathclyde
229 PUBLICATIONS 2,073 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Evangelos Boulougouris on 18 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Conference on Maritime Safety and Operations, Glasgow, UK, 13th – 14th October 2016

Tanker Ship Structural Analysis for Intact and Damage Cases

R. Fernandez., I. Lazakis, G. Theotokatos & E. Boulougouris
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, U.K.

ABSTRACT: This paper presents the work carried out to assess the structural calculation of a tanker ship in
intact and damage conditions, in order to know the areas of the central cargo ship exposed to greater stresses.
Analysing the results obtained from the intact condition and damage conditions due to grounding. The method
selected to simulate the damage conditions has been done applying a change in the mechanical properties of
the material; reductions of 40, 60 and 80 % of Young Modules were applied. The validation of the results was
made following the guidelines “Common Structural Rules for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers” from IACS. The
finite element method and finite element analysis software (Ansys®) were used to analyse intact and ground-
ing cases. For intact case only one scenario was done, full load condition. For grounding, three scenarios were
done. The results presented correspond to the validation of the finite element model, and the results concern-
ing the maximum value of Von Mises Stress for each load condition, verifying if the permissible stress has
been exceeded in each of the conditions analysed.

KEYWORDS: intact; damage; grounding; collision; finite element analysis; young module; IACS

1 INTRODUCTION the highest stresses. The method selected to simu-

late the damage conditions has been done applying
Since the first publication of the Convention of a change in the mechanical properties of the mate-
Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), approved in 1914 to rial; reductions of 40, 60 and 80 % of Young Mod-
present day, the maritime safety has managed to ules were applied at ship bottom. Research results
improve gradually to a preventive approach. Even have been validated according to the guidelines of
though each day it is applied new safety procedures the International Association of Classification So-
and new marine systems are introduced, injuries cieties. The finite element method and finite ele-
and fatalities in passengers and crew, environmen- ment analysis software (Ansys®) was used to ana-
tal pollution as well as damage on ship and its lyse the intact and damage cases. For the intact case
equipment continue to occur. only the full load condition scenario was consid-
From the report of EMSA (2015) regarding to ered, while for damage conditions, three scenarios
marine incidents, between the years 2011-2014 the have been studied.
number of occurrences reported was 9180. For The evaluation of the strength structure has been
2014 there were 3025 occurrences; within which analysed using the finite element method, this pro-
765 were serious and 99 very serious. Also this ject has taken into consideration the information
document shows the dates regarding ship collision obtained from finite element analysis manuals, in-
and grounding that for 2014 there were equal to ternational regulations and research papers outlined
293 for ship collision and 331 for Ground- below.
ing/Stranding. Nowadays the use of finite element analysis is a
Attending the information exposed in the para- conventional method applied to resolve the majori-
graph above, this study has the objective to analyse ty of problems related to structural calculation. It is
the areas exposed to highest stress due to ship possible to find important information regarding
grounding, simulating different scenarios of dam- the application of finite element analysis in marine
age along the ship bottom. industry using Ansys in the study carry out by (Su-
The structural condition of a tanker ship for in- man et al., 2008). Another interesting study about
tact and damage cases is investigated, in order to strength analysis using Ansys was done by (Mathai
provide an approximation of the areas exposed to et al., 2013) applied to container ship. Lakshmi and

145
Nageswara (2015) studied the utilization of finite
element analysis applied on a cargo ship.
Attending the importance of factors such as
model generation, selected material, applied loads
and constraints imposed, in order to validate the re-
sults obtained, this project has followed the guide-
lines stablished mainly by IACS (2006), IACS
(2012).
Regarding the literature consulted about strength
analysis on ships, it is necessary to emphasize the
work done by (Saad-Eldeen, et al., 2016) regarding
hull girder ultimate strength, also the research done
by (Dimitris et al., 2003), another important litera-
ture consulted was the research done by (Gaspar,
2016) and (Heinvee et al., 2013) regarding predic-
tion of bottom damage in tanker due to grounding.
This paper is organized as follows: Section 2
presents and methodology applied. The main char-
acteristics of the model selected as well as the pro-
cess follows to generate the model developed is ex-
plained. Section 4 shows the values of the mesh
generated. In Section 5 an explanation about mate-
rial selection is done. Section 6 shows the boundary
conditions applied. The information regarding
Loads applied were described in Section 7. Section
8 shows the information regarding the validation of
the model. The Von Mises Stress results for intact
and damage conditions are presented in Section 9.
The conclusions are presented in the last section.

2 METHODOLOGY Figure 1. Flow chart methodology.

The methodology followed in this project starts

with the definition of the main characteristics and 3 INVESTIGATED VESSEL
dimensions of the ship, and the scantling of the
structure. Followed by the generation of the mesh 3.1 Principal Ship Characteristics
of the ship model. The next step is related to the The vessel selected for this analysis is an Aframax
definition of material properties and reductions of oil tanker. This vessel is designed to operate in in-
Young Modulus established for each condition es- ternational waters. For this study the guidelines es-
tablished. The sequence follows with the definition tablished by IACS (2012) have been followed,
of the boundary conditions and the application of more concretely section 9 regarding design verifica-
the static loads. tion, which explain the requirements to evaluate the
Next section is dedicated to explaining and hull strength applying the FEA. The rule require-
showing the process and results obtained to validate ments are based on the assumption that the materi-
the model. The next section has been left to show als used are manufactured in accordance with the
the results of the areas of maximum stress concen- rolling tolerances specified in IACS (2012). Table 1
tration. Leaving the last section for conclusions. shows the main dimensions of the ship.
Figure 1 shows methodology follow in this project.
Table 1. Main dimensions of the vessel.
Main Particulars m
______________________________________________
LOA 240.5
LBP 230.0
B(mld) 42.0
D(mld) 21.2
T(mld, Design) 12.2
T(mld,F.load) 14.9
_____________________________________________

146
Following the guidelines indicated by IACS (2012), 3.2 Materials
three cargo holds have been modelled to represent For this project has been decided to select the mate-
the midship section of the ship (two whole holds rial from the material library of Ansys®. The reason
and two half holds at the fore and aft of the midship why this steel has been selected is because it has
areas. The structure consists of shell elements rep- the same mechanical properties as used in the naval
resenting plates and beam elements representing industry, at the same time this steel conforms the
stiffeners. The distance between web frames is 4.75 requirements established by IACS (2012) in regards
m. The watertight bulkheads are located at the end to material properties. As was mentioned in the sec-
of every cargo tank, with a distance equal to 28 m. tion 2 of this project regarding to material used, it
Figure 2 shows the location of the cargo tanks ex- has had in consideration the specifications collected
amined. in IACS (2012), regarding to thickness tolerances
of steel plates. The material properties of the steel
selected are displayed in Table 2.

Table 2. Mechanical properties structural steel

______________________________________________
Figure 2. Cargo holds selected. Item Value
______________________________________________
Tensile yield strength 250 MPa
With the intention to reduce the calculation time of Compressive yield strength 250 MPa
FEA, several assumptions were considered notably; Tensile ultimate strength 460 MPa
the smallest elements with length between 0.1 m to Density 7850 kg/m3
_____________________________________________
0.4 m of width were not modelled. The tool Design
Modeler of Ansys® program has been used to mod-
el the tanker ship midship section. Figures 3 and 4 3.3 Finite Element Model
show the arrangement and the section view of the
The Finite Element code of Ansys® software was
cargo tanks in Design Modeler.
used to analyse the structure. The generated number
of nodes was equal to 75049 and 49525 elements.
Figure 5 is shows the mesh generated.

Figure 5. Structure of midship section (Web Frame).

3.4 Boundary Conditions

The boundary conditions have been applied at the
Figure 3. Cargo holds Arrangement. rigid links on the cargo ends, point constraints and
end-beams. Following the instructions specified in
IACS “Common structural rules for double hull
tanks”. Rigid links connect the nodes on the longi-
tudinal members at the model ends.

3.5 Loads Applications

Concerning this paper, exclusively static loads have
been applied to take into account for analysing the
strength of structural model, ignoring any dynamic
loads on the structure. The loads applied on the
Figure 4. Section view of cargo holds. structure are described in the following table.

147
Table 3. Loads description.
______________________________________________
Load type Description
______________________________________________
Structural weight Steel and Outfit weight
Internal pressure Crude oil hydrostatic load.
External pressure Sea water hydrostatic load.
Bending moments Sagging condition.
_____________________________________________

The Structural model has been investigated in four

different scenarios. Intact condition, damage condi- Figure 8. Damage condition 3.
tion 1, damage condition 2 and damage condition 3.
The first scenario analyses the structural strength
at intact condition. For this analysis only static
loads are applied on the model. With the intention 4 MODEL VALIDATION
of knowing and validating afterwards the strength
obtained, with the results of strength obtained from The validation of the 3D model and the results ob-
the software Poseidon. tained in Ansys® have been analysed and validated
The other three cases include the investigation of by using DNV-GL software “Poseidon”, it is a
structural strength, taking into account damage software to evaluate the strength of ship hull struc-
conditions at different areas of ship bottom. The in- tures, which permit to compare the hull section
vestigated damage locations are shown in Figures modulus, inertia and normal tension results at the
6, 7 and 8, at the same time for each damage area; a deck and bottom areas of ship in intact condition.
reduction of 80, 60 and 40% of Young Modulus At the same time, at the final of this section a
has been applied in bottom plates and stiffeners in testing made using Ansys® has been included. The
contact with bottom plates and floors. purpose of this test is none other than studying the
behaviour of the structure. For this test, the Von
Mises Stress was analysed, using the comparison
between intact condition and damage condition 2,
with the correspond reductions of 40, 60 and 80%
in the mechanical properties of the material.
The process followed for the comparison was
first of all the selection of the loading Condition,
which for this case was the No. 13 from Stability
Booklet. Which correspond with the ship in situa-
tion of departure condition (harbour) and fully
loaded condition. In this condition the water ballast
tanks are empty. Following is showing the values
Figure 6. Damage condition 1.
corresponding to maximum shearing force and
maximum bending moment, for shear for the value
is equal to 25905 Kn. For the maximum bending
moment in sagging condition the value is equal to
1212251 Kn-m. The Table 4 shows the main data
for this condition.

Table 4. Fully loaded cond. dep. full bunker.

______________________________________________
Item Value
______________________________________________
Displacement 122659.00 (Tm)
Mean Draft 14.88 (m)
Fore Draft 14.75 (m)
Figure 7. Damage condition 2. AFT Draft 15.00 (m)
L.W. 16159.00 (Tm)
Prov. 10.00 (Tm)
Const. 274.00 (Tm)
Cargo 102465.00 (Tm)
W.B. 0.00 (Tm)
F.W. 483.00 (Tm)
F.O. & D.O. 3268.00 (Tm)
_____________________________________________

148
Next Poseidon results will be presented, moments Now the attention is centred from -15 m to -20 m
of inertia, section modulus on bottom and deck, which corresponds with port side, the stress in this
bending moments and shear forces. Table below area is equal to 100 MPa and from 0 m to 20 m cor-
shows the normal tensions and the difference of er- responding to starboard side with an approximate
ror obtained from Poseidon and Ansys®. value of 60 MPa. In conclusion, these differences
are found, because the elements affected for the re-
Table 5. Results comparison. ductions of mechanical properties absorb less
Normal Ten- Normal Ten-
Error stress. Therefore, the structure of the starboard side
sion DNV-GL sion ANSYS has to support the stress that cannot be absorb by
(MPa) (MPa) (%)
the structure with the reduction of mechanical
Deck 37.22 35.83 3.73
properties.
Bottom 26.62 23.80 10.59

Bearing in mind that the criteria followed was pro-

posed by the International Association of Classifi-
cation Societies (IACS). The results presented in
the Table 5 shown that the percentage of error ob-
tained is not significant, therefore in this case it is
possible to conclude that the model represents the
investigates vessel structure behaviour with ac-
ceptable accuracy, allowing to analyse the damage
conditions. Figure 10. Von Mises Intact and Damage condition 2.
As it was mentioned at the beginning of this sec-
tion, a study of the behaviour of the structure has
been done, with the intention to evaluate the behav- 5 RESULTS FOR INTACT AND DAMAGE
iour of the structure. The structure analysed corre- CONDITIONS VON MISES STRESS ANALYSIS
spond with a transversal section located in the mid-
dle of the area of the damage condition 2, on the The results presented in this section have been ob-
hull bottom and crossing from side to side the ship. tained following the instructions guidelines of
Figure 9 shows this section. The test allows the IACS. The verification of results against the ac-
comparison between stresses obtained for intact ceptance criteria is to be carried out in accordance
case and for the reduction of 40, 60 and 80% of with Table 6, which establish the Maximum per-
Young Modulus. missible stress.

Table 6. Maximum permissible stresses.

Structural component Yield utilization factor
Internal structure in
tanks
Plating of all non-tight struc-
tural members including
transverse web frame struc-
ture, wash bulkheads, internal λy ≤ 0.8 (load
web, horizontal stringers, combination S)
Figure 9. Damage condition. floors and girders. Face plate
of primary support members
Attending Figure 10, left side corresponds with the modelled using plate or rod
portside of the ship. The blue line represents the in- elements.
Structure on tank
tact condition, the orange line stand for reduction of boundaries
40% of Young Modulus, the grey line refereeing to Plating of deck, sides, inner
the reduction of 60% and the last line related to yel- sides, hopper plate, bilge
low colour corresponds with the reduction of 80%. plate, plane and corrugated λy ≤ 0.72
Observing the behaviour of the blue line from cargo tank longitudinal bulk- (load combination S)
left to right side, the distribution of the stress is heads. Tight floors, girders
and webs.
symmetric, with approximate values of stress equal
Plating of inner bottom, bot-
to 40 MPa. Attending the other lines from 0 m to – tom, plane transverse bulk- λy ≤ 0.64
15 m from centreline, it is observed a progressive heads and corrugated bulk- (load combination S)
reduction of stress in the rest of the lines, showing a heads.
maximum reduction for yellow line with a value of Where:
20 MPa. λy yield utilization factor = σvm/ σyd
σvm = Von Mises stress calculated based on membrane stress-
es N/mm2

149
σyd = specified minimum yield stress of the material, in N/mm2
S = Static condition

The Table 7 shows the results concerning the max-

imum value of Von Mises Stress for each load con-
dition. Analysing Table 8 results, it is possible to
conclude that when a reduction of 40% of Young
Modulus is applied the stress values remain similar,
with a maximum difference of 2 MPa with respect
to the Intact Case. For the reduction of 60% it is Figure 12. Von Mises Stress – Damage condition 1 – 80 %
possible to appreciate a considerable increase, in reduction Young’s Modules.
this case the maximum difference is of 25 MPa. For
the last reduction of 80% this increase is more sig-
nificant, obtaining a maximum difference of 68
MPa.

Table 7. Von Mises stress results

Von Mises Stress I.C. D. C. 1 D. C. 2 D. C. 3

Young Modulus
166 MPa - - -
Reduction 0 % Figure 13. Von Mises stress – damage condition 2 – 80 % re-
Young Modulus
- 167 MPa 167 MPa 168 MPa duction Young’s modules.
Reduction 40 %
Young Modulus
- 182 MPa 184 MPa 191 MPa
Reduction 60 %
Young Modulus
- 214 MPa 218 MPa 234 MPa
Reduction 80 %

Figures 11-15 bellow show Von Misses stress plots

on the finite element analysis carried out in Ansys®.
The figures selected correspond with the maximum
values obtained for intact and damage conditions.
It is necessary to specify that due to amount of
material obtained from the analysis conducted, it Figure 14. Von Mises Stress – Damage condition 3 – 80 %
has not been possible to include all plots obtained reduction Young’s Modules.
for the different reductions of Young Modulus. For
this reason, it has been excluded the reductions cor- The first condition analysed correspond to the in-
responding to 40 and 60% for all damage condi- tact condition, knowing that the maximum stress is
tions. Considering sufficient the inclusion only the affecting the area located in the starboard side be-
reduction percentage which has more repercussion low the inner bottom as shown Figure 15. For this
in the values of the Von Mises results for all dam- area has been applied a value of yield utilization
age cases, that corresponds with the Young Modu- factor of 0.72 for its validation.
lus reduction of 80%.
To the left of each figure there is a coloured
scale, which represents the stress levels plotted on
the structure sketch. The Figures 11, 12, 13 and 14
correspond the Von Mises Stress for intact condi-
tion and damage condition with a reduction of 80%
of Young Modulus.

Figure 15. Starboard Side - Intact condition.

Figure 11. Von Mises Stress – intact condition.

150
Table 8. Von Mises results.
σvm σyd
Reduction λy ≤ 0.72
N/mm2 N/mm2
0% 166 250 0.664
40 % - - -
(I.C.)
60 % - - -
80 % - - -

The data showed in the table above shown the re-

sult obtained for yield utilization factor λy is minor
to 0.72, which means the stress obtained is permis-
sible according the criteria established in Table 6. Figure 17. Starboard Damage condition 2.
The next results correspond with the damage
condition 1 (D.C.1). According Figures 12 and 16 Table 10. Von Mises results.
corresponding to port side, it is possible to observe σvm
that areas with maximum stress are located between Reduction σyd N/mm2 λy ≤ 0.72
N/mm2
the intersection of the double bottom and the trans- 0% - - -
versal bulkhead. Regarding to permissible stress, 40 % 167 250 0.668
the yield utilization factor applied was equal to (D.C.2)
60 % 184 250 0.728
0.72, the results are shown on the Table 9. 80 % 218 250 0.856

The table above illustrates that for the reduction of

40%, the stress obtained is permissible, but for the
reductions of 60 and 80% the stress factor is ex-
ceeded.

Figure 16. Starboard Damage condition 1.

The data exposed in Table 9 shown the results ob-

tained for yield utilization factor, for a reduction of
40% the stress obtained is permissible, the opposite
occur for the reductions of the 60 and 80%, which Figure 18. Starboard Damage condition 3.
in both cases exceeded the factor.
Last results correspond with damage condition 3
Table 9. Von Mises results. (D.C.3). Figures 14 and 18 shown the areas with
σvm maximum stress, located these on the starboard side
Reduction σyd N/mm2 λy ≤ 0.72 in this case between the double bottom and the
N/mm2
0% - - - transversal bulkhead, to study the permissible stress
40 % 167 250 0.668 has been applied a yield utilization factor of 0.72,
(D.C.1) the results are shown on the Table 11.
60 % 182 250 0.728
80 % 214 250 0.856

Next results correspond with the damage condition Table 11. Von Mises results.
2 (D.C.2). According Figures13 and 17, the area σvm
Reduction σyd N/mm2 λy ≤ 0.72
with maximum stress is the starboard side in this N/mm2
case between the double bottom and the transversal 0% - - -
bulkhead, to study the permissible stress has been 40 % 168 250 0.672
(D.C.2)
applied a yield utilization factor of 0.72, the results 60 % 191 250 0.764
are shown in Table 10. 80 % 234 250 0.936

151
6 CONCLUSIONS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The conclusions from the static analysis done for This paper is partially funded by INCASS project.
the finite element model of Aframax oil tanker, INCASS has received research funding from the
concerning intact condition, damage condition 1, European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme
damage condition 2 and damage condition 3, will under grant agreement No. 605200. This publica-
be showed below. The validation of the results was tion reflects only the author’s views and European
done following the guidelines Common Structural Union is not liable for any use that may be made of
Rules for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers issued by the information contained herein.
IACS (2012), which in its chapter 9 presents the
method in order to assess the hull structure strength
using the finite element method. The loading condi- REFERENCES
tion selected from stability booklet was No. 13,
which correspond with the situation of departure Ahmet H. Ertasa, Veysel Alkanb, Ahmet Fatih Yilmazc 2014.
(harbour) and fully loaded condition (sagging). For Finite Element Simulation of a Mercantile Vessel
Shipboard Under Working Conditions. Procedia
this condition the water ballast tanks are empty and Engineering 69: 1001-1007.
cargo tanks are fully loaded. Alice Mathai, Alice T.V., Ancy Joseph 2013. Shear Strength
Following the guidelines, three cargo holds have Assessment of Ship Hulls. International Journal of
been modelled to represent the midship section of Engineering and Innovative Technology (IJEIT) Volume
the ship. The structure consists of shell elements 2, Issue 8: 161-165.
representing plates and beam elements representing Alice Mathai, George John P., Jini Jacob 2013. Direct
Strength Analysis of Container Ships. International
stiffeners. The Finite Element code of Ansys® was Journal of Engineering Research and Development,
used to analyse the structure. The generated number Volume 6, Issue 5: 98 -106.
of nodes was equal to 75049 and 49525 elements. Anuar AbuBakar, R.S. Dow 2013. Simulation of ship
The validation of the 3D model and the results ob- grounding damage using the finite element method.
tained in Ansys® have been analysed and validated International Journal of Solids and Structures 50: 623–
by using DNV-GL software “Poseidon”; it is a 636.
Ansys 16. 2015. Mechanical User's Guide.
software used to evaluate the strength of ship hull Ansys suite 16. 2015.
structures. Attending the analysis done for intact C. Pollalis & M.S. Samuelides 2013. Ultimate strength of
condition, with a maximum stress value equal to damaged hulls. Collision and Grounding of Ships and
166 N/mm2 located bellow the double bottom and Offshore Structures: 297-304.
bilge plates, as shows the Figure 15, and the value European Maritime Safety Agency 2015. Annual Overview of
of yield utilization factor equal to 0.72, it is possi- Marine Casualties and Incidents 2015.
Gaspar, A.P. Teixeira & C. Guedes Soares 2016. Sensitivity
ble to conclude that the ship satisfies the require- analysis of the IACS-CSR buckling strength requirements
ments stablished by IACS (2012). According to the for stiffened panels. Maritime Technology and
previously mentioned in this paragraph, this study Engineering 3: 459-470.
concludes that the ship can sailing in a safe way. Hadi K.K. Amlashi, Torgeir Moan 2008. Ultimate strength
For the damage condition 1, 2 and 3 under reduc- analysis of a bulk carrier hull girder under alternate hold
loading condition – A case study Part 1: Nonlinear finite
tion of 40% of the mechanical properties, the Ta- element modelling and ultimate hull girder capacity.
bles 9, 10 and 11 show that the values of yield uti- Marine Structures xxx: 1–26.
lization factor are below of 0.72; therefore, the ship Huynh Van-Vu 2015. Prediction the Ultimate Longitudinal
satisfies the requirements stablished by IACS Strength of Intact Ship by Finite Element Method.
(2012). For that reason, this study denotes that the International Journal of Mechanical. Engineering and
ship can sailing in a safe way. For the damage con- Applications. Special Issue: Transportation Engineering
Technology. Vol. 3, No. 1-3: 18-23.
dition 1, 2 and 3 under reduction of 60% and 80% Diewald, B. Gerlach & S. Ehlers 2016. On the influence of
of the mechanical properties, the Tables 9, 10 and primary and secondary structural members on the global
11 show that the values of yield utilization factor strength of ship structures. Maritime Technology and
are above of 0.72, therefore, the ship does not pass Engineering 3: 435-441.
the requirements stablished by IACS (2012). In Dimitris Servis, George Voudouris, Manolis Samuelides,
consequence this study suggests that the main re- Apostolos Papanikolaou 2003. Finite element modelling
and strength analysis of hold No. 1 of bulk carriers.
sponsible of the ship has to stop of sailing, and car- Marine Structures 16(8): 601–626.
ry out a close up inspection to identify and evaluate M. Heinvee & K. Tabri, M. Kõrgesaar 2013. A simplified
the damages produced. To conclude, this study has approach to predict the bottom damage in tanker
achieved the objectives established. The “hot spots” grounding. Collision and Grounding of Ships and Offshore
areas subjected to highest stress have been success- Structures: 161-169.
fully identified, exposing the highest stresses val- IACS. 2012. Background document – Section 9/1, Design
verification, Hull girder ultimate strength. Common
ues, at the same time that give the necessary sug- Structural Rules for Double Hull Oil Tankers.
gestion to carry out in case of damage. International Association of Classification Societies.
London.

152
ISSC 2015. International Ship and Offshore Structure Ship Structure Committee. (1996). Guideline for evaluation of
Congress: committee III.1: Ultimate Strength. finite element and results.
Okumoto, Y., Takeda, Y., Mano, M., & Okada, T. (2009). S.G. Lee, S.H. Jun & G.Y. Kong 2013. Modeling and
Design of ship hull structures . (Springer, Ed.) Higashi, simulation system for marine accident cause investigation.
Oiroshima, Japan. Collision and Grounding of Ships and Offshore Structures:
Y. Lakshmi Prasanna, Dr. Amar Nageswara Rao 2015. Ship 39-47.
Hull Structure Analysis in Ansys. International Journal of Suman Kar, D.G. Sarangdhar & G.S. Chopra 2008. Analysis
Scientific Engineering and Technology Research, Col.04, of ship structures using ansys. SeaTech Solutions
Issue 33: 6698-6701. International (S) Pte Ltd.
Yoshiteru Tanaka, Hiroaki Ogawa, Akira Tatsumi & Y. Garbatov, S. Saad-Eldeen 1 , C. Guedes Soares 2015. Hull
Masahiko Fujikubo 2015. Analysis method of ultimate girder ultimate strength assessment based on experimental
hull girder strength under combined loads. Ships and results and the dimensional theory. Engineering Structures
Offshore Structures, Vol. 10, No. 5: 587–598. 100: 742–750.
S. Benson, M. Syrigou & R.S. Dow 2013. Longitudinal ISSC 2015. International Ship and Offshore Structure
strength assessment of damaged box girders. Collision and Congress: committee III.1: Ultimate Strength.
Grounding of Ships and Offshore Structures: 305-314.

153
View publication stats