WG211-1.0 For MarCOM Review

PIANC
The World Association for Waterborne

Transport Infrastructure
LY
PIANC Fender Guidelines 2023
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
MarCom Working Group Report N° 211 – 2023
PIANC MARCOM WG 211 1

1.0 for review 20 JANUARY 2023
LY
PIANC REPORT N° 211
N
O
MARITIME Navigation COMMISSION
TS
EN
M
PIANC MarCom WG211 Guidelines for the M
Design, Manufacturing and Testing of Fender
O
C
Systems 2023
R
FO
20 January 2023
ED
SU
IS
T
Cover Picture : Siebe Swart - www.siebeswart.nl

AF
R
D

PIANC has Technical Commissions concerned with inland waterways and ports (InCom),coastal and
ocean waterways (including ports and harbours) (MarCom), environmental aspects (EnviCom)
and sport and pleasure navigation (RecCom).
This report has been produced by an international Working Group convened by the Maritime
Commission (MarCom). Members of the Working Group represent severalcountries and are
acknowledged experts in their profession.
The objective of this report is to provide information and recommendations on good practice.
Conformity is not obligatory and engineering judgement should be used in its application,
especially in special circumstances. This report should be seen as an expert guidance and state-of-
LY
the-art on this particular subject. PIANC disclaims all responsibility in the event that this report
should be presented as an official standard.
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
PIANC HQ
SU
Boulevard du Roi Albert II 20 B. 3

1000 Brussels | Belgium
IS
T
http://www.pianc.org
AF
VAT BE 408-287-945
R
D
ISBN 978-2-87223-XXX-X
© All rights reserved

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................. 8
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................. 10
1 INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL ASPECTS ............................................................................. 12
1.1 PFG23, A COMPLETELY NEW GUIDELINE .................................................................................. 12
1.2 FUNCTION OF GUIDELINES ....................................................................................................... 12
1.3 SCOPE OF GUIDELINES ............................................................................................................ 12
LY
1.4 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT ........................................................................................................ 12
1.5 PIANC CERTIFIED FENDER AND PIANC TYPE APPROVAL ......................................................... 12
1.6 WORKING GROUP.................................................................................................................... 13
N
1.7 MEETINGS ............................................................................................................................... 13
O
1.8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................... 13
1.9 USE OF THE GUIDELINES .......................................................................................................... 14
TS
2 INTRODUCTION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF FENDERING ......................................................... 15
2.1 GENERAL DESIGN APPROACH .................................................................................................. 15
2.2 FENDER TYPES AND SYSTEMS ................................................................................................. 15
EN
2.3 FENDER EFFICIENCY................................................................................................................ 16
2.3.1 Types of Buckling Fenders ............................................................................................ 17
2.3.2 Types of Side Loaded Fender ....................................................................................... 17
M
2.4 FENDER SELECTION AND FENDER SYSTEM DESIGN................................................................... 17
2.4.1 Buckling Fenders Systems ............................................................................................ 18
M
2.4.2 Side Loaded Fender Systems ....................................................................................... 20
2.4.3 Floating Fenders ........................................................................................................... 21
O
2.4.4 Special Applications ...................................................................................................... 22
2.5 VESSEL TO VESSEL FENDERING ............................................................................................... 24
C
2.6 FENDERS AND STRUCTURES .................................................................................................... 24

R
3 PARTICULAR ASPECTS REGARDING DESIGN VESSELS ..................................................... 25

3.1 VESSEL CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................................................... 25
FO
3.1.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................... 25

3.1.2 Container Vessels ......................................................................................................... 25
3.1.3 Dry Bulk & Ore Carriers ................................................................................................ 26
ED
3.1.4 Cruise Ships .................................................................................................................. 26

3.1.5 Ro/Ro, RoPax & Vehicle (Car) Carriers ........................................................................ 27
3.1.6 Tankers ......................................................................................................................... 27
3.1.7 Gas Carriers (LPG and LNG) ........................................................................................ 27
SU
3.1.8 General Cargo, Refrigerated Cargo and Livestock Carriers ......................................... 28

3.1.9 Passenger Ferries ......................................................................................................... 28
3.1.10 Fishing Vessels ............................................................................................................. 29
IS
3.1.11 Offshore Supply Vessels & Harbour Tugs .................................................................... 29

3.1.12 Other Vessels ................................................................................................................ 29
T
3.2 DISPLACEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 29

3.3 VESSEL HULL CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................. 30
AF
3.3.1 Hull Shape Influence on Fender Design ....................................................................... 30

3.3.2 Hull Shape Parameters for Fender Design ................................................................... 32
3.3.3 Multi Fender Contact - Geometry for Fender Compression Calculations ..................... 32
R
4 BASIS OF DESIGN ...................................................................................................................... 34

D
4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 34

4.2 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................... 34
4.3 OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................. 35
4.4 SITE CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................... 35
4.5 DESIGN CRITERIA .................................................................................................................... 35
4.6 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ............................................................................................... 36
4.7 RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................... 37
5 BERTHING ENERGY ................................................................................................................... 39

5.1 BERTHING MANOEUVRES AND NAVIGATION CONDITIONS ........................................................... 39
5.1.1 Alongside Berthing (Parallel or Angular) ....................................................................... 39
5.1.2 End Berthing (Longitudinal) ........................................................................................... 39
5.1.3 Ship-to-Ship Berthing .................................................................................................... 39
5.1.4 Navigation Conditions ................................................................................................... 40
5.2 KINETIC ENERGY OF A BERTHING VESSEL................................................................................. 41
5.2.1 Fundamentals of Kinetic Energy Method ...................................................................... 41
5.2.2 Characteristic Berthing Energy ..................................................................................... 42
5.2.3 Design Berthing Energy ................................................................................................ 43
5.3 DISPLACEMENT OF VESSEL (M) ................................................................................................ 43
5.4 BERTHING VELOCITY (V) .......................................................................................................... 44
LY
5.4.1 Transverse Velocity (𝑽𝑩) .............................................................................................. 44
5.4.2 Longitudinal Velocity (𝑽𝑳) ............................................................................................. 45
N
5.5 CHARACTERISTIC BERTHING ANGLE (𝜶𝒄) .................................................................................. 45
5.6 ECCENTRICITY FACTOR (𝑪𝒆) .................................................................................................... 46
O
5.6.1 Fender Reaction Force (𝑹𝑭) and Hull Contact Point .................................................... 48
5.6.2 Radius of Gyration (𝑲) .................................................................................................. 49
TS
5.6.3 Vessel Centre of Mass .................................................................................................. 50
5.7 ADDED MASS FACTOR (𝑪𝒎) .................................................................................................... 51
5.7.1 Alongside Berthing ........................................................................................................ 51
EN
5.7.2 End Berthing.................................................................................................................. 52
5.8 PARTIAL ENERGY FACTOR (𝜸𝑬) ............................................................................................... 52
5.9 SHIP-TO-SHIP BERTHING ......................................................................................................... 56
M
5.9.1 Berthing Manoeuvres .................................................................................................... 56
5.9.2 Ship-to-Ship Berthing Energy ........................................................................................ 57
M
5.9.3 Characteristic Berthing Velocity (𝑽𝒔𝒕𝒔, 𝒄) ...................................................................... 57
5.9.4 Eccentricity Factor ......................................................................................................... 58
O
6 FENDER SYSTEM SELECTION .................................................................................................. 59
C
6.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 59

6.1.1 Role of the Designer ..................................................................................................... 59
R
6.2 FENDER SELECTION OVERVIEW ............................................................................................... 59

6.2.1 Fender Selection using Pre-Set Design Criteria ........................................................... 61
FO
6.3 FENDER SYSTEM SELECTION ................................................................................................... 61

6.4 FACTORS INFLUENCING FENDER SYSTEM SELECTION ............................................................... 62
6.4.1 Bow Radius ................................................................................................................... 63
ED
6.4.2 Fender System Pitch ..................................................................................................... 64

6.4.3 Bow Flare ...................................................................................................................... 65
6.4.4 Single Fender System Contact ..................................................................................... 66
SU
6.4.5 Multiple Fender System Contact ................................................................................... 67

6.4.6 Vessel Belting................................................................................................................ 68
6.4.7 Double Hull Contact ...................................................................................................... 70
IS
6.4.8 Type of Supporting Structure ........................................................................................ 70

6.4.9 Fender System Heights ................................................................................................. 71
6.4.10 Flexible Dolphins ........................................................................................................... 71
T
6.4.11 Vessel Hull Structure ..................................................................................................... 72

6.4.12 Number and Size of Fenders ........................................................................................ 72
AF
6.4.13 Submerged Fenders ..................................................................................................... 72

6.4.14 Cone Fender Element Orientation ................................................................................ 72
R
6.4.15 Mooring Analysis ........................................................................................................... 73

6.4.16 Permanent Mooring ....................................................................................................... 73
D
6.4.17 Ageing Effects on Fenders ............................................................................................ 74

6.5 BASE FENDER PERFORMANCE ................................................................................................. 74
6.6 CORRECTION FACTORS ........................................................................................................... 75
6.6.1 Application of Correction Factors .................................................................................. 75
6.6.2 Velocity Factor ............................................................................................................... 75
6.6.3 Temperature Factor....................................................................................................... 76
6.6.4 Angular Factor ............................................................................................................... 78
6.6.5 Multiple Fender Contact Factor ..................................................................................... 79
6.7 DETERMINING FENDER DESIGN PERFORMANCE ........................................................................ 80

6.7.1 Application of Partial Resistance Factors ..................................................................... 80
6.7.2 Fender Performance Factor .......................................................................................... 82
6.7.3 Multiple Fender Contact Factor ..................................................................................... 83
6.7.4 Load Factor ................................................................................................................... 84
6.8 HULL PRESSURE ..................................................................................................................... 85
6.8.1 Factors Affecting Induced Hull Pressure ....................................................................... 85
6.8.2 Hull Structure................................................................................................................. 85
6.8.3 Recent Hull Pressure Research .................................................................................... 87
6.8.4 Hull Pressure Distribution .............................................................................................. 89
6.8.5 Hull Pressure for Cylindrical Fenders............................................................................ 90
6.8.6 Hull Pressure for Foam and Pneumatic Fenders .......................................................... 90
LY
6.8.7 Typical Hull Pressure Capacities .................................................................................. 90
6.9 SHIP TO SHIP FENDERING ........................................................................................................ 92
N
6.9.1 Ship to Ship Fender Selection ....................................................................................... 92
6.9.2 Vessel Stand-off and Number of Fenders ..................................................................... 93
O
6.9.3 Ship to Ship Operational Considerations ...................................................................... 94
7 FENDER SELECTION UNDER MOORED CONDITIONS ........................................................... 95
TS
7.1 FENDER DESIGN FOR MOORED VESSELS .................................................................................. 95
7.2 CHARACTERISATION OF VESSEL AND BERTH CONFIGURATION ..................................................... 97
7.3 DYNAMIC MOORING ANALYSIS.................................................................................................. 98
EN
7.4 CREEP AND FATIGUE LIMITS FOR DYNAMIC MOORING ANALYSIS ................................................ 98
7.4.1 Fatigue .......................................................................................................................... 98
7.4.2 Creep ............................................................................................................................. 99
M
7.4.3 Fatigue Damage ............................................................................................................ 99
7.4.4
7.4.5
M
Fatigue and Creep Limits .............................................................................................. 99
Creep and Cylic Loading Limits .................................................................................. 101
O
8 FENDER SYSTEM COMPONENTS DESIGN ............................................................................ 102
C
8.1 FENDER PANEL DESIGN ......................................................................................................... 102

8.1.1 Load Cases and Structural Analysis ........................................................................... 102
8.1.2 Fender Panel Internal Structure .................................................................................. 103
R
8.1.3 Edge chamfers ............................................................................................................ 104

FO
8.1.4 Panel Size and Position .............................................................................................. 104

8.2 CHAINS AND FIXINGS DESIGN ................................................................................................. 105
8.2.1 Chain Types and Positions ......................................................................................... 105
8.2.2 Chain Design ............................................................................................................... 107
ED
8.2.3 Support Chains for Foam and Pneumatic Fenders..................................................... 108

8.2.4 Bracket Design ............................................................................................................ 108
8.2.5 Fixing Anchor Design .................................................................................................. 109
SU
8.3 LOW FRICTION FACING DESIGN .............................................................................................. 109

8.3.1 Low Friction/ Resin Facings ........................................................................................ 110
8.3.2 Steel Facing ................................................................................................................ 111
IS
8.3.3 Fixation ........................................................................................................................ 111

8.4 PARALLEL MOTION FENDER SYSTEMS .................................................................................... 111
8.5 FENDER INTERFACES WITH THE MOORING LINES ...................................................................... 112
T
8.6 WHOLE LIFE CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................................. 112

AF
8.7 CORROSION OF FENDER COMPONENTS .................................................................................. 112

8.8 MARINE GROWTH .................................................................................................................. 113
8.9 DESIGN OF FENDERS COMPONENTS IN ICE CONDITIONS .......................................................... 113
R
9 MANUFACTURING OF FENDER SYSTEMS ............................................................................ 114

D
9.1 MANUFACTURER QUALIFICATIONS .......................................................................................... 114

9.1.1 Quality Control by Manufacturer ................................................................................. 114
9.1.2 Workforce Qualification ............................................................................................... 114
9.1.3 Storage of Produced Fender (elements) ..................................................................... 115
9.2 RUBBER FENDER COMPOUND ................................................................................................ 115
9.2.1 Natural Rubber (NR) ................................................................................................... 115
9.2.2 Synthetic Rubber (SR) ................................................................................................ 115
9.2.3 Recycled Rubber ......................................................................................................... 115
9.2.4 Fillers ........................................................................................................................... 116

9.2.5 Anti-aging Agents ........................................................................................................ 116
9.2.6 Oil (Processing Aids) ................................................................................................... 116
9.2.7 Accelerators and Sulphur ............................................................................................ 116
9.2.8 Other Ingredients......................................................................................................... 116
9.3 MANUFACTURING PROCESS OR RUBBER FENDERS ................................................................. 117
9.3.1 Mixing of the Compound ............................................................................................. 117
9.3.2 Moulding, Extruding and Wrapping ............................................................................. 117
9.3.3 Curing / Vulcanising of the Rubber Element ............................................................... 118
9.4 FABRICATION OF STEEL PANELS ............................................................................................ 118
9.4.1 Panel Internal Structure .............................................................................................. 118
9.4.2 Material ........................................................................................................................ 119
LY
9.4.3 Protection Against Corrosion for Steel Panels ............................................................ 119
9.5 FABRICATION OF UHMW-PE LOW FRICTION FACING .............................................................. 120
N
9.6 FABRICATION OF ACCESSORIES ............................................................................................. 120
9.6.1 Chains ......................................................................................................................... 121
O
9.6.2 Anchors and Accessories ............................................................................................ 121
9.6.3 Protection Against Corrosion for Accessories ............................................................. 121
TS
9.7 PNEUMATIC FENDERS ............................................................................................................ 122
9.8 FOAM FENDERS..................................................................................................................... 122
10 TEST PROCEDURES OF MARINE FENDERS ......................................................................... 123
EN
10.1 CLASSIFICATION OF RUBBER FENDER TESTING: ....................................................................... 123
10.2 DETERMINATION OF FENDER BASE PERFORMANCE:.................................................................. 124
10.3 TEST APPARATUS FOR COMPRESSION TEST ............................................................................ 125
M
10.4 SUPPORTING PROTOCOLS ..................................................................................................... 125
10.4.1
10.4.2
M
Break-In compression cycle ........................................................................................ 125
Stabilizing compression cycles ................................................................................... 125
O
10.4.3 Thermal stabilization ................................................................................................... 126
10.5 PERFORMANCE TESTING PROTOCOL FOR STANDARD COMPRESSION ........................................ 126
C
10.6 PROTOCOL FOR DURABILITY TEST .......................................................................................... 127

10.7 MATERIAL TESTS ................................................................................................................... 129
R
10.7.1 Rubber compound: Physical properties ...................................................................... 129

10.7.2 TGA (Thermogravimetric Analysis) ............................................................................ 131
FO
10.7.3 Test Protocol for the creation of Velocity Factors ....................................................... 131
10.7.4 Test Protocol for the creation of Temperature Factors ............................................... 132
10.7.5 Test Protocol for Angular Factor ................................................................................. 133
ED
10.8 RUBBER COMPOUNDS FOR PNEUMATIC FENDERS .................................................................... 134

10.9 PERFORMANCE TESTS OF PNEUMATIC FENDERS ..................................................................... 134
10.10 MATERIAL TESTS FOR FOAM FENDERS: ................................................................................... 134
10.10.1 Foam core ................................................................................................................... 134
SU
10.10.2 Polyurethane (solvent free) outer layer elastomer or similar material ........................ 134
10.10.3 Reinforcement layer: ................................................................................................... 135
10.11 PERFORMANCE TESTS OF FOAM FENDERS ............................................................................. 135
IS
10.11.1 Verification tests for Foam Fenders ............................................................................ 135

10.11.2 Velocity (VF), Angular (AF) and Temperature factor (TF) for foam fenders ............... 136
T
10.11.3 Durability Tests (see section 10.6) .............................................................................. 136

10.11.4 Skin thickness and foam density verification and testing ............................................ 136
AF
10.12 TESTS FOR ACCESSORIES ...................................................................................................... 137

10.12.1 Fabricated Steel Structures Air-Leakage/ pressure test procedure ............................ 137
10.12.2 NDT (Non- destructive testing -All fabricated steel parts) ........................................... 137
R
10.12.3 UHMW-PE RESIN and PADS ..................................................................................... 138

D
11 INSTALLATION, INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE ............................................................. 139

11.1 INSTALLATION........................................................................................................................ 139
11.2.1 Handling and installation .................................................................................................. 139
11.2.2 Accessibility ...................................................................................................................... 139
11.2 SPARES AND STORAGE .......................................................................................................... 139
11.3.1 Spares .............................................................................................................................. 139
11.3.2 Storage ............................................................................................................................. 140
11.3 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE ............................................................................................. 140
11.4.1 Inspection ......................................................................................................................... 141

11.4.2 Maintenance ..................................................................................................................... 142
11.4.3 Emerging Technology ...................................................................................................... 143
12 SUSTAINABILITY OF FENDERS .............................................................................................. 144
12.1 CIRCULAR ECONOMY WITH RUBBER FENDERS.......................................................................... 144
12.2 CARBON FOOTPRINT.............................................................................................................. 144
12.3 RUBBER SOURCING ............................................................................................................... 144
12.4 FABRICATION......................................................................................................................... 145
12.5 FENDER DESIGN & MATERIALS SELECTION............................................................................... 145
12.6 RECYCLING ........................................................................................................................... 146
12.6.1 Current Practise of fender recylcing ............................................................................ 146
LY
12.6.2 Rubber recycling ......................................................................................................... 146
12.6.3 Foam fender recycling ................................................................................................. 147
12.6.4 Steel recycling ............................................................................................................. 147
N
12.6.5 UHMW PE recycling .................................................................................................... 147
O
12.7 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FENDER SUSTAINABILITY .................................................................. 148
13 SPECIFICATION WRITING ........................................................................................................ 149
TS
13.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 149
13.2 GENERAL .............................................................................................................................. 149
13.2.1 Qualification of Manufacturer ...................................................................................... 149
EN
13.2.2 Standards and Codes of Practice ............................................................................... 150
13.2.3 Quality Control............................................................................................................. 150
13.2.4 Submittal Requirements .............................................................................................. 150
M
13.2.5 Records ....................................................................................................................... 151
13.2.6 Warranty, Product Liability and Compliance ............................................................... 151
M
13.3 VESSEL, BERTHING AND QUAY STRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS ................................................ 151
13.4 MANUFACTURING, TESTING AND QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR FENDER UNITS ........................ 152
O
13.5 DELIVERY, INSTALLATION AND STORAGE................................................................................. 153
C
13.6 SUSTAINABILITY ..................................................................................................................... 153

14 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 154
R
APPENDIX A: RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR FENDERS ..................................................... 157

FO
APPENDIX B: THERMAL CONDUCTION OF RUBBER FENDERS ................................................ 161

APPENDIX C: GLOSSARY, ABBREVIATIONS SYMBOLS AND UNITS ........................................ 164
C.1 GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................................. 164
ED
C.2 ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 165

C.3 SYMBOLS ................................................................................................................................ 166
SU
APPENDIX D: TERMS OF REFERENCE WG211 ............................................................................. 169

APPENDIX E: FAQ ABOUT DIFFERENCE WG33 & WG211 .......................................................... 171
IS
T
AF
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: flowchart WG211 report ...................................................................................................... 14
R
Figure 2-1: Typical buckling fender deflection curve ............................................................................ 17

D
Figure 2-2: Side loaded fender deflection curve ................................................................................... 17

Figure 3-1: parallel hull of a typical container vessel ............................................................................ 26
Figure 3-2: Fender Contact Zones on Vessel Hull at Low Berthing Angles ......................................... 31
Figure 3-3: Fender Contact at Hull Tangent Line impacts at fender centreline .................................... 33
Figure 3-4: Fender Contact at Hull Tangent Line centrally between fenders ....................................... 33
Figure 5-1: End Berthing Mode ............................................................................................................. 39

Figure 5-2: Degrees of Motion of a Vessel ........................................................................................... 41
Figure 5-3: Berthing Motion and Corresponding Reference Angles ..................................................... 41
Figure 5-4: Nomenclature for Calculating 𝐶𝑒 Factor ............................................................................. 47
Figure 5-5: Vessel Centre of Mass and Underkeel Clearance ............................................................. 50
Figure 5-6: Virtual Mass Factor. ............................................................................................................ 51
Figure 5-7: Under Keel Clearance of a Vessel ..................................................................................... 51
Figure 5-8: Ship-to-Ship Berthing for Free Floating Vessels ................................................................ 56
LY
Figure 6-1: Overview of fender selection process................................................................................. 60
Figure 6-2: Bow radius (𝑅𝐵) and length of bow flare (𝐿𝐵𝑜𝑤) ................................................................ 64
N
Figure 6-3: Maximum Fender pitch and minimum clearance to the supporting structure..................... 65
O
Figure 6-4: Bow flare (𝛽𝑓) and clearance to supporting structure (𝑐𝑒𝑓𝑓). ............................................ 66
TS
Figure 6-5: Single fender contact .......................................................................................................... 67
Figure 6-6: Contacted fender for larger berthing angles. ...................................................................... 67
EN
Figure 6-7: Multiple fender contacts for small berthing angles. ............................................................ 68
Figure 6-8: Arch fenders with maximum deflection smaller than belting height. .................................. 69
M
Figure 6-9: Arch fenders with maximum deflection greater than belting height. ................................... 69
Figure 6-10: Belting causing vessel hull double contact and line loads. .............................................. 70
M
Figure 6-11: Application of correction factors and partial resistance factors. ....................................... 77
O
Figure 6-12: Calculation of 𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡, 𝑐 for Multiple Fender Contact. ........................................................ 80
C
Figure 6-13: Identification of 𝑅𝑓, 𝑐 and calculation of 𝑅𝑓, 𝑑 for Linear and Non-Linear force-deflection
curves. ................................................................................................................................................... 81
R
Figure 6-14: Typical vessel hull side structures (TNO, 2019). .............................................................. 86
FO
Figure 6-15: FEM results maximum hull pressure that damages side hull structure (Berendsen, Roubos,
Wiliams, & Broos, 2023). ....................................................................................................................... 88
ED
Figure 6-16: FEM results maximum fender reaction force that damages side hull structure (Berendsen,
Roubos, Wiliams, & Broos, 2023) ......................................................................................................... 88
Figure 6-17: Contact area of a flat fender panel. .................................................................................. 89
SU
Figure 6-18: Calculation of peak and average hull pressure. ............................................................... 90

Figure 7-1: Fender design flow chart for moored conditions ................................................................ 96
IS
Figure 7-2: Example of fender deflection time series showing the average value and the different cycles
............................................................................................................................................................ 100
T
Figure 7-3: Distribution of loads as a function of frequency load ........................................................ 100

AF
Figure 7-4: Energy Distribution as a Function of frequency ................................................................ 101

Figure 8-1: Typical design cases of fender contact with vessel hull profile. ....................................... 103
R
Figure 8-2: Recommended minimum thicknesses for steel in fender panels. .................................... 103
D
Figure 8-3: Typical fender system chain layout (viewed from rear of fender panel). .......................... 106
Figure 8-4: Typical tension chain arrangement................................................................................... 107
Figure 8-5: Recommendations for angles and chain arrangement for non-compressed fenders. ..... 108
Figure 8-6: Double and 4-chain arrangements for foam and pneumatic fenders. .............................. 108
Figure 8-7: Typical examples of bracket fender system bracket assemblies. .................................... 108
Figure 8-8: Typical facing connection details. ..................................................................................... 111

Figure 9-1: Manufacturing of Rubber Fender ...................................................................................... 117
Figure 9-2: Typical fender panel cross section samples, showing U profile in the left side and T-profiles
in the right side. ................................................................................................................................... 119
Figure 9-3: Typical fender frontal, back and internal panel structure views ....................................... 119
Figure B-1: Fender model for heat conduction (Source??) ................................................................ 161
Figure B-2: Thermal Stabilization Time (source?) .............................................................................. 162
Figure B-3: Time history of inner temperature and ambient temperature ........................................... 163
LY
LIST OF TABLES
N
Table 2-1: Typical Fender Types and Systems .................................................................................... 16
O
Table 2-2: Typical Cone Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) .......................................... 18
Table 2-3: Typical Cell Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) ............................................ 18
TS
Table 2-4: Typical Element/Leg Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) .............................. 19
EN
Table 2-5: Typical Special Element Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) ......................... 19
Table 2-6: Typical Arch / Trapezoidal Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) ..................... 20
M
Table 2-7: Typical Cylindrical Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) .................................. 20
Table 2-8: Typical Foam Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) ......................................... 21
M
Table 2-9: Typical Pneumatic Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) .................................. 21
O
Table 2-10: Typical Pile/Pivot Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) .................................. 22
C
Table 2-11: Typical Parallel Motion Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) ......................... 23
R
Table 2-12: Typical Rolling Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B) ...................................... 23
FO
Table 3-1: Approximate Displacement v Capacity Relationships for various vessel types. ................. 30
Table 4-1: Consequence classes and description of failure consequences ......................................... 38
Table 5-1: Description of Navigation Conditions at Berth ..................................................................... 40
ED
Table 5-2: Recommended Characteristic Values of Design Variables ................................................. 43

Table 5-3: Characteristic Berthing Velocity in the Absence of Site-Specific Information ..................... 44
SU
Table 5-4: Characteristic Longitudinal Berthing Velocity in the Absence of Site-Specific Information . 45
Table 5-5: Berthing angle [degrees] at the moment of impact when site-specific information is not
IS
available. ............................................................................................................................................... 46
Table 5-6: Typical 𝐶𝑒 Factors for Different Impact Point along the Vessel. .......................................... 48
T
Table 5-7: Typical Block Coefficients for Various Types of Vessels ..................................................... 49
AF
Table 5-8: Variation in Displacement .................................................................................................... 53

Table 5-9: Reference Partial Energy Factor for 100 Berthing Per Year – Single Fender Contact ....... 54
R
Table 5-10: Reference Partial Energy Factor for 100 Berthings per Year – Multiple Fender Contact . 54
D
Table 5-11: Correction Factor for an Alternative Annual Berthing Frequency (𝛾𝑛) for n ≤ 100 ........... 55
Table 5-12: Correction Factor for an Alternative Annual Berthing Frequency (𝛾𝑛) for n > 100 ............ 55
Table 5-13: Closing Velocity for Ship-to-Ship Operations .................................................................... 58
Table 6-1: Application of fender systems for various vessel types ....................................................... 62
Table 6-2: Application of fender systems to various marine applications ............................................. 63
Table 6-3: Partial material factor 𝛾𝑓 related to the performance of a single fender. ............................. 83

Table 6-4: Partial factor 𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 related to single and multiple fender contact. ..................................... 84
Table 6-5: Partial factor 𝛾𝑅 for reaction forces to be used in fender system design. ........................... 84
Table 6-6: Typical values of Hull Pressure capacity (under discussion). ............................................. 91
Table 6-7: Ship-to-ship recommended stand-off distance, number of fenders and typical sizes for calm
conditions. ............................................................................................................................................. 94
Table 7-1: Description of fatigue damage in fenders depending on their type and material. ............... 99
Table 7-2: Proposed creep and cyclic load limit for fenders. .............................................................. 101
LY
Table 8-1: Types of chains .................................................................................................................. 106
Table 8-2: Typical design values of coefficients of friction .................................................................. 110
N
Table 10-1: Fender testing scheme .................................................................................................... 123
O
Table 10-2: standard conditions where characteristic correction factors are 1.0. .............................. 125
Table 10-3: Additional Information for standard compression test. .................................................... 127
TS
Table 10-4: Additional Information for durability test .......................................................................... 128
Table 10-5: Physical Properties Table ................................................................................................ 129
EN
Table 10-6: Foam core physical properties ......................................................................................... 134
Table 10-7: Polyurethane properties ................................................................................................... 135
M
Table 10-8: Nylon reinforcement filaments properties ........................................................................ 135
M
Table 10-9: Verification tests for Foam Fenders ................................................................................. 136
O
Table 10-10: NDT test of all fabricated steel parts ............................................................................. 137
C
Table 10-11: Physical Properties of UHMW-PE resin and pads......................................................... 138

Table 11-1: Common failure modes for typical rubber fender components. ....................................... 141
R
Table 13-1: Required Fender System Design Information ................................................................. 149

FO
Table A-1: Probability of failure and the associated reliability target for different consequence classes
............................................................................................................................................................ 158
Table A-2: Description of failure consequences in literature .............................................................. 159
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

1 INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL ASPECTS
1.1 PFG23, a completely New Guideline
Working group 211 report started as an update of PIANC MarCom WG33: ‘Guidelines for the Design
of Fenders Systems: 2002’ . However, the final report is essentially rather a new report than an update.
This guideline completely supersedes the previous guideline (PIANC, 2002) report and also all fender
and berthing related paragraphs in other PIANC reports.
Users cannot simply change WG33 into WG211 in their own fender specifications. That will lead to
significant cost increase due to a different design approach. User specifications need a full update. In
LY
general, there will be a slight upward (Roubos, et al., 2023).
Since the changes are quite substantial, there is a transition period between WG33 and WG211 in order
N
to reorganize the manufacturers catalogues according to the new guideline, this requires significant
amount of type approval testing. This period ends 1-9-2025 (two years after WG211 report publication).
O
Normal reference to this guideline should be made as: ‘PIANC Fender Guidelines 2023’, abbreviated
as PFG23 (or PIANC WG211). The formal reference shall be: ‘PIANC MarCom WG211 report
TS
Guidelines for the Design, Manufacturing and Testing of Fender Systems 2023’.
EN
1.2 Function of Guidelines
This report provides guidance in designing, manufacturing and testing of fender systems to ensure
these fender systems are sufficiently safe for both vessel and berth, reliable, durable, and have an
M
optimal Total Cost of Ownership.
M
In addition this guideline aims to enhance the knowledge level about fenders (Chapters 2, 4 8 & 9) and
to guide the reader through the steps from initial design (Chapters 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8) up to a well-tested
O
(Chapter 10) and installed (Chapter 11) fender system. The guideline includes the best practice and
C
takes into account the up-to-date knowledge, however, is not a tender/contractual document.
1.3 Scope of Guidelines

R
This guideline focusses on fender systems for sea going vessels, primarily tug assisted or equipped
FO
with thrusters, often supervised by a pilot and in all cases executing controlled berthing manoeuvres. It
is not about collisions, e.g. ships crashing into structures (will be covered by MarCom WG215), and the
design of protection of e.g. bridge piers. The guideline covers energy absorbing rubber fenders in all its
ED
shapes and designs, such as buckling and non-buckling, pneumatic and foam fenders.
Recommendations primarily come from global experts in the field applying lessons learned and sharing
best practices.
SU
The guideline can be applied to small (inland) vessels / barges that are not tug assisted or supervised
by pilot. These types of vessels often moor against wood or even plain concrete walls (lock chambers)
without any issues (Broos, van Schaik , & Huitema, 2013). This guideline does not deal with these ships
IS
and their operations, but these ships do berth on fenders and should in that case be taken into account.
Typically hull pressure is not a critical issue, but the low freeboard at low tide is.
T
1.4 Climate Change Impact

AF
Climate change is one of the key issues nowadays. Suitable fenders increase the safety of a berth and
can be part of making existing port infrastructure future proof. Good knowledge of berthing operations
R
in a specific port (chapter 5) might offer the designer the chance to allow bigger vessels on existing
infrastructure (Roubos, et al., 2023). Two of the key challenges with rubber are the carbon footprint and
D
the yet fairly limited possibility to recycle the material (chapter 12), so it is of utmost importance to design
suitable fenders with a long lifetime.
1.5 PIANC Certified Fender and PIANC Type Approval

Type approval is a certificate issued by an independent party that verifies that specific fender fulfils the
recommendations of this guideline. The responsibility for stating this type approval lies totally with this
third party and not at PIANC (chapter 10).

Often companies claim they have ‘PIANC certified’ fenders. That cannot be the case, since PIANC is
not a certifying body. Any PIANC logo or stamp on a certificate is illegal. Manufacturers can claim that
fenders are designed (chapter 6), produced (chapter 9) and tested (chapter 10) according to
recommendations in this guideline. These fenders are however never certified by PIANC.
1.6 Working Group

Name Representing Company
Dr. Hitoshi Akiyama Japan Coastal Development Institute of Technology
Capt. Dennis Barber UK Dennis Barber Marine Consulting
Mr. Erik Broos (Chairman) Platinum Partner Port of Rotterdam
LY
Mr. Marco Gaal The Netherlands Trelleborg
Mr. Gary Greene US Gary Green Engineers
N
Mr. Chistian Hein Germany Bremenports GmbH&Co.KG
Mr. Rune Iversen US Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, Inc.
O
Mr. Mishra Kumar Platinum Partner Trelleborg
Mr. Patrick Lambiotte Belgium Besix
TS
Mr. Bob Lamont-Smith Australia E & PI Consultants
Mr. Luis Lopez Gonzalez Spain Siport21
Mr. Masamitsu Ikebe Japan Shibata Industrial
EN
Mr. Vitomir Mihajlovic Spain Prosertek
Mrs. Prasanthi Mirihagalla UK AECOM
Mr. Svein Ove Nyvoll Norway Nyvoll Consult as
M
Mr. Jeff Oskamp US Moffatt & Nichol
Mr. Dominique Polte
Mr. Eduardo Rodero Aristoy
Platinum Partner
Spain
MShibataFenderTeam
ShibataFenderTeam
O
Dr. Alfred Roubos (secretary) The Netherlands Port of Rotterdam
Mr. Sergej Sergijenko UK Royal HaskoningDHV
C
Mr. Harvinder Singh Australia JACOBS

Dr. Shigeru Ueda Japan Emeritus Professor Tottori University
R
Mr. Arjan Van der Weck (mentor) MarCom Boskalis

FO
Mr. Rob Williams (editor) UK Waves Group

Mr. NG Yeow Kiat OCIMF ExxonMobil / OCIMF
Dr. Haruo Yoneyama Japan Port and Airport Research Institute
Mr. Soonhwan Yun South Korea Hwaseung Corporation
ED
1.7 Meetings
SU
The WG211 had four physical meetings before COVID-19 pandemic disturbed the process. After that
7 online meetings were held, then 3 additional physical/hybrid meetings were held to finalize the report.
All meetings where well attended.
IS
1.8 Acknowledgement
T
The writing of this report was not possible without the support of the mother companies of the members,
local PIANC committees and input and critical review of external experts amongst them:
AF
DSME, Samsung Heavy Industries, Delft University of Technology, Royal Institution of Naval Architects,
TNO, Lloyds Register, Port of Dover, Port of Melbourne, Port of Rotterdam, Port of Valencia, Port of
R
Wilhelmshaven, Port of Bremerhaven, national subgroups of WG211 (UK, Japan, US, Netherlands),
D
Coastal Development Institute of Technology, Mr. Jaap Havinga form KIWA, Dr. Alan Muhr of Tun Abdul
Razak Research Centre, HR Wallingford, Ben Bullock and Hari Panchumarthi from Jacobs, Elizabeth
Eldridge from AECOM, Knowledge Centre for Manoeuvring in Shallow and Confined Water
(MASHCON) - cooperation Ghent University and Flanders Hydraulics.

1.9 Use of the Guidelines
Below flowchart presents a brief overview over how this report is structured and can be used.
LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
Figure 1-1: flowchart WG211 report

2 INTRODUCTION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF FENDERING
This chapter provides an overview of the typical characteristics of a range of fenders and fender
systems currently in use around the world. It also provides an overview of the general fender selection
and design approach.
This overview is not considered to be exhaustive and covers many commonly adopted fenders types
and fender systems in operation at a wide variety of ports and marine facilities.
2.1 General Design Approach
LY
Fender systems in general are considered as part of the safety equipment on marine structures,
providing an interface between berthing vessels and the supporting structure.
The principal function of a fender system is to absorb the vessel berthing energy and dissipate the
N
associated reaction forces into the supporting structure. A correctly designed fender system, under
O
normal operating conditions, will bring the berthing vessel to a complete and safe stop without damaging
the vessel hull, the supporting structure, or the fender system.
TS
Once the vessel is moored, the fender system should also be able to protect the vessel and the
supporting structure from additional loads induced by vessel motions caused by wind, waves, currents,
tidal variations, and the loading or unloading of cargo. Special consideration is required for the
EN
accommodation of cyclic loading and should be considered separately.
Shear forces resulting from the movement or warping of vessels along a berth, and rotating onto and
M
off the berth, must also be incorporated into the fender system design.
The design of fender systems shall also consider the uncertainties during berthing. Consideration
M
should be given to the consequences of fender failures, frequency of use, type of cargo and a range of
O
other factors.
C
2.2 Fender Types and Systems

Fenders can be categorised according to the mode by which they absorb or dissipate the kinetic energy
R
of the berthing and/or moored vessel.

FO
Fender systems are designed as a combination of different fender elements, closed box steel panels
and accessories including chains and anchors. The designer is required to consider a wide range of
variables, options and alternatives, operational constraints and design criteria when selecting the
ED
appropriate fender and designing the required fender system.

Fender selection depends on a wide variety of factors, and is not limited to fender performance alone.
The selection of the correct fender is a significant element of developing the correct fender system
SU
design.
Table 2.1 provides an overview of common fender types currently used in the industry. Typical values
of the fender size, energy absorption and reaction force are provided for information and relative
IS
comparison only and should not be used for fender selection or design purposes. Further details on
these fender units and other types are provided in Section 2.4. The various energy absorption and
T
reaction force values and ranges are based on a variety of hardness grades that high performance
fenders are available in. Hardness grades will be discussed later in this document, but it is for the
AF
designer to note that the stiffer a fender, the higher the energy absorption and reaction force.
The properties listed in Table 2.1 and Section 2.4 are based on data published by fender manufacturers
R
relating to berthing impacts perpendicular to the berthing line. This data is current at the time of
publication.
D
Fender systems can also have bespoke, limited applications. These fenders may not have been widely
adopted or are customised for one specific project, e.g., fully submerged fenders, temporary fenders or
fenders for specific shipyard applications.
There is no single solution to all fendering challenges. Designers should be aware that simplified fender
selection tools may lead to generic designs. Combinations of vessels, navigational limits, types of
supporting structure, end-user preferences and particular berthing conditions, present a range of
different operational requirements and constraints. Vessels at highly automated container terminals will
have very different demands on the fender systems than at high frequency ferry terminals.

Table 2-1: Typical Fender Types and Systems
Cone Fenders Cell Fenders Element/Leg Fenders
Size: H 400 - 3000 Size: H 250 - 2000
LY
Size: H 300 - 2500
EA: ~ 10 - 9500 EA: ~ 10 - 9800 EA: ~ 10 - 1300
N
RF: ~ 55 – 7200 RF: ~ 50 - 8850 RF: ~ 80 - 1750
O
Performance values for single unit of 1,000
mm length
TS
Arch Fenders Foam Fenders Pneumatic Fenders
EN
M
Size: H 150 - 1000 Size: D 700 - 4200 M Size: D 500 - 4500
EA: ~ 5 - 450 L 1500 - 8500 L 1000 - 12000
O
RF: ~ 90 - 1050 EA: ~ 30 - 9000 EA: ~ 6 - 9050
C
Performance values for single unit of 1,000 RF: ~ 130 - 8500 RF: ~ 65 - 10500
mm length
R
Sizes in mm | EA in kNm | RF in kN | Shapes might differ from manufacturer to manufacturer

FO
Fender selection also depends on the properties of the supporting structure. This topic has also been
addressed in WG184 (PIANC, 2019). This report highlights that, “the design of a fender system has to
ED
be integrated with that of the berth structure as not all types of fenders are compatible with all types of
structures”.
SU
All fender types are characterised by their energy conversion capacities. Fender manufacturers are
constantly conducting research and development into improvements to rubber fenders, compounds and
the components. Designers are therefore recommended to consult with fender manufacturers to adopt
IS
a holistic approach and to consider the entire fender system in the fender selection process.
Designers are also recommended to allow for variations in the range of energy absorption and reaction
T
forces of the selected fenders, as performance characteristics for similar fender types and sizes can
vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. This is most important when considering load sensitive
AF
structures.
R
2.3 Fender Efficiency

D
Fenders can be divided into two distinct types:

• Force transmission: Solid fenders such as D-Shape and extruded rubber profiles that primarily
transmit forces directly to the supporting structure, with minimal energy absorption capability.
Those type of fenders are not part of this guideline.
• Energy absorbing: Fenders as covered by this guideline and are sub-divided into two
categories, buckling and side loaded fenders.

2.3.1 Types of Buckling Fenders
Buckling fenders typically consist of cone, cell, and element or leg fenders. The typical indicative load
deflection curve of these types of fenders is as indicated in Figure 2-1. The illustrated deflection
behavior provides substantially greater energy absorption capacities, when compared to side loaded
fender.
The efficiency of buckling fenders is in the region of 70 to 80% of the theoretical maximum characteristic
energy absorption, calculated based on the area under the curve. A consequence of this greater overall
efficiency is that the maximum reaction force is reached early on in the compression cycle at about half
the design deflection, when compared to a side loaded fender.
LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
Figure 2-1: Typical buckling fender deflection curve
2.3.2 Types of Side Loaded Fender

M
O
Side loaded fenders consist of cylindrical, pneumatic and foam fenders. The typical indicative load
deflection curve of these types of fenders is shown in Figure 2-2. These fenders are characterised by a
C
constant, almost linear, increase in fender compression and reaction force. This deflection behavior is
often beneficial for accommodating smaller vessels and other specialist applications, due to lower
R
resultant reaction forces for smaller deflections.

FO
The efficiency of these fender types is limited to approximately 50-60% of the theoretical maximum
energy absorption, calculated based on the area under the curve.
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
Figure 2-2: Side loaded fender deflection curve

When comparing both types of fenders, designers should be aware of their respective limitations, stand-
R
off requirements and the relative performance of each fender type. The most suitable fender, be it
D
buckling, or side loaded fender, should be selected based on the required project specific design
criteria.
2.4 Fender Selection and Fender System Design

Fender selection and fender system design should be based on the operational and environmental
conditions specified for the project site. An overview of the typical characteristics of a range of different
fender types is included below.

It is acknowledged that other materials, such as tyres and timber are used as fenders in certain
circumstances. In the context of these guidelines, such materials are considered as force transmission
fenders. Consequently, they are not covered by these guidelines.
2.4.1 Buckling Fenders Systems

Table 2-2: Typical Cone Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
LY
N
O
TS
Size (H): 250 – 2500 mm Energy: ~ 10 – 9500 kNm Reaction: ~ 55 – 7200 kN
EN
The cone fender is an efficient fender that is used in a wide variety of applications. It has a conical
body with the larger diameter end of the fender mounted on the supporting berth structure and
M
rubber-encased steel mounting flanges. With its refined geometry, the typical deflection is about
70%, the cone fender offers good energy absorption to reaction force ratio (E/R) and high shear
M
stability, with no loss of performance up to a 10° contact angle.
O
Typical applications include container and bulk terminals, oil and gas terminals, general cargo
terminals, cruise terminals, ferry and RoRo terminals, navy berths.
C
R
Table 2-3: Typical Cell Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
FO
A) B)
ED
SU
IS
Size (H): 400 – 3000 mm Energy: ~ 10 – 9800 kNm Reaction: ~ 50 – 8850 kN

T
AF
The cell fender is a well-established fender type, with a hollow cylindrical body and rubber-encased
steel mounting flanges. The cell fender is designed to deflect in an axial direction up to 52.5 % of
its original height. The cell fender is a robust and durable fender which are typically easy to
R
assemble and install and have a good resistance to shearing.

D
Typical applications include container and bulk terminals, oil and gas terminals, general cargo
terminals, cruise terminals, ferry and RoRo terminals, navy berths.

Table 2-4: Typical Element/Leg Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
LY
N
Size (H): 250 – 2000 mm Energy: ~ 10 – 1300* kNm Reaction: ~ 80 – 1750* kN
O
Element or leg fenders are modular rubber units with embedded mounting plates combined with
steel fender panels. They are based on V-Type Fenders but each leg is separate. The modularity
TS
of the fender provides good flexibility and options for the arrangement of the fenders when installed
with closed box steel panels or where mounting space is limited. Element fenders are designed to
deflect about 57.5% in an axial direction.
EN
The element or leg fenders are considered to have a good energy absorption to reaction force ratio
(E/R) and have a modular and compact design with a small footprint. These fenders can be
M
vertically and / or horizontally mounted as part of a combined fender system. Single element or leg
fender units can also be used in combination with fender pile designs, for easy maintenance and
replacement.
M
Typical applications include container and bulk terminals, general cargo terminals, RoRo terminals,
O
navy berths and barge berths.
C
*Performance values for single unit of 1,000 mm length

R
FO
Table 2-5: Typical Special Element Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
ED
SU
IS
T
Size (H): 250 – 1250 mm Energy: ~ 10 – 730* kNm Reaction: ~80 – 1270* kN
AF
Special element fenders combine rubber Element/Leg Fenders with low friction frontal shields
directly fixed to the fenders, and belt deflector if it is necessary. They are also designed to deflect
R
about 57.5% in an axial direction.

D
The special element fenders are available in different sizes / widths and with different colour options
of UHMW-PE plates which makes them a flexible system; they offer low friction facing and are
considered an alternative to steel panels.
Typical applications include container and bulk terminals, jetties, and berths for small to medium
size vessels, general cargo terminals and navy berths.

Table 2-6: Typical Arch / Trapezoidal Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
LY
N
O
Arch fenders are a rigid, moulded one piece type of fender. They are available in different cross
TS
sections and lengths. The main difference in the cross sections is the width of the fender head and
the resulting vessel contact surface area. Arch fenders can be equipped with an additional
EN
embedded steel plate in the fender head that allows for the installation of low friction frontal plate,
a steel fender panel, or the mounting of the fender unit behind a fender pile installation. Arch fenders
are designed to deflect about 50% in an axial direction.
M
Arch fenders are considered to be very robust, durable and require minimal maintenance. These
fenders have a high shear resistance in the longitudinal direction and can be installed both vertically
M
and horizontally onto the supporting structure. They are ideally suitable for turning dolphins and
pivot points. The main disadvantage is the relatively small contact area, resulting in high hull
O
pressure values.
C
Typical applications include general cargo terminals, multi-purpose-terminals, RoRo ramps,

passenger vessel terminals, berths for barges and tugboats.
R

FO
2.4.2 Side Loaded Fender Systems

ED
Table 2-7: Typical Cylindrical Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
SU
IS
T
AF
R

D
Cylindrical fenders were the first fender type to be produced with a defined performance. Installation
is simple using chains, bars, ropes, or specially designed ladder brackets, depending on the fender
size and supporting structure. As the cylindrical fender is compressed, the energy absorption and
associated reaction force increase proportionately up to the characteristic deflection of 100% of the
ID. This can be advantageous in providing a lower reaction forces, resulting in a comparatively
‘softer’ berthing.

The cylindrical fender is very robust, simple and easy to install and has a high abrasion resistance.
The main disadvantage is the relatively small contact area, resulting in theoretically high hull
pressure values.
Typical applications include multiple usage at different berths, container and bulk terminals, general
cargo terminals, RoRo terminals, berths for tugboats and barges.
2.4.3 Floating Fenders
LY
Table 2-8: Typical Foam Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
N
O
TS
EN
M
Size (OD): 700 – 3000 mm (L):
Energy: ~ 30 – 850 kNm
M Reaction: ~ 130 – 3351 kN
1500 – 6500 mm
O
Foam fenders are best suited to applications with large variations in water level. They are also
considered to be good solutions for cruise terminals, due to the non-marking surface and the ability
C
to adapt to different hull shapes. Foam fenders are fabricated using a resilient, energy absorbing,
closed cell foam. A skin covering the foam core is constructed from a continuously wound fabric
R
cord of reinforced polyurethane elastomer. Foam fenders can be fitted with or without a protective
chain and tyre net. Typically, these fenders are mounted against a smooth substructure to reduce
FO
wear and uneven deflections. Foam fenders are designed to deflect about 60% in an axial direction.
As well as the traditional foam fender, there are other foam fender types, such as ‘Donut’ fenders,
small foam fenders with thru-ropes or plastic pipes to suit a variety of applications. Foam fenders
ED
also provide a constant relationship between increasing compression and increasing of reaction
force. Foam fenders typically exert low hull pressures and can provide submerged contact area
(submarine type foam fenders only) and can be made available in various grades of foam.
SU
Typical applications include navy vessel berths, cruise terminals and ship-to-ship operations, locks
and dry dock entrance.
IS
Table 2-9: Typical Pneumatic Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
T
AF
A) B)
R
D
Size (OD): 500 – 4500 mm (L):

Energy: ~ 6 – 9050 kNm Reaction: ~ 65 – 10500 kN
1000 – 12000 mm

Pneumatic fenders suited to applications with large variations in water level. They are also
considered to be good solutions for ship-to-ship operations. The pneumatic fender has a cylindrical
shape with hemispherical ends. The fender body consists of several rubber layers with fabric tyre
cord reinforcement layers. The fender is fully vulcanized and filled with air. Pneumatic fenders are
available with and without the protective chain and tyre net. For submerged applications, hydro-
pneumatic fenders are available, which are partly filled with air and water and positioned with a
counterweight. The governing standard for these fenders is ISO17357 and they are typically
mounted against a smooth substructure to reduce wear and uneven deflections. Pneumatic fenders
are designed to deflect about 60% in an axial direction.
Pneumatic fenders provide a constant relationship between increasing compression and increasing
LY
of reaction force. Pneumatic fenders typically exert low hull pressures and can provide submerged
contact area (hydro-pneumatic fenders only) and can be provided with different initial air pressures.
N
Typical application includes ports with extreme tidal variations, ship-to-ship operations, oil and gas
O
(typically FSRU, floating storage and regasification unit), temporary berthing, submarine jetties
(hydro-pneumatic fenders only).
TS
2.4.4 Special Applications
EN
Table 2-10: Typical Pile/Pivot Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
M
M
O
C
R
FO
Size: customised Energy: customised Reaction: customised
Pile or pivot fender systems are a common alternative to parallel motion fenders and can be
ED
designed to utilise a variety of different fenders. Typically, cone, cell or element fenders are used
with a pile or pivot fender system.
Pile / pivot fender systems rotate at a level well below the water level where the lower tip of the
SU
fender frame is fixed either into a shoe on the seabed, or by welding a support bracket to the support
structure. Pile / pivot fender systems can provide a single point contact between the vessel and
fender system at any water level.
IS
The energy absorbing fender is typically positioned as close as possible to mean sea level to
provide the optimum energy absorption at a range of water levels. The panel is typically inclined to
T
the vertical to accommodate vessel belting and differences in vessel draft between unladen and
AF
fully laden conditions.

Typical applications include bulk terminals, oil and gas terminals, ferry & RoRo terminals, terminals
with sheet pile walls or pile structures with concrete capping beam.
R
D

Table 2-11: Typical Parallel Motion Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
LY
N
O
Parallel motion fender systems are individually engineered systems and can be designed to utilise
several different fenders. Typically, cone, cell or element fender are used. To maintain a vertical
TS
panel face at all levels of compressions, turning lever arms (torsion arms) are mounted between
the support structure (concrete or steel) and the frontal steel panel. The arms restrain the panel
movement during the entire fender compression, allowing it to move only parallel to the support
EN
structure, irrespective of impact level and berthing angle. The main advantages of the PMF’s are
the avoidance of a second contact on the vessels’ hull, as well as a substantially increased energy
absorbing capacity. For designs that focus on the hull impact only, singe fender units could be used.
M
In cases where an increased energy absorption is required, back-to-back cone fender
configurations could be used as these substantially increase the energy absorption of the fender
M
system, while keeping the reaction force low. PMF’s should only be used for controlled berthing
environments as the system is generally more prone to damages if used incorrectly.
O
Typical applications include bulk terminals, oil and gas terminals, ferry and Ro-Ro terminals,
C
monopiles and load sensitive structures.

R
FO
Table 2-12: Typical Rolling Fender system (A) and Performance Curves (B)
A) B)
ED
SU
IS
T

AF
Rolling fenders are particularly suited for providing vessel guidance in narrow channels and berth
structures, rather than withstanding berthing impacts. A wide range of types and performances are
R
available to suit almost all project requirements and each rolling fender is designed for the specific
D
projects. Typically, these fenders use commercially available truck or earthmover tyres that come
with a defined capacity.
Typical applications include locks, floating/dry docks and canals.

2.5 Vessel to Vessel Fendering
Fendering is also required for operations that are performed directly between ships or other floating
structures. This is known as ship-to-ship (STS) operations and require vessel to vessel fendering. STS
operations can include berthed, sailing, or anchored vessels to enable operations such as cargo,
supplies or personnel transfer. These STS operations can include berthed, sailing, or anchored vessels.
Vessels can be berthed one against another in some special ports or under special conditions (e.g.,
naval facilities, oil and gas terminals, offshore industry).
There are some special vessels designed to perform STS operations, such as floating storage and
regasification / liquefaction units (FSU, FSRU, FSLU), bunkering vessels and shuttle tankers. These
LY
vessels required specialist fender systems to be designed to separate the vessels and prevent hull and
vessel contact damage.
For additional detail on STS fender selection, refer to Section 6.9.1 in these guidelines.
N
O
2.6 Fenders and Structures
Flexible dolphins have very different design requirements when compared to closed quay walls or
TS
bulkhead wall retaining (semi-closed) structures. These differences in requirements influence the
design, selection and type of fenders that are adopted on flexible dolphins.
EN
Fenders mounted on flexible dolphins are designed to absorb a portion of the berthing energy. The
remainder of the berthing energy is absorbed by the deflection of the structure. The proportion of energy
absorbed by the fender and structure can vary and this is determined as part of the detailed design
M
process and is a function of the operational requirements of the flexible dolphin. For additional detail on
fender selection for flexible structures, refer to Section 6.4.10 in these guidelines.
M
Fenders can also be installed on floating structures (“spacer barges”), between the berthing vessel and
O
the berth structure. These ‘spacer barges’ or ‘camels’ might have fenders installed on both sides to
allow contact with the hull of the vessel and with the berth structure.
C
Special considerations should be given to fenders installed at lock entrances, dry docks and ship lifts.
For these applications, a variety of fenders could be used, but typically donut, wheel fenders or guide-
R
walls made of steel fender panels with different rubber units are used.
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

3 PARTICULAR ASPECTS REGARDING DESIGN VESSELS
This Chapter provides information on ship types and hull shapes relevant to the design of Fenders and
should be read in conjunction with PIANC WG235: Ship Dimensions and Data for Design of Marine
Infrastructure (PIANC WG235, 2022).
The vessel shape data is important in the determination of the location of fender contact and the number
of fenders contacted.
3.1 Vessel Characteristics
LY
3.1.1 Overview
Ships trading between our ports are designed for specific purposes and thus their designs vary with
N
their function, cargo, economic market, etc. Key parameters in ship design can be driven by different
objectives such as:
O
• Maximizing the loaded cargo by weight
TS
• Shipping cargo that is defined by volume
• Speed of transit
• Capacity
EN
• Nature of the cargo (value, hazards, parcel size, etc.)
• Fuel efficiency
• Loading & unloading requirements
M
• Limitations of major canals such as Suez and Panama on beam, draft, and length
• Port depth limits M
• Port crane/loader or unloader reach that limit beam
•
O
Safety
• Manoeuvrability
C
• etc.
Ship sizes are not a smooth linear change with increasing size. Sizes distributions are driven by industry
R
demands that are constantly changing. This results in step changes and gaps in the size distribution.
FO
3.1.2 Container Vessels

Container vessels are designed for a high transit speed and rapid loading/unloading. This results in a
ED
sleek hull shape with most containers stacked above the top deck. Overall vessel dimensions are driven
by the standard container dimension and the number of containers to be transported.
Because container vessel beams are a multiple of container widths there is a larger variation in vessel
SU
dimensions for the same gross tonnage (GT). At smaller sizes, the variation is larger and significant.
Hence the envelope of maximum dimensions can look odd when compared with an individual vessel in
that size range. The block coefficient is also variable due to the range of different beams.
IS
The design of fenders for container vessels requires special consideration to be given to the hull flare
and the short length of flat side for fenders to bear against the ship’s hull. The shorter contact length
T
can have consequences on:

AF
• Eccentricity factor Ce that may be higher than other vessels with impact closer to the vessel
centre of mass, especially at modest berthing angles.
• Larger fender loads from vessel yawing motion when moored alongside the quay
R
• Projection of the ships deck over the quay line due to both horizontal and vertical hull flare when
D
berthing at higher angles. It is recommended this be discussed with pilots and port operators
to establish safe set-backs for Quay cranes.
The small parallel hull of a typical container vessel is shown in Figure 3-1.

Bow Tangent Line
Parallel (Flat) Hull
Figure 3-1: parallel hull of a typical container vessel

If a vessel has a modest horizontal berthing angle of less than around 5o, its initial fender contact point
will be close to the bow tangent line. Depending on the berthing angle, compression and spacing of the
LY
fenders and the size of the vessel this may be on the flat or bow side of the tangent line. Contact in the
bow area has both a vertical flare angle and a horizontal curvature on the plane of contact point.
N
The height of fenders relative to the vessels deck will influence the hull contact point. Consideration
needs to be given to quay/fender levels relative to water level at all tides and the range of different
O
vessel deck heights at arrival.
Some smaller container vessels may have hull belting (possibly non-continuous), and this should be
TS
considered in selecting and designing the system.
Typically, container berths would be expected to be reasonably well protected because of the
EN
requirements to ensure small vessel motions for safe crane operations. In major ports, the number of
tugs used would be expected to be sufficient to ensure low berthing angles are achieved. This may not
be the case in all terminals and should be checked with the port operator.
M
Additional information on container vessels can be found in WG235 and WG186 (PIANC, 2023)
3.1.3 Dry Bulk & Ore Carriers

M
O
Dry bulk and ore carrying vessels are designed primarily to maximise the cargo load to reduce the
C
transport cost/tonne and speed is less important. The result is a much more prismatic hull shape with
long parallel hull sides and lower cruising speeds of around 14 knots. Larger bulk carriers are used to
carry high volume cargos, like coal and iron ore, and sizes reduce to suit lower volume cargos and/or
R
port constraints.
FO
Dry Bulk terminals, typically service large vessels and thus can have large fenders and larger fender
reaction forces. This requires fenders to be fitted with fender facing panels to ensure loads on the hull
are sufficiently distributed to meet the hull pressure and line force limits set out in Chapter 6.8.
ED
There is a large difference between the draft in ballast and laden conditions. Fenders must be able to
cater for laden vessels on low tide through to ballast condition on high tide.
SU
3.1.4 Cruise Ships

Cruise ship design is driven almost entirely by function but also the need for speed and stability.
IS
Most larger cruise vessels have bow thrusters and some have Azimuth drive propellers that enable
great manoeuvrability and control over lateral berthing speed. It is not unusual for these vessels to
T
berth at small ports with one tug or no tugs in good conditions. The draft of cruise vessels does not
vary much with loading.
AF
The bow of cruise ships has large vertical and horizontal flare angles. Fender design needs to take
hull shape into consideration allowing for tide levels at berthing. The parallel hull length for cruise
R
vessels varies with design, typically the bow shape will be similar to container vessels but the stern
D
shape will be less tapered than container vessels.
Cruise ships can also have hull features hazardous to fenders such as belting (that may be
discontinuous) shell doors that need to open for provisioning and pilot doors that may be recessed in
the hull. These features can hook the edges of fenders causing damage and even destruction of the
fender.

It is recommended that a range of hull plans should be obtained from the terminal operator for the
planning and design of new or existing fenders with respect to the assessment of hull shape on the
fender system.
Additional information on cruise vessels and fendering for these vessels can be found in WG152
(PIANC, 2016)
3.1.5 Ro/Ro, RoPax & Vehicle (Car) Carriers

Ro/Ro and Car Carrier vessels primarily carry mobile “drive on and drive off” cargo. This includes cars,
other motorised vehicles and equipment, laden trucks and rolling stock. The parking decks on these
LY
vessels are enclosed and the vessel will typically have its own vehicle ramps at the stern (there are a
small number of exceptions).
N
Some RoRo vessels are a mix of enclosed deck and cargo deck (usually containers) and as a result
they have a lower GT. There is also significant variation in beam and length for similar displacement
O
vessels.
Characteristics of these vessels include:
TS
• Significant variation in dimensions. The dimensions of an envelope of maximums can look odd
when compared with an individual vessel in that size range.
EN
• Large range in vessel block coefficient 𝐶𝑏 .
• High windage area.
•
M
Large hull flare at the bow then flat sided to the stern.
• Volume based cargo carriers so rarely operate at the maximum scantling draft.
M
The values for displacement in the PIANC WG235 Ship Data Tables are estimated P90 values at the
O
full summer draft. For any given capacity, the values for displacement can vary with vessel design.
Lower displacement values may be applicable as typical drafts can be 10 to 15% lower than the
C
summer draft. It is recommended that data should be obtained from the applicable Port Authority to
determine design values for draft and displacement of RoRo and Car Carrier vessels.
R
Hull belting does occur on some of these vessels.

FO
3.1.6 Tankers
Tanker vessels include crude oil tankers, product tankers, chemical tankers and specialist tankers used
ED
for specific products.

Generally, the length and beam of all tanker types for a given deadweight (DWT) does not vary too
SU
much, however, some special tankers may have different drafts where the product densities vary from
the major liquid products.
IS
As noted for bulk carriers, tankers have quite prismatic shapes and their hull capacity must be
considered in the design of the fender system. There is a significant difference between the draft in
ballast and laden conditions. Fenders must be able to cater for laden vessels on low tide through to
T
ballast condition on high tide.

AF
3.1.7 Gas Carriers (LPG and LNG)

R
There are two main types of gas carriers, LNG (Liquified Natural Gas) that carry gas as a cryogenic
liquid and LPG (Liquified Petroleum Gas) that may be carried as a cryogenic liquid of pressurised liquid
D
and gas. Gas ships sizes are based around their cubic meter gas capacity.
LNG Carriers
There are two primary designs for LNG vessels based around the tank design:
• Membrane type with prismatic tanks

• Moss with distinctive spherical tanks
The hull of these vessels does not form part of the tank.

LPG Carriers
LPG carriers are smaller than LNG vessels.
Safety considerations around explosion, fire and spills dictate design of gas terminals that are
standalone berths with exclusion zones. The berth arrangement is typically similar to oil terminal
arrangements with breasting dolphins protecting the loading/unloading platform and mooring dolphins
set back behind the berth line.
The change in the draft of Gas Carriers between loaded and ballast condition is small because of the
low density of the cargo.
LY
Softer fenders are preferable for gas terminals and should be designed to keep contact hull pressures
within the guidelines outlined in section 6.
N
O
3.1.8 General Cargo, Refrigerated Cargo and Livestock Carriers
General cargo vessels are small ships that carry a mixed variety of cargos. Some cargos are
TS
containerised and others, not suited to containerisation either because of the nature of the cargo or
volume of the local trade, are loose. In many cases, the vessels are multipurpose cargo carriers and
often the vessels are “geared” self-loading and unloading vessels.
EN
Some smaller general cargo vessels may have side belting on the hull. Where belting is present the
design needs to take the small contact area and potential line loads into consideration as for some
fender types, this will not engage the full capacity of the fender.
M
Refrigerated cargo and livestock carriers also fit into the size range of general cargo vessels but typically
M
will have a greater wind area.
O
There are a considerable number of smaller general cargo vessels that may include side hull belting
that should be considered in designing fenders.
C
3.1.9 Passenger Ferries

R
Passenger ferry designs vary considerably as there are a considerable number of different
FO
requirements such as:

• Number of passengers;
• Speed required;
ED
• Route travel distance;

• Time of travel and impacts on passenger amenities required (e.g. overnight cabins,
restaurants);
SU
• Associated need for cargo and vehicles;

• Environment – ocean, lake, river, etc.;
• Operating sea state associated with the route, including ice risk.
IS
Hull designs include monohulls, catamarans / SWATHS (Small Waterplane Area Twin Hull) and some
trimarans. Large ferries are usually steel monohull designs. Many high-speed ferries are constructed
T
in aluminium and some smaller ferries can be fiberglass (reinforced plastic) or wooden hulls. It is quite
common for ferries to have belting on the side of the hull.
AF
Reliable data on the hull configuration of ferries is difficult to obtain so it is essential when designing
ferry terminals and fenders for such berths, to seek specific vessel information from the facility
R
operator.
D
Where belting is present, the design needs to take the small contact area into consideration as for some
fender types this will not engage the full capacity of the fender. Generally, where ferries berth side on,
it is better to arrange fenders in a vertical configuration to cover the potential variation on the impact
height due to tide, sea state and variable ferry size / types. Vertical fender piles can be placed in front
of the fender to protect the fenders from belting and manage variations of the impact height.
Parallel motion fenders are often used for high frequency terminals and those with large tidal ranges.
Manufacturers of parallel motion fenders provide guidelines for the design, installation, and
maintenance of these fender types.

Where a ferry terminal is designed for end on (bow or stern) berthing it is essential to have details of all
vessels berthing at the terminal to ensure the arrangement is suitable for all vessels. In this type of
berth Ce is 1.0.
3.1.10 Fishing Vessels

There are many thousands of fishing vessels of all types working the world’s oceans. These also include
fish carriers, fish factory vessels, research and patrol vessels and special purpose fishing vessels.
Designers should obtain clear directions from owner / operators on the range and details of fishing
vessels to be accommodated at port fishing facilities.
LY
In designing fenders for fishing vessels consideration must be given to hull belting that is common on
some smaller vessels.
N
3.1.11 Offshore Supply Vessels & Harbour Tugs
O
Virtually all offshore supply vessels have side belting that may be vertical, inclined, or horizontal
depending on the location along the hull. They also have a large, flared freeboard forward reducing to
TS
a relatively low freeboard at the rear loading deck. Where these vessels have dedicated berths the use
of tall fender piles is often the best fendering solution. Some facilities use large tractor tyres hung over
fender panels to protect the panels from the belting.
EN
Harbour tugs hulls typically have a low freeboard and continuous belting along the hull and cushion
protection (beard) at the bow for pushing vessels. Rubber rubbing strips are usual either side of the
M
beard. Sides are often fitted with chain hung tyres. Modern harbour tugs (tractor tugs) have azimuth
drives and particularly good manoeuvrability. Tugs can berth against port wharves where the port
M
operator is satisfied this can be done safely without damage to the berth fenders.
O
Many ports have dedicated tug berths or harbours for their tug fleets. These can be floating or fixed
structures depending on tide, cost, and local preference. Some tug pens are designed for four point
C
berthing, so the tug does not have, in theory, to come alongside a jetty and is held in the centre of the
pen. Nevertheless, some fendering provision should be made. Where tugs are berthing against
R
fendered jetties the principles applied to small ferry fendering are applicable.
FO
3.1.12 Other Vessels

There are numerous other vessel types such as naval vessels, offshore vessels, construction vessels
and yachts that have specific characteristics and fender requirements.
ED
When dealing with facilities dedicated to special vessels, designers should seek specific vessel data
from the owner / operators of the facility.
SU
3.2 Displacement
The fully laden displacement is listed for various vessel types and sizes in PIANC MarCom WG235:
IS
Ship Dimensions and Data for Design of Marine Infrastructure (2022).

The values are notionally intended to be a P90 value but that is a judgement assessment based on the
T
data available which is unsuitable for a precise statistical evaluation.

AF
Designers can also calculate displacement using the formulae below or the relationships in Table 3-1.
M = LBP*B*D*pw* Cb
R
M = Displacement [tonnes]
D
LBP = length between perpendiculars [m]

B = Beam [m]
D= Draft of vessel [m]
Cb = block coefficient
pw = Water density (Summer Sea water density = 1.025 t/m3 used in calculations)

Ballast Displacement, where relevant, is also included in the WG235 tables. It is calculated using the
formulae above and the estimated ballast draft at midships (D).
The relationship between displacement and capacity (DWT or GT) is surprisingly linear, but with some
exceptions. A median value for displacement for various ship types can be estimated from the formulae
below. The accuracy value represents the difference between the mean value and likely maximum
value.
Table 3-1: Approximate Displacement v Capacity Relationships for various vessel types.
Vessel Type Mean Displacement Approx. Comment
Formulae (linear)2,3 Accuracy 1
LY
General cargo = 1.35 DWT + 200 12%
N
Container = 1.29 DWT + 1700 5%
O
Cruise = 0.50 GT + 1900 7% DWT is not related to Displacement
Dry Bulk = 1.12 DWT + 3500 5%
TS
Oil Tanker = 1.13 DWT + 3800 5%
EN
Product tanker = 1.17 DWT + 1300 5%
Chemical Tanker = 1.25 DWT + 450 6%
M
RoRo = 1.50 DWT + 1950 17%
Vehicle Carrier = 1.64 DWT + 2900 20%

M
O
Refrigerated Cargo = 1.50 DWT + 500 17%
C
LPG = 1.33 DWT + 5400 10%

LNG = 1.33 DWT + 1400 10%
R
FO
Ferry No reliable formulae

Fishing vessel No reliable formulae
Notes:
ED
1 Represents likely max deviation, however, there are some outlying values for unusual vessels may be
outside this range. Accuracy typically improves with larger vessels.
SU
2 For upper bound values the mean displacement should be adjusted for the variability.
3 Values based on summer seawater density.
IS
3.3 Vessel Hull Characteristics

T
Vessel hull shape and strength are an important consideration when designing fenders and checking
clearances between the vessel and shore-based equipment. They vary considerably with the type of
AF
vessel, size, and individual designs.

R
3.3.1 Hull Shape Influence on Fender Design

D
Hull shapes differ with the specific functional requirements for the vessel. The most important of these
are:
• Nature of the cargo
• Speed of transit
• Cargo capacity
• Fuel efficiency
• Loading & unloading requirements
• Safe freeboard

Ferries, Fishing, Yachts, and other small vessel types may be single or multiple hulls and have a wide
range of design features and providing general guidelines is not practical and design data will need to
be obtained on a case by case basis.
Larger monohull vessels will have similar overall characteristics for the type of vessel, but still can have
significant variation in hull shape from one design to another. In principle, the key parameters of interest
will be:
• Flat (Parallel) hull length at the level of the fenders
• Location of the hull Tangent Line (TL) between the flat side hull and the start of the bow curve
(or stern curve if stern impact with fenders is a consideration) at the level of the fenders
•
LY
Hull curvature in the horizontal plane at the bow (or stern if near stern impact with fenders is a
consideration) at the level of the fenders for various tide levels and vessel draught’s
• Hull flare angle in the vertical plane at the level of the fenders
N
Design will usually focus on bow impact because:
O
1. Stern impact is typically avoided because the hull flares rapidly near the water line and can
cause the vessel to ride over the fenders or even the quay if the vessel is in ballast and the
TS
water level near the quay deck level
2. The bow curve to the TL is usually longer than the stern curve to the tangent point (TP)
EN
Figure 3-2 defines key zones of a vessel hull with respect to fender contact.
LOA
M
𝑋𝑏𝑜𝑤;𝑤𝑙
M
Tangent line between 𝑋𝑏𝑜𝑤,𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑘
flat hull & bow curve
O
C
Unladen Water Line

R
FO
Likely initial fender contact at low angles Point 1m above unladen WL 𝑋𝑏𝑜𝑤;ℎ𝑖𝑔ℎ
Primary area for bow fender contact Point 1m below deck 𝑋𝐿𝑏𝑜𝑤;𝑙𝑜𝑤
ED
X = Distance from the bow to the tangent line at any level

SU
Figure 3-2: Fender Contact Zones on Vessel Hull at Low Berthing Angles
For most vessels at very low angles contact will occur with multiple fenders on the flat part of the hull
with a small increase in the berthing angle further contact will also occur on the bow. As the angle
IS
increases the bow fender closest to the tangent point may become the first contact point and contact
can occur with other fenders on the bow.
T
The extent of contact with bow fenders is a function of the berthing angle, vessel length, vessel bow
AF
radius, fender spacing and the compression of the first fender contacted.
Vessels with higher sailing service speed will have a sleeker hull shape with less flat hull length and
when berthing at an angle are more likely to impact fenders on curved sections of the hull. Dry & Liquid
R
Bulk carriers have slower sailing service speed and are designed to maximise the cargo capacity. This
D
results in longer flat hull length and shorter curved hull at the bow and stern.
Determining the curved hull section that will engage with a fender during berthing is a complex geometry
exercise that must take into consideration factors that are independent of the hull shape such as:
• Berthing angle
• Vessel position relative to the fenders
• Fender spacing
• Compression of the first fender contacted
• Height of the fender relative to the vessel deck (varies with draft, tide, and fender level)

Hull shape is an important factor in determining the point of impact and the number of fenders engaged
during berthing. The hull shape should also be considered for:
• Determining fender layout and geometry to avoid accidental impact with wharf structures and/or
shore based quayside equipment (cranes, shiploaders and the like);
• Fender panel design where contact can occur on curved sections of the ship’s hull or hull
features such as belting.
3.3.2 Hull Shape Parameters for Fender Design
LY
Typical values that may be used for hull shape parameters at the bow in the layout of fenders and
design of fender panels can be found in Appendix A of PIANC MarCom WG235: Ship Dimensions and
N
Data for Design of Marine Infrastructure (2022).
Vessel manoeuvring is assumed to favour first contact at the bow over stern contact. Stern fender
O
contact at a large angle is undesirable because of the potential of the hull to ride over the fenders/quay
line in some circumstances. Pilots would be expected to avoid this situation and it is assumed that any
TS
stern impact would be limited so as not be more severe than a bow impact.
Where the frequency of berthing at angles of greater than 10o is significant designers should undertake
EN
a more detailed evaluation of the hull flare angle.
3.3.3 Multi Fender Contact - Geometry for Fender Compression Calculations
M
Where muti-fender contact occurs the berthing energy is distributed between the contacted fenders.
M
This is described in Section 6.4.5. To calculate the contribution of multiple fenders acting at berthing,
the ship and fender geometry are required. Figures 3.3 and 3.4 demonstrate the geometry of multi-
O
fender contact and the impact of fender geometry.
C
Because the location of the tangent point on the hull varies with the elevation, designers must consider
the effects of the vessel draft, tide and elevation of the fenders. A lower elevation the fender contact on
the hull will result in a higher eccentricity factor (Ce) in the berthing energy calculation (refer chapter 5).
R
FO
Case 1: Multi Fender Contact at Low Approach Angle α – Contact at Hull Tangent Point
Multi-Fender Contact
ED
∆H2 = ∆H1 - S Tan α Sin ϴ = (S / Cos α) / RB ≈ S / RB for small α

∆H3 = ∆H1 - 2S Tan α F = Bow hull offset at B1 from line of flat hull
∆H4 = ∆H1 - 3S Tan α F = 2RB Sin (½ϴ) Cos (90 - ½ϴ) = 2RB Sin2(½ϴ)
SU
Etc Alternatively, F = RB(1 – Cos ϴ)

∆B1= ∆H1 + S tan α - F / Cos α α = Approach angle and H = Fender height
∆B2 no contact assumed ≥ 0 RB = Bow Radius at the level of the fender
IS
Centre of bow radius

ϴ
T
AF
R
RB RB
D
Hull bow radius tangent

point at centre of first fender
vessel bow
∆B1 ∆H1 etc. fender line
α
H
S S S S S
Fender B1 Fender H1 Fender H2 Fender H3 Fender H4 Fender H5

Figure 3-3: Fender Contact at Hull Tangent Line impacts at fender centreline
Case 2: Multi Fender Contact at Low Approach Angle α – Hull Tangent Point between fenders
Multi-Fender Contact
∆H2 = ∆H1 - S Tan α Sin ϴ = (½S / Cos α) / RB ≈ S / 2RB for small α
∆H3 = ∆H1 - 2S Tan α F = Bow hull offset at B1 from line of flat hull
∆H4 = ∆H1 - 3S Tan α F = 2RB Sin (½ϴ) Cos (90 - ½ϴ) = 2RB Sin2(½ϴ)
Etc. α = Approach angle, H = Fender height
∆B1 = ∆H1 + S Tan α - F / Cos α Alternatively, F = RB(1 – Cos ϴ)
∆B2 no contact assumed ≥ 0
LY
N
O
TS
Hull bow radius tangent point
F small at B1 RB at centre between fenders
EN
vessel bow
∆B1 ∆H1 etc.
fender line
α
M
H
S ½S ½S S M S S
O
Fender B2 Fender B1 Fender H1 Fender H2 Fender H3 Fender H4
C
Figure 3-4: Fender Contact at Hull Tangent Line centrally between fenders
It should be noted that the eccentricity factor (Ce) will change as more fenders are contacted as the
R
distance R from the vessel centre of mass to the centroid of the fender reactions will change. Refer
FO
Chapter 5.6 for further explanation.

ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

4 BASIS OF DESIGN
4.1 Introduction
This chapter establishes the parameters that should be taken into consideration in the design of a fender
system. The chapter can be used as a roadmap for the design process or as a template to develop a
Basis of Design document to document the various parameters that will affect the design. Details about
the various steps in the design process can be found in the following chapters of this document.
A fender system should be designed to serve the primary functions established in Chapter 2 and to
meet both the functional and operational requirements for the marine terminal. The design of a fender
LY
system deserves as much attention as the design of any other element of the structure of which it is a
part. For a new design the selection of fender system and type and the selection of the system and type
of structure should be interactive, especially with dolphins. For an existing structure the fender system
N
should be selected and designed to fit the type and capacity of the structure. The fender should be
O
designed considering the following requirements:
• Functional requirements including purpose of the berth and what the specific functions of the
TS
fender system will be.
• Operational requirements including design vessel(s), design life limitations for operation of the
berth, both during berthing and mooring conditions.
EN
• Assessment of the site conditions including bathymetry, wind and current conditions,
manoeuvrability.
• Assessment of the design criteria. This includes local codes, company requirements, and
M
standards to be used for the design.
• M
Assessment of acceptable reliability levels for the fendering system, including considerations
regarding potential for loss of life, dangers to the environment, and economic impacts to both
O
the terminal and the surrounding area.
C
These items could be used to produce a basis of design document. This document should include all
relevant factors that will feed into the design. The design of the fender system will then follow, including
these steps:
R
• Calculation of the energy to be absorbed by fender (during berthing or when moored).

FO
• Calculation of required reaction force for the moored condition.

• Select a suitable fender system and type based on these energy and reaction force criteria .
• Determine the reaction force and related friction force for design.
ED
• Check reaction force from fender and compare to supporting structure capacity.
The above process may have to be repeated several times to select the most optimal fender for the
specific situation. There are numerous fender brands and each of those brands offers various types of
SU
fenders and most often several standard dimensions for each fender type. It is the task of the design
engineer to select the fender of which the specified characteristics meet (or come closest to) the design
requirements.
IS
4.2 Functional Requirements

T
During the design life of the Fender System, it should be able to perform its design functions within the
AF
limitations stated in the basis of design. Functional requirements describe the specific functions of the
fender system may include the following:
•
R
Will the fender system be used for energy absorption purposes or just protection to prevent
contact between the vessel hull and steel or concrete? An example of fender systems used for
D
protection can be timber fender systems used for large fishing vessels. Note that this document
is focused on energy absorbing fender systems only.
• Are there special requirements for non-marking of the hull of the ships that will call at the
terminal. This could often be the case for cruise vessels?
• Is the fender system used for regular contact by arriving vessels or is it a safeguard for
accidental berthing?
• Will the fender system be expected to absorb energy in compression, or shear, or both?
• Is the fender system considered sacrificial, so it is expected to fail during a design event? This
might be a case for fenders protection bridge piers.

• Is the fender system expected to absorb all of the energy from the berthing vessel by itself, or
will the energy absorption be shared between the fender and the supporting structures?
4.3 Operational Requirements

The operational considerations can have a significant influence on the selection and design of fender
systems. The port or facility operations manual or guidance will inform the design together with
investigation and assessment by the designer in consultation with the operator. Operational aspects
that may need to be considered include:
• The freeboard of the range of vessels;
LY
• How the various vessels will approach the berth and contact the fender system;
• Any special aspects of the vessel design (e.g. flare, belting, ramp or door locations etc.);
• Any constraints on the stand off from the berth dictated by operations (e.g. plant reach, oil
N
loading arms, vessel gangway length etc.);
O
• Operational limits imposed by adverse weather or sea conditions. Some vessels may move off
the berth during adverse conditions for safety or comfort others may remain at berth throughout
adverse conditions such that the vessels motion against the fender system will need to be
TS
considered;
• The normal operational conditions at the berth;
•
EN
The movement of vessels during loading and offloading or maintenance;
• The intended service life of the fender system, including the impact of wear and tear caused by
operations;
M
• The risks and consequences of an extreme or accidental event in terms of damage to the fender
system or the berth structure and impact on operations;
M
• Vessel motion and operating envelopes;
• Survival and operating limits wind/wave design limit requirements;
O
• Possible future equipment installations (e.g. shore power).
C
4.4 Site Conditions

R
Sufficient data regarding the configuration and location of the berth should be obtained to establish the
factors that impact the fender system design. Such factors may impact fender system loading, durability,
FO
material selection etc. The likelihood of several extreme site conditions occurring at the same time shall
be considered.
The following site conditions may need to be considered:
ED
• The geographical location of the berth;

• The wind conditions and frequency that various conditions will affect the berth;
SU
• The wave conditions and frequency that various conditions will affect the berth;
• The currents at the berth location;
• The water depth at the berth and in the approach zone and the anticipated effects of climate
IS
change;
• The tidal range;
• The temperature range to which the fender system may be exposed and influence of UV levels
T
[need to research this] or potential for ice build-up or impact during operations;
AF
• The configuration of the berth structure where the fender system will be fixed (e.g. could floating
fenders roll under or over the quay edge, is there sufficient space for anchor bolts, chains, etc.);
• If the fender system is to be fixed to an existing structure, the load capacity, configuration and
R
remaining service life of the structure;

D
• Passing vessel forces (both off and along the berth);

• Effects of permanently moored vessels (maybe in combination with operational requirements).
4.5 Design Criteria

Following the assessment of the functional and operational requirements and based on the site
conditions, the design criteria that will be used in the calculation of the berthing energy and the selection
of the fender system can be determined. Functional and operational requirements will include:
• The codes and standards to be used;

• The design vessel(s) and their characteristics;
• The approach velocity under normal conditions and extreme conditions;
• Frequency of berthing (fatigue);
• The vessel’s allowable hull pressure;
• The desired design life;
• The safety factors to be used;
• Whole life cycle considerations;
• Maintenance periods;
• Site conditions during berthing operations and while mooring.
Other variables to be determined during the design process will include:
LY
• The structural layout of the berth;
• The maximum reaction force (horizontal and vertical);
N
• The friction coefficient;
O
• The minimum or maximum fender spacing.
It is common practice around the world to use 50-year return period loads as characteristic, or nominal,
TS
loads for design of structures using Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) or Partial Load Factor
design. A 50-year return period is therefore used for the characteristic berthing velocities in this report,
as well as for calculations including berthing energy and energy factor. This choice of load return period
EN
is not necessarily tied to the design life of the structure being designed.
Fenders and hardware used for mounting and securing fenders to a berth structure, have typically an
M
expected service life of 20 years. Compared to a structure with a 50-year service life, a fender will
therefore appear to have a lower probability of failure, and lower probability of exceeding the design
M
load during its design life. However, a fender itself is not only there to function as an independent
structural element, but to function as an interface between berthing vessels and the structure supporting
O
the fender. Since berthing energy ultimately is converted to a reaction force onto the supporting
structure, a properly designed and selected fender is important to properly characterize that reaction
C
force. An under designed fender will influence the magnitude of this reaction force and will have a high
probability of being overloaded, reaching a point where it will stop absorbing energy and instead just
R
transfer a reaction force directly to the supporting structure. At this point the fender has stopped
FO
performing its primary function.

The structure supporting the fender will be designed for a 50-year load, and to get an appropriate
characterization of that load, the fender itself therefore needs to be designed to a load with the same
50-year return period, even if it is expected to be replaced within a 20-year period. This is reflected
ED
below, and in the following chapters.
4.6 Operation and Maintenance

SU
The design life of a fender system is likely to be less than that the of maritime structures it interacts
with. To ensure the fender system remains functional during the entirety of its design life, regular
IS
maintenance and inspection plan must be implemented. Visual inspections should typically be carried
on an annual basis. General guidance on types and intervals of inspections can be found in WG108
(PIANC, 2008), ASCE101 (Childs, 2001) and the associated references. These give seven inspection
T
types:
AF
• New construction inspection

• Baseline inspection
R
• Routine inspection*
• Repair design inspection*
D
• Special inspection*
• Repair construction inspection*
• Post-event inspection
*These inspections define routine maintenance activities.
How a fender system can be repaired or replaced needs to be considered during the design stage.
Consideration should be given, making fenders easy to maintain in all states of the tidal range. This will
help to minimize downtime if a repair is required.

The assumptions made by the designer in the design of the fender system need to passed onto the
operator. This will help in the safe operation of the berth and aid in future fender replacement, upgrades,
or other changes. This information should be properly documented in the basis of design.
4.7 Reliability Requirements

An important step in the design basis for a fender system is deciding on the appropriate reliability level
for the design. Many factors can influence this reliability level, but the most important one is the
consequence class for the fender system.
Understanding the position and failure consequences of a fender system is of great importance. In
LY
general, when failure consequences are high the required reliability level increases. In some
circumstances, failure of a single fender will not result in economic repercussions, whereas in other
N
situations major accidents may occur. When national recommendations regarding reliability targets are
lacking, Table 4-1 presents typical examples of fender systems for different consequence classes.
O
The vast majority of the fender systems installed on marine structures correspond to class A or
class B. The reader is referred to Appendix A for further background information regarding the
TS
consequence classes. It is highly recommended that the consequence class be selected by the port
authority or terminals with any necessary input from the engineer of record (Refer to Chapter 13). In
Chapter 5.8, the partial energy factor will be determined for all consequence classes, whereas in
EN
Chapter 6.7 the material factors (or partial resistance factors) are presented.
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

Table 4-1: Consequence classes and description of failure consequences
Class Description of failure Explanation Example of fender systems

consequences
A Negligible/ low consequences for Failure of a single fender Fenders installed on a marine structure that is part
risk of loss of human life AND, predominantly results in of a terminal or port with functional redundancy a
environmental damage AND, insignificant structural and limited number of people at risk;
economic damage. damages.
Exceeding the rated deflection of a single fender is
not likely to result in widespread damage to the
marine structure or unavailability of the berth. An
LY
example can be a continuous earth retaining quay
wall or a dolphin berth with more than two breasting
dolphins
N
B Some consequences for risk of Material damages and Fenders installed on a marine structure that have
O
loss of human life OR functionality losses of vital economic importance, without functional
environmental damage, OR significance for owners redundancy a;
economic damage. and operators and low or
Fenders installed on a marine structure that is a
TS
no social impact.
part of another system, such as chemical or power
plants, but for which failure of the fender system
does not lead to failure of other structures, such
EN
critical installations (for hazardous cargo)b. An
example can be a dolphin berth with two breasting
dolphins.
M
C Considerable consequences for Material losses and Marine structures equipped with a fender system,
risk of loss of human life OR functionality losses of M located in fairly crowded locations for which failure
environmental damage, OR societal significance, of the fender system could put lives of people at
economic damage. causing regional risk.
O
disruptions and delays in
important societal services Fenders installed on a marine structure for which
failure of the fender system will close the berth and
C
over several weeks.

cause considerable consequential economic loss.
Examples can be an essential powerplant or
floating production storage offloading units that are
R
stopped operating after fender failure and

SUFFICIENT backup measures are available,
FO
such as spare fenders.
Fenders installed on marine structures for which

D High risk of loss of human life, Disastrous events causing failure of the fender system will lead to massive
OR environmental damage, OR severe losses of societal
ED
disruptions. Examples are progressive damage or

economic damage. services and disruptions cascading effects of other types of structures, e.g.
and delays at national critical installations (for hazardous cargo) or
scale over periods in the essential powerplants or floating production
order of months.
SU
storage offloading units that are stopped

operating after fender failure and NO backup
measures are available, such as spare fenders.
IS
E Very high risk for loss of human Catastrophic events Beyond the scope of this guideline.
life, OR environmental damage, causing losses of societal
OR economic damage. services and disruptions In some cases, owners may choose for practical
and delays beyond reasons to add an additional berthing criteria to
T
national scale over periods cover “Extreme Events” where additional energy is
absorbed by partial collapse of secondary
AF
in the order of years.

structural elements to protect critical wharf assets.
a
) In the event that a structural component is part of a series system or in the case that progression of failure is not mitigated, a
R
higher consequence class should be considered.

D
b
) It should be noted that the follow-up conditional probability that a hazardous installation will fail due to the failure of the quay
wall should be taken into consideration. If this conditional probability of failure is quite high, a higher reliability index should be
considered.

5 BERTHING ENERGY
This Chapter provides guidance on calculating the berthing energy of a vessel that the fender system
should absorb. The Kinetic Energy method is adopted.
5.1 Berthing Manoeuvres and Navigation Conditions

Navigation conditions influence the vessel berthing manoeuvres and are generally set in berthing
policies specific to a port. Real time computer simulation is frequently used for evaluating vessel
manoeuvres in harbour design.
LY
The following generic vessel berthing manoeuvres commonly used in practice are covered in this
guideline.
N
5.1.1 Alongside Berthing (Parallel or Angular)
O
For parallel berthing manoeuvres, the vessel is slowed or brought to a stop off the berth and then
manoeuvred transversely to the berth (e.g. a trestle jetty, a quay, or breasting dolphins) with pilot and
TS
tug assistance. The berthing approach angle is typically very low, and this is illustrated in Figure 5-3 in
Section 5.2.
Vessels that may use one tug and have less or no thruster capacity, such as coasters and feeders,
EN
typically perform an angular berthing manoeuvre, i.e. landing a spring forward and pushing the stern in
with the main engine and rudder, possibly resulting in larger approach angles. High berthing angles can
risk impact between overhanging vessel deck and any quay equipment close to the edge of the shore
M
structure. This must be considered in establishing port berthing procedures.
M
In some cases pilots may use an angular approach for vessels with a small under keel clearance or
vessels berthing in currents. This berthing manoeuvre is performed to maintain control over the vessel,
O
during which masters and pilots, preferably assisted by tugs, use currents and wind conditions to their
advantage during the berthing process.
C
5.1.2 End Berthing (Longitudinal)

R
In some situations, with ferries, coastal passenger boats / catamarans and for some Ro/Ro vessels,
FO
end berthing is the most common mode of berthing. The vessel approaches directly towards the end
fenders and generally held in position with forward propulsion after the impact continuously pushing
towards the fenders, without mooring the vessel.
ED
Ro/Ro vessels with side ramps typically berth with alongside berthing procedures. Ro/Ro vessels berth
stern first perpendicular to the wharf in and end berthing manoeuvre. This is covered in Section 5.4.
SU
IS
T
AF
R
Figure 5-1: End Berthing Mode

Where the facility has a side quay of dolphin structure the vessels may initially berth alongside this
D
structure while reversing to the unloading wharf and stopping short of the unloading wharf fenders. In
this case, fenders are installed only to take incidental stern impact into account. Common design safety
considerations for accidental situations are normally recommended for these situations.
5.1.3 Ship-to-Ship Berthing

A vessel berthing against a vessel (i.e. ship-to-ship berthing), is a special berthing procedure and further
guidance is given in Section 5.9.

5.1.4 Navigation Conditions
Guidance on navigation conditions is given in Table 5-1 for use when site specific information is not
available. A navigation condition that is neither favourable nor unfavourable can be considered
moderate.
Table 5-1: Description of Navigation Conditions at Berth

Navigation Conditions
Favourable Moderate Unfavourable
LY
Vessel The vessel is slowed or Manoeuvring onto the berth Manoeuvring onto the berth by
approach brought to a controlled stop by making use of the vessel making use of the vessel
N
strategy and can be brought momentum and use of the momentum and use of the
alongside using tug currents, wind, and wave currents, wind, and wave
O
assistance or engine only. conditions. Vessel is not conditions. Vessel is not
brought to a controlled stop brought to a controlled stop
TS
before the final manoeuvre. before the final manoeuvre.
Propulsion Vessels and tugs have good Vessels and tugs have good Environmental forces are
EN
propulsion characteristics propulsion characteristics, significant compared to the
and hence able to fully however, are responding to propulsion of the vessel and
control their movements, e.g. moderate environmental tugs. Minimal propulsion
using bow / stern thrusters or conditions which require resources in reserve to respond
M
adequate tug pulling active use of the propulsion to changing conditions or the
capacity. to maintain control of the
M pilot is reliant on the use of
vessel. vessel anchors to control the
approach to the berth.
O
Pilots and Berthing aided by local pilot An experienced pilot having Docking performed by a pilot
C
monitoring having knowledge of some limited knowledge of with limited experience and/or
permissible maximum the maximum permissible by the ship's master in the
R
berthing velocities and with berthing velocities. absence of a local pilot.

good docking aids such as
FO
PPU or shore-based docking

aid system.
Currents Negligible currents at oblique Currents are generally Strong currents e.g. turbulent
ED
angles or parallel to the berth parallel to the berth however currents, at an oblique angle, or
having minimal effect on the may require continuous use parallel that require substantial
manoeuvring vessel. Smaller of vessel propulsion and/or use of propulsion to control the
SU
current relative to available tug power to stabilize control vessel. Current forces are
tugboat power and/or vessel of the vessel in its final substantial relative to any
propulsion. approach. Some oblique tidal available tugboat or bow
currents may be considered thruster power.
IS
“moderate” if the available

propulsion can adequately
manage the current forces.
T
AF
Waves Negligible wave effects on Negligible wave effects on Waves significantly influence
both the berthing vessel and the berthing vessel however both the berthing vessel and
the assisting tugs. Short may influence the assisting any assisting tugs. The degree
R
period waves experienced tugs. Waves experienced to which waves influence a

during berthing relative to the during berthing have short vessel is a function of both
D
response of the vessel periods relative to the wave height and period; for
response of the vessel. exposed berths, consultation
with the local pilots and
maritime engineers is
recommended.
Wind Typical wind speeds and/or Wind speeds and/or windage Wind influences resulting in
smaller windage area area resulting in moderate high wind forces relative to the
propulsion.

resulting in small wind forces wind forces relative to the
relative to the propulsion. propulsion.
The degree to which current forces affect a berthing vessel depends on several factors, including the
size and type of vessel, the angle of the current axis relative to the berth, and the water depth relative
to the vessel draft (i.e. under keel clearance). Additionally, the predictability of currents is a factor to be
considered. Current patterns in a river with varying flood stages may introduce different considerations
than tidal currents in a coastal port.
LY
5.2 Kinetic Energy of a Berthing Vessel
5.2.1 Fundamentals of Kinetic Energy Method
N
The Kinetic Energy method is based on Newton’s second law of motion. The six degrees of vessel
O
motions (Figure 5-2), associated with velocity and rotation in horizontal and vertical directions, are
simplified to sway, surge and yawing. Heaving, rolling, and pitching of the vessel are normally discarded
TS
due to negligible influence. Although the Kinetic Energy method depends on up to a certain degree of
subjective input and experience of the designer, it has been proven in the past to provide reasonable
results that consider the major variables of vessel berthing. The kinetic energy of a berthing vessel is
EN
the vessel’s mass moving forward, sideways and/or in rotation.
M
M
O
C
R
Figure 5-2: Degrees of Motion of a Vessel

FO
Figure 5-3 illustrates a berthing vessel with approach velocity combined with initial rotation at the time
ED
of impact.
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
Figure 5-3: Berthing Motion and Corresponding Reference Angles
The kinetic energy of a vessel in motion may, in berthing situations, be calculated as in Equation (5-1)
below. The vessel’s initial motion and velocity at the time of first contact with the fender should be the
input for berthing energy calculations.

The kinetic energy of a vessel in motion may, in berthing situations, be calculated as in Equation (5-1)
below. The vessel’s initial motion and velocity at the time of first contact with the fender should be the
input for berthing energy calculations.
1 1
𝐸𝑣 = 𝑀𝑉 2 + 𝑀𝐾 2 𝜔02 (5-1)
2 2
Where,
𝐸𝑣 Kinetic energy of berthing vessel at the time of impact [kNm]
LY
𝑀 Mass equivalent to the water displacement of berthing vessel [tonnes]; see Section 5.3
𝑉 Berthing velocity of vessel at the time of impact [m/s]; see Section 5.4
N
𝐾 Radius of gyration of vessel [m]; see Section 5.6.2
O
𝜔0 Initial angular velocity of berthing vessel [radians/s]; see Section 5.3
TS
When berthing velocity component parallel to the berthing line (𝑉𝐿 ) and 𝜔0 are small the vessel berthing
energy can be simplified in calculation to consider only 𝑉𝐵 . Subsequent to the first impact, the fender
will deflect and will continue to absorb energy until the vessel is brought to a stop. Concurrently, due to
EN
mass momentum of inertia, some of the translational energy of the vessel will be transformed into
rotational energy. The rotational energy of the vessel is accounted for by an eccentricity factor.
M
Furthermore, the energy to be absorbed by the fender system is also adjusted to account for:
• the inertial mass of water pushing on the vessel at the point of fender contact using the virtual
M
mass factor
•
O
the softness of the fender using the softness factor
Therefore, the berthing energy that is to be absorbed by the fenders and the supporting structure can
C
be calculated as below:
R
1
𝐸𝑘 = ( 𝑀𝑉𝐵2 ) 𝐶𝑒 𝐶𝑚 (5-2)
FO
Where,
ED
𝐸𝑘 Kinetic energy to be absorbed by fenders and structure during the impact [kNm]
Berthing velocity of vessel at the time of impact, perpendicular to berthing line [m/s]; see
𝑉𝐵
Section 5.4.1
SU
𝐶𝑒 Eccentricity factor; see Section 5.6

IS
𝐶𝑚 Virtual mass factor; see Section 5.7

T
Notes:
AF
Softness factor (Cs) has been removed by consensus based on (Berendsen, 2022)
Berth configuration factor (Cc) has been removed (Heemskerk, 2020)
R
5.2.2 Characteristic Berthing Energy

D
The uncertainty in the berthing velocity significantly influences the uncertainty in the calculated kinetic
energy (Ueda, 2010) and therefore berthing velocity is the most predominant design variable when
calculating vessel berthing energy. The other two important, but non-dominant variables are the
displacement of vessel (𝑀) and the berthing angle (𝛼).
When the largest displacement, highest berthing velocity and extreme berthing angle are
simultaneously considered in the fender selection process, this may lead to a significant overdesign of

the fender system. It is recommended that characteristic values of the design variables given in Table
5-2 below are considered when calculating the characteristic berthing energy.
Table 5-2: Recommended Characteristic Values of Design Variables
Design Variable Characteristic Value
Berthing velocity (𝑉𝐵,𝑐 ) 0.02% of probability being exceeded per berthing manoeuvre
LY
Displacement (𝑀) Maximum displacement of the largest design vessel
N
Berthing angle (𝛼) 5% probability of exceedance per berthing manoeuvre
O
TS
The characteristic berthing energy is therefore calculated as;
EN
2
𝐸𝑘,𝑐 = ( 𝑀𝑉𝐵,𝑐 ) 𝐶𝑒 𝐶𝑚 (5-3)
2
M
Where,
𝐸𝑘,𝑐 Characteristic energy to be absorbed by the fenders in contact (and the supporting
M
structure where applicable) during the impact [kNm]
O
𝑉𝐵,𝑐 Characteristic berthing velocity of the vessel [m/s]; see Section 5.4
C
5.2.3 Design Berthing Energy

R
The design berthing energy accounts for variations in displacement, effect of vessel berthing frequency
FO
and other uncertainties in energy calculation. The partial energy factor accounts for these uncertainties.
𝐸𝑘,𝑑 = 𝛾𝐸 𝐸𝑘,𝑐 (5-4)

ED
Where,
𝐸𝑘,𝑑 Design energy to be absorbed by fenders in contact during the impact [kNm]
SU
𝛾𝐸 Partial energy factor; see Section 5.8

IS
A marine structure equipped with a fender system shall provide sufficient capacity to absorb the total
energy exerted by the berthing vessel whilst also accounting for uncertainties associated with the fender
T
system. See further guidance in Chapter 6.

AF
5.3 Displacement of Vessel (M)

R
The berthing energy calculation takes account of the mass equivalent to the water displacement of a
vessel. see Chapter 3 for further guidance. Displacement of a vessel can be calculated as explained in
D
Section 3.2
Some berths only facilitate specific vessels, whereas others may accommodate a wide range of vessels,
and hence displacements per berthing manoeuvre may vary significantly. Although, for practical
considerations, it is recommended using the maximum displacement of the largest design vessel for a
berth having a wider range of vessels, this may lead to over conservatism in calculated characteristic
berthing energy . The positive effect of variation in displacement can be accounted by a lower partial
energy factor when the variation in displacement is moderate or high, see Section 5.8 Step 3.

When project-specific values for displacement are not available, recommendations in PIANC WG 235
can be used.
5.4 Berthing Velocity (V)

The berthing velocity is defined as the vessel’s approach velocity at the first moment of contact with the
fender system.
The mean berthing velocity of a single berthing manoeuvre is generally quite low. However, velocities
greater than the mean value will occur during the service life of a fender and need to be taken into
account in the design of a fender system. These greater velocities are considered by distinguishing a
LY
‘characteristic’ berthing velocity (𝑉𝑐 ) which is largely influenced by the local navigation conditions.
Recommendation in Table 5-2 to be considered in berthing energy calculations.
N
It is recommended using local information where available when defining a project-specific
characteristic berthing velocity. Velocities less than 0.100 m/s are recommended to be used with great
O
caution.
Navigation simulations to evaluate berthing velocities and berthing angles can also be considered.
TS
However, a high number of such simulations will be required to arrive at the characteristic design
berthing event and typically the actual berthing is not part of those simulations.
EN
5.4.1 Transverse Velocity (𝑽𝑩)
For parallel and alongside berthing manoeuvres with very small berthing angles, the rotational velocity
M
(𝜔0 ) and the longitudinal berthing velocity of the vessel (i.e. velocity parallel to the berthing line) at the
time of impact (𝑉𝐿 , Figure 5-3) become insignificant in berthing energy calculation.
M
For an angular berthing manoeuvre, both the parallel and perpendicular velocity components, combined
O
with rotational velocity should be accounted for in berthing energy calculation. However, typically for
larger vessels and to a certain extent smaller vessels, it is common practice to simplify and consider
C
only the perpendicular component of the berthing velocity (𝑉𝐵 ) when calculating the berthing energy.
When site-specific information is not available Table 5-3 can be used to determine characteristic
R
berthing velocities perpendicular to the berthing line at the moment of impact. Velocities in Table 5-3
FO
can be reduced based on a bespoke formal review of the port only for berths with an actively managed
berthing speed monitoring system. The adopted berthing velocity limit for new built berths should not
be smaller than 80% of the characteristic velocity given in Table 5-3 for the relevant exposure category.
ED
A berthing monitored system must meet the following criteria:

1. A documented formal assessment of the maximum allowable berthing velocity prepared by a port
operations committee that must include the harbour master, port pilots and a maritime engineer
SU
familiar with the fendering system and its design.
2. An installed “Approach Velocity Measurement System” certified to measure velocity to an accuracy

IS
of ± 5%. There must be sufficient points measured to provide a continuous readout of the approach
velocity at the centre of mass of the vessel. The velocity data must be displayed manner that can
be readily read by the pilots while engaged in berthing the vessel.
T
AF
Table 5-3: Characteristic Berthing Velocity in the Absence of Site-Specific Information

Exposure Category: Favourable Moderate Unfavourable
R
Type of Vessela 𝑽𝑩,𝒄 (m/s)

D
Coaster, Feeder, Handysize 0.150b 0.225c 0.300d
Handymax, Panamax 0.120b 0.225c 0.275d
Vehicle carriers 0.120e 0.225e 0.275e
Post Panamax, Capesize (small), Aframax 0.100b 0.175c 0.275d

New Panamax, Capesize (large), Suezmax 0.100b 0.175c 0.250d
Cruise & passenger vessels 0.100e 0.150e 0.250e
ULCV, VLBC, VLCC, ULCC 0.100b 0.150c 0.250d
a. Typical vessel dimensions: Coaster, Feeder, Handysize (5,000-42,000 DWT); Panamax, Handymax (42,000-85,000 DWT);
Post Panamax, Capesize, Aframax (85,000-115,000 DWT); New Panamax, Capesize, Suezmax (115,000-170,000 DWT);
ULCV, VLBC, VLCC, ULCC (>170,000 DWT).
b. The recommended berthing velocities are largely based on field measurements in Rotterdam and Wilhelmshaven (Roubos,
2018), (PIANC WG145, 2022).
LY
c. The recommended berthing velocities are largely based on the normal navigation conditions distinguished by PIANC
WG145 (PIANC WG145, 2022).
d. The recommended berthing velocities are largely based on the measurements conducted in Bremerhaven (Roubos, 2018),
N
(PIANC WG145, 2022)
e. The recommended berthing velocities are based on interviews with masters, pilots and harbour masters.
O
5.4.2 Longitudinal Velocity (𝑽𝑳 )
TS
For instances of end berthing the berthing energy calculations should be carried out the same way as
when calculating for parallel or angular berthing approaches. However, some of the factors applied in
Equation (5-2) and in Equation (5-3) are specific to end berthing where recommendations are given in
EN
subsequent sections of this Chapter. Longitudinal berthing velocity,𝑉𝐿 , will be the governing velocity.
Transverse velocity and rotation become insignificant.
M
The vessel manoeuvring procedure will influence the characteristic value of the longitudinal velocity for
use in fender design. Only a limited number of published data on end berthing velocities are available
M
(BS6349, 2014), (EAU, 2020), (ROM, 2012). It is recommended that characteristic longitudinal
velocities are determined using statistical data specific to the berth or factual data obtained from a
O
similar berth. In the absence of specific information Table 5-4 provides guidance on characteristic
velocity (𝑉𝐿,𝑐 ) to be used in fender design, based on data from ferry berths connecting Germany and
C
Sweden.
R
FO
Table 5-4: Characteristic Longitudinal Berthing Velocity in the Absence of Site-Specific Information
Type of vessel Characteristic Berthing Velocity 𝑽𝑳,𝒄 (m/s)
Favourable Moderate Unfavourable

ED
Passenger vessels, Ro-Ro vessels 0.400 0.500 0.600

SU
For ferry berths that have rapid turn-around times, increased approach velocities up to 1.0 m/s can also
IS
occur and are relevant for side fender design. Vessels may slide along the side fenders before utilising
end fenders. Sliding velocity is different to the approach velocity.
T
5.5 Characteristic Berthing Angle (𝜶𝒄 )

AF
The characteristic berthing angle (𝛼𝑐 ) is defined as the angle between the heading of the vessel and
the berthing line, measured at the time of its initial point of contact with the fender, as illustrated in
R
Figure 5-3 and defined in Table 5-2. It is not the approach angle.
D
Berthing angle depends on the type of berthing manoeuvre, tug assistance and thruster capacity. When
bow flare angles are high and cranes are located close to the edge of a berth, the berthing angle should
be small. When site-specifical information or local information is not available Table 5-5 can be used to
determine the characteristic berthing angle. These values are based on the data of WG145 and expert
judgement by master mariner.

Table 5-5: Berthing angle [degrees] at the moment of impact when site-specific information is not available.
Approach Tugs Thrusters  ca  ib Explanation
Side Yes Yes 2 3 Vessels positioned off the berth and approach parallel.
berthing Vessels have sufficient thruster capacity.
(Parallel)
No 3 5 Vessels positioned off the berth and approach parallel.
Vessels do not have thrusters or under keel clearance is
very low and therefore it negatively influences
LY
manoeuvrability.
No Yes 2 3 Vessels positioned off the berth and approach parallel.
N
Vessels have sufficient thruster /pod capacity on bow and
O
stern (like cruise vessels).
No X X This can only be done using a current. To be discussed
TS
with pilots and ship masters.
Side Yes Yes 3 5 Vessels have a large angle during the approach. Local
EN
berthing current or wind is used to berth the vessel. However, at
(Angular) the moment of fender contact the berthing angle is low.
Vessels have sufficient thruster capacity.
M
No 4 7 Vessels have a large angle during the approach. Local
M
current or wind is used to berth the vessel. However, at
the moment of fender contact the berthing angle is low.
O
Vessels do not have thrusters or under keel clearance is
very low and therefore negatively influences
C
manoeuvrability.
R
No Yes 8 15 Smaller coastal vessels perform an angular approach,

landing using spring lines and pushing the bow or stern in
FO
with engine and rudder. Vessels have some thruster

capacity.
No 10 20 Smaller coastal vessels preform an angular approach,

ED
landing using spring lines and pushing the bow or stern in

with engine and rudder. Vessels have nor or insufficient
thruster capacity.
SU
a. Characteristic berthing angle to be used in the design

b. Upper limit of the berthing angle to ensure that the fender spacing is adequate (see Chapter 6)
IS
The characteristic berthing angle is used both in berthing energy calculations and in fender selection.
T
In addition, an incidental berthing angle needs to be considered in order to prevent contact between the
vessel and the support structure.
AF
The incidental berthing angle (𝛼𝑖 ) is generally used to verify whether there is bow or side contact for the
smallest design vessel in order to determine the minimum fender spacing in order to prevent damage
R
to the supporting structure or berth facility (see Chapter 6).

D
5.6 Eccentricity Factor (𝑪𝒆 )

When a vessel berths with the first point of contract with fenders eccentric to the centre of mass of the
vessel (e.g. near its bow or stern), the reaction to the impact will make the vessel yaw. This will dissipate
its berthing energy due to part of its energy transforming into kinetic rotation energy. After initial contact
the frictional resistance at the vessel to fender interface will influence the amount of berthing energy
that will be transferred to rotational energy. Lower the friction at the interface higher will be the rotational
energy component. The eccentricity factor (𝐶𝑒 ) accounts for the above in berthing energy calculation.

In instances of insignificant friction and infinite friction (i.e. no sliding) analytical formulae can be used
to calculate 𝐶𝑒 and computer simulations can be used to estimate cases with moderate friction. In
general, the differences in the formulae are relatively small, and it is sufficiently accurate for most
fender designs to assume high friction and apply the following formulae:
𝐾 2 + 𝑟𝐹2 𝑐𝑜𝑠(∅)
𝐶𝑒 = (5-5)
𝐾 2 + 𝑟𝐹2
Where,
LY
𝑟𝐹 Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to the resultant fender reaction force [m]; see
Section 5.6.1
Angle between velocity vector and the line between the hull contact point of the resultant
N
∅
fender reaction force and the centre of mass of vessel [radians]; see Figure 5-4
O
𝑟𝑆
sin(∅) = (5-6)
𝑟𝐹
TS
𝑟𝑠 Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to the hull contact point of resultant fender
EN
reaction force parallel to the berthing line [m]; see Figure 5-4
𝑟𝐿 Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to the hull contact point of resultant fender
reaction force perpendicular to the berthing line [m]; see Figure 5-4
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
Figure 5-4: Nomenclature for Calculating 𝐶𝑒 Factor

T
AF
The value of 𝐶𝑒 normally varies between 0.3 and 1.0 depending on the berthing manoeuvre and berthing
angle. When for instance where yawing of the vessel is insignificant 𝐶𝑒 can be closer to 1.0. Such
R
instances are e.g. when multiple fenders are installed at a continuous quay and that the berthing angle
D
is quite small (i.e. less than one degree) or when a vessel is end berthing and in both cases yawing of
the vessel becomes insignificant. However, calculating 𝐶𝑒 can be complex when yawing is significant
and further guidance is given in the subsequent section.
However, in the absence of accurate data orwhere a high level assessment is required, following values
for Ce may be used (reference Jeff’/Alfred’s paper?).

Table 5-6: Typical 𝐶𝑒 Factors for Different Impact Point along the Vessel.
𝒙𝑭
𝑪𝒃 = 0.55 𝑪𝒃 = 0.65
Impact point 𝑳𝑩𝑷
α=2˚ α=3˚ α=4˚ α=8˚ α=10˚ α=2˚ α=3˚ α=4˚ α=8˚ α=10˚
Fifth point 20% 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.42 0.43 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.45 0.47
Quarter point 25% 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.51 0.52 0.50 0.51 0.51 0.54 0.55
Third point 33% 0.66 0.67 0.67 0.70 0.71 0.69 0.70 0.70 0.73 0.74
Mid ship 50% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
LY
𝒙𝑭 𝑪𝒃 = 0.75 𝑪𝒃 = 0.85
Impact point 𝑳𝑩𝑷
α=2˚ α=3˚ α=4˚ α=8˚ α=10˚ α=2˚ α=3˚ α=4˚ α=8˚ α=10˚
N
5th point 20% 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.43 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.48
O
4th point 25% 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.48 0.50 0.48 0.48 0.49 0.51 0.53
TS
3th point 33% 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.57 0.59 0.57 0.57 0.58 0.60 0.61
Mid ship 50% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
EN
5.6.1 Fender Reaction Force (𝑹𝑭 ) and Hull Contact Point
M
The fender reaction force is the resultant reaction force from all fenders in contact with the vessel as
M
shown on Figure 5-4 and acts on the vessel hull at a distance rF from the centre of mass of vessel.
Therefore,
O
C
𝑟𝐹 = √(𝑟𝑆 )2 + (𝑟𝐿 )2 (5-7)

R
And,
FO
𝑛𝑓
∑𝑖=1 𝑅𝑓𝑖 𝑟𝑠𝑖 𝑅𝑓1 𝑟𝑠1 +𝑅𝑓2 𝑟2 + ⋯ + 𝑅𝑓𝑛 𝑟𝑛
𝑟𝑠 = = (5-8)
𝑅𝐹 𝑅𝑓1 +𝑅𝑓2 + ⋯ + 𝑅𝑓𝑛
ED
𝑓 𝑛
∑𝑖=1 𝑅𝑓 𝑟𝐿𝑖
𝑖
𝑅𝑓 𝑟𝐿1 +𝑅𝑓 𝑟𝐿2 + ⋯ + 𝑅𝑓 𝑟𝐿𝑛
1 𝐿2 𝑛
𝑟𝐿 = = (5-9)
𝑅𝐹 𝑅𝑓 +𝑅𝑓 + ⋯ + 𝑅𝑓
SU
1 2 𝑛
Where,
IS
𝑅𝐹 Resultant reaction force of fenders in contact [kN]; see Figure 5-4

𝑅𝑓𝑖 Reaction force of ith compressed fender [kN]
T
AF
𝑅𝑓𝑛 Reaction force of nth compressed fender [kN]

𝑟𝑠𝑖 Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to compressed ith fender parallel to the berthing
line [m]
R
𝑟𝑠𝑛 Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to compressed nth fender parallel to the
D
berthing line [m]

𝑟𝐿𝑖 Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to compressed ith fender perpendicular to the
berthing line [m]
𝑟𝐿𝑛 Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to compressed nth fender perpendicular to the
berthing line [m]
𝑛 Total number of compressed fenders

For vessels where the centre of mass is closer to mid-ship and when the distance from hull bow point
(corresponding to 𝐿𝐵𝑃 ) to the reaction force is known;
2
𝐿𝐵𝑃
𝑟𝐹 = √( − 𝑥𝐹 ) + (𝑦𝐹 )2 (5-10)
2
Where,
LY
𝐿𝐵𝑃 Length between perpendiculars of vessel [m]; see Figure 5-3
𝑥𝐹 Distance from hull bow point (corresponding to 𝐿𝐵𝑃 ) to the hull contact point of fender
N
reaction force, 𝑅𝐹 at the level of fender contact [m]; see Figure 5-4
O
𝑦𝐹 Distance from vessel’s centre of mass to the hull contact point of fender reaction force, 𝑅𝐹
[m]; see Figure 5-4
TS
In the absence of detailed vessel information a conservative estimate would be to assume that 𝑦𝐹 is
half the beam of the vessel (i.e. B/2) in Equation (5-10).
EN
In theory, the type of fender, fender spacing, fender height, geometry of the vessel such as the bow
radius and parallel body length and berthing angle can largely influence 𝑟𝐹 . To determine 𝑟𝐹 , the
probable worst outcome for the position of the vessel and the hull contact point of the resultant fender
M
reaction force should be determined based on the fender system and vessel geometry.It is important to
allow an out of position of vessel along the quay from the point of impact. This tolerance can typically
M
range between 2% to 5% of the length overall of the vessel. For different vessel hull shapes and varying
berth fender cofigurations the value of 𝑟𝐹 will differ.
O
C
5.6.2 Radius of Gyration (𝑲)

The radius of gyration of vessel can be calculated using the formulae below:
R
𝐾 = (0.19𝐶𝑏 + 0.11)𝐿𝐵𝑃 (5-11)

FO
𝑀
𝐶𝑏 = (5-12)
𝐿𝐵𝑃 . 𝐵. 𝐷. 𝜌𝑤
ED
Where,
SU
𝐶𝑏 Block coefficient of vessel

𝐵 Beam of vessel [m]; see Figure 5-3
IS
𝐷 Draught of vessel [m]; see Figure 5-7

𝜌𝑤 Density of water (1.025 typical for seawater) [tonne/m3]
T
AF
Data for the block coefficient (𝐶𝑏 ) is available in PIANC WG 235. Where a range is given in WG 235 the
mean value can be used in the absence of other information.
R
Table 5-7: Typical Block Coefficients for Various Types of Vessels

D
Type of Vessel Typical Cb Values
< 70,000 DWT > 70,000 DWT
Tankers and Bulk Carriers 0.80 0.85
General Cargo and Dry Cargo combination Carriers 0.72 0.83

Gas Carriers (LNG) 0.72 0.75
Gas Carriers (LPG) 0.70 0.63
Container Vessels 0.68 0.70
Ro/Ro Vessels 0.65 0.73
Car Carriers 0.55 0.70
LY
< 150,000 GT > 150,000 GT
N
Passenger and Cruise Ships 0.63 0.72
O
Ferry 0.55 N/A
TS
5.6.3 Vessel Centre of Mass
EN
For most vessels, the draught is approximately constant along the length and the centre of mass can
be taken as the midpoint. For vessels in ballast (berthing at export facilities), where the draught at the
M
stern is greater than the draught at the bow, the centre of mass will be closer to the stern. The location
of the centre of mass from the stern can be estimated as follows:
M
1
O
[𝐷𝐹 + (𝐷𝐴 − 𝐷𝐹 )]
𝐿𝑐 = 𝐿𝐵𝑃 3 (5-13)
[𝐷𝐴 + 𝐷𝐹 ]
C
Where,
R
𝐿𝑐 Distance to centre of mass of vessel from its stern [m]; see Figure 5-5
FO
𝐷𝐹 Forward draught; see Figure 5-5
𝐷𝐴 Aft draught; see Figure 5-5

ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
Figure 5-5: Vessel Centre of Mass and Underkeel Clearance
Some unusual-shaped hulls or small vessels may have larger offsets between the centre of mass and
the midpoint. In these circumstances, it is likely that vessel geometry can largely influence the fender
design, and hence specific information should be sort from the vessel owners.

5.7 Added Mass Factor (𝑪𝒎 )
A vessel in motion is subject to a range of hydrodynamic forces, such as drag forces due to viscous
effects, which act to resist velocity and slow the vessel down, and inertial forces due to the mass of
water surrounding the vessel that “moves” with the vessel and resists changes in velocity. This inertial
force is known as “added mass” and is accounted for in the berthing energy calculation by multiplying
the vessel mass by a Added Mass Factor (𝐶𝑚 ). There are numerous references for calculating 𝐶𝑚 that
have been tested by modelling to various degrees. There is no clear definitive method since the number
of variables in the estimation of 𝐶𝑚 is considerable. The most important variable, however, is the under
keel clearance.
LY
5.7.1 Alongside Berthing
For parallel and angular berthing manoeuvres it is recommended that 𝐶𝑚 be estimated from the graph
N
below:
O
2,00
TS
1,90
EN
1,80
M
Added Mass Factor (Cm)
1,70
M
O
C
1,60
R
1,50
FO
1,40
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
ED
Underkeel Clearance (Uc) / Vessel Draught (D) [ratio]

SU
Figure 5-6: Virtual Mass Factor.

IS
The above graph is primarily based on the work in PIANC WG33. Between 0% and 10% underkeel
clearance the 𝐶𝑚 value is based on discussions with experts of Gent University fed with the research
(Heemskerk, 2020) that clearly indicated that ships with low underkeel clearance in free basis conditions
T
stop earlier. There is a neglected friction from the boundaries i.e. the bottom and if present wall or slope.
The measurement of under keel clearance is shown on Figure 5-5 and Figure 5-7.
AF
R
D
Figure 5-7: Under Keel Clearance of a Vessel

5.7.2 End Berthing
Influence of water which moves with the vessel when it approaches the berth longitudinally is less
significant than alongside berthing. The size of the vessel and hull shape are important factors. For
smaller vessels, e.g. harbour ferries, and for bow first berthing the additional hydrodynamic mass can
be ignored and therefore a 𝐶𝑚𝑒 of 1.0 can be used. For stern first berthing the 𝐶𝑚𝑒 can be taken as 1.1.
In the case of characteristic berthing energy calculations 𝑀 in the equation should be replaced with 𝑀𝑐 .
LY
5.8 Partial Energy Factor (𝜸𝑬 )
The partial energy factor (γE) accounts for the uncertainty in the berthing energy calculation and is
N
applied to the characteristic berthing energy Ek,c in order to determine the design value of the berthing
energy Ek,d (see Equation (5-4)). The partial energy factor is derived as below:
O
𝛾𝐸 = 𝛾𝐸,𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝛾𝑛 𝛾𝑝 𝛾𝑐 (5-14)
TS
Where:
EN
𝛾𝐸,𝑟𝑒𝑓 Reference partial energy factor for 100 berthings per year
𝛾𝑛 Correction factor for alternative annual berthing frequencies; see Step 6
M
𝛾𝑝 Correction factor for berthings without pilot assistance; see Step 7
𝛾𝑐
M
Correction factor for correlations between design variables; see Step 8
O
C
The partial energy factor (𝛾𝐸 ) can be derived using the following steps:
1. Allocate an appropriate consequence class (see Chapter 4 for guidance).
R
2. Evaluate site specific navigation conditions.

3. Account for variations in water displacement of the berthing vessels.
FO
4. Determine whether a single fender or multiple fenders contribute to berthing energy asborption.
5. Select reference partial energy factor.
6. Adjust reference partial energy factor for alternative annual berthing frequencies.
ED
7. Adjust reference partial energy factor for berthings without pilot assistance.
8. Activate positive effects of correlations between design variables where relevant.
Each step is further described below.
SU
Step 1: Allocate an appropriate consequence class

IS
For the purpose of reliability differentiation, Table 4-1 presents consequences classes considering the
consequences of failure or malfunction of a fender system that may occur at a specific site. The required
T
level of performance, and hence the target reliability level of a fender system, vary for each
AF
consequence class. Consequently, a higher consequence class would require a higher partial energy
factor.
Step 2: Evaluate the local navigation conditions
R
When calculating the berthing energy, berthing velocity is considered to be the most dominant design
D
variable. However, local navigation conditions can significantly influence the variation in berthing
velocity and hence influence the probability of failure of a fender system. Therefore, for favourable,
moderate and unfavourable navigation conditions different partial energy factors are recommended
(Table 5-1) In addition, for monitored conditions for instances when berthing aid systems are used, such
as portable pilot units or fixed shore-based docking systems, and masters and pilots are aware of
berthing speed limits lower partial energy factors can be taken into account.
Step 3: Adjust patrial energy factor for variations in displacement

When deriving the reference partial energy factor an important, but practical, assumption has been
made. Namely that the characteristic displacement Mc is taken as the maximum arrival displacement of
the largest design vessel. For berths facilitating vessels with small variations in displacement this seems
reasonable. However, for berths that facilitate a wider envelope of design vessels the above assumption
might be too conservative. In order to prevent overdesigning the fender system, the partial energy factor
can adjust the estimation of the coefficient of variation of the water displacement 𝐶𝑜𝑉𝑀 of the
approaching vessels. When data is available the coefficient of variation can be calculated using the
following equation:
𝜎𝑚
LY
𝐶𝑜𝑉𝑀 = (5-15)
𝑀𝑚
N
Where:
O
𝜎𝑚 Standard deviation of the displacement of approaching vessels [tonnes]
𝑀𝑚 Mean displacement of approaching vessels [tonnes]
TS
EN
A low value of 𝐶𝑜𝑉𝑀 means that variations in water displacement of the approaching vessels are fairly
small and marginally influence the probability of failure of the fender system. When no data the
explanation in Table 5-8 can be used.
M
Table 5-8: Variation in Displacement
M
Coefficient of variation Explanation
O
Low 𝐶𝑜𝑉𝑀 < 15% Variations in displacement of the approaching vessels are small
C
and marginally influence the berthing energy. Berths facilitate

predominantly the same vessel type and class. Furthermore,
variations in draught of the vessels is minimal.
R
Moderate 15% ≥ 𝐶𝑜𝑉𝑀 < 50% Variations in displacement of the approaching vessels are
FO
moderate and will influence the berthing energy. Berths facilitate

predominantly the small envelope of vessels. Furthermore,
variations in draught of the vessels is moderate.
ED
High 𝐶𝑜𝑉𝑀 ≥ 50% Variations in displacement of the approaching vessels are high
and will significantly influence the berthing energy. Berths
facilitate a wide envelope of design vessels, e.g. both big and
SU
small vessels. Furthermore, variations in draught of the vessels

are significant.
IS
Step 4: Determine whether a single fender or multiple fenders absorb the berthing energy
T
This step has a relation with the partial material factor 𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 , which will be further discussed in Chapter
AF
6. When the berthing angle and fender spacing are fairly small multiple fenders may contribute in
absorbing the berthing energy. For multiple fender contact the amount of energy that can be absorbed
by the fender system is largely influenced by the berthing angle and geometry of the vessel (bow radius
R
and parallel body length), whereas for single fender contact the influence of the berthing angle is much
lower. Since the probability that the characteristic berthing velocity and characteristic berthing angle
D
occur simultaneously is quite low, a lower partial energy factor can be taken into account for multiple
fender contact (Table 5-10) compared to single fender contact (Table 5-9) in order to prevent
overdesigning the fender system.
Step 5: Select the reference partial energy factor
The reference partial energy factor can be selected using Table 5-9 and Table 5-10 that correspond to
the relevant failure consequence class and the method of fender contact. Reference partial energy
factors were derived for a frequency of 100 berthings per year in accordance with (Brolsma, Hirs, &
Langeveld, 1977).

Table 5-9: Reference Partial Energy Factor for 100 Berthing Per Year – Single Fender Contact
Navigation CoVM Reference Partial Energy Factor for Reliability Classes, 𝛾𝑟𝑒𝑓
Condition
A B C D
Monitored High 1.25 1.40 1.45 1.55
Moderate 1.30 1.45 1.50 1.60
Low 1.40 1.55 1.65 1.75
LY
Favourable High 1.30 1.50 1.60 1.70
N
Moderate 1.35 1.55 1.65 1.80
O
Low 1.50 1.70 1.80 1.95
Moderate High 1.35 1.60 1.70 1.85
TS
Moderate 1.45 1.65 1.75 1.90
Low 1.60 1.80 1.90 2.10
EN
Unfavourable High 1.50 1.85 2.00 2.20
Moderate 1.60 1.95 2.05 2.30
M
Low 1.80 M 2.15 2.30 2.55
Table 5-10: Reference Partial Energy Factor for 100 Berthings per Year – Multiple Fender Contact
O
Navigation CoVM Reference Partial Energy Factor for Reliability Classes, 𝛾𝑟𝑒𝑓
C
Condition
A B C D
R
Monitored High 1.10 1.25 1.30 1.40

FO
Moderate 1.15 1.30 1.35 1.45

Low 1.30 1.45 1.50 1.60
ED
Favourable High 1.15 1.35 1.40 1.50

Moderate 1.20 1.40 1.55 1.55
SU
Low 1.35 1.50 1.60 1.70

Moderate High 1.20 1.40 1.45 1.60
IS
Moderate 1.25 1.45 1.55 1.65

Low 1.40 1.60 1.70 1.80
T
Unfavourable High 1.25 1.55 1.65 1.85

AF
Moderate 1.35 1.60 1.75 1.95

R
Low 1.50 1.80 1.95 2.15

D
Step 6: Adjust the partial energy factor for alternative berthing frequency
The actual annual berthing frequency can be much higher or lower than the 100 per year assumed in
𝑔𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑓 , which can significantly influence the reliability of the fender system. For instance, fender systems
that are installed at ferry berths may be subject to a berthing impact every 15 minutes, whereas other
berths may facilitate a single vessel per year. The correction factor 𝛾𝑛 adjusts the partial energy factor
and can be estimated using the following equation (Roubos et al, 2021):

𝛾𝑛 = 𝑎 𝑙𝑛(𝑛) + 𝑏 (5-16)
Where:
𝑎 Logarithmic regression coefficient
𝑏 Constant; see Table 5-11 and Table 5-12
𝑛 Annual berthing frequency
LY
Table 5-11: Correction Factor for an Alternative Annual Berthing Frequency (𝛾𝑛 ) for n ≤ 100
N
Class Annual Berthing Frequencies, n Equation (5-16)
O
1 2 5 10 20 50 100 a b
TS
A 0.68 0.73 0.79 0.84 0.89 0.95 1.00 0.0696 0.6788
B 0.72 0.76 0.82 0.86 0,90 0.96 1.00 0.0605 0.7207
EN
C 0.73 0.77 0.83 0.87 0.91 0.96 1.00 0.0573 0.7356
M
D 0.76 0.79 0.84 0.88 0.91 0.96 1.00 0.0529 0.7561
M
O
Table 5-12: Correction Factor for an Alternative Annual Berthing Frequency (𝛾𝑛 ) for n > 100
C
Class Annual Berthing Frequencies, n Equation (5-16)

R
200 500 1000 2000 5000 10000 25000 a b

FO
A 1.05 1.13 1.18 1.23 1.30 1.36 1.43 0.0778 0.6416
B 1.05 1.11 1.15 1.20 1.26 1.31 1.37 0.0669 0.6917

ED
C 1.04 1.10 1.14 1.19 1.25 1.29 1.35 0.0630 0.7095

SU
D 1.04 1.09 1.13 1.17 1.22 1.26 1.32 0.0576 0.7340

IS
Step 7: Correct for berthings without pilot assistance

T
Reference partial energy factors, presented in Table 5-9 and Table 5-10, were derived based on field
observations where berthing manoeuvres were assisted by pilots and tugs. Pilots are familiar with the
AF
local navigation and environmental conditions and therefore no adjustments to the values in Table 5-9
and Table 5-10 are required, i.e. 𝛾𝑝 equals 1.0. For berthing manoeuvres that are assisted by tugs
R
alone, tug skippers are generally guided by the captain or the master who may not be completely familiar
with the local navigation conditions. This can lead to higher vessel berthing velocities / energies and
D
therefore it is recommended that a higher partial energy factor is used. In the absence of field
measurements or site-specific information a correction factor 𝛾𝑝 of 1.25 is recommended for use
following the guidelines of the Spanish ROM (ROM, 2012).
Step 8: Activate positive effects of correlations between vessel size and berthing velocity, if any
Majority of the vessel berthing records (approach velocity and berting anlge) collected by the PIANC
WG145 do not show a strong relation between vessel size and berthing velocity. Therefore, 𝛾𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑓 was
derived assuming that both these design variables are independent. When there is no correlation
between vessel size, berthing velocity and berthing angle, 𝛾𝑐 equals 1.0. However, when vessel size,

berthing velocity and berthing angle are to some extent dependent, this might lead to over conservatism
in the calculated berthing energy. For instance when a large vessel, having a larger water displacement,
has a much lower berthing velocity compared to a small vessel, then a high value of the kinetic energy
is less likely to occur during the service life of the fender system. Hence the probability of fender system
failure is also low. Where site-specific information is available, for example if a port or terminal has a
comprehensive data set, showing that large vessels berth with much lower berthing velocity compared
to small vessels, it is recommended to quantify the effect of correlations between design variables. For
an example, Roubos et al. (2021) found that 𝛾𝑐 is close to 0.6 for a container terminal with favourable
navigation conditions in Rotterdam, which indicates that correlations between berthing velocity and
vessel size can significantly influence the reliability of a fender system. On the basis of the berthing
records that are available, it is not yet possible to provide recommendations for 𝛾𝑐 that are generally
LY
applicable. Therefore, in the absence of site-specific information or data it is recommended that 𝛾𝑐 to
be taken as 1.0. Furthermore, it should be noted that when vessel size largely influences berthing
N
velocity, the largest vessel might not result in highest berthing energy.
O
5.9 Ship-to-Ship Berthing
TS
5.9.1 Berthing Manoeuvres
Ship-to-ship berthing operations can be divided into three categories:
EN
A. Double Banking Transfer – STS operation that is conducted while one ship (usually the larger
of the two) is alongside a berth, dolphins or moored to buoys within port limits.
B. Transfer at Anchor – STS operation that is carried out between ships when they are moored
M
alongside each other and where one of the ships is at anchor (or in a flexible mooring system
such as MBM or SPM). M
C. Underway Transfer – STS operation that is conducted between two ships that are underway.
O
For ship-to-ship transfer operations in Category A, the berthing energy calculation should proceed using
the equations outlined above in the previous sections of this chapter.
C
For ship-to-ship transfer operations where both vessels are free-floating, the berthing energy calculation
R
must account for the mass of both vessels. For Categories B and C, the berthing energy calculation
must be modified to account for two free-floating bodies; this involves similar principles to a vessel
FO
berthing against a fixed structure. However, in the case of ship-to-ship operations, both vessels are
either in motion prior to berthing or can be set in motion due to the berthing operation. Categories B
and C are illustrated by Figure 5-8. For Categories B and C the mass (real + added mass) of both
ED
vessels is relevant, along with the relative velocity between the vessels prior to fender contact.
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
Figure 5-8: Ship-to-Ship Berthing for Free Floating Vessels

5.9.2 Ship-to-Ship Berthing Energy
The energy to be absorbed by the fenders in a ship-to-ship berthing can be calculated assuming an
inelastic collision between the two vessels, which is described by the following equation:
1 2
𝐸𝑘,𝑐 = 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 = ( . 𝑀𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 ) . 𝐶𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑒 (5-17)
2
Where,
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 Characteristic ship-to-ship berthing energy that needs to be absorbed by the fender
LY
system at the time of impact [kNm]
𝑀𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 Characteristic mass for energy of ship-to-ship berthing, including the effects of the
displacement and added mass of both vessels [tonnes]
N
O
𝑀1 𝐶𝑚1 𝑀2 𝐶𝑚2
𝑀𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 =
𝑀1 𝐶𝑚1 + 𝑀2 𝐶𝑚2 (5-18)
TS
𝑀𝑖 Mass equivalent to displacement of ith vessel [tonnes]
EN
𝐶𝑚𝑖 Virtual mass factor of ith vessel; see Section 5.7.1
𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 Characteristic closing velocity between the vessels [m/s]; see for definition of the velocity
vectors
M
𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 = 𝑉𝐵1 + 𝑉𝐵2
M (5-19)
O
C
𝑉𝐵𝑖 Berthing velocity of the ith vessel, component perpendicular to berthing line [m/s]; see
Section 5.9.3
R
𝐶𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑒 Eccentricity factor; see Section 5.9.4

FO
The generally accepted design practice is that each fender in the system should have sufficient energy
absorbing capacity to absorb the largest anticipated berthing energy. Each fender must be capable of
ED
absorbing the full impact load since vessels almost always contact a single fender on initial impact. A
safety factor (𝛾𝐸 ) should be included to account for conditions (particularly velocities) that exceed the
characteristic values.
SU
5.9.3 Characteristic Berthing Velocity (𝑽𝒔𝒕𝒔,𝒄 )

IS
The characteristic berthing velocity, “𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 ”, also called the “relative approach velocity” or the “closing”
velocity, is defined relative to the virtual berthing line illustrated in Figure 5-8. This is the final alignment
of the two vessels together and (although not known prior to the calculation) represents the reference
T
frame for calculating the closing velocity. I.e., the closing velocity is equal to the sum of the velocities
AF
VB1 and VB2 in Figure 5-8. In practice, the closing velocity can be thought of as the speed at which the
two vessel centres of gravity are approaching each other. It is influenced by the wind and sea conditions,
skill of the pilot(s), the size and loading of the vessels, and the type of propulsion. An additional
R
consideration for ship-to-ship applications is whether both vessels are underway or if one is stationary.
Because the berthing energy is proportional to the square of the velocity, “𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 ” is the single most
D
important factor in calculating the berthing energy.

The characteristic berthing velocities for ship-to-ship transfers are generally higher than those assumed
for vessels berthing at fixed marine structures. Typical characteristic closing velocities for ship-to-ship
transfers are summarised in Table 5-13. The full documentation behind how these velocities were
developed was not available for review in preparation of this document. However, these velocities are
used extensively in the industry and are referenced in peer reviewed publications (e.g., Sakakibara &
Yamada (2008)). A few clarifications are helpful for interpreting these velocities:

• In many locations, ship-to-ship berthing may not be considered safe under the conditions listed for
the Moderate and Rough categories. Many other factors (which are beyond the scope of this
guidance) govern the safety of ship-to-ship berthing operations. The velocities reported in this table
indicate a reasonable starting point for estimating the closing velocity; however, local data (when
available) and the judgement of the engineer are paramount for ensuring that the design closing
velocity will reasonably reflect the conditions experienced in the field.
• These velocities are referenced to deadweight tonnage, which may be different for the two vessels
mooring together. The deadweight tonnage of the smaller vessel can be used in selecting the
berthing velocity.
• These velocities were developed for tankers; however, they can be used for other types of vessels
LY
with similar mass and propulsion characteristics (e.g., bulkers).
• Sea state categories are as defined by the World Meteorological Organisation
N
Table 5-13: Closing Velocity for Ship-to-Ship Operations
O
Deadweight Characteristic Berthing Velocity [m/s]
Tonnage
TS
[tonnes] Calm Moderate Rough
Sea State: 0 to 3 Sea State: 4 Sea State: 5
EN
Wave Height: < 1.25 m Wave Height: 1.25 - 2.5 m Wave Height: 2.5 - 4.0m
< 10,000 0.300 0.400 0.500
M
10,000 – 50,000 0.250 M 0.325 0.400
50,000 – 100,000
O
0.200 0.250 0.300
C
> 100,000 0.150 0.200 0.250

R
FO
5.9.4 Eccentricity Factor

The effect of eccentricity is often neglected for ship-to-ship berthing calculations (i.e., 𝐶𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑒 = 1.0), which
ED
is conservative. However, the principle of trade-off between translation and rotational energy that leads
to the eccentricity coefficient for berthing against fixed fenders can be applicable for ship-to-ship
berthing and can be included when appropriate. For ship-to-ship berthings in Category C (both vessels
SU
underway), there can be significant hydrodynamic effects that develop between the two vessels that
may modify the rotational characteristics of the vessels, making the eccentricity coefficient very difficult
to accurately specify. Thus, it is recommended to only consider an eccentricity factor less than 1.0 for
IS
Category B ship-to-ship berthings. If an eccentricity coefficient is calculated, it should be calculated

using the same approach as for fixed terminal berthing however with the point of contact specified
based on the position of the fenders relative to the centre of gravity of each vessel.
T
AF
R
D

6 FENDER SYSTEM SELECTION
6.1 Introduction
This Chapter outlines the fender selection process, providing background information on the issues that
should be considered when selecting a fender system. The selection of a fender system deserves as
much attention as the design of any other element of the structure of which it is a part. The selection of
the fender, the type of fender system and the supporting structure are therefore interlinked. The
selection of a fender system should take a commonsense approach and follow the general process as
outlined below:
LY
• Determination of the functional requirements.
• Determination of the operational criteria.
N
• Assessment of the site conditions.
•
O
Establishment of the design criteria.
• Calculation of the berthing energy to be absorbed by the fender during berthing and/or when
moored (refer to Chapters 5).
TS
• Selection of a suitable fender and fender system based on the berthing energy and design
criteria.
•
EN
Determination of the fender reaction force and related friction forces.
• Confirmation that the supporting structure and vessel hull can accommodate the calculated
forces.
M
The above process may have to be repeated several times to select the most optimal fender and/or
fender system for a specific situation. M
6.1.1 Role of the Designer
O
There are numerous fender system variations available, and it is the task of the designer to
C
pragmatically select the most suitable fender system which satisfies the design requirements or
specified characteristics.
R
Before designing a fender system, the designer is advised to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of
FO
all project-specific criteria that the fender system must satisfy. A sound understanding of the principles
behind the use of the correction factors is also recommended, to prevent a potentially significant over,
or under design, of the resulting fender system.
ED
The fender should be selected based on the calculated design berthing energy of the design vessel(s),
vessel type and berth use, as outlined in Chapter 5.
SU
6.2 Fender Selection Overview

Every type and size of fender has different performance properties. Whatever type of fender is selected,
IS
the fender must have sufficient capacity to absorb the energy of the berthing vessel. When selecting
fenders, the designer must consider many factors, including:
T
• Differences in vessel size and shape.

•
AF
Approach velocity.
• Single or multiple fender contact.
• Angular compression of the fender.
R
• Temperature range.
• Berthing frequency.
D
• Fender efficiency.
The selection of a suitable fender relies in part, on carrying out calculations to confirm that the energy
absorption properties of the fender are greater than the berthing energy of the vessel. In addition, the
associated compressed fender reaction force must be less than the vessel hull pressure limit and the
capacity of the supporting structure.
Fender selection relies on the experience and judgement of the designer to make reasoned and
pragmatic decisions as to which fender and fender systems may function best in the circumstances

unique to each project. In conjunction with this experience, the designer is also recommended to seek
advice from fender manufacturers in identifying suitable fender solutions.
Having determined the characteristic berthing velocity of the design vessel and calculated the design
berthing energy, as outlined in Chapter 5, the designer must first identify the types of fenders that are
most likely to satisfy the primary design criteria for the project. It is possible that several different types
of fenders may be considered suitable. The initial fender type selection process is outlined in Figure
6-1. Guidance on the selection and suitability of fenders for certain applications, is included within
Section 6.3.
F L C M L using pro ect speci ic design criteria
LY
ro ect speci ic design criteria is used to deter ine the :
N
Characteristic berthing velocity
O
Maximum and minimum average temperatures
Design vessel fender compression angle
TS
Single or multiple fender contact
Assessed consequence class and failure consequence.
EN
1. Identify the fender type that is likely to satisfy the pro ect requirements , based on the
characteristic berthing velocity, the fender si e and grade of rubber (i).
M
Characteristic
erthing elocit
Fender eight
M rade o u er
O
C
Typical range Typical range Sof t Hard

20 mm/s to 00 mm/s 100 mm to 3000 mm
R
train ate = or Compression time

FO
2. Identify the ase er or ance of the selected fender, (i.e., the Berthing Energy
ED
absorption capacity and the associated Reaction Force).
3. Determine the fender Characteristic er or ance by applying the Correction Factors to

SU
the fender ase er or ance (refer Figure 11).

IS
. Determine the fender esign er or ance by applying the artial esistance Factors to
the fender Characteristic er or ance (refer Figure 11).
T
AF
. eri that:
the capacity and capability of the selected fender is greater than the design berthing
energy required to be absorbed by the fenders .
R
the vessel hull pressure limit is not exceeded by the reaction forces generated by the
D
selected fender.
the structural load capacities of the load distribution
, support and restraint system are
greater than the reaction forces generated by the selected fender .
of r r n r or n or n of o n o on r n
n on of of f n r o
Figure 6-1: Overview of fender selection process

Using the calculated design berthing energy, the designer must then refer to the fender performance
data for each type of fender, as published in the fender manufacturer’s catalogues, to identify the Base
performance properties for each type of fender, (refer to point 2 in Figure 6-1).
To determine the Characteristic performance of the selected fender, the designer needs to determine
the applicable correction factors, using the project specific design criteria. The base performance of the
fender is then multiplied by these correction factors, to determine the fender characteristic performance,
refer to point 3 in Figure 6-1 and to Section 6.6.
The Design performance of the selected fender requires the designer to determine the applicable partial
resistance factors and apply these to the fender Characteristic berthing energy and reaction force. Refer
to point 4 in Figure 6-1 and to Section 6.7.
LY
At the project outset, specific site-based design criteria may not be available or may need to be
estimated. The designer may need to undertake a sensitivity analysis to determine the effect of changes
N
to the assumed design criteria on the required size and performance properties of the selected fender.
O
The designer may also need to iteratively assess a range of different fender types and sizes. The design
process is likely to identify several different fender types and sizes that could accommodate the required
range of vessels and conditions.
TS
This design process is repeated until the designer has assessed all possible fender solutions and/or
identified the optimum solution. It is highlighted that the most efficient energy absorbing fender may not
EN
be the most suitable fender for the required application.
6.2.1 Fender Selection using Pre-Set Design Criteria
M
To quickly assess and compare numerous different types and sizes of fenders, fender manufacturers
M
may publish fender characteristic performance information (𝐸𝑓;𝑐 and 𝑅𝑓;𝑐 ) that utilises ‘pre-set’ design
criteria for each type and rubber grade of fender. Using this approach, designers can select fenders ‘at
O
a glance’, as the following correction factors may have already been applied.
C
• Berthing Velocity (moderate conditions): 175 mm/s

• Temperature (Energy Absorption): 25 C
R
• Temperature (Reaction force): -10 C

• Fender Compression Angle: 5°
FO
• Single fender contact.

When using the pre-set design criteria, the designer must be aware that this methodology is intended
for preliminary fender selection only. The final fender selection may change due to differences between
ED
the project design criteria and the pre-set design criteria.

These pre-set design criteria are used to provide the designer with a quick reference, comparison, and
‘look-up’ tool for fender selection and may well differ from the final pro ect specific design criteria. The
SU
designer will need to check the suitability of the selected fender prior to finalising the selection.
The partial resistance factors will also need to be applied to complete the fender selection using this
IS
pre-set criteria method. If the project design criteria are significantly different to the pre-set criteria, the
designer is recommended to revert to the methodology outlined in Figure 6-1.
T
6.3 Fender System Selection

AF
The selection of a suitable fender system may need to consider a wide range of potentially limiting
conditions or restrictions. These may include, but are not limited to, specific types of vessels, matching
R
replacement fender systems to an existing fender system, large vessel stand-off distances,
accommodating vessel gangways, vessels with belting, etc.
D
The range of vessel sizes using the berth will also need to be carefully considered as this may influence
the fender type, spacing (pitch) and the size(s) (heights) of the fenders selected.
Alternatively, there may be one primary overriding criterion which may govern the whole fender system
selection process. Refer to Chapter 2 for a summary of fender types and systems and the preliminary
considerations linked to their selection.
As part of the fender selection and design process, the designer is recommended to consider all fender
system options that may be considered suitable. Each potential solution should then be assessed

against the project-specific criteria to determine the most efficient, robust, and cost-effective design
solution.
Table 6-1 provides an overview of which types of fender system may be suitable for use with a range
of different vessel types. Further advice on which fender types may be most suitable to a particular
situation, location, or vessel, can be obtained from fender manufacturers.
Table 6-1: Application of fender systems for various vessel types
LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
In addition to differing vessel types, and as an additional starting point for fender system selection,
Table 6-2provides an indication as to which fender types may be suitable for use in a range of general
marine applications.
T
The designer should not consider Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 to be prescriptive or definitive, and the final
AF
fender selection must be verified using the calculation methods included in this guidance. The designer
is also recommended to consider all permanent and temporary conditions associated with the operation
of the berth (e.g., crane offload), to ensure that the most suitable fender type and fender system is
R
selected.
D
6.4 Factors Influencing Fender System Selection

Fender systems can be designed to function as single stand-alone fender systems (e.g., berthing
dolphins), or they can function as part of a combined multiple fender system arrangement (e.g., on a
continuous berth).
A wide range of factors and variables must be considered by the designer when selecting a suitable
fender system. These factors are outlined in the following Sections.

Table 6-2: Application of fender systems to various marine applications
LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
6.4.1 Bow Radius

A vessel’s bow radius (RB) at the level of the contact with the fender system, is an integral part of
determining the pitch of the fender system. In the absence of vessel specific information, the bow radius
may be estimated using the following equation. Refer Figure 6-2. Refer also to Chapter 3 for more
detailed information on hull shape and the determination of the bow radius.
𝐵 𝐿𝑏𝑜𝑤,𝐹 2
𝑅𝐵,𝐹 ≈ ( + ) (6-1)
4 𝐵

Where:
𝑅𝐵,𝐹 : Bow Radius (m)
𝐵 : Beam of the Vessel (m)
𝐿𝐵𝑃 : Vessel Length Between the Perpendiculars (m)
𝐿𝑂𝐴 : Vessel Length Over All (m)
𝐿𝑏𝑜𝑤 . 𝐹 : Distance from the bow tangent point to the bow at the elevation of the fender (m)
LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
Figure 6-2: Bow radius (𝑅𝐵 ) and length of bow flare (𝐿𝐵𝑜𝑤 )
R
6.4.2 Fender System Pitch

FO
For continuous berthing structures, the fender system pitch (𝑝𝑓 ), (the spacing between each fender
system), is an important design consideration and can be a contributory factor in the design of the
ED
supporting structure (i.e., headstock separation). An estimate of the maximum pitch should be
calculated as part of the fender selection and design process.
The pitch will need to be assessed for the range of design vessels and for the different fender types
SU
selected, as the optimum pitch will vary with differences in the vessel bow radius, the level of the fender
system above the water line and the stand-off distance of the berthing line from the supporting structure.
The maximum pitch (𝑝𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) between two fender systems, for bow contact only, can be calculated as
IS
follows:
T
𝑝𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 ≤ 2 √ R B 2 - (R B - ℎ𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝑡𝑎𝑛 𝛽𝑓 )2 (6-2)

AF
Where:
R
𝑝𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 : Maximum fender system pitch (m)

𝑅𝐵 : Bow radius (m)
D
ℎ𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 : Fender height at maximum rated compressed, measured at centre line of fender (m)
𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛 : Minimum clearance to support structure (m)
𝛽𝑓 : Bow flare angle.
The recommended maximum pitch shall be taken as 0.15 x the smallest design vessel length (𝐿𝑂𝐴𝑠 ).
Whilst a large pitch may be preferrable, this may allow some vessels, especially smaller ones, to contact
the supporting structure in between the fenders. The pitch should also be small enough to prevent a
vessel hull contacting the supporting structure. The designer may elect to include smaller, intermediate

fenders between the larger, primary fender systems to prevent smaller vessels contacting the
supporting structure, refer Section 6.4.5.
For small vessels (e.g., fishing vessels), the spacing of the fenders will need to be in the order of a few
metres to avoid contact with the quay or supporting structure. Small vessels are sometimes berthed
stern on to the quay, also necessitating a close fender spacing. Vertically orientated fenders should be
considered to accommodate for the vertical movement of the vessels due to tides and waves. For small
vessels, fender systems that project a significant distance from the supporting structure, may suffer
damage due to vessel movement and are not recommended.
When the fender(s) is compressed to its maximum rated compression (ℎ𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 ), a minimum clearance
LY
(𝐶𝑚𝑖𝑛 ), between the vessel hull and the supporting structure should maintained, refer to Figure 6-3. This
minimum clearance distance is recommended to be taken as 15% of the uncompressed fender height
(ℎ𝑓 ), up to a maximum of 300mm.
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
Figure 6-3: Maximum Fender pitch and minimum clearance to the supporting structure
C
For vessels approaching at small berthing angles, typically multiple fender systems will be compressed,
simultaneously. Should the adjustment of the pitch to suit the design vessel geometry not be possible,
R
(e.g., designing replacement fenders for an existing berth), the designer may need to consider
adjustments to the stand-off distance of the berthing line from the supporting structure. This can be
FO
done by using larger fenders or mounting fenders on quay line outstands.
6.4.3 Bow Flare

ED
The vertical angle of a vessel’s bow is known as the bow flare. Many vessels have considerable
amounts of topside ‘flare’ forward and aft, below the main deck level. When a vessel is approaching at
an angle to a berth, the fender system will need to accommodate the differences and changes in this
SU
vertical angle of the vessel hull profile at the fender contact locations. High tidal ranges will exacerbate
this consideration.
IS
The bow flare angle (𝛽𝑓 ) at the contact point with each fender system can vary considerably, depending
on the water level in relation to the berth (i.e., tidal water level) and the draft of the berthing vessel. As
the bow flare angle is often not known, the designer may need to consider a range of bow flare angles
T
to assess whether the effective clearance provided between the vessel hull and the supporting structure
AF
and quayside equipment (cranes, ship-loaders, etc.) is sufficient, for a range of approach angles, refer
to Figure 6-4. An estimate of the effective clearance to the supporting structure due to the bow flare
angle (𝛽), can be calculated as follows:
R
D
𝑐𝑒𝑓𝑓 = c' - 𝑑𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 × 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝛽𝑓 (6-3)

Where:
𝑐𝑒𝑓𝑓 : Effective clearance between supporting structure and vessel hull due to bow flare (m).
c' : Clearance between fender system and support structure due to bow radius and fender
deflection (m).
𝑑𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 : Height from fender centreline to vessel deck or to top of supporting structure,
whichever is the lower (m).
𝛽𝑓 : Bow flare angle.
Clearances to quayside equipment should be based on similar geometry and the port procedures with
respect to equipment placement during berthing. The projection of the vessel deck over the compressed
LY
fender line must be considered in assessing clearances to quayside equipment.
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
Figure 6-4: Bow flare (𝛽𝑓 ) and clearance to supporting structure (𝑐𝑒𝑓𝑓 ).
The designer may elect to complete a geometric assessment of the minimum vessel freeboard, draft,
ED
and the lowest tidal water level to ensure that the vessel bow flare does not contact the upper surface
or edge of the supporting structure during berthing, at the characteristic design approach angle. In such
cases, the effective clearance to all components of the fender system, including the fender panel,
brackets, chains, etc. may need to be checked. In extreme cases, the bow flare can overhang the
SU
supporting structure.
In addition, geometric checks should be completed to confirm that the lowest part of the fender system
IS
will be positioned at a low enough level to prevent the fender system catching on low freeboard vessels
at low tidal states.
T
The level of the upper part of the fender system will also need to be configured to accommodate contact
with vessels with considerable amounts of flare angle.
AF
The designer is also recommended to consider the combined angle of compression of the fender, taking
account of the angular compression due to the bow radius and the bow flare. This combined effect may
R
reduce the overall energy absorption capacity of the select fender.

D
6.4.4 Single Fender System Contact

For a single fender system, (e.g., a berthing dolphin), irrespective of the vessel approach angle and
bow radius, the selected fender must be capable of absorbing all the design berthing energy of the
approaching vessel, refer to Figure 6-5. Therefore, the worst-case design scenario is likely to be the
single fender system contact.

LY
Figure 6-5: Single fender contact
N
O
6.4.5 Multiple Fender System Contact
Whilst vessels may attempt to approach parallel to a berth, in practice, given the number of variables
TS
influencing the vessel approach and the vessel hull geometry, true parallel berthing is considered
difficult to achieve. None the less, multiple fender system contacts can, and do, occur at low berthing
angles.
EN
For continuous berths, and depending on the approach angle of the vessel, the bow radius, and the
fender system pitch, vessels may contact multiple fender systems simultaneously when berthing.
M
The total berthing energy absorption capacity of multiple fender system contacts equates to the sum of
the energy absorbed by all the compressed fenders. The energy absorbed by each individual fender
M
system will vary depending on the degree to which each fender system is compressed.
O
Multiple fender contacts will provide the greatest berthing energy absorption capacity but will
consequently induce cumulative reaction forces on the supporting structure. The supporting structure
C
must therefore be capable of resisting these cumulative reaction forces.

If one fender system is initially contacted, closely followed by the adjacent fender systems, the energy
R
will be absorbed by all the fenders that are contacted. The energy absorbed is proportional to the
FO
deflection of each fender that is contacted. The fender at the initial point of contact will have the largest
deflection and the largest associated reaction force, refer to Figure 6-6 and Figure 6-7.
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
Figure 6-6: Contacted fender for larger berthing angles.

In practice, for a vessel with an approach angle that is almost parallel to the berth, this can result in
multiple fenders being contacted, compressing each fender by varying amounts, refer to Figure 6-7.
The cumulative energy absorption capacity of the multiple fender systems that are compressed is
therefore greater than that for a single fender system contact.
For multiple fender contact with buckling fenders, the non-linear force deflection characteristics of the
fender will result in larger overall reaction forces on the structure compared with single fender contact.

LY
N
Figure 6-7: Multiple fender contacts for small berthing angles.
O
The designer must also consider the range of design berthing velocities associated with the range of
design vessels. The associated differences in berthing velocity, considered in combination with the
TS
vessel approach angle and vessel geometry, will result in numerous berthing scenarios that may all
need to be considered to identify the optimum solution.
Changes in the selected pitch, fender type and fender height will also influence the number of fenders
EN
that are compressed for a multiple fender contact scenario. The smaller the pitch, the more fenders are
likely to be contacted.
M
If the range of sizes of design vessels is large, it is often not economical or practical to arrange the
fender systems for the largest vessels, using the pitch calculated for the bow radius of the smallest
M
vessels. In such cases, smaller alternative fenders can be considered between the primary fender
systems that are provided to accommodate the largest vessels.
O
The designer is recommended to consider both single and multiple fender system contact scenarios,
C
for a range of vessel approach angles. Contact with multiple fender systems during berthing increases
the potential berthing energy absorption capacity, potentially enabling a smaller fender to be selected
R
or larger vessels to be accommodated on the berth.

FO
Should the initial berthing contact be made by the stern quarter of a vessel and, as the hull radius is
typically considerably much smaller at this location, the designer should consider whether single fender
contact is also a distinct possibility.
ED
6.4.6 Vessel Belting

To accommodate vessels that are equipped with belting, the designer must consider how the belting
SU
will interact with the selected fender system. Certain fenders can be damaged or perform inefficiently
when contacted by vessel belting. Vessels that have damaged belting have the potential to cause
damage to the fender during berthing and the designer may wish to consider selecting fenders that are
IS
less likely to be affected by damaged belting.

To assist with this process, the designer is recommended to obtain details of the belting profile,
structure, and load capacity so that the interactions with the selected fender can be assessed in detail.
T
Friction between the belting and the fender must also be considered, particularly as the belting faces
AF
are often heavily worn, with minimal paint system coating as it will have been worn away. Refer to
Section 8.3 for more information on applicable coefficients of friction.
R
Where fender panels have been selected, the potential for double hull contact and high horizontal line
loads within the fender panel should be assessed, refer to Section 6.4.7.
D
Where arch type rubber fenders without fender panels have been selected and are mounted vertically
on a supporting structure, the maximum energy absorption capability of the arch fender is limited to the
actual contributing length of the fender. The remaining uncompressed lengths of the arch fender will
therefore will not contribute to the absorption of the berthing energy, refer Figure 6-8.

H = Fender height
Gap between
X = Max. fender deflection
vessel hull
B = Belting height
and fender
facing
Supporting
structure
Vessel
LY
belting
N
Arch
fender
O
TS
Figure 6-8: Arch fenders with maximum deflection smaller than belting height.
If the maximum fender compression is greater than the belting height, direct hull contact may also occur
EN
on sections of the hull plating adjacent to the belting. This will provide some increase in energy
absorption but also result in a significantly larger reaction force on the vessel hull, refer Figure 6-9.
M
H = Fender height
Gap
X = Max. fender deflection M
between
B = Belting height
vessel hull
O
and fender
facing
C
Supporting
structure
R
FO
Vessel
belting
ED
Arch
fender
SU
Compression of fender by
remaining fender length
IS
Figure 6-9: Arch fenders with maximum deflection greater than belting height.
The sizing and selection of the arch fender is dependent on the belting geometry and a larger section
T
arch fender may be required to accommodate the design berthing energy. An incorrectly sized fender
could result in damage to the supporting structure or to the vessel hull due to high, locally concentrated
AF
reactions forces.
When considering the selection of other panel free fender systems, e.g., foam, pneumatic or cylindrical
R
fenders, the designer should consider the interaction of the fender with the vessel belting. This is of
D
particular significance if the fender is mounted horizontally resulting in an increased risk of the fender
becoming caught under the vessel belting as it moves up and down on the berth.
The designer must also take account of variations in the shape of the ends of the belting, changes in
the belting cross sectional profile and/or discontinuities in the belting line (e.g., pilot door openings). An
angular shaped belting end has the potential to cause damage to the fender. Consideration should be
given to the use of fender chamfers and sloping fender profiles to prevent the belting becoming
‘snagged’ on the fender.

Multiple beltings at various heights on the vessel, and at differing positions along the vessel hull, also
should be assessed in relation to the position of the vessel when berthing and when moored, potentially
requiring the selected fender system to extend above the deck of the supporting structure.
6.4.7 Double Hull Contact

Double hull contact by a fender system typically occurs on vessels that are equipped with belting, refer
to Figure 6-10. Double hull contact is of particular significance when a fender panel is included. This
issue will be exacerbated where a large tidal range exists requiring, longer fender panels. Double hull
contact for fender systems without fender panels, (e.g., foam or cylindrical fenders), is less likely to
occur, however the designer is recommended to consider how this type of fendering will interact with
LY
the vessel belting during vessel berthing.
The designer may consider undertaking a geometric assessment of the vessel and fender system
N
interaction at extreme water levels, to develop the fender and fender panel geometry and to check that
no part of the vessel may be damaged during berthing (i.e., low level windows).
O
Double hull contact will result in line loads being imposed on the vessel belting, as well as on the vessel
TS
hull plating both above and below the belting line, as illustrated in Figure 6-10. These concentrated line
loads could potentially cause buckling and deformation of the vessel hull plating.
For long fender panels, multiple fenders may be required to support the fender panel and efficiently
EN
absorb the berthing energy.
M
Fender panel M
leans onto vessel
hull above belting.
O
C
R
Fender panel
FO
leans onto vessel

hull below belting.
ED
Figure 6-10: Belting causing vessel hull double contact and line loads.
6.4.8 Type of Supporting Structure

SU
The type of supporting structure to which the fender system is to be attached is a primary consideration
when selecting a suitable fender system. A supporting structure consisting of a gravity or retaining wall
IS
is stable against external forces, such as the vessel berthing or wave forces. The reaction force imposed
by the fender system is also relatively small by comparison and the effect of the characteristic correction
factors on the berthing energy and reaction forces may not be critical.
T
However, in the case of suspended jetties, wharf structures, and dolphins, the influence of the reaction
AF
force from the fenders may be a defining load case for the design of the overall structure. In such cases,
all characteristic correction factors are significant and should be assessed in detail.
R
Based on the design of the proposed or existing supporting structure, limitations associated with the
area upon which the fender can be mounted, the required stand-off distance, minimum anchor edge
D
distances, etc., will also need to be considered by the designer.

The age of the supporting structure will also need to be considered in detail, (i.e., ‘new-build’ design or
an existing structure). The geometry of an existing structure may preclude the use of certain fender
systems that may necessitate significant modifications to the supporting structure. Maintaining a straight
berthing line and/or working within a set stand-off distance may also limit the options for fender and
fender system selection.

6.4.9 Fender System Heights
The selection of a fender system located in tidal waters must be able to accommodate the full range of
design vessels, for the full range of water levels expected to be experienced at the berth.
The selected fender system should also be capable of accommodating the vessel load condition (laden
or in ballast) and to accommodate the vessels response to sea state conditions (e.g., waves) and other
design environmental or meteorological effects (e.g., storm surge), whilst the vessel is alongside the
berth.
6.4.10 Flexible Dolphins
LY
Flexible dolphins or monopiles are vertical or near vertical piles cantilevered from the river or seabed.
These load sensitive structures absorb the vessel berthing energy by the combined deflection of the
N
pile head and the compression of the associated fender system.
They are commonly used at berths where unloading takes place at dedicated facilities, e.g., for liquid
O
bulk, gas, oil, etc. where berthing and mooring structures remote from the operational platform are
required.
TS
Flexible dolphin piles are generally of circular shape and consist of numerous sections welded together,
each with variable wall thicknesses to satisfy the changes in bending stresses at various levels. The
EN
upper sections of the flexible dolphin monopile should fabricated to be easily connected (i.e., bolting)
to facilitate onsite connection of the upper section, deck, fender system mounting or other fixtures and
fittings, e.g., access ladder.
M
The energy absorption capacity of a flexible dolphin is proportional to the square of the steel stress and
linear to the selected pile wall thickness. Hence, the use of a higher-grade tensile steel and a large wall
M
thickness is effective for providing high energy absorption characteristics.
O
The designer is recommended to consider all relevant design codes while designing large diameter
monopiles and considering the effects of local buckling. The monopile can also be filled with a mixture
C
of sand and gravel to assist with preventing local buckling.

R
Consideration should also be given to the corrosion of the steel pile and the associated welds. If
corrosion, combined with fatigue effects are considered significant, the designer is recommended to
FO
consider a lower steel grade strength.

However, flexible dolphins are not suited to all geologies and their capacity is dependent on the
properties of the ground conditions. The ground conditions must be capable of resisting the horizontal
ED
loads exerted by the embedded length of the pile caused by the berthing impact of the vessel. The
ground conditions must also be capable of returning the pile to its original position when berthing or
other applied forces have ceased to act.
SU
The designer should also consider the design bed level and make an allowance for potential scour and
changes in the bed level which may affect the level of fixity of the pile and potentially reducing the
energy absorption capacity of the structure.
IS
As a minimum, flexible dolphins should be designed to resist the following:

•
T
berthing impacts forces from the range of characteristic design vessels.

AF
• mooring line forces (if used for securing mooring lines).

• wind, wave, and current forces acting on the moored vessel (and hence onto the flexible dolphin).
R
The Design Energy absorption performance of the selected flexible dolphin monopile (𝐸𝑑,𝑑 ) and the
D
selected fender system (𝐸𝑓,𝑑 ), must be greater than the Kinetic Energy (𝐸𝑘,𝑑 ) of the berthing vessel.
𝐸𝑓,𝑑 + 𝐸𝑑,𝑑 ≥ 𝐸𝑘,𝑑 (6-4)
The selection of a suitable flexible dolphin and fender system should also consider the following:
• The fender reaction forces must be matched to the energy absorption capacity of the monopile.
• Mounting of the selected fender system onto the monopile may be difficult due to the comparable
limited size of the monopile, e.g., parallel motion fender system.

• The distance between the face of the fender panel (fender line) and the monopile structure should
be sufficient to ensure that contact between the vessel (e.g., hull plating, heel, belting, etc) and the
monopile cannot occur when the design berthing load is applied.
• The flexible dolphin structure may have potential restricted access that requires the selection of a
low maintenance fender system.
• For berths subject to numerous berthing events, the designer is recommended to consider the
impact of fatigue on the design of the flexible dolphin pile.
The design should consider appropriate load factors to determine the design berthing energy and to
ensure that the elastic deflection of the flexible dolphin for the range of berthing energies and
LY
associated reactions forces, is not exceeded.
N
6.4.11 Vessel Hull Structure
O
The structural capacity of the vessel hull in resisting berthing forces needs to be assessed early in the
fender system selection process. Guidance on vessel hull structure load capacities is included in
Section 6.8.
TS
Limitations on the vessel hull structure and belting capacity (if present) may influence the size and
number of fender panels required to distribute the fender reaction force into the berthing vessel. The
EN
designer should assess all applicable berthing impact loads, the structural capacity of the vessel hull
and the belting and the area over which these loads are distributed, to ensure that the selected fenders
can accommodate the characteristic design vessel berthing energy.
M
6.4.12 Number and Size of Fenders M
The performance of a fender system can be modified by using multiple fenders attached to one fender
O
panel. Whilst doubling the number of fenders will in theory double the energy absorption capacity, the
reaction force will also double, potentially having a significant effect on the supporting structure. An
C
increase in the vessel approach angle will also result in a reduced energy absorption capacity.
If a larger, but softer fender is selected, the energy absorption capacity will be increased. For the
R
selected Design Vessel, the associated reaction force may therefore be lower. However, the opportunity
FO
to utilise a larger fender might be limited by the required stand-off distance of the vessel from the
supporting structure or certain cargo handling requirements.
In addition, if the vessel berthing velocity increases, or a vessel larger than the Design Vessel calls at
ED
the berth, the designer must be aware that the potential maximum reaction force could be significantly
greater and may detrimentally affect the supporting structure.
SU
6.4.13 Submerged Fenders

When fenders are submerged, the voids in some fenders can fill with water. This issue typically occurs
with cone and cell type fenders. When a fender of this type is compressed during a vessel berthing, the
IS
water may be unable to escape quickly enough, resulting in significantly increased reaction forces.
To cater for this, adequate venting should be provided within the fender system to allow the water to
T
escape within the time that the fender is compressed. Designers are recommended to request additional
AF
fender performance data from the fender manufacturers for fully submerged fenders.
The possibility of marine growth obstructing any vent holes should also be considered when establishing
the size of the vents and future maintenance provisions.
R
D
6.4.14 Cone Fender Element Orientation

For some types of fenders (i.e., cone and element fenders), the fender orientation needs to be
determined by the designer. The standard orientation of these fenders is for the wider footprint to be
connected to the supporting structure and the narrower footprint to be connected to the back of the
fender panel. For some berths, the designer may consider it beneficial to install the fender in a non-
standard arrangement (i.e., “inverted”, with the smaller footprint attached to the supporting structure).
This orientation requires less space on the supporting structure for the mounting bolts.

The energy absorption capacity of the fender is unchanged in the non-standard orientation, therefore
in principle, it is possible to utilise an inverted fender. However, inverting a fender can result in a different
distribution of stresses, with potential additional stresses induced in certain parts of the fender.
Regardless of the fender orientation, care should be taken when designing the chain support system to
ensure that the weight of the fender panel and shear forces from the vessel contact do not exceed the
permissible stresses of the fender. As the geometry and wall thickness of fenders is not the same across
all manufacturers, the designer should be aware of the potential differences with this arrangement if
considering the inverted orientation of a fender and is recommended to consult with the fender
manufacturer in such cases.
6.4.15 Mooring Analysis
LY
An effective mooring analysis, conducted as part of the fender system selection process, can assist in
identifying optimised fender system solutions. The location and orientation of certain berths may require
N
the designer to consider the effect of vessel motion whilst moored at the berth. Typical examples of
O
such conditions are:
• berths exposed to long fetches of open water.
TS
• long-term mooring of vessels.
• potential for strong and gusting winds.
• mooring required in a range of adverse weather conditions.
EN
• where non forecastable, sudden extreme weather events (e.g., tsunamis, squalls, etc.) can occur.
• restricted operational limitations on the amount of vessel movement at the berth.
•
M
moored vessels subjected to demanding met-ocean conditions at the berth, such as infragravity
waves, preventing operational limitations being achieved.
•
M
other specific limitations to the performance of the vessel at berth.
In such cases, the Design Fender Energy (𝐸𝑓,𝑑 ), absorption capability and Reaction Force (𝑅𝑓,𝑑 ) may
O
on occasion, be exceeded due to mooring conditions at the berth.
C
The designer should be aware of the potential effects of vessel movements whilst moored at the berth
and the potential demands that this could place on the requirements of the selected fender system. The
R
loads imposed by a moored vessel may, in certain circumstances, be more critical for fender selection
and design, than the berthing energy.
FO
To account for these potentially adverse conditions, the designer is recommended to consider
undertaking mooring simulations to assess the motion of the vessel on the berth. Refer to Chapter 7 for
more information on mooring analyses.
ED
6.4.16 Permanent Mooring

SU
In a permanently moored vessel situation, the fender deflection and magnitude of the cyclic loading are
the most important considerations when assessing the fender durability and long-term performance. In
these situations, the rubber fenders are subject to viscoelastic characteristics such as cyclic loading
IS
(hysteresis loss) and creep that are difficult to represent in numerical simulations. The selection of a
suitable fender depends on the mooring arrangement, location, and the predominant environmental
conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, wave height and period). Refer to Chapter 7 for more
T
information on permanent mooring.

AF
To accommodate cyclic loading of a fender, the maximum deflection should be limited so that the
fenders do not buckle. The fatigue life of the fender is also recommended to be assessed, with reference
to the expected number of compression cycles and the fender durability tests. This assessment will
R
help determine the fender design life and the recommended maintenance and inspection requirements
D
throughout the operational life of the fender.

The rubber fenders are subject to viscoelastic characteristics such as hysteresis loss and creep that
are difficult to represent in numerical simulations. Fenders should be carefully selected so that they will
not buckle due to creep after prolonged static loads by continuous wind or currents, or not to be
subjected to repetitive motions of ship at the deflections which exceed the peak of the reaction force.
Pre-tensioned mooring lines and sustained wind loading (constant loads) can induce deflections in a
fender, which can increase over time. This type of fender deflection is known as ‘creep’. Fenders should
be carefully selected so that they do not buckle due to creep after prolonged static loads by continuous

wind or currents. Further information on the recommended deflection limits is outlined in Chapter 7 and
advice on the selection of suitable fenders for specific situations can be obtained from fender
manufacturers.
When selecting fenders for permanent mooring situations, consideration should be given to alternate
fender rubber grades and fender heights which may be more efficient or suitable. A larger fender
compression may be considered more appropriate in place of a harder grade of rubber. Pneumatic or
foam fenders often provide different characteristics which may be operationally preferrable.
6.4.17 Ageing Effects on Fenders
LY
The long-term performance, or ageing impact, of a fender within the design lifecycle of the selected
fender should be considered by the designer.
Ageing effects appear in the later stages of fender life, typically after more than 25 years of operation
N
and use. As a result of the ageing effects of rubber, an increase in the fender reaction force can occur.
O
The ageing effects are influenced by a range of factors, including:
• Environmental temperature / humidity / ozone concentration.
TS
• Rubber compound composition.
• Amount of recycled rubber / white fillers.
• Fender rubber thickness.
EN
• Curing system used in the fender manufacturing process.
The effects of aging on fenders are difficult to measure. The effect of sunlight, oxygen and ozone will
M
largely occur within the surface zone of the fender leading to a hardening of the fender surface.
However, the aging effects of heat will penetrate deeper into the fender body and could cause further
M
fender degradation over time.
O
Advances in technology have enabled sensor-based mechanisms to be installed on some newly
manufactured fenders to measure the deflection of a fender over time and to provide a comparison of
C
fender deflection for similar vessels and similar berthing velocities. Eventually, fender hardening can
lead to increases in the fender reaction force generated by the fender for the same or reduced fender
R
compression.
FO
Recent experiments on fenders approaching the end of their serviceable life, have indicated that the
associated fender reaction forces can be increased by up to 20%. If deep surface cracks occur, due to
the ageing and degradation of the fender, the loss of performance can be far greater.
ED
The designer should be aware of the implications of the potential for increases in fender reaction forces
in the later stages the serviceable life of a fender. Recommendations should be provided for periodic
inspection and a maximum fender operational lifetime.
SU
6.5 Base Fender Performance

IS
To determine whether a selected fender is suitable, the designer must first determine the base fender
performance for the selected fenders from the fender manufacturers catalogues.
T
The performance of fender depends predominantly on its type and size and the material grade. Several
other factors, including the amount of angular compression, ambient temperature, speed of
AF
compression and the number of fenders contacted during berthing, also influence the performance of
the fender. The base fender performance represents the mean value of fender performance and is used
for testing of the fender.
R
To determine the base fender performance properties, fender manufacturers undertake slow Constant
D
Velocity (CV) compression testing for each type, and rubber grade of fender. These CV fender
compression tests determine the Base Energy absorption (𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 ) and Base Reaction force (𝑅𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 )
properties. This process is outlined in Chapter 10.
The 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 and 𝑅𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 performance properties are published by fender manufacturers for use in the first
stage of the fender selection process.

6.6 Correction Factors
Fender selection and the design of the fender system requires the Base Energy absorption (𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 ) and
Base Reaction force (𝑅𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 ) to be adjusted by a series of correction factors that are directly applicable
and relate to the project specific conditions and design criteria. The correction factors consist of the
following:
• Velocity factor (𝐶𝑣 ). Refer to Section 6.6.2.
• Temperature factor (𝐶𝑡 ). Refer to Section 6.6.3.
• Angular factor (𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔 ). Refer to Section 6.6.4.
•
LY
Multiple fender contact factor (𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 ). Refer to Section 6.6.5.
The characteristic values of the vessel berthing velocity, ambient temperatures at the project site, and
vessel approach angle are used to determine the correction factors. The significance of the dominant
N
and non-dominant design variables is outlined in Chapter 5.
O
6.6.1 Application of Correction Factors
TS
The correction factors are applied to the Base Energy absorption (𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 ) and the Base Reaction force
(𝑅𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 ) of the selected fender to determine the Characteristic Fender Energy absorption (𝐸𝑓;𝑐 ) and
Characteristic Fender Reaction force (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 ). Refer also to Figure 6-11.
EN
To account for the increase in energy absorption capacity due to multiple fender contact, the designer
must apply the relevant 𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 factor as outlined in Section 6.6.5. For single fender contact design
M
situations, 𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 is equal to 1.
𝐸𝑓,𝑐 = 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝐶𝑣,𝑐 𝐶𝑡,𝑐 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔,𝑐 𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡,𝑐

M (6-5)
O
𝑅𝑓,𝑐 = 𝑅𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝐶𝑣,𝑐 𝐶𝑡,𝑐 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔,𝑐 (6-6)
C
It is highlighted that different characteristic values for temperature are used to calculate 𝐸𝑓,𝑐 and 𝑅𝑓,𝑐 .
R
The methodology for the selection of 𝑅𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 , depending on the selected fender type, is outlined in Section
6.7.1.
FO
The characteristic fender performance represents a conservative estimate of the fender properties.
They are only valid if the fender has been preconditioned by compressing the fender to the maximum
capacity, several times, before use. The initial maximum compressions of a fender may produce higher
ED
than expected reaction forces. Refer to Chapter 10 for details on fender testing.
6.6.2 Velocity Factor

SU
Typically, the berthing velocity of vessels ranges from between 20 mm/s to 300 mm/s.
Ideally, fender manufacturers would test fenders at the actual or design berthing velocity to determine
IS
the required performance of the fenders and enable fender selection. However, in practice this is very
difficult to achieve, given the size and complexity of the testing equipment required and the range of
T
fenders to be tested. Consequently, fender manufacturers determine the base fender performance
properties using slow, constant velocity compression tests at velocities of between 0.33 to 1.33 mm/s
AF
(0.01 to 0.3 %/s). Refer to Chapter 10 for further information on fender testing.
To account for the difference in the velocity between the base performance tests and the actual, real-
R
life design berthing velocity, fender manufacturers determine and publish Velocity factors (𝐶𝑣 ) for a
range of compression times.
D
The 𝐶𝑣 factor depends on the fender size, strain rate and the type of fender and is determined from the
compression time. The fender’s maximum reaction force will occur at the greatest berthing velocity.
Failure to apply 𝐶𝑣 could lead to an underestimation of the forces acting on the fender system and
supporting structure.
To determine the characteristic value for 𝐶𝑣,𝑐 , the designer must first determine the strain rate or
compression time of the fender, by dividing the characteristic berthing velocity (as identified in Chapter

5 to calculate 𝐸𝑓,𝑐 ) by the fender height. The associated compression time is then identified in the
published manufacturer’s data and 𝐶𝑣,𝑐 is selected accordingly.
Fender manufacturers may provide 𝐶𝑣,𝑐 factors for a range of different rubber compounds. A natural
rubber fender is less prone to higher velocity effects when compared to a synthetic rubber fender, when
tested at the same compression velocity. For more details on rubber blends and compounds, refer to
Chapter 10.
6.6.3 Temperature Factor

Elastic materials, like rubber, typically get softer when warm and stiffer when cold. A fender’s minimum
LY
energy absorption will occur at the highest mean operating temperature, whereas the maximum reaction
force will occur at the lowest mean operating temperature.
N
The ambient temperature to which a fender is exposed to during its service life influences the overall
rigidity of the compound. This effect must therefore be taken into consideration when undertaking
O
calculations to determine the characteristic berthing energy and reaction forces of a fender. Failure to
do so could lead to an underestimation of the forces acting on the fender system and supporting
TS
structure.
To enable the selection of a fender that is suitable for the stated design temperature range, fender
EN
manufacturers typically provide Temperature factors (𝐶𝑡 ), for each fender type and grade.
The datum for 𝐶𝑡 , (where 𝐶𝑡 is equal to 1), is defined as 23°C. For more details on the effects of
temperature on fender performance, fender testing and fender stabilisation, refer to Chapter 10.
M
The 𝐶𝑡 factor is dependent on the type and blend of rubber used in the manufacture of the fender.
M
Therefore, 𝐶𝑡 varies with the type and grade of rubber used in each fender and between different fender
manufacturers. Typically, this factor is close to 1 , except for very cold or polar regions.
O
Ideally, the temperature considered in the design should be as recorded from the project site where the
C
fender is to be installed. Practically, and in the absence of such records, meteorological records in the
general regional vicinity of the project site can be used.
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
Figure 6-11: Application of correction factors and partial resistance factors.

To determine the Characteristic Fender Energy absorption (𝐸𝑓,𝑐 ), designers must determine the average
monthly mean ambient air temperature of the hottest month (𝑇𝑐,ℎ𝑖𝑔ℎ ) for the project site. The designer
must then select the relevant 𝐶𝑡,𝑐 from the manufacturers published data. The average monthly mean
temperature is used as the effect on energy absorption in milder climates is negligible.
In contrast, to determine the Characteristic Fender Reaction force (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 ), designers must determine the
average daily mean ambient air temperature (𝑇𝑐,𝑙𝑜𝑤 ) of the coldest day of the year with a return period
of five years, for the project site. In the absence of project specific site data, this coldest temperature
can be estimated using the following formula:
LY
𝑇𝑐,𝑙𝑜𝑤 = 𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛,𝑙𝑜𝑤 − 1.65 (𝑇𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛,𝑙𝑜𝑤 − 𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛,𝑙𝑜𝑤 ) (6-7)
The designer must then select the relevant 𝐶𝑡,𝑐 from the manufacturers published data. The average
N
daily mean temperature is used as the effect of variations in the reaction force in colder climates can
be significant.
O
It is recommended that the fender manufacturers are consulted for fenders located where extreme high
TS
and low temperatures are expected to be encountered.
6.6.4 Angular Factor
EN
The fender compression angle is defined as the angle that the vessel’s hull creates against the berthing
structure, at the point of contact. This angle is associated with the horizontal angle of approach of the
vessel onto the berth and the vertical change in hull profile at the bow or stern of the vessel. The
M
compression angle can also be determined from a combination of both the horizontal and vertical
angles. M
Larger vessels generally approach a berth at a shallow angle, typically between 0 and 3 degrees to the
O
berthing line. Ultra-large vessels tend to approach parallel to the berth, as far as practically possible.
C
For design purposes, the maximum berthing approach angle is often set as a specified project design
criterion, or it is set as a function of the vessel type and size. The vessel type and size, if available, also
enables the vertical angles associated with the change in hull profile, to be determined.
R
In the case of dolphins and monopile berths for large vessels, the effect of angular compression has
FO
paramount importance. Geometric checks are required to verify that the fender panel or the vessel does
not contact the support structure during the compression of the fender.
The Angular factor (𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔 ) accounts for the loss of energy absorption capability of a fender, due to the
ED
non-uniform deflection of the fender. Failure to account for this reduction in energy absorption capability
could lead to an underestimation of the forces acting on the fender system and supporting structure.
SU
The minimum energy absorption of a fender will occur at the largest compression angle of the fenders.
The maximum fender reaction force will occur at the smallest compression angle. The datum for the
𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔 , (where the horizontal and vertical 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔 factor is equal to 1), is defined as 0°, parallel to the berthing
IS
line.
Some fender systems are particularly affected by the angle of compression of the fender due to the
varying degrees of compression of different parts of the fender. Fender manufacturers typically publish
T
specific characteristic angular factors to allow for this effect on the fender performance.
AF
Designers can use the Characteristic Berthing Angle (as identified in Chapter 5) or the vertical bow/
stern flare angle, to determine 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔,𝑐 from the manufacturer’s published data.
R
Whilst the Angular factor varies for each fender type and compression angle, the 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔,𝑐 for calculating
D
𝐸𝑓,𝑐 is not taken as larger than 1.0 and is typically 0.7 to 0.8 for compression angles of up to 20°. Some
fender types have a 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔,𝑐 of as low as 0.5 for compression angles of 20°.
For calculating 𝑅𝑓,𝑐 , the compression angle is typically taken as 1.0. However, a 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔,𝑐 of 0.8 or 0.9 can
be applied for certain fender types for compression angles of up to 20°.
The designer selects the compression angle from the Characteristic Berthing Angle or hull profile angle
for the calculation of 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔,𝑐 for axis-symmetrical fenders. Non-axis-symmetrical fenders and their
proposed orientation will require the calculation of 𝐶𝑎𝑛𝑔,𝑐 in both orientations.

Designers should also consider the influence of fender panels and restraint chains on the design of the
fender system as they will perform differently to a single fender, e.g., tension loads during angular
compression.
6.6.5 Multiple Fender Contact Factor

A berthing approach that is almost parallel to the berthing line, (i.e., a Characteristic Berthing Angle of
2° or less), will typically result in the vessel contacting multiple fenders. Refer to Chapter 5 for further
information related to the Characteristic Berthing Angle of the vessel.
The Characteristic Berthing Angle of the vessel determines the number of fender systems that
LY
contribute to absorbing the berthing energy. The proportion of the energy absorbed by each contacted
fender depends on the amount that each fender deflects. The cumulative energy absorption capacity
of the multiple contacted fender systems is therefore greater than that for a single fender system
N
contact. Contact with multiple fender systems at smaller berthing angles, is also influenced by the fender
pitch, refer to Section 6.4.
O
For larger berthing angles (i.e., with a Characteristic Berthing Angle of greater than 2°), the number of
TS
contacted fenders is primarily influenced by the geometry of the vessel’s bow, refer to Section 6.4.3.
To account for the influence of several contacted fenders in the design and selection of the fender, the
Multiple Fender Contact factor (𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 ) has been introduced.
EN
Depending on the length of the Design Vessel, and the number of fenders contacted, (based on the
Characteristic Berthing Angle), the characteristic value of 𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡,𝑐 can be in the region of up to 2.5 or 3.0.
M
This corresponding increase in the total energy absorption capacity enables the designer to potentially
select a smaller fender, generating lower reactions forces to be accommodated by the support structure.
M
The Characteristic Multiple Fender Contact factor (𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡,𝑐 ) can be calculated by the designer, using the
O
following methodology.
•
C
Using the dimensions of the Design Vessel and the proposed fender arrangement, carry out a
geometric analysis of the vessel alongside the berth, at the Characteristic Berthing Angle. Refer to
Figure 6-12.
R
• The geometric analysis should identify the number of contacted fenders based on the maximum
FO
rated deflection of the fender at the initial point of contact.

• For each contacted fender, calculate the fender deflection using the fender pitch and Characteristic
Berthing Angle.
• Using the Base Energy absorption of a single fender (𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 ) and the generic performance curves
ED
for the selected fender type, (as published by the fender manufacturers), identify the energy
absorbed for the calculated deflection of each contacted fender.
• Calculate 𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡,𝑐 using the following formula:
SU
𝐸𝑓,𝑐,1 + 𝐸𝑓,𝑐,2 + 𝐸𝑓,𝑐,3 + ⋯ + 𝐸𝑓,𝑐,𝑛 (6-8)

𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡,𝑐 =
𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒
IS
Where:
T
𝐸𝑓,𝑐,𝑛 Characteristic Berthing energy absorbed by 𝑛𝑡ℎ fender of the partially compressed
AF
fenders (kNm)
R
D

LY
N
O
Figure 6-12: Calculation of 𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡,𝑐 for Multiple Fender Contact.
TS
An iterative approach is often required when considering multiple fender contacts to identify the
optimum fender solution. Variations in fender pitch and the fender size will change the overall energy
absorption characteristics of the berth. The parameters of multiple design vessels may also require
EN
comparative geometrical assessment to determine the critical design case.
The calculation of 𝐶𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡,𝑐 can also be undertaken using simulations to replicate the berthing approach.
M
This enables the efficient assessment of variations in numerous vessel dimensions, berthing
approaches, and berth configurations.
M
6.7 Determining Fender Design Performance
O
The fender design performance is derived by applying partial resistance factors of safety to the
C
characteristic performance values, determined in Section 6.6. The design fender performance largely
depends on the project reliability requirements for the fender system.
R
To determine the fender design performance, partial factors related to the energy absorption of a single
FO
fender (𝛾𝑓 ) (which includes for the variable effects of the manufacturing process), the effect of a single
or multiple fender contact (𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 ) and a partial load factor (𝛾𝑅 ), must be considered.
The selection of the partial resistance factors and their application to the Characteristic Energy
ED
absorption (𝐸𝑓,𝑐 ) and Characteristic Reaction force (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 ) is outlined in the following Sections and
illustrated in Figure 6-11.
SU
6.7.1 Application of Partial Resistance Factors

The Design Energy absorption capacity (𝐸𝑓,𝑑 ) is determined by dividing the Characteristic Energy
absorption capacity (𝐸𝑓,𝑐 ) by the partial Material factor (𝛾𝑚 ). 𝛾𝑚 can be calculated from the partial Single
IS
Fender Performance factor (𝛾𝑓 ) and the Multiple Fender Contact factor (𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 ), refer to Equation (6-9).
The product of these partial factors is applied to the 𝐸𝑓;𝑐 to determine 𝐸𝑓,𝑑 , as presented in Equation
T
(6-10). Recommended factors for 𝛾𝑓 and 𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 are included in Sections 6.7.2 and 6.7.3.
AF
𝛾𝑚 = 𝛾𝑓 𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 (6-9)
R
𝐸𝑓,𝑐 𝐸𝑓,𝑐 (6-10)

𝐸𝑓,𝑑 = =
D
𝛾𝑚 𝛾𝑓 𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡
The Design Reaction force (𝑅𝑓,𝑑 ) is calculated using Equation (6-11) and is used to design the fender
components and conduct the hull pressure check. To determine 𝑅𝑓 , 𝑅𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 must first be multiplied by the
appropriate correction factors. The performance curves for the selected fender type are used to identify
the applicable value of the reaction force, (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 or 𝑅𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 ). The applicable reaction force may be different
for linear and non-linear fender compression, refer Figure 6-13.

LY
N
O
Figure 6-13: Identification of 𝑅𝑓,𝑐 and calculation of 𝑅𝑓,𝑑 for Linear and Non-Linear force-deflection curves.
TS
For non-linear fenders, 𝑅𝑓,𝑐 is the taken as the maximum reaction force generated by a fender at up to
80% of the fender’s maximum deflection. 𝑅𝑓,𝑐 is then multiplied by the partial Single Fender Performance
Factor (𝛾𝑓 ) and the partial Load factor (𝛾𝑅 ) to determine 𝑅𝑓;𝑑 .
EN
For linear fenders, 𝑅𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 is typically defined as the maximum reaction force generated by the fender at
the fender’s maximum compression. 𝑅𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 is then multiplied by the partial Single Fender Performance
M
factor (𝛾𝑓 ) to determine 𝑅𝑓,𝑑 .
𝑅𝑓,𝑑 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 𝛾𝑓 𝛾𝑅 ; 𝑅𝑓,𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝛾𝑓 )

M (6-11)
O
Recommended partial factors for 𝛾𝑓 and 𝛾𝑅 are included in Sections 6.7.2 and 6.7.4.
C
For berthing events that involve multiple fender contacts, the cumulative sum of the fender reaction
forces acting on the supporting structure may be greater than the Design Reaction force 𝑅𝑓,𝑑 for one or
R
two fender systems. This should be carefully considered in the design of a fender supporting structure
FO
with multiple fender systems.

As the Characteristic Energy Absorption and Reaction Force of a fender represents a conservative
estimate of the mean fender performance properties, the partial resistance factors are applied to
ED
determine the Design Fender Performance. These partial resistance factors account for the rarest,
extreme design events that may occur based on the assessed consequence class, as outlined in
Chapter 4.
SU
Uncontrolled, accidental berthing events or collisions are not accounted for within the fender design
performance properties, as these are extreme design conditions and are defined as accidental limit
state events. The requirement to design for accidental berthing events are a unique client requirement
IS
and should be based on a residual assessment of the capacity of the selected fender system, with all
factors of safety set to 1.0.
T
6.7.1.1 Berthing Energy Fender Verification

AF
To verify that the selected fender is suitable, in conjunction with the associated fender selection
considerations, the designer must check that the fender has a Design Energy absorption capacity (𝐸𝑓,𝑑 )
R
greater than or equal to the vessel’s Design Kinetic Energy (𝐸𝑘,𝑑 ). Refer also step 6 of Figure 6-11.
D
𝐸𝑓,𝑑 ≥ 𝐸𝑘,𝑑 (6-12)
6.7.1.2 Fender Component Design
The Design Reaction Force (𝑅𝑓,𝑑 ) of the selected fender, (as determined in Equation (6-11), is used to
determine the structural design of the fender panel, chains, and components of the fender system.

𝑅𝑓,𝑑 ≤ Structural capacity of the fender panel, chains, and components. (6-13)
6.7.1.3 Hull Structure Limit Check
The Design Reaction force (𝑅𝑓,𝑑 ) of the selected fender and the fender panel contact area is also used
to determine the applicable load acting on the hull structure of the berthing vessel and to verify that the
allowable hull pressure limit is not exceeded.
𝑅𝑓,𝑑 ≤ Load capacity of vessel hull structure, e.g., the hull plating,
(6-14)
stiffeners, and web frames (refer Section 6.8).
LY
6.7.1.4 Supporting Structure Design
N
The design of the supporting structure, to which the fender system(s) are to be attached, must consider
O
the Characteristic Berthing Impact Force (𝐹𝑐 ), which is equal to the Characteristic Reaction Force (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 ).
As the fender induced berthing impact force is typically considered to be a variable load, national
TS
standards usually require the application of a partial load factor of between 1.3 and 1.7 to the
Characteristic Berthing Impact Force (𝐹𝑐 ). 𝐹𝑐 should be modified by the applicable partial load factor
EN
from the relevant national code, or annex to determine the determine the Design Berthing Impact load
(𝐹𝑑 ). This is the design load to be resisted by the supporting structure. Refer Equation (6-15).
𝐹𝑐 is generally defined as a live load having a return period of 50 years. The Characteristic Reaction
M
Force (𝑅𝑓;𝑐 ), provides a conservative estimate of 𝐹𝑐 and can be used in the design of the supporting
structure to determine the associated Design Berthing Impact Force (𝐹𝑑 ).
M
O
𝐹𝑑 = 𝐹𝑐 𝛾𝑄 𝜑𝑄 = 𝑅𝑓,𝑐 𝛾𝑄 𝜑𝑄 ≤ Structural capacity of support structure. (6-15)
C
Where:
𝛾𝑄 : Partial load factor in accordance with national code, standard or annex
R
𝜑𝑄 : Combination factor in accordance with international code, standard or national annex

FO
On some occasions, the calculation of 𝐹𝑑 , may be considered conservative, (i.e., if an oversized fender
has been selected). As many national codes consider 𝑅𝑓,𝑐 to represent a load with a return period of 50
years, the designer may decide to conduct a statistical analysis, accounting for all the applicable
variables, to determine the maximum Characteristic Berthing Impact Force.
ED
The designer should be aware that in certain circumstances, the fender reaction force from the berthing
contact is the governing load for the design of the supporting structure, e.g., a berthing dolphin equipped
SU
with a buckling-type fender system.

For a supporting structure such as a suspended deck or quay wall equipped with a fender system
consisting of multiple fenders, the fender reaction forces are generally not considered to be the
IS
dominant design loads. A load combination factor, determined by national design codes, can often be
adopted.
T
Since the type of fender selected influences the frequency of the occurrence of the maximum reaction
AF
force, it also influences the distribution of the berthing impact force into the supporting structure. For
berthing events that involve multiple fender contacts simultaneously, the cumulative sum of the fender
reaction forces acting on the supporting structure need to be taken into consideration in the design.
R
6.7.2 Fender Performance Factor

D
Differences in the variety of the components and processes that are part of the manufacturing of fenders
can lead to variations in the properties of a fender. Such components include:
• Raw materials and rubber compounds.
• Manufacturing process of the rubber or fender element.
• Moulds.
• Curing process.
• Storage temperature and humidity.

• Testing equipment.
Partial material factors, related to the Fender Performance factor (𝛾𝑓 ), are included in Table 6-3. This
factor replaces the manufacturing tolerance factor that was applied to take account of variances in
fender production in PIANC WG33 (2002). The 𝛾𝑓 factors are based on the mean performance of the
fender, as typically published by the fender manufacturer.
If the minimum or lower bound performance parameters of a fender are provided by the manufacturer,
and are proposed for use by the designer to determine the fender design performance 𝛾𝑓 , independent
third-party testing of the fenders would need to demonstrate that the actual achieved manufacturing
tolerances are consistently lower than those tolerances presented in Table 6-3.
LY
It is highlighted that the factors presented in Table 6-3 are only valid when the fender production
tolerances are in line with the recommended values stated by the fender manufacturer. This partial
N
factor does not prevent fender failure caused by ‘low-quality’ fenders or other production issues. Such
failures should be prevented by performing adequate quality control procedures and fender testing.
O
Refer to fender testing in Chapter 10.
TS
Table 6-3: Partial material factor 𝛾𝑓 related to the performance of a single fender.
𝜸𝒇 factor for all
EN
Performance
consequence Typical example types of fender system
tolerance
classes
M
Cone, cell, arch, element, and cylindrical (wrapped)
+/- 10% 1.10
fenders. M
+/- 15% 1.15 Foam fenders.
O
Cylindrical (extruded), extruded, composite and shear
+/- 20% 1.20
C
fenders, wheel, and roller fenders.

Reference
R
1.00 Pneumatic fenders a

ISO17357-1
FO
a)
𝛾𝑓 = 1.0 for the calculation of the Design Berthing Energy according to ISO 17357-1
6.7.3 Multiple Fender Contact Factor

ED
The energy absorption of a single fender contact, is primarily influenced by the quality and production
tolerances of the single fender, as noted in Section 6.7.2. For multiple fender contacts, the energy
SU
absorption can be significantly influenced by the variation in the berthing angle of the approaching
vessel, as noted in Section 6.6.5.
Consequently, a partial factor (𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 ) is applied to account for low berthing angles and accounts for the
IS
cumulative increase in berthing energy absorption capability for all the contacted fenders. The
recommended partial factors (𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 ) for single and multiple fender contact are presented in Table 6-4.
T
The principles of multiple fender contact are also outlined in Section 6.4.5.
AF
For very small berthing angles, in combination with multiple fender contacts, a partial factor of greater
than one prevents the over estimation of the capacity of a selected fender system.
R
D

Table 6-4: Partial factor 𝛾𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡 related to single and multiple fender contact.
Factor 𝜸𝒎𝒖𝒍𝒕 for each

Fender Consequence Class
Type of berthing
contact
A B C D
Single All berthing manoeuvres 1.0
Angular berthing, (> 2°). Due to a relatively large

Multiple berthing angle, the bow radius dominates the 1.0
LY
respective deflection of the fenders.
N
Parallel berthing, (< 2°). Due to a relatively low
berthing angle, the flat sided parallel body length
O
Multiple of the vessel predominantly influences the number 1.00 b 1.10 b 1.15 b 1.20 b
of fenders that contribute to absorbing the kinetic
TS
energy of the berthing vessel.
b)
These factors are derived based on the characteristic berthing velocity having a probability of exceedance of 0.2% and a
EN
berthing angle having a probability of exceedance of 5% (Refer to Chapter 5).
6.7.4 Load Factor
M
In certain circumstances, a comparatively small fender deflection results in the maximum reaction force
M
of the fender (e.g., cell or cone fender). For other fender types, this occurs only at the maximum
deflection of the fender (e.g., cylindrical, foam or pneumatic fenders).
O
When a fender exceeds its maximum rated deflection, the associated reaction force typically increases
C
at an exponential rate. In addition, some fender types demonstrate linear hardening effects over time,
whereas others indicate non-linear softening. This can result in significantly greater forces being
R
imparted onto the supporting structure and being transferred to the vessel hull structure.
FO
The type of fender selected therefore influences the frequency of the occurrence of the maximum
reaction force. The designer is recommended to investigate the potential frequency of the occurrence
of the Characteristic Fender Reaction force (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 ), to ensure that the appropriate reaction force is
applied to the design of the fender system. Refer to Chapter 2 for indicative performance graphs for
ED
different types of fenders.

The use of 𝛾𝑅 should be carefully considered when assessing fender induced berthing impact loads
SU
acting on support structures, since recommendations for load factors and combination factors are
generally prescribed within national codes and standards. Refer to Section 6.7.1.4 for further
information.
IS
The partial Load factor (𝛾𝑅 ) is applied to the Characteristic Reaction Force (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 ) to determine the
Design Reaction Force (𝑅𝑓,𝑑 ). The recommended partial Load factors 𝛾𝑅 are presented in Table 6-5.
T
Table 6-5: Partial factor 𝛾𝑅 for reaction forces to be used in fender system design.
AF
Factor 𝜸𝑹 for each Consequence Class

Partial Load factor
A B C D
R
𝛾𝑅 1.30 1.40 1.45 1.50

D
The 𝑅𝑓,𝑑 of the selected fender is used to design all the components of the fender systems (e.g., the
fender panel, restraint chains, anchor bolts, etc.). Refer to Section 8.2 for recommendations on the
applicable factors of safety for the design of the restraint chains and determining the loads on the
brackets. 𝑅𝑓,𝑑 is also used to assess the load distribution on the vessel hull structure. Refer to Section
6.8.

6.8 Hull Pressure
While absorbing the berthing energy of a vessel, the fender will exert a reaction force on both the vessel
and supporting structure. Under normal berthing conditions, no plastic deformation of the vessel's hull
structure is accepted.
Coordination between fender designers and naval architects remains limited. Forces induced by wave
impacts during vessel voyages continue to be the governing criteria for hull design. The vessel Class
provision for minimum hull plate thickness in the fender contact zone is also limited. Typically, vessel
designers and manufacturers will only apply consideration and additional reinforcement to the fender
contact area, if required by the vessel owners and/or to fulfil specific port requirements.
LY
With vessel sizes continuing to increase, side plate thicknesses are relatively reduced. The spacing
between web frames is also increasing, driven primarily by the requirement to reduce the costs of vessel
construction. As a consequence, in some cases the permissible loads on the vessel hull structure stated
N
by vessel owners are noted to be decreasing, athough factual evidence to confirm this is unavailable.
O
Designers are recommended to seek clarification on the maximum permissible distributed and point
loads on the vessel hull structure.
TS
6.8.1 Factors Affecting Induced Hull Pressure
Several factors influence the magnitude of the hull pressure induced on a vessel hull. These are outlined
EN
below, and the designer should be aware of the significance of each item.
1. Vessel approach velocity,
M
2. Vessel approach angle,
3. Vessel hull profile (e.g., bow flare), M
4. Fender spacing,
5. Fender contact area,
O
6. Multiple simultaneous fender contact,
7. Fender panel facing shape and orientation.
C
Arguably, the most significant of these is the vessel approach velocity. Whilst it is also acknowledged
R
that there may be other port or vessel specific influencing factors, the designer may need to consider
their significance when establishing the fender design criteria and assessing the operational parameters
FO
of the port.
6.8.2 Hull Structure

ED
Vessel hull structures can typically be constructed from a wide variety of materials, including steel,
aluminium, wood and composite materials. Most vessels are constructed using carbon steel and this
document provides guidance on the design of steel hulls only. Typical examples of the structure of
SU
vessel hull structures are outlined in Figure 6-14.

The vessel’s hull structure is generally comprised of three components. A typical steel hull consists of
steel plating welded to longitudinal (horizontal) stiffeners. These stiffeners are designed to provide the
IS
necessary hull strength to resist the loads, forces, bending moments and stresses imposed by cargo
and environmental loads.
T
Certain parts of the vessel hull may be locally strengthened to accommodate the additional forces of
AF
tugs pushing against the side-shell plating. Alternatively, as is more common, the positions along the
hull in line with the transverse bulkheads (which are more resistant to transverse loading in a small
area) may be marked for tug contact points.
R
D

LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
(a) Typical container, tanker, and general cargo b) Typical bulk cargo vessel (handymax / panama
vessel side structures. Note some older and sizes) side structure also applies to large cape
smaller general cargo vessels have only single
skin side structures.
M size bulk carriers.
O
Figure 6-14: Typical vessel hull side structures (TNO, 2019).
C
The stiffeners are generally of sufficient size and strength to accommodate the loads from fenders and
span between the transverse frames. By implication of the tug push markers, the shell plating between
R
them is likely to tolerate less concentrated pressures than can be applied from a tug. On vessels with
large displacements this could occur on berthing impact by contacting a single or small number of
FO
fenders. Typical sizes are summarised below.

1. Side-shell plating. Typical thickness ranges between 15mm and 20mm. The thickness is very
dependent on the overall size of the vessel. Smaller general cargo vessels can have side-shell
ED
plating of about 8mm to 10mm. On container vessels, the sheer strake (uppermost section of side-
shell plating) is typically significantly thicker. For very large vessels, side-shell plating thickness can
be greater than 15mm. It is highlighted that most ocean-going vessels are double skinned
SU
(incorporating an inner hull) with the exception of the majority of larger bulk carriers, which are
generally single skinned in way of the transversely framed hold sides.
2. Longitudinal stiffeners. Typically spaced at between 0.8m and 0.9m and dependent on the overall
IS
size of the vessel. Smaller vessels will have a smaller spacing, within the limits of what can be
practically welded and vice versa. Where the vessel is longitudinally stiffened, web frames are
T
typically spaced approximately 1.8m to 4.0m apart. This geometry is also dependent on overall
vessel size, but the very large container vessels can have even larger spacings. For container
AF
vessels, the frame spacing can also vary along the length of the vessel.
3. Decks. Besides the main deck, one or more decks can be found in the double hull. The most well-
R
known is the engineers passageway as found on all container ships. These decks provide, together
with the frames a strong boundary of the grillage of stiffeners that supports the hull plates. Decks
D
normally also support the belting of a ship if present.

4. Transverse frames. Typically spaced at between 0.6m to 1.0m for the sides of holds in bulk
carriers. However, these vessels are typically of a composite construction with longitudinal framing
in the topside and double bottom structures where the convention for longitudinally framed vessels
is followed, with web frames positioned every three or four transverse frames.
The dimensions of all four components varies with the size, type and age of vessel, classification society
rules, designer, and the vessel builder.

The names of typical structural members used withing vessel hull design are included within Figure
6-14. The figures indicate a transverse slice of a typical vessel side structure. This section is typically
repeated longitudinally along the vessel, usually with a fixed web frame spacing. A web frame spacing
is subdivided into intermediate frame spacings as indicated.
Except for the bulk cargo vessels (handymax / panamax and capesi e), a vessel’s side structure
general arrangement looks very similar, albeit that the structural dimensions (scantlings) vary
significantly.
With advancements in vessel design, the following tendencies have been identified:
1. The use of steel with higher yield strength. Whilst this increases the hull plating’s resistance to
LY
fracture, the thickness tends to be reduced and therefore more susceptible to deformation. On the
larger hulls, such as panamax and particularly capesize bulk carriers, deformation due to impacts
can require Class supervised repair necessitating an extended port stay.
N
2. Increasing of the distance between transverse frames, (e.g., 3 m for early generation vessels
O
increasing to up to 6 m for later generation container vessels),
3. Berthing energies are increasing (due to increases in vessel size),
TS
Car carriers typically have single skin side shell structures and vehicle decks that span the full breadth
and length of the vessel. There may be some ballast tanks at the outboard side of the lower decks
which have similar looking construction to a typical container / tanker, but they do not extend all the way
EN
to the upper deck.
Similarly, ro-ro vessels tend to have a single skin side shell above the main cargo / vehicle deck. This
M
will typically be longitudinally stiffened with transverse web frames every three to four frame spaces,
although it is possible that they can be transversely stiffened, similar to the side shell of a bulk carrier.
M
Depending on the arrangement and if the ro-ro vessels have a lower hold below the main deck, then a
similar side tank arrangement, as indicated in Figure 6-14, may be seen up to the level of the main deck
O
level.
C
Very Large Ore Carriers (VLOC) also differ as they have very large ballast tanks situated either side of
the central holds. Side-shell plating to accommodate fender contacts will be constructed very similarly
to tankers with longitudinal stiffening and web frames.
R
FO
6.8.3 Recent Hull Pressure Research

Historically, fenders were dimensioned using a maximum allowable hull pressure to spread the design
reaction force in a safe way over the hull of the vessel. Theoretically this means that cylindrical fenders
ED
cannot be used as these typically generate a high hull pressure. However, based on recent observations
and experience it is acknowleged that vessels of all sizes can and do berth safely on cylindrical fenders.
The Port of Rotterdam has undertaken research that demonstrates the use of cylindrical fenders for
SU
container vessels (Lloyd's, 1989), oil and LNG vessels (Broos, Rhijnsburger , & Vredeveldt, 2018), and
on all general classes of vessels (TNO, 2019).
As part of the work undertaken by WG211 additional research was undertaken (Berendsen 2022). The
IS
FEM analyses of the fender (allowing for buckling with various panel sizes) and hull structure interaction
indicated that very small fenders (e.g. cylindrical and arch fenders) have critical hull pressures,
significantly greater than the recommended hull pressures stated in WG33 (refer Figure 6-15).
T
AF
R
D

LY
N
O
TS
Figure 6-15: FEM results maximum hull pressure that damages side hull structure (Berendsen, Roubos, Wiliams,
EN
& Broos, 2023).
M
For fenders that utilise fender panels, increasing the size of the fender panel makes it possible to
increase the reaction force from the fender onto the vessel hull. However, it was identified that there is
M
a maximum point that represents the upper limit of the capacity of the hull. In such cases, either the
web frame or deck become critical. Therefore, simply increasing the contact area of the fender panel
O
does not necessarily ensure that these larger reaction forces can be accommodated by the vessel hull,
as can be seen in Figure 6-16.
C
R
FO
ED
Maximum
contact
SU
area
IS
T
AF
Figure 6-16: FEM results maximum fender reaction force that damages side hull structure (Berendsen, Roubos,
R
Wiliams, & Broos, 2023)

D
(Berendsen, Roubos, Wiliams, & Broos, 2023) conclude that:

• The stress distribution in the vessel grillage is largely influenced by the structural layout of the
vessel, the dimensions of the fender panel and the location of the berthing impact. The critical
stress is defined as the onset of plasticity in the structural members, such as the hull plates,
web frames and stiffeners.
• The prevailing failure mode largely depends on the dimensions of the fender panel. For
example, relatively wide fender panels that activate a web frame or, high panels that activate
a deck results in critical stress concentrations within the web frames. For small and narrow

panels the plate-and stiffener-induced failure seems to be the governing failure mode,
whereas high and slim panels result in tripping of the stiffeners.
• When a fender panel subject to a berthing impact load activates a web frame or deck
structure, the critical stress is reached by applying larger fender impact loads.
• Current design codes, used to asses pressure on the parallel body of the vessel hull,
assumes a constant hull pressure criterion. The results of this study showed that a constant
hull pressure can over-estimate a vessel’s structural capacity. Consequently, it is
recommended that a limiting value of total fender-induced reaction force should be advised
for designing fender panels.
• For larger vessels, typically wide fender panels are considered to be more efficient when
LY
compared to taller fender panels. In tidal ports however, fender panels are already typically
tall and it may therefore be more efficient to engage with a vessel deck structure.
N
6.8.4 Hull Pressure Distribution
O
Many vessels can resist forces acting upon on their hull, up to a defined limit. It is therefore important
to define the correct fender panel size or fender contact area to ensure that the imposed force and
TS
resulting hull pressure is less than the permissible limits.
For buckling fenders, typically fitted with fender panels, the fender panel size is defined according to
EN
the vessel’s maximum hull structural capacity, the selected fender reaction force, the vessel freeboard
and tidal range. These criteria are used to ensure that the contact area of the panel, excluding chamfers,
distributes the hull pressure below the allowable limits. Depending on the size and rigidity of the fender
M
panels, additional line loads can be imposed on the vessels side-shell plating where the edges of the
panel encounter the vessel hull. M
For non-buckling fenders (e.g., foam or cylindrical fenders), the contact area of the fender on the vessel
O
hull increases as the fender is compressed. The hull pressure at the fender’s Guaranteed Energy
Absorption (GEA), as stated by the fender manufacturer, must be checked to ensure that for the hull
C
pressure is below the allowable limits.

6.8.4.1 Hull Pressure Calculation
R
𝑤𝑝𝑎𝑛
FO
The Average Hull Pressure (𝑃ℎ𝑢𝑙𝑙,𝑎𝑣 ) for a fender panel is

calculated as follows:
𝑅𝑓,𝑑
ED
𝑃ℎ𝑢𝑙𝑙,𝑎𝑣 = (6-16)
𝐴𝑐
Where:
ℎ𝑝𝑎𝑛
SU
𝑅𝑓,𝑑 : Design fender reaction force (kN). Refer to Section

6.7.1.3.
𝐴𝑐 : Area of contact, excluding chamfers (m²)
IS
The Contact Area (𝐴𝑐 ) of the flat panel is calculated as the

product of the width of the panel, excluding lateral chamfers
T
(𝑤𝑝𝑎𝑛 ), and height of the panel, excluding top and bottom

AF
chamfers which is in contact with vessel hull (ℎ𝑝𝑎𝑛 ).

Figure 6-17: Contact area of a
flat fender panel.
Ac = 𝑤𝑝𝑎𝑛 × ℎ𝑝𝑎𝑛 (6-17)
R
D
6.8.4.2 Peak Hull Pressure

The Average Hull Pressure (𝑃ℎ𝑢𝑙𝑙,𝑎𝑣 ) is calculated when the fender reaction onto the panel is close to
the symmetrical axis. When the fender reaction is off the panel centre line, a peak hull pressure is
generated. This peak hull pressure is greater than the average hull pressure. In certain cases, and
depending on the rigidity of the fender panel, this can result in line loads being imposed on the vessel
hull.
The selected fender system should ensure that the peak hull pressure is no greater than double the
average hull pressure. Figure 6-18 indicates a series of different design cases.

LY
N
O
TS
EN
Figure 6-18: Calculation of peak and average hull pressure.
Vessels with belting produce a line load on the fender facing or panels which will be considerably greater
M
than the 𝑃ℎ𝑢𝑙𝑙,𝑎𝑣 . The design of the fender panel must also account for these concentrated forces.
M
Special attention should be paid to the positions of the horizontal chains supporting a fender panel.
When chains are installed below the fender (towards the bottom of the panel), the rotation of the fender
O
panel due to the vessel's bow flare, can be restricted. As a result, line loads may occur which could
C
exceed the hull pressure limit.
6.8.5 Hull Pressure for Cylindrical Fenders

R
Based on Lloyds (1989), TNO (2019) and Berendsen (2023), WG211 concludes that hull pressure as
FO
determined for fender systems with panels, should not be used for cylindrical fenders, as these fenders
are comparatively small and rarely induce their maximum reaction force (refer to Chapter 2).
In general, the maximum allowable pressure generated by cylindrical fenders should be limited to a
ED
maximum pressure of 500 kN/m2. This means that the inner diameter should be 50% larger than the
outer diameter. The maximum outer diameter is recommended to be 1400 mm with a maximum length
of 2000mm.
SU
Larger or stiffer cylindrical fenders can also be used, but specialist advise from fender manufacturers is
recommended.
IS
6.8.6 Hull Pressure for Foam and Pneumatic Fenders

T
Foam fenders can be assessed in a similar way to cylindrical fenders, however there are important
differences to be considered. Foam and pneumatic fenders tend to have much larger diameters and
AF
lengths compared to rubber cyclindrical fenders. It is therefore important to limit the maximum reaction
force on the vessel structure. The general recommendation is to limit the hull pressure to 250kN/m2 and
to follow the maximum forces recommended in Table 6-6.
R
Not discussed in big group yet.

D
6.8.7 Typical Hull Pressure Capacities

Ideally, designers of a fender system would be able to obtain, or be provided with, the permissible hull
pressure limits of the design vessels that the fender system is required to accommodate. In practice,
permissible hull pressure limits are difficult to obtain and as such, the designer must make some
reasonable assumptions to size the fender panel correctly.
It is acknowledged that most berths are required to be designed to accommodate a wide range of
vessels and to provide the operator of the facility with the greatest degree of operational flexibility.

Calculation of the maximum allowable hull pressure for every vessel type is not practical or cost
effective, and the use of general guidance is considered to be sufficient.
Table 6-6 can be used as a general guide for a range of applicable hull pressures in the absence of
vessel specific information. These figures include the factors of safety normally used by Classification
Societies.
Conservatively, for large vessels that are not fitted with belting, the permissible pressure that may lead
to yield in either the side shell plating or the side longitudinal stiffener of the vessel is reached when the
hull pressure, expressed in kN/m², is equal to 10 times the draught of the fully laden vessel in meters.
LY
Table 6-6: Typical values of Hull Pressure capacity (under discussion).
Maximum Allowable Maximum Allowable

Type of Vessel Hull Pressure (𝑃ℎ𝑢𝑙𝑙,𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) (1) Fender Reaction Force
N
(kN/m²) (𝑹𝒇,𝒍𝒊𝒎 ) (kN)
O
General Cargo
≤ 20,000 DWT <500 NK (4)
TS
> 20,000 DWT < 400 NK (4)
Bulk Carriers
EN
Small bulk carriers 200 2,200
Large bulk carriers 320 3,800
Container
M
Panamax and smaller < 400 1,500
Meo/post Panamax < 200
M 5,600
Tankers
O
≤ 0,000 DWT < 350 NK (4)
C
> 60,000 DWT < 300 1,800

VLCC < 150 to 200 NK (4)
R
Gas carriers (LNG) < 140 NK (4)

FO
Gas carriers (LPG) < 245 NK (4)

Cruise
≤ 20,000 DWT < 400 NK (4)
ED
< 60,000 DWT < 300 NK (4)

100,000 DWT < 200 NK (4)
SU
Passenger Ferries and Ro-Ro

Ro-Ro (belting) Refer Notes 2 and 3 below NK (4)
Refer to equivalent size NK (4)
IS
Ro-Ro (no belting)

Cruise Vessel
Passenger (belting) Refer Notes 2 and 3 below NK (4)
T
Refer to equivalent size NK (4)

Passenger (belting)
AF
Cruise Vessel
SWATH (double hull NK (4)
Refer Notes 3 below
vessels)
R
NOTES:
D
1. The maximum hull pressure values above include for the deduction of factors often used by Classification
Societies and can be considered as calculated pressures for semi-probabilistic analysis, associated to
non-failure conditions. These values can be considered to act independently to each contact area, with
the exceptions as noted in points 2 and 3 below.
2. All vessels, but specifically car carrier, Ro-Ro, ferries, cruise, fishing boats, barges, and some auxiliary
vessels with small displacements, can include one or some belting lines located at different levels of the
vessel hull. These beltings are typically rectangular, trapezoidal, or circular in section, protruding
approximately 20 to 40cm from the vessel hull. In such cases, checking the hull contact pressure from the
fender system into the vessel hull is not applicable. The designer must check that the line loads caused

by the belting are acceptable to both the vessel hull and the fender system. The typical maximum permitted
loads on beltings for vessels with steel hulls is usually between 1,000 and 1,500 kN/m and between 150
and 300 kN/m for aluminium hulls, however the designer is recommended to request specific information
on the structural capacity of the belting.
3. Some fast ferries, as well as catamarans, especially if they have aluminium hulls, are not capable of
accommodating any kind of direct impact load onto the bottom sections of the hull. In such cases, unless
they have special designed belting, the designer will need to ensure that the berthing load impact area is
located at a strengthened area of the vessel, independent of the water level.
4. The N.K. (not known) means that these values have not been calculated by Berendsen or WG211.
LY
Where hull pressures may be critical to the design of the fender system (i.e., naval / military vessels), a
naval architect or vessel owner should be consulted for the provision of specific requirements.
N
Certain operators may require a berth and associated fender system, to accommodate a specific,
unique vessel type. In such cases, if details of the vessel side plating, longitudinal stiffeners and side
O
transverse frame separation information is provided, the permissible hull pressure can be calculated,
providing the designer with greater confidence in the fender system design.
TS
6.9 Ship to Ship Fendering
EN
Design considerations associated with the selection of fenders for ship-to-ship berthing are somewhat
different to those for vessel-to-dock berthing. For ship-to-ship situations, stand-off distance, relative
approach velocity in different weather conditions, and fender type are the most important parameters
M
to consider.
M
The fender reaction against the vessel hull structure is also an important design consideration.
However, most fenders suitable for the use as ship-to-ship fenders, are designed to exert reaction
O
forces substantially lower than the permissible vessel hull structure limits.
C
It is rare that vessels carrying out ship-to-ship berthing manoeuvres make a parallel approach and
almost always contact only one fender at the point of the initial impact. Each individual fender must
therefore have sufficient energy absorption capacity to accommodate the largest anticipated individual
R
design berthing load. A proportion of the berthing energy is absorbed by the vessel pivoting about the
FO
fender; however, this occurs after the initial fender contact. In the event of parallel contact, the berthing
energy will be distributed across all contacted fenders.
6.9.1 Ship to Ship Fender Selection

ED
To select a suitable fender for ship-to-ship berthing, the designer must calculate the ship-to-ship
berthing energy (𝐸𝑘,𝑑 ) at the point of contact. The berthing energy calculation for ship-to-ship berthing
SU
is outlined in Chapter 5.
The relative approach velocity of the berthing vessel can have a significant effect on the berthing energy
absorption requirements of the fenders. The selected relative approach velocity should consider the
IS
effects of local weather, sea and swell conditions, vessel tug or thruster capability, and the overall size
of the vessels involved. Smaller vessels tend to have higher approach velocities. Recommended
T
characteristic approach velocities for a range of conditions, are also included in Chapter 5.
AF
The selected fender must have a Design Energy absorption performance (𝐸𝑓,𝑑 ) greater than the ship-
to-ship berthing energy (𝐸𝑘,𝑑 ).
R
𝐸𝑓,𝑑 ≥ 𝐸𝑘,𝑑 (6-18)

D
The selected fender is also assessed to ensure that it provides the required stand-off distance between
the vessels and that the correct number of fenders is provided.
Many ship-to-ship operations use large foam-filled or pneumatic fenders. The fenders used in ship-to-
ship transfer operations offshore are typically divided into two categories.
• Primary fenders, which are positioned along the flat sided parallel body of the vessel to afford the
maximum possible protection while alongside.

• Secondary fenders may be used to protect bow and stern plating from inadvertent contact during
berthing and unberthing.
6.9.2 Vessel Stand-off and Number of Fenders

The required stand-off distance for ship-to-ship operations is often the primary consideration in the
selection of the appropriate fender diameter or type.
The roll angle of the vessel (which is a function of sea conditions, vessel dynamics, vessel forward
speed and orientation, relative to the prevailing wind and sea conditions) needs to be assessed to
determine the minimum required stand-off distance. The stand-off distance must be large enough to
LY
keep the vessel hulls and superstructures from contacting as the vessels move independently of one
and other.
Product transfer equipment (i.e., hoses, manifolds, booms, etc.) may also need to be considered in the
N
required stand-off distance. The stand-off distance must also include a sufficient margin of safety.
O
The approximate stand-off distances, the recommended minimum number of fenders, and the typical
fender sizes are provided in Table 6-7, for high pressure pneumatic fenders in calm weather conditions.
TS
These parameters are related to the displacements of both vessels involved in the ship-to-ship berthing,
defined by the Combined Vessel Mass Coefficient (𝑀𝑐𝑣 ). The method for calculating the 𝑀𝑐𝑣 is
calculated as follows.
EN
2 𝑀1 𝑀2
𝑀𝑐𝑣 = (6-19)
M
𝑀1 + 𝑀2
Where,
M
O
𝑀𝑐𝑣 Combined Vessel Mass Coefficient (tonnes)
C
𝑀𝑖 Mass equivalent to displacement of vessel i (tonnes)

R
The final required stand-off distances are likely to be greater if more onerous sea and weather
conditions are to be accommodated (e.g., large wave heights, strong winds, etc.) or special operational
FO
limitations on vessel movement are required.

It is recommended that fender manufacturers and operators, experienced with ship-to-ship berthing are
consulted prior to confirming the selected fender size and required number of fenders.
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

Table 6-7: Ship-to-ship recommended stand-off distance, number of fenders and typical sizes for calm conditions.
Combined Vessel Typical High

Minimum Stand-Off Minimum Pressure Pneumatic
Mass Coefficient
Distance Number of Fender
(𝑴𝒄𝒗 )
(meters) Fenders (a) (50kPa) size (a)
(tonnes) (meters)
6,000 1.2 - 2.0 3 2.5 x 5.5

10,000 1.5 - 2.2 3 2.5 x 5.5
LY
25,000 1.5 - 2.2 4 3.3 x 5.5
50,000 1.8 - 2.5 4 3.3 x 6.5
N
100,000 2.4 - 3.3 4 3.3 x 6.5
O
150,000 2.4 - 3.7 5 3.3 x 6.5
200,000 2.4 - 3.7 5 3.3 x 6.5
TS
330,000 3.3 - 4.0 4 4.5 x 9.0
EN
470,000 4.0 - 4.5 4 4.5 x 9.0
790,000 4.2 - 4.5 4 4.5 x 12.0
M
Note: If the characteristic design vessel displacement is between two of the values stated, then use the
larger vessel displacement for fender stand-off distance selection.
(a)
M
Ship to Ship Transfer Guide for Petroleum, Chemicals and Liquefied Gases published by the Oil
Companies International Marine Forum (OCIMF), Section 9.1.2 and Table 9.1.
O
C
6.9.3 Ship to Ship Operational Considerations

Ship-to-ship operational considerations are highly dependent upon the specific type of the operation,
R
including any operational limitations on permissible sea states. It is recommended that the vessel
FO
operators are consulted before the final fender system is selected and that the mooring arrangement
for the ship-to-ship berthing should be considered by the designer. The mooring arrangement must be
compatible with quick departure manoeuvres under emergency conditions.
ED
For lightering or other similar cargo transfer operations, one vessel is initially fully laden and the other
light. The berthing energy for a given approach velocity would therefore be less than two fully laden
vessels. Allowance for this can be made by adjusting both the displacement tonnage and the added
mass of the light vessel.
SU
As a light vessel will likely have a greater windage area, the berthing approach manoeuvre may be
difficult. The effect of waves may also be greater on the light vessel. Both factors may contribute to
IS
higher approach velocities than normally anticipated.

After the two vessels are located alongside one another, operational considerations will dictate whether
T
the actual transfer operation can occur while the vessels are underway and maintaining steerage, or
whether the vessels must stay in one position. For a moored vessel with a second vessel alongside,
AF
the upper limit of sea conditions under which the operations can continue, must be considered.
R
D

7 FENDER SELECTION UNDER MOORED CONDITIONS
This Chapter outlines the design considerations that are applicable for fender systems that are required
to accomodate moored vessels.
|For fender systems designed specifically for berthing conditions, it is necessary to check the suitability
of the selected fender system for moored vessels. Mooring conditions are important when considering
the dynamic external actions acting on the vessel. These actions include but are not limited to, infra-
gravity waves, swell and wind generated waves. The potential for extreme events such as hurricanes,
tsunami, squalls, etc. must also be investigated and included within the assessment if there is a realistic
chance of occurring in the vicinity of the moored vessel. Whilst berthing manoeuvres can be controlled,
LY
the mooring conditions may transmit higher loads into the fender system.
Where berths are located close to navigation channels and other vessel manoeuvring areas, the effect
N
of the passing vessel close to the moored vessel at the location of the fenders must be considered in
the fender selection process. Passing vessel suction forces and wake wash can lead to a significant
O
response on the moored vessel and, consequently, on the fenders.
In all cases, mooring conditions must be assessed.
TS
A wide variety of conditions can affect the dynamic response of a vessel. These conditions can induce
the movement of a moored vessel, indicated by the cyclic movements in the six degrees of freedom.
EN
These movements can subsequently induce cyclic loading within the different elements of the mooring
and fender system. As mooring arrangements are dynamic, a careful assessment should be undertaken
to establish the effects on the moored vessel.
M
7.1 Fender Design for Moored Vessels M
The typical fender system design approach is to calculate the vessel berthing energy and then select
O
an appropriate fender system. Refer to Chapters 5 and 6. However, berthing energy is not always the
only design condition to be considered for the selection of a fender system. The fender system must be
C
designed to accommodate the range of conditions that will be experienced by the vessel while moored
for prolonged periods of time. For example, certain environmental conditions that may occur while the
R
vessel is moored may result in higher loads on the fender system (both normal reaction and friction
forces) than would be typically experienced during berthing.
FO
Figure 7-1 illustrates how a mooring analysis often fits with the fender system design workflow. A
mooring analysis can be performed at the early stage of a design project to assist with optimising the
fender configuration and design. Initiating the mooring analysis early is particularly important if the
ED
designer expects that the moored conditions may be the limiting factor in the fender system design or
that the fenders may be the limiting factor in determining the operational conditions for the berth. The
design of the fender system may therefore have a direct impact on the berth operation and downtime
SU
performance.
IS
T
AF
R
D

LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
Figure 7-1: Fender design flow chart for moored conditions

ED
The designer must define or select a set of limiting conditions for mooring, including the design vessels
or fleet, mooring arrangement of the vessel, weather conditions (wind, waves, current, water level, etc.,)
SU
depending on the project.

Once the mooring analysis has been carried out, the results are compared with the project design
applied to both the fender system or to the mooring system If the criteria is satisfied, the mooring
IS
analysis is completed. If it is not satisfied, it is necessary to improve the fender and mooring system
and repeat the analysis. In some cases the solution consists of setting up a set of operational measures.
T
The differences in fender performance between different types, sizes, and grades of fenders may lead
AF
to significant differences in the dynamic response of the moored vessel. If the design of the fender
system is controlled by the outputs of the mooring analysis, it is recommended that a sensitivity analysis
is undertaken to compare the different fender performance characteristics to determine whether a
R
particular fender is more suitable. This is particularly beneficial at the project tender stage as often the
fender supplier is not known.
D
In some design situations, the fenders are not the only flexible part of the structure. When the fender is
fixed to a flexible structure (e.g., flexible dolphins), the response characteristics of the support structure
must also be considered so as to accurately simulate the dynamic response of the mooring system.
The vessel hull response is not usually included in a mooring analysis due to the high stiffness of vessel
hulls compared to the fender stiffness. Hull pressure, resulting from the peak fender reaction, should
be checked against the hull pressure criteria as noted in Chapter 6.8.

Although the mooring analysis is often performed using the average performance curves for the
selected fender, designers must also be aware of the non-elastic characteristics of the fender
performance. In certain mooring conditions, the non-linear characteristics of the fender element can be
important.
Safety factors and manufacturing tolerances are not usually included in the fender characteristics for
mooring analysis. The average reaction-deflection performance curve is the most common choice to
describe the moored vessel behaviour. Depending on the objective of the study, other performance
curves may be selected.
The non-linear effects occur in the form of hysteresis in the fender performance curves. The rate at
which the fender rebounds is not simply a function of the instantaneous position on the performance
LY
curve, but also a function of how the fender has been worked up to that point in time.
In a permanent mooring situation and considering cyclic loading, the fender element can dissipate a
N
significant amount of energy (in the form of heat), which affects the fender performance.
O
Under elevated constant loading of the fender, creep in the fender element can lead to deformation or
buckling in a rubber fender at a load significantly less than the design reaction force. A mooring analysis
TS
allows a check on the deflection under constant load conditions to be conducted, using the creep
criteria, refer section 7.4.7.
EN
7.2 Characterisation of vessel and berth configuration
Evaluating a fender’s performance with a vessel moored alongside requires an understanding of the
M
relevant vessel and the characteristics of the berth, as well as an understanding of the likely mooring
configurations. Chapter 4 includes information that can be used to characterise vessels, when data is
M
not available for a project.
O
The parameters for fender contact with a moored vessel can vary based on the specific project. The
main parameters to be considered include, the size/position of the vessel parallel mid-body, the
C
presence (or absence) of vessel belting, and the strength/structure of the hull. The location of the vessel
fairleads is also often relevant, both in support of the mooring analysis and for checking for geometric
R
interferences between mooring lines and the fenders.

FO
An accurate layout of the terminal geometry, including the number, size, and location of fender systems,
is important for evaluating the fender-vessel interface under moored conditions. The designer must
ensure that adequate fender-vessel contact is maintained throughout the range of anticipated water
levels and vessel loading conditions. Bollard and/or mooring hook locations are a required input for
ED
checking mooring line interference with fenders, as well as for conducting a mooring analysis.
All possible mooring positions and configurations should be considered by the designer to ensure that
the fender system can support vessels for all service conditions. For example, an oil tanker berth may
SU
always moor a vessel in approximately the same location (+/- several meters). However, a bulk terminal
may require the vessel to moor at various positions and both orientations to fill all holds of the vessel
systematically.
IS
Mooring configurations can vary greatly from jetty or quay wall moorings to unique layouts involving
combinations of fixed structures with mooring buoys and/or use of the vessel’s anchor. A mooring
T
assessment is also required for ship-to-ship moorings to assess the mooring arrangement and the
AF
behaviour of the moored vessel including the relative motions between both vessels.
All elements of the interface between the fender system, the vessel and the berth must be checked for
interferences that are likely to occur during vessel loading/unloading operations. All vessel positions
R
should consider, as a minimum, the;

D
• Interferences between the fender systems and mooring lines.

• Interferences between the fenders with ladders, gangways, fingers, etc., and access to the
vessel.
• Interferences between the fenders with loading arms or flexible hoses, cranes or another
loading system and the vessel.

7.3 Dynamic Mooring Analysis
A mooring analysis is the design process assessing the response of the moored vessel, when moored
at a berth. A defined mooring layout and fender system is considered and assessed against the effect
of a set of defined met-ocean conditions or other external forces. Refer to PIANC WG186 for guidance
on how to select the analysis method, how to perform a mooring analysis, for determining what
conditions should be simulated and what design criteria must be applied.
A mooring assessment can be a particularly important part of the fender design process for marine
terminals subject to cyclical loading from swell waves, high forces from passing vessels, extreme high
wind events, and/or tsunamis.
LY
Mooring analysis results can provide an estimate of the maximum fender loads under the design or
operational environmental conditions, as well as the distribution of mooring loads between multiple
fenders. Additionally, a mooring analysis can illustrate how the vessel will move while at berth and assist
N
with optimising the fender placement to ensure contact of the fenders with the vessel’s hull.
O
The decision to improve the fender system is usually based on the performance of the fenders under
the design conditions (maximum forces or deflections). However, different criteria (operational and safe
TS
mooring limits, downtime, fatigue, etc.) may also indicate that changes or refinements are required to
the fender system design. In the same way, the results of the fender system assessment may suggest
the improvement of the mooring layout or changes in the berth configuration or mooring equipment in
EN
the terminal.
7.4 Creep and Fatigue Limits for Dynamic Mooring Analysis
M
Fender fatigue analysis is typically not required in protected ports. However, in exposed locations, the
M
effects of constant swells or frequent and strong gusty wind should be carefully considered. In the same
way, extreme conditions may reduce the resisting capacity of the fenders. Since fenders can perform
O
substantially differently than the published catalogue data under cyclic load conditions, the fender
C
manufacturer should be consulted for design assistance in these situations.

Both elevated constant fender loads (e.g., high pretension or sustained winds) and cyclic fender loads
R
(e.g., under swell waves) are substantially different from the testing conditions represented by catalogue
fender performance data.
FO
The effect of fatigue and creep on fenders must be assessed. When identified that the local conditions
at the berth, an assessment must be performed.
ED
7.4.1 Fatigue
Fatigue in fenders is a process of progressive (internal) damage occurring in the fender body material
SU
that is subjected to cyclic loading and whic may lead to the failure of the fender in satisfying the purpose
it was designed for.
Fatigue life is defined as the maximum number of loading cycles that an element can sustain before
IS
failure occurs. The fatigue life depends on the nature of the failure and of the nature of the loading
cycles, Being the shape of the loading cycle and the period between consecutive cycles, the most
important parameters.
T
AF
All fender types suffer fatigue of a certain nature, and there are important differences depending on:
• Material, additives, grade and manufacturing process.
• Fender type, considering the shape of the performance curve.
R
• Aging
D
• Service temperature
Fatigue effects can affect all the installed fenders, but it is especially important and must be assessed
in the design process for:
• Permanent mooring solutions
• “Important” cyclic loading due to local conditions

7.4.2 Creep
Creep is the permanent deflection of fenders after loading (CDIT, 2019). Creep in rubber and foam
filled fenders is due to different phenomena. Foam filled fenders require a longer time to recover after
each load cycle and some inner ‘cells’ are destroyed, leading to creep,
There is an important relationship between creep and fatigue damage as creep increases the effect of
cyclic loading.
7.4.3 Fatigue Damage

The effect of the fatigue depends on the fender type and construction material. The heat generated
LY
inside the fender material due to the load cycles increases the working temperature of the fender. This
is occurs when the periods are small (specially compared with the berthing period). The shorter time a
N
fender needs to cool down, the greater the temperature will be. In the same way, the higher the load in
the load cycle, the greater the amount of energy must be dissipated, and the effect on the fatigue will
O
be greater.
Table 7-1: Description of fatigue damage in fenders depending on their type and material.
TS
Fender Type Fatigue Damage Description
EN
Buckling fenders suffer a definitive change in shape
Buckling
after the start of buckling. Before buckling, the
Including cone, cell, buckling fenders show an almost linear behaviour
M
leg, and arch types. with the fender load. This is important as dynamic
load buckling of the fender has an important role on
M
fatigue damage.
Rubber Fender
O
This occurs when there is no buckling effect and no
Non-Buckling sudden change in the behaviour of the loaded
C
Including cylindrical fender. There is an important change in fender

shape, loading the fender over this point and this
R
and solid types.

increases fatigue damage.
FO
Foam Filled Fender Fatigue affects foam fenders in a different way, as every time a foam fender
is compressed, some inner cells of the foam are destroyed. This means, a
Floating Fender permanent deflection of the fender (creep) occurs.
ED
Pneumatic fenders do not suffer from fatigue, as the main elastic element is
the air inside. Fatigue on the skin (rubber) is very limited and is considered
SU
Pneumatic Fender not relevant. But there are two important factors to be considered by the
designer:
Floating Fender
•
IS
Fatigue on valves and elements of the pressure control system.

• Risk of losing the fender due to damages. In that case, the fender
is destroyed, and this catastrophic damage must be taken into
T
account by the designers

AF
7.4.4 Fatigue and Creep Limits

R
Within current guidelines, there is insufficient published data to provide sound limits for fatigue and
creep. Speciaist advice from manufacturers for fatigue and creep assessment is required.
D
Operational conditions must be described in the specification and during the purchasing process in
order to assess the nature and characteristics of the cyclic loading.
Designers are responsible for considering these effects and looking for manufacturer's advice when
assessing fatigue. Manufacturers are responsible for defining the fatigue limits when there is no data
published in support of these limits.
If fatigue may be an issue due to the berth conditions, fatigue testing results should be performed and
compared with the expected number of cycles during the lifetime of the fender.

Different limits may be required for creep and fatigue when assessing fatigue. When accurate limit data
for fatigue fender design is available, only fatigue must be assessed, however due to a lack of data,
both creep and fatigue limits must be applied.
The following criteria for safe mooring for fenders limits to be applied in dynamic mooring analysis
(DMA) must be considered:
7.4.4.1 High Constant Fender Loads (Creep Limit)
Constant loading of a fender can lead to creep (CDIT, 2019) of the fender and eventually to a
progressive fatigue damage when considering additional cyclic loading.
LY
This effect is important in buckling fenders, where a sudden deflection over the buckling point may be
found at a load lower than the buckling load, leading to a quick deterioration of the fender, due to fatigue.
Due to the permanent deflection that may be found within foam filled fenders, the selection of this type
N
of fender must be carefully assessed for permanent solutions and for locations where significant cyclic
O
load are expected.
In order to assess the constant fender loads, the constant deflection of the fenders must be considered.
TS
It is important to note that results from static calculations are not a valid parameter to assess creep.
Constant deflection can be estimated from a dynamic mooring analysis as the average of the deflection
EN
time series during three hours under the design conditions. The design conditions are taken as extreme
conditions for permanent mooring and maximum safe mooring conditions for temporary stays of the
vessel at the berth. The longer the fender is exposed to this constant load, higher the risk of suffering
M
from creep.
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
Figure 7-2: Example of fender deflection time series showing the average value and the different cycles
7.4.4.2 Cyclic Fender Loads
SU
Durability test data for fenders (refer to Section 10.6) typically considers repeated compressions with a
cycle duration of 150s. However, environmental loading can cause compressions at a much shorter
IS
cycle period, resulting in a much higher rate of heat transfer in the fender. This can lead to softening of
the rubber and larger deflections, limiting the ability of the fender to rebound between cycles.
T
Loading with a longer cycle period results in slower heat transfer to the fender elements and allows
more time for the fender to rebound between compressions.
AF
Fender fatigue analysis is typically not required in protected ports. However, in exposed locations, the
effects of constant swells or frequent and strong gusty wind should be carefully considered. In the same
R
way, extreme conditions may reduce the capacity of the fenders. Since fenders can perform
substantially differently than the published catalogue data under cyclic load conditions, the fender
D
manufacturer should be consulted for design assistance in these situations. The analysis should
consider not only the maximum load or deflection but the distribution of loads as a function of frequency
load.
Figure 7-3: Distribution of loads as a function of frequency load

When specific data from the manufacturer is not available and cyclical loads are expected, engineering
judgement is required in determining a reasonable limiting load condition for the fenders.

LY
N
O
TS
EN
W
M
Figure 7-4: Energy Distribution as a Function of frequency
7.4.5 Creep and Cylic Loading Limits

M
O
When there is no avaiable published data and the manufacturer cannot provide specific and accurate
C
limits for assessing fatigue, the following table provides advice on possible values that may be
considered by the designer in the design process for fatigue and creep limits.
R
The use of the values and comments in this table does not discharge from the responsability of the
designer to research for specific data and to consult the manufacturers.
FO
Table 7-2: Proposed creep and cyclic load limit for fenders.
Fender Type Creep Limit Cyclic Load Limit
ED
Buckling 40% to 50% design load

Equivalent to 5 % - 10% Buckling not permitted
SU
Including cone, cell,

leg, and arch types. deflection
Rubber
Fender
IS
Non-Buckling 20% reaction force (not Change in fender shape (needs a

Including cylindrical finally agreed) clear definition)
T
and solid types.

AF
Foam Filled Fender Limited fatigue on the skin – Fatigue on valves and pressure
Floating Fender control system must be assessed
R
D
Pneumatic Fender 10% reaction force

Floating Fender No creep allowed ? Design deflection (not agreed)
(Not finally agreed)

8 FENDER SYSTEM COMPONENTS DESIGN
Careful consideration should be given to the design of the fender panel, chains, UHMW-PE pads and
fixing details to ensure an efficient, yet robust design of the Fender systems, and should be part of the
integral berth design, since it is necessary that berth structure configuration can accommodate the
required fender system and all its components (chains, anchors, etc.). It should be noted that there is a
serious risk of failure and reduction of durability of the fender systems if the design of the components
is not correct or if the berth design does not match the fender system requirements for the structure.
This Chapter outlines the fender system components design process, providing background information
on the issues that should be considered when designing these key elements of the fender system.
LY
8.1 Fender Panel Design
N
The fender panels are an integral part of several fender systems, refer to Chapter 2. The fender panel
must provide a suitable contact surface positioned at the required level. The designer should consider
O
variations in tide, weather, operations. Variations in vessel hull profile and structure and should be
accounted for in the panel design to distribute the fender reaction forces into the vessel’s hull structure.
TS
Fender panels may be subject to a combination of uniformly distributed loads, line loads and point loads
according to the hull profiles of the vessels using the berth.
EN
During berthing and mooring, vessels contact the fender panels, inducing bending moments and shear
forces into the panel structure which must be accounted for in the panel design. The designer should
also be aware of the effects of asymmetric load cases and consider where stress concentrations may
M
exist, such as at bolted fender unit connections and chain brackets connections.
Fender panels should be designed to give a minimum service as defined in chapter 4, assuming
M
adequate planned maintenance during the serviceable life, according to manufacturer maintenance
manual.
O
Fender panel design should determine the overall panel dimensions, edge chamfers and pressure
C
distributions within the panel. The design should also determine the internal structure of the panel,
including the location and thickness of all plates, stiffeners, and the associated weld sizes. Limit state
R
design codes should be used to determine the construction of the steel panels and frames. Input loads
from the fender reactions, the vessel hull profile, and chain connections should all be considered.
FO
The designer is recommended to consider corrosion protection of the panel to optimize durability. The
provision of drain points in the event the panel becomes damaged and fills with water should also be
included.
ED
8.1.1 Load Cases and Structural Analysis

SU
Vessels typically contact fender panels either as a flat hull contact or if beltings are present, as several
line loads or point loads. The exact geometry of the vessel contact is dependent on the type of vessel
and the angle of approach of the vessel to the berth.
IS
The designer must consider each design case to be unique and carry out a detailed assessment of all
fender design criteria to determine the specific panel design load cases. Typical vessel contacts with
T
fender panels and example load cases are indicated in Figure 8-1.
AF
The range of different load cases identified will create varying demands on the fender panel structure.
The designer must assess each load case and identify the governing design case(s). A durable fender
panel design is highly dependent on correctly identifying and defining all applicable load cases that can
R
reasonably be expected to occur during the life cycle of the fender system.
D
Design calculations should consider bending, shear, local buckling and crushing effects in the steel
panels and fender frames. Local buckling should be checked as inadequately supported webs in the
panel grillage may be prone to collapse under line load or point load conditions.
Vessels with belting can be particularly damaging to panel structures and facings, leading to line or
point load cases. A careful determination of load cases and structural analysis can assist in providing
sufficiently robust structures. Consideration as to whether vessels with belting are berthed frequently or
if the belting on the vessels is poorly maintained can also be of benefit in the design process.

Berthing frequency should be considered in the design of the fender system, since high frequency
berthing combined, with fatigue effects will deteriorate the fenders more rapidly. At berths with frequent
use and in cases where extended service life is expected, panel fatigue analysis should be undertaken
as part of the design process. Special care is needed where stresses are concentrated, such as chains
brackets and bolted connections.
LY
N
O
TS
Figure 8-1: Typical design cases of fender contact with vessel hull profile.
Fender panel design calculations should, as a minimum, consider static principals to determine shear
EN
forces and moments. More detailed analyses, i.e., finite elements analysis methods, should be
considered to study the more complicated effects of asymmetric load cases and the distribution of
stresses induced within the steel structure. Appropriate partial load factors should be applied for the
M
design of the fender panels when considering the characteristic and design impact cases. With
reference to the application of partial safety factors related to the applied impact loads, these should be
M
considered as non-permanent loads.
O
8.1.2 Fender Panel Internal Structure
C
The overall weight of a fender panel provides a preliminary estimate and general ‘rule of thumb’ of the
panel capacity to support particular load combinations. A typical range of panel weights and intended
R
uses is as follows (these values are only indicative):

FO
• Standard duty panels: approximately 250 to 300 kg/m². Normally designed for flat hull contact.
• Heavy duty panels: approximately 300 to 400 kg/m². Normally designed for belting and line
loads.
• Extreme heavy-duty panels: over 400 kg/m². Normally designed for point loads or special
ED
cases.
The typical panel weight can be defined in the project design criteria and can be considered when
SU
comparing different alternatives to validate the likely robustness of the steel fender panel design.
Generally, two types of fender panel forms of construction are available, “closed box” and “open box”.
The “closed box” form of fender panel is considered to have a higher strength to weight ratio and creates
IS
a simple exterior shape which is easier to paint and maintain. The inside of the “box panel” is protected
against corrosion as it is should be fully sealed, and pressure tested. It is therefore recommended to
verify quality control of the internal panel construction before the box is closed and sealed.
T
AF
Recommended minimum thicknesses for the steel sections in fender panels are:
R
• Plates exposed on two surfaces: ≥ 12mm (A)

• Plates exposed on one surface: ≥ 9-10 mm (B)
D
• Internal members (not exposed): ≥ 8mm (C)
Figure 8-2: Recommended minimum thicknesses for steel in fender panels.

A panel is a construction of welded steel plates conforming one single piece. Constructions of a single
fender panel made by more than one piece bolted to each other is not allowed. It is possible to link
together two different fender panels by panel hinges built in the side of the panels.
Chains are connected to brackets welded to the internal structure of the panel; therefore chain position
and loads are considered as part of the panel structure design.
The grade of steel used for the fabrication of the fender panel should be clearly specified considering
the design temperature range (as low temperatures require special steel grades which do not become
brittle), fender panel loading and the availability of certain steel grades.
LY
8.1.3 Edge chamfers
N
The fender panel design should consider the potential for the direct application of vertical or horizontal
loads to the perimeter of the panel. Such forces could result from:
O
• vessel belting contacting the top of the panel during vessel movement whilst on the berth.
•
TS
vessel belting contacting the top of the panel on a falling tide.
• a low freeboard vessel or vessel belting becoming hooked underneath the fender panel.
• vessels with discontinuous and multi-level beltings.
EN
• direct horizontal loads to the fender panel side.
These types of impacts can seriously affect the durability of the fender system, introducing potentially
destructive shear forces into the rubber unit, which it is not designed to resist. Fender panel design
M
should consider options to minimise potential damage to the fender system by including edge chamfers
or bevels around of the edges of panels. M
The minimum recommended width and angle of a chamfer is depending on the size of beltings.
O
To prevent excessive wear on mooring lines and potential mooring rope failures, the designer is
C
recommended to consider options to prevent mooring lines from coming into contact with, or becoming
snagged by, the fender panel edges. The fender system position and provision of rope-roll bars may
R
need to be considered.
FO
8.1.4 Panel Size and Position

The fender panel size, position and fender unit orientation, in relation to the berth structure, should be
carefully considered by the designer. Failure to undertake this part of the design process may result in
ED
reduced energy absorption capabilities of the fender and a reduced operational life of the fender system.
Determination of Panel Width
SU
The width of the panel should be determined based on the following:

• Sufficient panel width to provide the minimum panel contact area, required to keep the hull contact
IS
pressure below the maximum limit permitted by the design vessel.

• Sufficient panel width to accommodate the connection detail of the selected rubber unit and
restraint chain arrangement. The arrangement of the chain connection eye pad can sometimes
T
become a dominant factor in determining the overall panel width.

AF
• As far as practicable, consider the maximum width readily transported from the manufacturing
facility to site.
• Compliance with any project specific requirements for minimum panel width conditions.
R
D
Determination of Panel Height

The height of the panel should be determined based on a combination of the following:
• In combination with the panel width, sufficient height is needed to ensure the minimum contact
area required to keep the hull contact pressure below the maximum limit permitted by the
design vessel.
• Consider the full range of vessels likely to use the berth and account for any unique vessel
design features.

• Cater for the full tidal range.
• Provide an allowance for variations in water level produced by wave and/ or vessel wash.
• Accommodate variations in vessel operational draught and trim during loading/ unloading of
cargo.
• Consider the full range design vessels at the different expected tide levels and loading
conditions.
Based on the above considerations, the top level of the fender panel will largely be determined by the
minimum draft of an unladen vessel at the highest astronomical tide, with reference to the top level of
the berthing structure. To define the bottom level of the fender panel, the minimum freeboard of the
design laden vessel and lowest astronomical tide will apply.
LY
Fender panels can extend above the supporting structure deck level; however, the position of the
mooring lines should be checked to ensure that the vessel can be correctly moored and that the mooring
N
lines do not become snagged. The extension of fender panels above the deck of the berth structure
can also cause problems where vessels with side or quarter ramps are to be accommodated and where
O
the berth is used for other types of cargo vessels.
TS
To accommodate vessels with belting, the fender panel must be long enough to accommodate the full
range of vessel movement at the berth. The panel length should be sufficient to minimise the risk of the
vessel belting riding over the top of, or being caught underneath, the fender panel whilst the vessel is
EN
on the berth. An allowance will also need to be given for wave height and sea state at the berth during
adverse weather conditions.
The fender panel maximum height should be proportional and limited to the size of the fender height
M
and position on the supporting structure. For cases that require long fender panels to be used with small
sized fenders, consideration should be given to the provision of double or triple fenders arranged on a
M
vertical axis, one above the other, to provide support and load transfer from the fender panels to the
O
support structure.
The panel height should be designed considering the relationship between the fender center line level
C
and its location within the panel to keep peak hull pressures below the required limits.
R
Determination of Panel Thickness

FO
Fender panel thickness is closely related to the panel internal structure. The designer should consider
the stand-off distance between the cope and berthing line when determining the fender panel thickness.
Cone fender systems require a spacer located between the top of the fender and the rear of the panel
to enable additional fender compression. This will increase the stand-off distance of the fender system.
ED
Position of Fender on the Panel

Fenders should be positioned slightly over the horizontal center line of the fender panel, and below the
SU
upper third of the fender height. Locating the fender below the horizontal center line of the fender panel
should be avoided. The optimum fender panel design is likely to require addition restraint and support
chains.
IS
Locating the fender rubber unit too close to the panel edges can lead to rotation of the panel without
compressing the fender when loaded. This action induces moments and forces in the fender that may
T
cause damage and reduce the energy absorption capability. Eccentric positioning of the fender will also
AF
lead to increases in induced loads in hull structures.
8.2 Chains and Fixings Design

R
D
8.2.1 Chain Types and Positions

Chains are used to control the position of the fender panel during berthing to prevent excessive panel
movement. They can also assist with supporting the weight of large panels, to prevent droop or sagging,
and to increase fender deflections and energy absorption in low-level impact cases.

LY
N
O
TS
Figure 8-3: Typical fender system chain layout (viewed from rear of fender panel).
EN
The following types of chains are generally used within fender systems, the positions of which are
indicated within Figure 8-3.
Table 8-1: Types of chains
M
Weight chains support the fender system and prevent excessive drooping of the system
M
caused by self-weight forces. They may also resist vertical shear forces
caused by vessel movements or changing draft.
O
Tension chains restrict tension on the fender rubber. Correct location can optimise the
C
deflection geometry.
R
Shear chains resist horizontal forces caused during longitudinal approaches or warping
FO
operations.
Uplift Chains prevent vertical shear forces in conjunction with the weight chains. These
are often specified for exposed offshore berths with large wave induced
ED
vessel movements. This type of chain is however typically used in special

cases and is not very common. The use of this type of chain should be
verified with the fender manufacturer.
SU
Rope Guard Chains are sometimes specified to prevent mooring lines from getting caught
behind fender panels particularly, on panels with no top tension chains.
IS
Keep Chains used to moor floating fenders and locate cylindrical fenders or to prevent
loss of fixed fenders in the event of accidents.
T
AF
The inclusion of weight and tension chains is recommended for all fender system installations to support
the fender panel and ensure the longevity of the system. The governing criteria for the design of tension
chains is the panel rotation angle resulting from low level vessel impacts or vessel rolling.
R
Typically, shear chains are required on berths where substantial longitudinal shear forces from vessel
D
movements are anticipated. This includes berths where vessels slide along the berthing face during
vessel manoeuvres (e.g., ferry or RoRo berths) or where vessels are warped along the berth during
loading or discharge operations. The correct position for shear chains is as shown on Figure 8-5 below,
attached to the side of the panel, therefore when this type of chain is required the design of the concrete
structure need to consider required space for shear chain at the required position and angle on the
sides of the fender system. Certain fender system designs and installation locations cannot
accommodate shear chains and the berth structure must be sized accordingly to provide connections
at the required locations. The designer is recommended to consider how the vessel is expected to

interact with the fender system and to select the most appropriate combination of restraint chains, and
if shear chains are required the structure design must provide sufficient space to allow its installation.
The crossing of shear chains must also be carefully considered to ensure that the chains are installed
with the required angle, are separated, and prevented from rubbing. If crossed shear chains are used,
both upper and lower shear chain sets may be required to prevent the rotation of the fender panel.
The provision of uplift, rope guard and keep chains is also closely linked to the design requirements
LY
and geometry of the fender system. The requirements for each chain type should therefore take account
of specific design considerations.
N
Chain systems work in combination with the shackles, chain tensioners (optional), connection brackets
O
and anchors, the general position of which is indicated in Figure 8-4.
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
Figure 8-4: Typical tension chain arrangement.

Adjustments in chain length can be accommodated with the inclusion of chain tensioners. It is often not
R
possible to add a tensioner to a tension chain due to the overall chain length being too short. Typically,
FO
all other chains are long enough to include a chain tensioner, if required.
A ‘weak link’ in the chain system is desirable to prevent damage to more costly components. Chains
should be hot dip galvanized to protect against corrosion.
ED
On one end chains are attached to the berth structure by brackets or U-anchor connections. On the
other end the chains are connected to brackets welded to the internal structure of the panel.
SU
8.2.2 Chain Design

Fender system accessories (chains, anchors, pad eyes) should be customised for each specific project
IS
application. They should be specifically designed by fender manufacturers to be complaint with the
specific requirements of the project.
The static angle and the overall length of the chain are the most important factors when determining
T
the required chain design load capacity, refer to Figure 8-5.

AF
Generally, the largest chain loads occur when the maximum fender reaction force occurs. The total
weight of the fender panel is not applicable when considering the tensile capacity of the shear chains.
R
The recommended minimum factor of safety applied to the Characteristic Reaction force (𝑅𝑓,𝑐 ) should
D
be taken as 3.0.
Each project technical specification should state, on a case-by-case basis, the minimum factor of safety
to be applied to the Characteristic Reaction force . Typical safety factors range from 2.0 to 3.0. In certain
very special circumstances factors of safety of up to 5.0 can be used in some special circumstances.
As the shackles and tensioners are suffering constant and substantial wear due to the movement and
corrosion of the fender system due to the direct exposure to marine environment, the factors of safety
applied to shackles, chains and tensioners is different and independent from the safety factor applied
to brackets and anchors, which are based on the general structural design codes and standards.

The designer must then verify the following:
Refer to Chapter 9 for details on chain fabrication.
LY
N
O
TS
Figure 8-5: Recommendations for angles and chain arrangement for non-compressed fenders.
EN
8.2.3 Support Chains for Foam and Pneumatic Fenders
M
Foam and pneumatic fenders use support chains attached to the supporting structure. One end of each
chain is attached to the supporting structure, typically via a shackle and bracket. The other end is
M
connected to a swivel connection to allow the fender to rotate. Different chain layouts can be used
depending on whether the fender is fully supported or floating. A 4-chain arrangement can be used to
O
prevent changes in the level of the fender.
C
R
FO
ED
Figure 8-6: Double and 4-chain arrangements for foam and pneumatic fenders.
SU
The supporting chains must be designed, as a minimum, to accommodate the frictional forces between
the vessel and the fender and the fender and the supporting structure, the self-weight of the fender and
to fit within the general arrangement of the supporting structure.
IS
8.2.4 Bracket Design

T
Brackets are typically required to connect the chain assembly to the support structure and can be
AF
designed to suit new or existing structures. The bracket should be considerably stronger than the
weakest component of the chain assembly. The design must allow the chain to freely rotate through its
full arc and the position and geometry should not interfere with other brackets, the fender panel or
R
rubber fender body during compression.

D
Figure 8-7: Typical examples of bracket fender system bracket assemblies.

The pad eyes typically experience large, concentrated forces transferred from the connected chain
assemblies. The pad eyes should be sufficiently thick or include spacer plates to support the correct

size and type of shackle. Induced localised stresses in and around the pad eyes should be carefully
checked and stiffeners provided to resist these stresses.
The weld size holding the pad eye to the base plate is critical and should be considered carefully in
conjunction with the manufacture of the brackets. The design of the pad eyes should therefore comply
with the relevant codes and standards for steel fabrication and weld design.
The position and orientation of the pad eyes on the fender panel and support structure should be
assessed to ensure that the chains are always straight and that the force induced in the pad eye acts
along the long axis of the pad eye.
LY
8.2.5 Fixing Anchor Design
Fixing anchors are required to attach fender systems, including the bracket and chain assemblies to
the supporting structure. The design of the fixing anchors should determine the anchor diameter,
N
required embedment or bond length, type and material.
O
Fender anchors are primarily subject to shear forces with limited tension forces. The required diameter
and minimum embedment of the anchors for each fender type are typically provided by the fender
TS
manufacturer.
Bracket and chain assembly anchors are primarily subject to tension and shear forces. The proportion
EN
of each of these forces is dependent on the angle of the chain and the geometry of the bracket. These
forces should be determined based on the characteristic load of the selected chain assembly multiplied
by the appropriate factor of safety and by assessing each specific load case and design load chain
M
arrangement. Cast-in U anchors should consider an additional thickness allowance to accommodate
for wear due to chain shackle friction. M
Anchor capacity is dependent on the concrete strength, the bonded length of the anchor, the size of the
bracket bearing plate and the concrete reinforcement details. For all anchor applications into concrete
O
(individual and groups of anchors), the designer must consider the potential modes of anchor failure,
C
including pull-out, concrete splitting, crushing and cone breakout which could affect the anchor design
and performance.
R
The minimum edge distances should be assessed which should also be incorporated within the design
of the support structure. In the absence of specific design information, a minimum edge distance of 5
FO
times the anchor diameter (recommended if possible between 8 to 10 ) or the overall length of the
anchor (whichever is the longer) should be considered. However, the required minimum edge distance
could be reduced due to the presence of reinforcement within the concrete. The design and integration
ED
of anchors into the concrete supporting structure is recommended to be carried out in conjunction with
the design of the supporting structure.
Cast in anchors are recommended to be specified for all new concrete structures. Drilling and chemical
SU
resin anchor fixing should only be considered for existing concrete structures. In such circumstances,
the designer may need to assess the residual concrete strength and integrity to determine the required
anchor diameter, drill hole size and bonded length.
IS
The factors of safety applied to brackets and anchors are based on the general structural design codes
and standards used for the supporting structure which typically are 1.5 (according to Eurocode) or 1.67
T
(according to ASTM).
AF
All fixings should be protected against corrosion using stainless steel or galvanized anchors.
8.3 Low Friction Facing Design

R
Friction has a large influence on the design of a fender system, particularly for the restraint chains. Low
D
friction facing materials are often used to reduce friction. Vessels moving longitudinally or vertically on
a berth induce friction forces at the contact surface between the fender system and the hull.
These forces induce shear deformations in the fender and should be kept within the fender design limits.
Large shear deflections should be limited by chains connecting appropriate parts of the fender to the
supporting structure. Shear forces should be calculated using the relevant coefficient of friction,
multiplied by the normal force at the fender face.
Facings can be manufactured from several different materials including Ultra-High Molecular Weight
Polyethylene (UHMW-PE), steel, timber, and rubber. The use of UHMW-PE is common due to its

inherently low coefficient of friction. Other materials, such as polyurethanes that are typically used for
the skin of foam fenders, also have lower friction coefficients than rubber against steel or concrete.
The designer must select the correct material considering the vessel hull material (e.g., steel), the
vessel geometry, potential berthing impact and wear allowance, vessel movement on the berth and
frequency of use. The low friction facing should be durable, replaceable and be designed to prevent
damage to the vessel hull and paintwork.
The coefficient of friction for each facing material varies considerably. In the absence of specific design
information, the coefficients of friction provided in Table 8-2 may be used. A higher design value is
recommended to be adopted to account for factors such as surface roughness, temperature, wet or dry
LY
conditions and the contact pressure which can affect the friction coefficient.
Table 8-2: Typical design values of coefficients of friction
N
Friction Coefficient
()
O
Materials
(Fender system facing against vessel hull) Typical
TS
Design
Range
Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMW-PE) (wet) Steel (wet) 0.1 - 0.15  0.3
EN
Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMW-PE) (dry) Steel (dry) 0.15 - 0.2  0.3
M
High Density Polyethylene (HD-PE) M Steel 0.2 - 0.25  0.3
Polyurethane Steel 0.3 - 0.4  0.4

O
 0.5
C
Steel Steel 0.3 - 0.5
 0.6
R
Timber Steel 0.3 - 0.6

FO
Concrete Steel 0.4 - 0.65  0.7
Rubber Steel 0.6 - 0.7  0.7

ED
8.3.1 Low Friction/ Resin Facings

SU
One of the more commonly adopted facing systems is low friction facing panels, manufactured using
UHMW-PE. Large UHMW-PE sheets are cut to size, drilled, and chamfered to create individual sections
which are fixed to the fender panel. These can be attached to steel fender panels using welded studs,
IS
bolts or low-profile fixings.

The design of the low friction facing should take into consideration the type and size of fixing and include
T
a wear allowance. The following should be considered for low friction facing design:
AF
• Minimum thickness of 30mm thick. The thickness requirements should be assessed on a case-
by-case basis accounting for level of expected use.
• Low friction facings should be designed to facilitate easy replacement.
R
• If access to enable facing replacement is difficult, then an extra wear allowance may be useful
D
to reduce maintenance and replacement intervals.

• Vessels with belting can be particularly damaging to low friction facing panels and may not be
the optimum solution in such cases.
• Typically, the coefficient of friction between a vessel and the low friction facing is between 0.15
and 0.2. However, for the purposes of design, it is not recommended to use a coefficient of
friction less than 0.3 to account for contact pressure, facing deterioration and temperature
variations and to allow for wear during the design service life.

8.3.2 Steel Facing
Where a high frequency of berthing takes place, such as Ro-Ro ferry ports, steel can be adopted as a
robust and durable fender facing. High friction forces can occur between the vessel's hull and the fender
face, which can be beneficial when vessels are berthing in reducing vessel approach velocity. However,
these forces must be accommodated within the fender system design.
Consideration should be given to the potential effects of bimetallic corrosion when using a steel facing
in combination with the fender system. Consideration should also be given to the possibility of sparks
arising from steel-to-steel contact when designing crude oil, chemical products, and gas terminals, if a
steel facing is adopted.
LY
8.3.3 Fixation
N
Low friction facing pads are attached in various ways according to the type and structure of the fender
panel. Studs or bolts with blind nuts are commonly used for closed box panels. Standard nuts are used
O
for open panels and structures. Flange nut fixings can provide a greater wear allowance.
Larger washers, typically 2.2 and 2.5 times the bolt diameter, are required to spread the loads due to
TS
friction and prevent pull through. The minimum thickness of the low friction facing under the head of the
washer is recommended to 30% of the overall low friction pad thickness.
EN
To provide greater wear allowance, the heads of the fixings should be set as low as possible from the
surface of the facing. The top face of the studs or bolts should be minimum 10mm to 20mm below the
surface of the facing. Typical fixing arrangement is shown in Figure 8-8.
M
M
O
C
R
Figure 8-8: Typical facing connection details.

FO
When fender panels are fabricated as closed box structures, the bolts must be secured with a watertight
threaded blind boss. If the threaded stainless-steel bolt shaft to the blind boss fixture is used, anti-galling
compounds should be used. To prevent contact with dissimilar metals, proprietary PTFE washers can
ED
also be considered.
Extreme shear forces or protrusions in the vessel hull have the potential to displace the UHMW-PE
pads. For those cases, adding a shear key in the panel design will help to prevent this problem.
SU
8.4 Parallel Motion Fender Systems

IS
A parallel motion fender system is a specialist fender system. The selection and design of such fender
systems should be carried out in consultation with fender manufacturers experienced in their design
and manufacture.
T
AF
Parallel motion fender systems are typically considered for selection when the supporting structure is
load sensitive. They can reduce berthing reaction forces by up to 60%, when compared with
conventional buckling fender system designs. However, a wide range of factors must also be
R
considered in the fender selection process, refer to Section 6.

D
The parallel motion fender system geometry and function ensures that the panel always remains
vertical, enabling a range of different vessels and water levels to be accommodated. A vertical berthing
face also avoids the potential risk of double fender panel contact with the vessel hull. Parallel motion
fender systems can also accommodate large berthing approach angles, up to 20°, with minimal loss in
the energy absorption capacity.
The energy absorption capability of the parallel motion fender system can be increased by utilising
back-to-back fenders. This results in an increase in the available compression distance and energy
absorption, whilst also reducing the corresponding reaction forces. A reduction in the imposed reaction
forces can result in lower forces needing to be accommodated by the supporting structure.

As parallel motion fenders are primarily pre-assembled at a fabrication facility, installation on site can
be simple and quick. However, the designer will need to consider provisions for the installation
requirements and the future maintenance of the parallel motion system, i.e., crane access for installation
and removal of components for inspection.
A parallel motion fender system typically consists of the following components; however, this may vary
depending on the project requirements.
• Rubber fender units – can also be mounted in pairs in a back-to-back configuration.
• Closed box panel (frame) – typically fully sealed and pressure tested and including chamfered or
bevelled edges to prevent snagging of mooring lines or vessel protrusions.
LY
• Torsion tube and arm assembly – also typically consisting of a closed-box construction. The tube
and arms keep the panel vertical at whatever level the berthing load is applied.
N
• Hinge units – these typically consist of stainless-steel pins and bearings allowing free rotation to
O
accommodate berthing angles and allowing compression of the fender system.
• Low friction facing – typically provided to reduce large friction forces being induced into the system.
TS
The design may also need to consider the provision of ‘check chains’ to act as rope deflectors to prevent
ropes from becoming snagged around the parallel motion system.
EN
8.5 Fender Interfaces with the mooring lines
M
When not taken into account mooring lines can damage fenders in various ways and fenders can
damage the mooring lines:
M
1. A line should never get stuck under a fender, if that risk is prone during berthing, a quick release
hook should be used instead of a bollard. The hook can then be opened to safe the fender. This
O
especially can occur with sinking steel wires, or large tidal differences;
C
2. During departure lines that are released should never be caught buy the panel or chains. The risk
of damaging the system is high if that happens. The issue should be solved by the fender designer,
R
not in procedures, but it is a local situation;

FO
3. Mooring lines are not allowed to get stuck between fender (panel) and the ship hull. That contact
will damage the mooring line and will lead to mooring line failure, either in this port or the next.
8.6 Whole Life Considerations

ED
Whole life consideration in the design of fender systems is very important. Designers and operators
should consider the whole life of a fender system prior to committing to the chosen fender system.
SU
By its very nature, any fender system will sustain impact from vessels, and thus the general philosophy
of fender system design is to ensure that the fender system is good for purpose, robust and can be
repaired or replaced easily. A reasonable life expectancy as defined in section 4.5 if planned
IS
maintenance, in accordance with the manufacturer’s requirements, is undertaken. For more information
about maintenance review section 11.3.
T
Fender system components design should consider where possible, advances in vessel design. In
AF
recent years, advances in naval architecture have produced differing hulls shapes from the classic
vessel shape.
R
The provision of spares for fender systems should be considered when procuring new or replacement
fender systems, to enable quick replacement in the event of damage or deterioration.
D
8.7 Corrosion of Fender Components

All metals suffer from some form of corrosion in a maritime environment. This is mainly due to the
following:
− Formation of Galvanic Cells
− Microbial Action inducing Galvanic Cells
− Erosion of Products of Corrosion
− Inadequate Preventative Maintenance

Consideration should be given to the influence of corrosion on the design of fenders and their
accessories. Unprotected steel will begin to reduce in thickness immediately after it is installed. The
onset of corrosion may be delayed by an appropriate paint system, suitably maintained. A sacrificial
steel thickness could also be included within the design to accommodate expected rate of corrosion.
Corrosion rates will vary according to local conditions and the position of the fender in the inter-tidal
zone. Corrosion rates may also be significantly higher in hotter climates.
The effect of corrosion on fender integrity and the inclusion of safety factors will also depend upon
whether the steel is exposed on both faces, or just one face.
In the case of restraint chains and bolts, loss of diameter affects the sectional area with very rapid loss
LY
of strength occurring once corrosion begins. This type of corrosion often requires periodic inspection
and replacement, which is considered more economic rather than using excessively large chain link
sizes to maintain minimum safety factors throughout the full fender system life.
N
O
8.8 Marine Growth
Marine growth can hide or even cause maintenance issues. In areas prone to heavy marine growth and
TS
strong currents or tides, marine growth can increase drag forces or substantially increase the weight of
the fender system.
EN
Special attention should be given to reducing the number of bolts below water as far as possible since
when covered by marine growth they could be difficult to find and replaced if necessary.
M
8.9 Design of Fenders Components in Ice Conditions
M
The potential for ice accumulation and the effects of ice on the berthing and mooring of vessels should
be considered when designing new or replacement fender systems.
O
In regions prone to the formation of ice, there is the potential for fenders to become frozen within the
C
ice. Subsequent changes in water level can add additional loads to the fender system, including the
supporting chains and anchors. Special consideration should be given to floating fenders which have a
fixed lower position in relation to the tide.
R
The accumulation of ice on and around the fender system can also increase the ‘self-weight’ of the
FO
fender, leading to additional vertical forces that must be accommodated by the fender and support
chains.
Strong currents and/or wind combined with ice formation presents a significant issue for fender design
ED
in the form of drifting ice. The fender panel can be exposed to excessive wear and tear. The low friction
facing panels may need more frequent replacement to maintain the design coefficient of friction.
SU
The longitudinal forces from the ice can be significant and greater than the potential longitudinal friction
forces from a berthing vessel. These forces need to be considered in the design of the fender system
and subsequently the supporting structure.
IS
Spring and drifting ice flows can also induce large forces on the fender system fixings, which can result
in the breaking of chains and, in worst cases, the removal of the fender from the support structure. The
risk of damage caused by drifting ice is increased with the use of larger fender panels.
T
AF
In areas subject to drifting ice, a closed box panel is recommended to reduce the possibility of ice
accumulation. Consideration should be given to the paint system applied to the steel panel as it should
be suitable for use in ice conditions.
R
D

9 MANUFACTURING OF FENDER SYSTEMS
Fender System on a whole is medium of absorption of kinetic energy from vessels made up of a complex
mechanism of different materials and components.
Fender systems typically include the following components:
• Rubber element to absorb energy;
• Steel frontal panel to distribute loads and hull pressure;
• Low friction facing pads to reduce friction and abrasion effects;
• Accessories like chains are required to improve the performance of the system working under
LY
forces coming from different sources and directions; and
• Anchors, to fix the fender and the chain brackets and transfer the loads into the structure.
N
This chapter covers the general manufacturing process of a fender system on a whole which will give
designers basic understanding of each element.
O
9.1 Manufacturer Qualifications
TS
Manufacturers shall demonstrate an acceptable level of experience with materials in the manufacture
of a marine fenders and associated accessories of a fendering system. Manufacturers shall possess
EN
adequate test data of all materials when requested and to reliably be able to predict and verify product
performance within the allowable tolerances.
Published performance in manufacturers catalogues shall include capabilities for fender range based
M
on a proven track record of performance testing that they have carried out on their fenders. This shall
include, but not limited to: M
• Energy Absorption
O
• Reaction force
• Hull pressure
C
• Material properties
• Durability and longevity of materials
R
FO
9.1.1 Quality Control by Manufacturer

Manufacturer shall have an Inspection Test Plan (ITP) in place to ensure that fenders are produced
within reasonable and industry accepted limits.
ED
The following verification shall be included as part of the ITP and be carried out on every fender for a
given project to make sure they are manufactured with an acceptable quality. Within the ITP the
following items shall be addressed:
SU
• Materials
• Manufacturing
•
IS
Process control
• Dimensional control
• Finishing
T
• Final inspection
AF
• Testing
Manufacturers shall provide physical properties of the compound certificates for the fender production
(Refer to Chapter 10: Testing of fenders).
R
D
9.1.2 Workforce Qualification

The fabrication unit must be ISO 9001 certified. The workmanship must be of the highest quality during
all phases of the work, skilled workforce shall be deployed and must be qualified enough to tackle
relevant standards and type of work. The WPS and PQR procedures must be conducted as per relevant
standards and only qualified welders must be deployed on work.
The fabricator should adopt good practices and procedures to minimize the repair works and proper
standard operating procedures (SOPs) should be followed. Only calibrated measuring instruments must
be used, and certificates must be readily available for verification purposes.

9.1.3 Storage of Produced Fender (elements)
The final product should be stored in a shaded area and must be covered using packing material to
avoid any sort of coating damage. The storage area must be free of hazards and unwanted vehicle
movements. Make sure that all threaded parts are protected in order to avoid thread damage while
handling.
9.2 Rubber Fender Compound

Rubber Fender compounds consist of a set of ingredients which form the compound composition of the
material. The addition of various ingredients to polymer (Natural or/and Synthetic rubber) in order to
LY
impart desirable properties is known as rubber compounding. Typical ingredients include reinforcing
fillers, anti-oxidants and -ozonants, process aids, vulcanizing agents, and many special additives in a
small quantity. The ratio of these ingredients varies between fender manufacturers and it depends on
N
the fender size, shape, and required performance. Therefore, it is important for a designer to understand
O
the basics of fender manufacturing and use of materials for manufacturing.
The energy absorption and reaction force characteristics of a marine rubber fender is governed by the
TS
geometry, size and hardness grade.
Elastomers (natural and synthetic rubber) are polymers to which various ingredients are added to create
a mixture known as a rubber compound, they set the basic boundaries for properties of the rubber
EN
fenders.
After vulcanization, rubber compounds become elastic and rubbery, they also dissipate energy because
M
of their viscoelastic nature. Their strength is high even when the fender is under shear and compressive
deformations. M
Manufacturers are continuously innovating their compounds by introducing new materials in their
O
compounds for better performance, processability and durability.
The following sub-sections describes key ingredients of rubber compound used in the manufacturing of
C
rubber fenders.
R
9.2.1 Natural Rubber (NR)

FO
Raw natural rubber is found in the extract of many plants (shrubs, vines, and trees), the principal of
which is the Hevea Brasiliensis tree, native to Brazil. Typically, natural rubber is cultivated in an area of
15° North and South of the equator, with Southeast Asia being the main producer worldwide. After the
ED
latex is processed, natural rubber becomes an elastomer with excellent mechanical properties. The
weak points are weather resistance and aging comparing with some synthetic rubbers.
Compound with natural rubber has a typical service temperature range between -55°C and 70°C.
SU
9.2.2 Synthetic Rubber (SR)

IS
Synthetic rubber is any artificial elastomer which are polymers synthesized from petroleum byproducts.
Synthetic rubber commonly used by manufactures are Styrene-butadiene rubber and butadiene rubber.
T
Synthetic Rubber is frequently used for rubber compounds. Styrene-Butadiene rubber (SBR) is a type
of synthetic rubber commonly used in the fender industry. SBR has a good aging resistance and tear
AF
resistance however, general mechanical properties are not as good as Natural rubber. SBR has a
typical service temperature range between -45°C and 100°C.
R
Manufacturers can also use Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer (EPDM), an alternate type of synthetic
rubber. This elastomer is characterized by a wide range of high-temperature applications. EPDM rubber
D
has outstanding resistance to aging, weathering, ozone, oxygen and many chemicals. The weak points
are poor adhesiveness and tear resistance.
9.2.3 Recycled Rubber

Recycled rubber used in fender industry are mainly two types: rubber crumb and reclaim (devulcanized)
rubber.
Crumb rubber is produced by grinding the waste rubber goods. The major methods for manufacturing
crumbs from vulcanized waste are grinding, cryogenic grinding, and wet grinding.

Manufacturing of reclaim rubber is an aggressive, energy-intensive system in which rubber powder is
cooked with certain corrosive chemicals under pressure. This process breaks long molecules into
shorter ones and the result is often a kind of soft, rubber-like material.
Designers must recogni e that recycled materials don’t have the mechanical properties which are
needed to produce high-quality, durable fenders. The use of recycled/reclaimed material in present
(2023) day with current technology will result in the production of low-quality fender.
Recycled rubber, blended with virgin rubber, has various performance disadvantages. These
disadvantages can include higher hysteresis and heat build-up, poorer flex and weather resistance,
greater risk of cracking and poor compression set as well reduced durability and life cycle of the fender.
LY
There is no easy way to find the quantity of the recycled rubber used in a rubber compound. Recycled
rubber in a rubber compound usually reduces most of the physical properties (refer chapter 10)
especially after ageing.
N
O
9.2.4 Fillers
Fillers are used as reinforcement to improve properties of all rubbers. They are not only used to enhance
TS
the physical properties of rubber compounds, but to improve the processing properties and impart UV
resistance. The level of reinforcement of fillers is defined by particle size, structure and surface activity.
The smaller the particle size, the higher surface area is achieved which potentially makes the fender
EN
much harder.
The most common filler in the fender industry is Carbon Black, but there are also other active and non-
M
active mineral fillers, that are required to produce marine rubber fenders. The activity grade of mineral
fillers is determined by the surface area (the higher, the more active the filler).
M
For coloured compounds, white active fillers like Silica are used in the mix for white or navy grey
compounds. These fenders shall comply with the same rigorous testing standards as black fenders.
O
C
9.2.5 Anti-aging Agents

Antioxidants help protect the compound from thermal aging while in use and while the compound is
R
being mixed and processed. These ingredients absorb free radicals that can break the polymers’ bonds
FO
and reduce the service life of a fender.

The most common antiozonant is wax, used to bloom out on the surface after moulding to protect the
rubber from ozone attack, oxygen, ozone, UV and other natural elements.
ED
9.2.6 Oil (Processing Aids)

Oil is included in a formula to help incorporate all the dry ingredients with the rubber blend while mixing
SU
in a rubber mixer. They also help to reduce the viscosity of the overall compound to help with the
moulding process.
It is important to understand that fillers and oil ratio controls the stiffness and hardness of the rubber
IS
compounds which influences the different energy absorption grades of rubber fenders.
T
9.2.7 Accelerators and Sulphur

AF
Accelerator, in the rubber industry is a substance that cause vulcanization of rubber to occur more
rapidly at lower temperatures. Many classes of compounds act as accelerators, the most important
being organic materials containing sulphur and nitrogen.
R
Sulphur-based chemicals are used for rubber vulcanization. Mineral sulphur is a widely used ingredient
D
to form cross-links between the rubber chains in the vulcanization process.

Vulcanization of rubber involves heating it in the presence of sulphur. This results in cross-linking of the
chains of rubber and sulphur to form a stable polymer which is stronger and more stable.
9.2.8 Other Ingredients

Many other ingredients including plasticisers are used in a small quantity to impart different properties,
colour and facilitate the mixing and manufacturing processes. These ingredients often influence the
rubber fender properties and sometimes are used to drive the cost of manufacturing down.

9.3 Manufacturing Process or Rubber Fenders
The manufacturing process of a marine fender starts with a rubber formulation, in which ingredients
suitable for the intended application and its percentage expressed in PHR (parts per hundred parts of
rubber) are selected.
The final product is produced and supplied following the various steps described below which follow
after the compounding process (Mixing of ingredients with polymer):
Mixing of Key Ingredients to obtain Finishing

rubber compound
LY
N
O
Preparation of inserted steel plates Curing
(applicable to moulding only)
TS
EN
1. The building of the fender body Dimensional Check
(Mould Filling)
• Compression moulding
M
• Injection moulding
2. Wrapping
3. Extruding
M Testing/Quality Assurance
O
Break-In Cycle
C
Figure 9-1: Manufacturing of Rubber Fender

R
9.3.1 Mixing of the Compound

FO
The mixing of ingredients is done in several stages in internal mixers. Special attention must be given
to the sequence of ingredient addition and the subsequent mixing times.
In a first stage, masticated natural rubber (NR) is mixed with synthetic rubbers (SRs) to create a uniform
ED
rubber blend. In a second stage, reinforcing fillers (Carbon Black and others) and other ingredients are
added to the rubber blend for the next mixing sequence. Filler dispersion commonly measured by a
carbon black dispersion in the final compound has a large impact on the quality and fender performance.
SU
A high dispersion rating is preferred for a good rubber compound. Poor dispersion can result in
reduction of fatigue life, poor performance and product appearance. On the other hands, over mixing
with high temperature degrades the rubber quality by destroying polymer chains. Manufacturers
IS
sometimes combine several mixers to create the optimum performance.

Compounds with different modulus or stiffness (slope of stress vs. strain curve) values are used to
T
manufacture fenders with different energy absorption grades. Soft grade fenders need compounds with
AF
lower modulus compounds, whereas hard grade fenders need high modulus compounds.
9.3.2 Moulding, Extruding and Wrapping

R
Most rubber fenders are produced by a process called vulcanisation using heat and pressure. The main
D
difference in this production process is the method of building of fender body.

Traditionally, steel moulds are used and filled manually with un-vulcanised rubber sheets or blocks.
This is still practiced today by some fender and manufacturers. The advantage of this method is that
the different materials can be included into the mould, such as locating the antiaging material at the
surface of product and high modulus material at the center of body. The disadvantage is that some
manufacturers could end up using a high-quality rubber on for the outside face just to demonstrate
compliance with their TGA testing and various other tests but could potentially end up with lower quality
rubber on the inside with the intention to reduce cost. After filling the moulds, the final shape is

completed using a compression press at a high temperature or by putting the moulds into autoclave
(heat oven with pressure) for vulcanisation.
The other method is high pressure injection moulding, where soft rubber is pumped into the mould. The
advantage of this method is that the rubber is already heated when it is injected in moulds therefore the
curing time can be significantly reduced but manufacturers cannot utilize different quality rubber
compound inside the fender as due to the manufacturing method. This method however requires high
skill labour as there are stringent control in temperature requirements, pressure and proper pumping
speed to ensure a good quality product is produced. The mould filled with injected rubber is compressed
by a heating press or by putting into an autoclave or heated by itself with hot steam passage or electric
heater equipped located inside the mould casing itself which are called jacket moulds.
LY
Fenders such as D fenders and other small longitudinal fenders, are typically produced by extrusion.
Rubber compound is fed into an extruder, that is heating up and being softened then pushed by an
N
internal screw through the mouthpiece of the extruder, the die, which forms the section profile in the
corresponding shape. This is followed by the vulcanizing process in an autoclave. Extruding is an
O
effective production method which does not require steel mold. Generally extruded products do not
have steel plates embedded in their flanges.
TS
Straight axisymmetric shape can be made by a wrapping method. Mandrel wrapping is the process by
which uncured rubber sheets are wrapped on a pipe mandrel until the required outer diameter and
EN
desired shape is reached. Cylindrical fenders and the main body of cell fender are often produced using
the wrapping process.
The combination of above methods is also possible. For instance, wrapping the hot extruded rubber
M
around mandrel is a good improvement to reduce vulcanisation time. Thus, note that manufacturers are
always trying to improve the quality and productivity, so manufacturing method is changing over time.
M
9.3.3 Curing / Vulcanising of the Rubber Element
O
Curing/vulcanization is a process that is virtually connected to the forming process as a final step of
C
rubber fender manufacturing and influences the properties of the rubber fender. For vulcanisation, sulfur
is the most common curative for rubber compounds. Rubber polymers are just entangled hydrocarbon
R
chains that will not hold shape and external forces. Rubber polymer chains are bonded together side
by side by heating rubber with sulfur under pressure, called vulcanisation, to form sulfur bridges
FO
between molecules.
The rate of reaction between rubber and sulfur is a slow process and commercially unviable. Therefore,
accelerators are used in a formulation to increase the speed of the curing reaction.
ED
9.4 Fabrication of Steel Panels

SU
Steel Panels are critical to the performance of most of the fender systems. The following key points
summarize the purpose of the steel panel, and should be considered when designing, specifying and
manufacturing steel fender panels:
IS
• Withstand the load combination transmitted by the vessels during the berthing approach and
mooring.
T
• Provide a suitable supporting surface, located at the correct levels, considering tide variations,
weather variations, operational variations, vessel dimensions, load conditions and fender level, able
AF
to efficiently transmit the loads into the deflecting rubber unit, allowing vessel energy absorption.
• Distribute the reaction force into the hull of the vessel, below the maximum allowed limit.
R
• Give a service life of a minimum of 20 years assuming adequate and planned maintenance,
provided there is no damage caused by accidental situations.
D
9.4.1 Panel Internal Structure

A typical fender panel cross-section includes several vertical and horizontal stiffeners, usually channels
or T-sections fabricated from steel plates. The external plate thickness, size, and type of stiffeners will
depend on many factors.
There are many demands on the fender panel which causes bending, shear, torsion, crushing and
fatigue. Section 8.1 of these guidelines provides a good insight into panel structural design. Panel
structural design should be carried out by manufacturer/suppliers team of experts in advanced structural

analysis in compliance with international, national and local design codes, in order to justify the design
of the external plate number, thicknesses, size, type of stiffeners and welding connections.
In general steel panel structures are closed-box type construction, which is a high strength to weight
ratio and creates a simple exterior shape that is easier to paint and maintain. The inside of the panel is
protected against corrosion since is fully sealed and pressure tested.
LY
N
O
Figure 9-2: Typical fender panel cross section samples, showing U profile in the left side and T-profiles in the
right side.
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
Figure 9-3: Typical fender frontal, back and internal panel structure views
T
9.4.2 Material
AF
Fender panels are made from weldable structural steel. The grade shall be selected depending on
design, local conditions and availability.
R
The steel used shall only be structural and in accordance with the relevant standards and shall be free
of scale, blisters, laminations or any sort of defects.
D
All the welding work must be in accordance with the approved specifications, drawings and standards.
9.4.3 Protection Against Corrosion for Steel Panels

All metals suffer more from corrosion in a maritime environment than onshore. This is mainly due to the
formation of galvanic cells within the metals of the structures acting as anodes and cathodes and the
solution of salts in seawater acting as the electrolyte or microbial action inducing galvanic cells.

Corrosion rates will vary according to local conditions and the position of the fender in the intertidal zone
and may be significantly higher in hotter climates.
9.4.3.1 Paint coatings
Coating systems are the main way for corrosion protection for the steel panels. Typically ISO 12944
should be followed as a minimum standard. For the longest service life in seawater, splash zones and
inter-tidal locations, the minimum requirements of corrosivity category C5 with durability vh (expected
service life of 20 years, vh=very high durability acc. to ISO12944-5), have to be followed alongside with
proper inspection and preventive maintenance.
To ensure maximum performance of a paint system, the majority of the coats of the system or, if
LY
possible, the complete system, should be applied in the workshop/factory. After completion of
installation on site, any damage shall be repaired. It is essential that the paint system is suitably
maintained according to paint manufacturers recommendations.
N
9.4.3.2 Sacrificial anodes
O
Waterproof closed-box type panels coated with high durability paints designed for very high corrosion
environments have proven a very efficient way to protect against corrosion over the years in many
TS
marine installations and can be considered enough protection in the majority of the cases and in the
majority of cases sacrificial anodes are not required. For some special cases which should be
EN
determined by the designers, where the fenders are located in places under very severe and extreme
corrosion conditions the addition of zinc anodes to the external plates of the steel panels could be a
good option to reduce the corrosion deterioration when the steel parts are submerged in water, they
M
provide a large zinc reservoir so they can protect steel. It is important that the anode is permanently
immersed to avoid built up of an oxide surface layer which prevents the anode from working.
9.4.3.3 Impressed current
M
O
Corrosion protection of some steel berthing structures is achieved by Impressed Current Cathodic
Protection (ICCP), a system that prevents corrosion by applying an electric current to the steel
C
structures, converting these from active to passive sites. It is possible to include the fender panels into
the system, by providing electrical bonding between the panels and the ICCP system.
R
In such a case, all fender’s design parameters must be communicated to the ICCP designer ahead of
FO
the full system development.
9.5 Fabrication of UHMW-PE Low Friction Facing

ED
UHMW-PE face pads shall be installed to cover the entire face of the panel (including the face of all the
chamfers). They are intended to create a smooth sacrificial rubbing surface designed to limit frictional
forces on the fender and the panel. The pads shall be installed to cover the entire face of the steel
SU
frontal panel to minimize surface friction when the frontal panel comes in contact with the vessel hull.
Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMW-PE) is synthesized from its monomer ethylene, which
is bonded together to form the base polyethylene product. Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene
IS
(UHMW-PE) is an engineering thermoplastic with a molecular weight of greater than 3 million g/mol.
The high molecular weight enhances a number of important physical properties, including abrasion
T
resistance, high impact strength and a low coefficient of friction.

AF
Specifications and/or drawings must define low friction facing colour. The colorants are blended into the
raw resin material so the entire thickness of the pad is coloured.
UHMW-PE low friction facing pads are manufactured by compression moulding, heat and hydraulic
R
pressure are used to fuse the polymer powder inside a mould between large platens. Then the UHMW-
D
PE is machined in order to adjust shape, edges and holes to the dimensional specifications.
9.6 Fabrication of Accessories

High-quality chains, accessories, compatible fixings, pad eyes, and anchors must ensure the correct
support and load distribution on the fender system. There is a wide range of materials suitable for fender
applications but these must be tested and certified.

The correct fabrication of fender accessories is critical and important for better performance and
durability of the fender system, therefore it is necessary to specify adequate details in the specification
and drawings.
9.6.1 Chains
Chains are used to protect the fender rubber unit from extreme tension and shear loads, they control
the geometry of the fender during impacts and prevent excessive panel movements. It prevents
excessive movement of a panel in vertical and horizontal directions.
The chain size will be fabricated according to the required Minimum Breaking Load of the chain.
LY
Minimum Breaking Load determines the different dimensions of the chain: diameter, inside link length,
inside link width and outside link width, as well as chain link length (typically 4D or 5D will be used) and
chain capacity.
N
The total number of links determines the overall chain length and that is determined by the fender
O
system design and dimensions, including rubber unit size, panel geometry, chain anchor position.
Chains typically work in combination with shackles, which are typically of two types: D-type or Bow-
TS
type.
For weight and shear chains a tensioner may be added as an option to support keeping the chain tight.
EN
In the case that tensioner is not available, chain length adjustment may be done by adding/removing
chain links on site.
M
9.6.2 Anchors and Accessories
Fender elements and chain brackets are fixed on concrete structures by means of steel anchors.
M
These can be either cast-in or post-fixed; whenever possible, preference should be given to cast-in
O
anchors as this minimizes the risk of installation-related quality issues and saves human efforts and
time.
C
The anchors should be manufactured as per the prevailing project standards. When these are not
R
specified, internationally recognized standard.

FO
Anchors are to be manufactured based on the design load supported by chain.

The anchor’s mechanical properties are directly impacted by the material durability.
Although stainless steel fixings may be recommended/specified in corrosive environments, there is no
ED
need for full cast-in assemblies to be made of the same steel grade. Stainless steel sockets may, for
example, be used in combination with carbon steel anchors. Although no galvanic corrosion would occur
in the absence of an electrolyte.
SU
9.6.3 Protection Against Corrosion for Accessories

IS
9.6.3.1 Galvanizing
Chains assemblies components, anchors and chain brackets are usually galvanized. This method
provides good corrosion protection for chains and other steel accessories.
T
AF
There are various processes to apply the zinc layer, depending on the element thickness and the
coating thickness to be achieved. the method used for fender components is typically the Hot Dip
Galvanizing, where the elements to be galvanized are immersed in a bath of molten zinc, allowing for
R
a nominal zinc layer of about 80µm (for element thicknesses >6mm). ISO 1461, ASTM A153, ASTM
A123 are the commonly followed international standards for hot-dip galvanization. Hot dip galvanization
D
is not an applicable option for steel panel structures since technically it is not possible to manufacture
hot-dip galvanized closed box steel panels.
Paint can be applied to hot-dip-galvanized surfaces. ISO EN 12944-5: shall be followed for DFT (dry
film thickness) recommendations.

9.6.3.2 Use of stainless-steel components
In highly corrosive environments, some fender elements such as anchors or fixings may be specified
to be in stainless steel. Stainless steel grade should be specified. Add more info. minimum grade 316
(equivalent ISO)
Since stainless stell load capacity is limited compared with other steel types, it is not recommended the
use of stainless steel for chains or U-anchors.
Awareness should be put in the galvanic corrosion which occurs when a stainless steel material is in
direct contact with galvanized material.
LY
9.7 Pneumatic Fenders
Pneumatic fenders shall consist of a cylindrical air bag with hemispherical heads at both ends, which
N
shall be filled with compressed air that absorbs the energy of the berthing vessel.
O
The basic body construction of this fender shall consist of an outer rubber layer, synthetic-tyre-cord
layer for reinforcement layer, and an inner rubber layer.
TS
The outer rubber shall protect the cord layers and inner rubber from abrasion and other external forces.
This rubber compounds shall have enough tensile and tear strength and the fenders should be built
with rubbers and metal components to provide a long lifespan. The reinforcement synthetic-tyre-cord
EN
layers shall be strong enough to hold the internal pressure in both compressed and non-compressed
situations.
M
These layers are vulcanized together to ensure bonding between layers of dissimilar characteristics.
For more details on minimum material requirements for pneumatic fenders, refer to relevant ISO 17357-
M
1-2014 standard.
O
9.8 Foam Fenders
C
There are generally three primary configurations or types of foam fenders:

•
R
Cylindrical mid-body and conical shaped ends terminating in a swivel end fitting on the
cylinder/conical centreline at each end.
FO
• Cylindrical mid body and hemispherical shaped ends and typically comes with chain/tire nets
as a protection/wear element and to facilitate attachment via flange (clevis) plates which are
part of the net.
• Circular or donut type fender with bearing pads which houses an energy absorbing foam
ED
annulus covered with a composite reinforced elastomer skin.

Foam filled fenders are constructed with a resilient, energy absorbing closed cell foam core. The core
SU
can be constructed of laminated layers to create a virtually solid core. This core is covered by a
composite skin of elastomer and flexible reinforcement. The purpose of the skin is to contain and to
protect the energy absorbing material. This surface should allow for the anticipated level of wear during
IS
the design life of the fender.

Skin thickness, reinforcement layer and the density of the foam determines the performance and the
T
durability of foam fenders. The skin is necessarily reinforced to ensure this function is performed
reliably.
AF
Depending on the foam filled fender design, features such as integral end swivels, attachment points,
chain/tire nets bearing materials may be included.
R
D

10 TEST PROCEDURES OF MARINE FENDERS
The main purpose of this chapter is to present the various recommended testing procedures for
establishing performance, verifying material quality and performance reporting of wrapped, moulded
/extruded (except fenders mounted on Tugboats) rubber, Pneumatic, Foam-filled marine fenders (refer
chapter 1). The testing protocol remains exclusive to its purpose of ensuring that engineering data being
reported in manufacturers’ catalogues, verifying fender performance and durability are based upon the
common testing procedures followed across the industry.
10.1 Classification of rubber fender testing:
LY
The testing of rubber is classified into three types:
Table 10-1: Fender testing scheme
N
Type of Definition Types of testing Extent of Testing conducted
O
testing disclosure by
TS
Fundament Testing of fenders - Base performance (see section 10.2) By the Manufacturers or
al testing and material to - Creation of Velocity Factor (VF), manufactu third-party agents
create data for Temperature factor (TF), Angle factor (AF) rer on the engaged by the
EN
publication in the (see section 10.7.3-5) manuals manufacturer.
catalogue for a - Durability test (see section 10.6) /brochure
new product or - Chemical composition /TGA (see section s All tests are
enhancement of 10.7.2) of rubber compound of the grades /websites mandatory
M
features and /or published in the catalogue
improvement of - Physical properties of vulcanised rubber
M
performance of compound (see section 10.7.1)
the existing - TGA of sample fenders tally with rubber
O
products. compound and samples for physical
properties (see section 10.7.2)
C
Type Fundamental - Base performance (see section 10.2) Testing Testing conducted
R
approval testing witnessed - Creation of Velocity Factor (VF), data or by manufacturer

testing and verified by Temperature factor (TF), Angle factor (AF) sources of and verified by
FO
third-party party (see section 10.7.3-5) testing third-party agents

for obtaining Type - Durability test (minimum 3000 cycles) (see data for or testing
Approval section 10.6) factors to conducted in a
certificate - Chemical composition/TGA (see section be third-party testing
ED
10.7.2) of rubber compound of the grades disclosed facility.

published in the catalogue upon
- Physical properties of rubber compound request. All tests are
mandatory
SU
(see section 10.7.1)

- TGA of sample fenders tally with rubber
compound and samples for physical
properties (see section 10.7.2)
IS
Verification Testing of the Mandatory tests: To the Mandatory tests

T
testing commercial project are conducted by

fenders used for a - Verification of base performance (see manufacturer.
AF
job site to section 10.2)

determine - Physical properties of rubber compound Highly
compliance with (see section 10.7.1) recommended
R
the published tests are

Highly recommended tests: witnessed/verified
performance or
D
customer - Performance and physical properties by third-party

specified energy testing witnessed by third-party, agent
and reaction using a 3rd party testing jig or in a 3rd or
requirements party testing facility
- Chemical composition /TGA of tests are
rubber compound used for conducted in a
production (see section 10.7.2) third-party testing
- TGA analysis of samples from facility
rubber fenders
based on the
agreement

Optional tests: between
- Verification of factors (see section 10.7.3-5) manufacturer and
- Verification of durability test (see section designers/ project
10.6) specification.
- Shear- compression test (see section 10.6)
- Fatigue testing (see section 10.6)
Note:
- The above tests needed for a project
will be decided by the designers/ end
users based on the severity/risk
LY
involved at the site, type and number
of fenders used of fenders used at
the site.
-
N
Type of tests needed should be
indicated in the project/purchase
O
specifications.
- Deviation for the mandatory testing
may be accepted by the project
TS
requirement/specification.
EN
Notes on 3rd party testing provider:
• Owner or end user of a project may seek for assistance in selecting a 3rd party for verification testing. The
M
final selection will be decided by the owner or end user.
• 3rd party should be an independent and accredited service provider or an independent testing facility with
M
proven testing knowledge and industry experience. .
• 3rd party testing facility should be adequately equipped, certified and sufficient capacity for verification
O
testing as per the recommendation of ISO 17025. Calibration of Test Apparatus shall be checked annually
by a qualified third-party organization, using instrumentation, which is traceable to a certified national
C
standard.
• Manufacturer and end users/ consultants may mutually agree to select a 3 rd party testing facility based on
R
their credentials.
• 3rd party testing equipment to be calibrated annually and verified by testing a dummy/known sample (load/
FO
reaction of similar magnitude) before each verification test at the testing location. Calibration certificates
by external agencies shall be provided to the end user as part of their QA requirements. It must be brought
along to the testing facility. The calibration needs to be performed for the single load cell and the group.
Equipment set-up needs to be agreed between manufacturer and 3rd party as this will impact the results.
ED
• Difference due to testing facilities may have impact on the test results, hence, the 3rd party should minimize
this, by using calibrated measuring equipment. The Manufacturer should build in a sufficient tolerance so
that the tested fenders will satisfy the ±10% manufacturing tolerance in a 3 rd party testing facility.
• Acceptance or re ection of the performance data should only be based on the manufacturer’s results.
SU
Should there be inconsistency between manufacturers test result and 3rd party 3rd party test results, further
investigations should be initiated to mitigate the differences.
IS
10.2 Determination of fender base performance:

Constant Velocity (CV)
T
The compression of a fender at slow constant speed and determining performance is called the
AF
Constant Velocity (CV) performance. The slow constant speed is speed of 2-8 cm/min (strain rate V0 =
0.01 to 0.3 % / s.
R
Standard compression and Base performance

D
The performance (Base reaction force (Rbase) and Base energy absorption (Ebase) tested in a standard
condition shall be called as the Base fender performance. This is the basic data published in
manufacturer's catalogue along with design factors.
Standard condition
The basic condition for the fender testing. At the following standard conditions, the characteristic
correction factors are 1.0.

Table 10-2: standard conditions where characteristic correction factors are 1.0.
Characteristic correction factors Values at Standard condition
Angular factor: Cang;c Standard angle θ0 = 0 °
Velocity factor: Cv;c Compression speed (2-8cm/min) or strain

rate V0 = 0.01 to 0.3 %/s
Temperature factor: Ct;c Standard temperature T0 = 23 °C+/-5
LY
10.3 Test Apparatus for compression test
N
a. The test apparatus shall be equipped with a calibrated load measuring device such as load cell(s)
O
or pressure transducer and linear transducer(s) or calibrated laser displacement sensor for
measuring displacement capable of providing continuous monitoring of fender performance.
b. The test apparatus shall be capable of recording and storing load-cell and transducer data at
TS
intervals of 0.0 H or smaller, where H is a fender’s normal height. The following information shall
be included, as a minimum:
EN
a. Serial number and description of test item
b. Date, time at the start and at the end of the test
c. Location of the test facility and the test apparatus ID
d. Stabilization temperature of the test specimen
M
e. Test ambient temperature
M
c. For fender tests, all equipment used to measure, and record force and deflection shall be calibrated,
and certified accurate to within ±1 (one) percent in accordance with ISO or equivalent requirements.
O
Calibration shall be performed within one year of the use of the equipment, or less if the normal
calibration interval is shorter than one year. Calibration of Test Apparatus shall be checked annually
C
by a qualified third-party organization, using instrumentation, which is traceable to a certified

national standard.
R
10.4 Supporting Protocols

FO
10.4.1 Break-In compression cycle

The reaction force of the 1st compression cycle is unpredictable and deviates from the catalogue value.
ED
Subsequent compressions bring the fender performance close to the published values. “Break-in”
compression is the 1st compression to its design deflection after the fender is manufactured.
SU
a) “Break-in” compression is mandatory for buckling type rubber elements used for fender systems
with a catalogue reaction force more than 1000 kN (100 tonnes) or to be installed on load
sensitive structures (e.g., dolphins).
IS
b) “Break-in” cycles for other fenders, if needed, should be decided, and specified by the
consultants/end users. Manufacturer should furnish load-deflection graphs for all “break-in”
compressions on demand. Temperature stabilization is not mandatory for such fenders.
T
c) Additional “break-in’ compressions are not necessary if fenders are selected randomly from all
AF
broken-in fenders prior to the verification testing.

For fenders used at low temperatures (-10°C and below) or being stored a long period of time (time
recommended by the manufacturer) , "break-in" is recommended prior to delivery.
R
D
10.4.2 Stabilizing compression cycles

Stabilizing compressions are defined as the preliminary compressions prior to the fender performance
tests to stabilize the variance of performance after manufacturing process. Testing conditions for
stabilizing compressions shall be at standard conditions. Usually, minimum number of stabilizing cycles
are two or more to ensure the difference of first peak values of reaction force between two continuous
compression is within 0-5 %. Further compressions are not allowed once the difference of continuous
compression is less than 5%.

10.4.3 Thermal stabilization
After vulcanization heat remains in the fender body. Performance of fenders varies by the internal heat
or environmental temperature. Hence, it is essential to stabilize fender temperature before conducting
performance tests.
Temperature stabilization should be carried out in a conditioning room at standard temperature (23 ±
5℃) for the days calculated by Eq. (10.1). The number of days can also be calculated by determining
the centre of the body temperature using a thermocouple, heat transfer analysis or equivalent methods.
See Appendix B.
t (days) =(12.675·LN(△T) －2.0352) · (Maximum Rubber thickness)2…………… (10.1)
LY
When the initial temperature higher than 28℃, △T= Initial temperature－28
N
When the initial temperature lower than 18℃, △T= 18－Initial temperature
O
• The days of thermal stabilization after curing shall be calculated using the curing temperature
TS
as an initial temperature.
• If the fender has been kept at the ambient temperature for a long time, the fender temperature
shall be checked and recorded for last one week and the highest or lowest temperature
EN
whichever the △T is bigger, shall be chosen as an initial temperature.
Conditioning of the fenders in the conditioning room shall be monitored by the manufacturer using a
suitable method such as video streaming, thermal data logger, etc. to prove that the fenders were stored
M
inside the conditioning room. The frequency of temperature logging is not less than three times per day
and duration should be the thermal stabilization days calculated by Equation (10.1).
M
Body surface temperature of the fenders should be measured by suitable equipment (thermocouple,
O
handheld non-contact thermometer etc.) holding it not more than 1 m distance of rubber surface. The
frequency of temperature measurement should not be less than three times per day at minimum three
C
different spots and duration should be the thermal stabilization days calculated by Equation (10.1).
R
Temperature stabilization is mandatory for all fundamental, type approval and verification testing.
FO
10.5 Performance Testing Protocol for standard compression

ED
The performance test shall be conducted at standard condition using CV testing method.
a. Prior to the performance tests, Thermal stabilization is mandatory for all compression cycles.
b. Complete Break-in compression cycle by deflecting the specimen once to its design deflection.
SU
c. Complete Stabilizing compression cycles of the break-in specimen by deflecting minimum twice
(5 mins interval should be given between two compressions).
d. Allow the specimen to ‘recover’ for a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 24 hours in the
IS
conditioning room, in the ambient temperature (23± ̊ C) or on the testing press (23 ± ̊ C).
e. Check fender temperature at various locations and ensure temperatures are within the specified
limit.
T
f. Deflect specimen again at the standard condition. This cycle shall be considered as a ‘Standard
AF
compression’ cycle. Performance values of Standard compression cycle shall be considered

as the base performance.
R
A complete test from break-in to Standard compression shall be completed within a maximum period
of 24h.
D
The reaction force of stored fenders beyond the maximum recovery time (24h) is expected to increase
(above 4th compression value but will always be below 1st compression value) depending on the grade
and type of rubber in addition to the time and temperature of the storage area. If performance of such
fenders needs to be determined, another stabilizing compression cycles should be conducted followed
by the standard compression.

Table 10-3: Additional Information for standard compression test.
Fundamental Testing Type Approval Testing Verification testing

1. Specimens for the 1. The test specimen is always a regular size fender
1. Specimens for the tests tests shall be full- 2. Steel spacer between fender and the plates may need to
shall be full-size size fenders/ scale use for certain (e.g., cone) type of fenders.
fenders/ scale down down model 3. Number of samples shall be selected according to a sample
model 2. Fenders/specimens scheme agreed between the customer and fender
2. Fenders/specimens shall be compressed manufacturer. If a specific sampling scheme has not been
shall be compressed to to the design noted, a minimum of 10% of the fender order shall be
the maximum possible deflection or more. selected randomly and tested for compliance with the
LY
deflection. The 3. Number of fenders performance.
deflection at which at for testing shall be 4. Fender compression should be stopped at the design
which the efficiency decided by the deflection. For some fenders +1% more compression
N
(E/R ratio) is maximum manufacturer. At maybe accepted to understand the trend of
is called “Design minimum, three increase/decrease of reaction force.
O
de lection” of the rubber grades and 5. A fender provides required performance for berthing, if it
fender. Base Reaction three heights meets the base (CV) energy value (- production tolerance)
force and base energy
TS
representing the without exceeding the base (CV) reaction value
absorption of the catalogue (+production tolerance) at any deflection point, where the
fenders shall be grades/heights shall compression is taken up to maximum design deflection
determined at this
EN
be selected for point.
deflection. testing for each type 6. For fenders for berthing, the reaction force values may be
3. Fundamental tests may of fender, fender higher or lower than the production tolerances between the
take 1-2 years to height and energy deflection points at which the performance is met and the
M
complete the entire test absorbing material design deflection. Fenders can be accepted based on these
protocols. Time should (rubber grades). reaction forces upon customer’s agreement.
be allowed
manufacturers,
for
M
7. For fenders for mooring, the allowable fluctuation should be
4. Interpolation of discussed and determined by the designer (See Chapter 7).
O
meanwhile, the results may be 8. Any fender within 10% of order quantity (randomly selected
manufacturer must applied for for testing) fails to meet the performance criteria, testing
C
comply with PIANC intermediate grades. needs to be extended to 20% of randomly selected fenders.
2002 protocols. 9. 100% of fenders need to be tested if any fender from 20%
R
lot fails the performance test or fenders used for load

5. Change in sensitive structures.
FO
compound/ 10. Chemical composition or TGA (Refer 10.7.2) testing of

geometry needs a rubber compound obtained from the body of the tested
new set of Type fenders shall tally with rubber compound from the
approval testing production floor and from samples for physical property
ED
testing.
11. Witness shall be allowed to observe the compression
procedure (near the testing press) without compromising on
safety. It is not recommended to view the testing procedure
SU
on a streaming device.
12. Location of the load cells of the 3rd party independent testing
jig should be discussed and finalized prior to the testing
IS
between manufacturer and 3rd party.

13. Folding marks appear on the fender inner or outer surface
during compression are acceptable unless proven to be
T
crack marks.
AF
14. Asymmetric folding of fenders during compression testing is

not expected, however, shall be accepted unless such
folding impacts performance values and durability.
R
10.6 Protocol for Durability Test

D
The purpose of this test is to impose a long-term fatigue condition to a fender in a short time span and
evaluate its longevity. The durability test consists of pre-repetitive compression, repetitive
compressions, and post-repetitive compression. The procedure is as follows:
a. Carry out Thermal stabilization of the specimen within 23± ֯ C.
o pre-repetitive compression
b. Break-in specimen by deflecting once to its designed deflection.

c. Stabilize specimen by deflecting twice to its designed deflection in the standard condition. The
reaction force of last compression is called RS2 and the energy absorption is called ES2.
d. Bring the specimen to the conditioning room (controlled at 23± ֯ C) and allow the specimen to
‘recover’ for a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 2 hours.
e. Measure the height of specimen (HS2) assigning it as the starting point of the repetitive and
post repetitive compression. Check the specimen temperature on its surface to ensure the
temperature is within 23± ֯ C.
f. Deflect the specimen repetitively to its designed deflection. The compression speed and wave
form are not stipulated but the period of one full cycle should be within 150 seconds. The
specimen generates heat during repetitive deflection, however, the specimen shall not be
cooled nor heated artificially.
LY
Combined shear- compression test: Deflect the specimen repetitively to 50% of the fender
height (less for certain fender types, like V-fenders) and simultaneously sheared at 20- 30%
N
(based on the project specification) of the fender height. These deflection percentages are
recommended values. These values may be decided by the designer based on the project
O
requirement.
g. Bring the specimen to the conditioning room (controlled at 23± ֯ C), check the specimen
TS
temperature and allow it to ‘recover’ for a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 2 hours.
h. Measure the height of fender (HSC) and deflect the specimen once at the standard condition.
The reaction force of this compression is called RSC and the energy absorption is called ESC.
EN
Table 10-4: Additional Information for durability test
Fundamental Testing Type Approval Testing Verification testing
M
1. Minimum two rubber grades,
M 1. For Durability test:
1. At least three different rubber hardest, and softest are - The specimen should be a randomly selected
grades, the softest, medium recommended for testing commercial fender manufactured for a project
and the hardest of each
O
2. TGA test of the test is recommended. If full size fender is not
type/grade shall be tested. specimen before and after possible to test a scaled down fender which is
C
2. The specimen shall be a the completion of the test big enough to represent the commercial fender
commercial fender for a must be carried out in an and small enough to fit into the test press
project or scaled down fender available in a 3rd party or manufacturer’s
R
accredited 3rd party

of the same basic design. For laboratory. facility.
leg fenders the specimen L/H
FO
3. Number of compression - The scaled down model should have the same
ratio shall not be less than the cycles: Minimum 3000 basic design and compound of the commercial
lowest ratio of any fender fender.
published in the catalogue of - The specimen L/H ratio for leg fenders shall
the same, basic design.
ED
not be less than the lowest ratio of any

catalogue models of the same, basic design.
3. Number of compression - Size and type of samples should be agreed
cycles: Minimum 3000 or between manufacturer and designer/end user
SU
decided by the manufacturer. or as indicated in the project specification

- For Shear-compression test: The specimen
shall be a scaled down model or a commercial
IS
fender for a project.

2. Chemical composition or TGA (refer 10.7.2) of
specimen body before and upon completion of
T
durability test, samples shall be collected by the

3rd party witness and the results shall tally with
AF
the TGA/ physical properties of fender body

fabricated for the project locations.
3. Acceptable requirement is as follows:
R
- No defects such as cracks confirmed to naked

eye.
D
- The remaining value of reaction force RSC/ RS2

shall be more than 80 %
- The remaining value of energy absorption ESC/
ES2 shall be more than 80 %
- The residual strain (HS2 - HSC) / HS2 shall be
less than 5 %.
For shear-compression test:
- Test sample shall be free from any signs of
crack or permanent deformation in shape.

4. No of cycles: Minimum 3000 or according to the
agreement between manufacturer and purchaser
or as indicated in the project specification.
Note: Fatigue testing:

- For fenders installed at exposed berths or between two permanently moored vessels, fatigue testing is
recommended. In particular, if a buckling fender element is allowed to deflect beyond the linear elastic
portion of the performance curve (generally not recommended, see Chapter 7), fatigue testing is critical.
- For fatigue testing, the fender may need to undergo compression cycles for more than 3000 cycles. The
LY
number of cycles and compression % should be decided based on the dynamic mooring analysis or as
indicated in the project specification.
- The test samples should be a scaled down model of similar shape, basic design and same compound.
N
- Normal practice for fatigue testing is to determine the speed by equating the strain rate of the actual fender
for projects and the model fender. This method should be applied unless technical justification is provided
O
for an alternate method. For example, for a buckling fender that will be allowed to repeatedly deflect
beyond the liner elastic portion of the performance curve, alternate scaling methods or testing techniques
TS
may be required to accurately simulate the build-up of heat in the fender element.
10.7 Material Tests
EN
10.7.1 Rubber compound: Physical properties
In a rubber production line, the raw materials/rubbers and chemicals are physically mixed. “Batch” shall
M
be defined as each mixing capacity of a mixer used for compound mixing. Often multiple batches are
M
used for one fender. “Lot” shall be defined as the quantity used for a project (for each fender type and
grade).
O
Physical property tests are recommended to evaluate the rubber compounds used in products for the
C
Fundamental testing, Type Approval testing and Verification testing.

• Sample type: Un-vulcanized rubber compound from the production floor and vulcanized in the
R
laboratory in accordance with the standards for sample preparation.

• Sample collection method: Required amount of sample from each type/grade/lot of compounds
FO
used in production for a project or according to a sampling scheme agreed between the customer
and fender manufacturer.
• The rubber test specimens should be prepared by the manufacturer or in the 3rd party laboratory
ED
based on the project specification.

• If different compounds are used in a fender, samples from all rubber compounds are recommended
to perform physical properties tests.
SU
• Recommendation on physical property tests (but not limited to) of rubber compounds for rubber
fenders is shown in Table 10-4.
• For Verification testing, chemical composition or TGA (refer 10.7.2) test results of the rubber
IS
samples should tally with values (within ±3% tolerance) from the samples of a commercial fender
manufactured for a project.
T
AF
Table 10-5: Physical Properties Table

R
PROPERTY TESTING CONDITION REQUIREMENT RECOMMENDED TO

STANDARD
D
Tensile strength ISO 37 Before Ageing 16MPa (min.) All
ISO 188 Aged for 96 hours at 70ºC 12.8MPa (Min.) All

Elongation at ISO 37 Before ageing 350%(min.) All
break
ISO 188 Aged for 96 hours at 70ºC 280% (Min.) All
Tensile product All

(Tensile strength
X Before ageing 6000 MPa.% (Min.)
Elongation All
LY
@break)
After ageing 4800 MPa.% (Min.)
N
Compression ISO 815-1 22 hours at 70ºC 30% (max.) All
O
set
TS
Tear resistance ISO 34-1 Original 70 kN/m (min.) All
EN
Static Ozone ISO 1431-1 50pphm, 100 hours, 20% No cracks All
resistance strain, 40ºC
M
Dynamic
Fatigue
ISO 132 15000 cycles M Grade 0-2 All
O
C
Bond strength ISO 813 Rubber to steel 7N/mm (min.) and 100% Optional to metal inserted
rubber to rubber break in a fender body
R
FO
Sea water ISO 1817 28 days at 85ºC Hardness change: ±10̊ Optional to fenders 100%
resistance shore A (max.) submersed in sea water
all the time
Volume change: +10/-5%
(max.)
ED
Abrasion loss ISO 4649 Original Max 150mm3 Optional to direct contact
SU
of Vessels and fenders

IS
Heavy Oil ISO 1817 72h at 23ºC in IRM oil #1. Volume change: ±10% Optional to fenders
resistance (max.) exposed to heavy oil
T
•
AF
Test results of samples prepared from the fender body may defer from the values given in
above table due to sample preparation process and different degree of vulcanization.
• Maturation time of the freshly prepared samples from the uncured rubber compound shall be
R
minimum 16 hours. Tensile Strength, elongation at break, hardness, tear strength shall be
carried out after maturation time. After ageing properties, compression set, ozone tests shall
D
be carried out after stipulated time provided in the respective ISO standards.
• Verification test: In case of rubber compounds not meeting the required values, however, the
fender performance test meets the specification, retesting of the failed properties in a 3rd party
laboratory of the specimens obtaining rubber compound from the manufacturer is
recommended. TGA conducted in the fresh samples should match with the TGA of the fenders.
If the tests fail in the 3rd party laboratory, the designer/end user may reject the lot of the fenders
manufactured using the failed batch of rubber compound.

10.7.2 TGA (Thermogravimetric Analysis)
a) Chemical composition test should be conducted in a TGA equipment using the test conditions
and procedures given in ISO9924 or equivalent standard for rubber compound testing.
b) ISO9924 specifies a thermogravimetric method for the determination of the total organic
content, carbon black content and ash in vulcanizates and uncured compounds. The loss in
mass at 300 C is an approximate guide to the volatile-matter content of the compound.
c) “Total organic content” is a combination of polymers and low volatile materials.
d) It is recommended to carry out acetone/ solvent extracted of the sample using ISO1407 or
equivalent standard to determine specific quantities of low volatile materials (e.g., waxy
hydrocarbons, mineral oils, sulphur in acetone extract, etc). Then carry out TGA test of the
LY
extracted samples.
e) Rubber samples used for TGA testing can be un-vulcanized rubber compounds from the
production floor and/or vulcanized rubber samples for conducting physical properties, or from
N
the delivered or used final products.
O
f) Required quantity of sample suggested by the testing laboratory from each lot of rubber
compound or according to a sampling scheme agreed between the customer and fender
manufacturer.
TS
g) For Verification testing, minimum 10% fenders should be randomly selected for sample
collection (preferably samples from different location of a fender) or as agreed between the
EN
customer and the manufacturer.
h) Manufacturer is expected to locate where the effect of scraping rubber fenders has the
minimum influence on the fender quality in case of sampling from the products.
M
i) Remaining rubber samples after TGA testing shall be preserved and delivered to customer if
demanded.
M
j) TGA values of the cured rubber compound/samples (solvent/acetone extracted) prepared for
physical properties and the samples (solvent/acetone extracted) from the fender body should
O
tally within ±3% tolerance. (e.g., for 50% content the applicable tolerance limits are 47% to
53%).
C
k) Due to the sensitivity of a rubber compound to its manufacturing and curing history, TGA testing
should be carried out together with performance and durability testing to assess the quality of
R
a fender unit.
FO
10.7.3 Test Protocol for the creation of Velocity Factors

The compression test protocol is intended to create velocity factor as a part of the Fundamental testing
in widely diverged compression speeds.
ED
a) Prior to the velocity factor tests, Thermal stabilization of the specimens (23± ֯ C) is mandatory (See
section 10.4.3)
SU
b) Complete Break-in compression cycle by deflecting the specimen once to its rated deflection. (See
section 10.4.1)
c) Complete Stabilizing compression cycles of the break-in specimen by deflecting twice (at the
IS
standard condition) or more and stop compression cycle once the reduction of the reaction force
(first peak) for two consecutive compressions falls within 0- 5% (5 mins interval should be given
between two compressions). The reaction force of the final compression is termed as R S2, and the
T
energy absorption is termed as ES2

d) Allow the specimen to ‘recover’ for a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 2 hours in the
AF
conditioning room.
e) Deflect the specimen at one recommended compression speed/strain rate (see note below) to its
R
designed deflection. The compression speed can be Constant Velocity (CV) or Decreasing Velocity
(DV) starting at the initial design speed and gradually decreasing with deflection.
D
The reaction force of this cycle is termed as RV and the energy absorption is EV. If the fender loses
its buckling due to very high speed, the rated reaction force RV is taken at the deflection where the
standard energy is absorbed. So, in this case VFE equals to 1.0.
If CV method is adopted for creation of VF, a conversion factor/calculation is needed to convert CV

testing speed to DV testing speed. DV method does not need any conversion factor.
f) Allow the specimen to ‘recover’ for a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 2 hours in the
conditioning room.

g) Deflect the specimen again at the standard condition at standard speed. This cycle shall be same
as a ‘Standard compression’ cycle and the reaction force is termed as R SC and the energy
absorption is ESC.
h) The velocity factor VF is determined by Eq. (10.2) and (10.3) for each recommended compression
speed.
For reaction force: VFR = 2×RV / (RS2 + RSC) (10.2)
For energy absorption: VFE = 2×EV / (ES2 + ESC) (10.3)
i) Repeat steps from d) to h) for each recommended compression speed.
j) Compute & publish the velocity factor table against strain rate or compression time in the catalogue.
LY
Note:
N
• A complete test from break-in to the final compression of one velocity condition shall be completed
O
within a maximum period of 24h.
• The recommended strain rate: 0.5, 1, 10, 20, 30, 50, 75, 100 %/s or compression speed: 0.05, 0.10,
TS
0.15, 0.20, 0.25 and 0.30 m/s for both Constant Velocity (CV) and the initial speeds of Decreasing
Velocity (DV).
EN
Strain rate (%/S): compression speed (mm/s)*100 / Height of a fender (mm)
Compression time (second): designed deflection (mm)/ )/ average of deaccelerating
M
compression speed (mm/s)*
•
M
Decreasing Velocity (DV): The initial speed is the various recommended compression speed at 0
O
% deflection and decreases to 0 %/s or slower than 0.005 m/s at the designed deflection.
Decreasing velocity can be linear, sinusoidal, or berthing simulation. The form of decreasing
C
velocity shall be noted and reported.

• Manufactures may use either CV or DV test, however, it is recommended that the VF values of DV
R
compression are published in the catalogue and used for fender systems design process.
• The test specimen can be a scaled model which has the same material and geometry as the actual
FO
size fender in manufacturer's catalogue. The minimum size of scale model should be the smallest
size published in the catalogue or decided by the manufacturer. At least three different rubber
grades, the softest, medium and the hardest of each type shall be tested.
• The Eq. (10.2) and (10.3) is a recommendation to cancel the compression history of specimen.
ED
Different methods to cancel the compression history could be acceptable as far as the reasonable
explanation is stated.
SU
10.7.4 Test Protocol for the creation of Temperature Factors

This compression test protocol is intended to create temperature factors as a part of the Fundamental
IS
testing in a wide range of temperatures.

a. Prior to the temperature factor tests, thermal stabilization of the specimens (23± ֯ C) is mandatory.
T
(See section 10.4.3)

b. Complete Break-in compression cycle by deflecting the specimen once to its designed deflection.
AF
(See section 10.4.1)

c. Complete Stabilizing compression cycles of the break-in specimen by deflecting twice (at the
R
D
energy absorption is termed as ES2
d. Bring the specimen in the conditioning room controlled at the recommended testing temperature ± ֯
C, allow it to ‘recover’ and to be thermally stabilized for the duration defined by Eq. (10.1).
e. Deflect specimen once to its designed deflection. The reaction force of this cycle is called R V and
the energy absorption called EV. If the fender loses its buckling due to very low temperature, the
reaction force RV is taken at the deflection where the standard energy is absorbed. So, in this case
TFE can be considered 1.0.

f. Bring the specimen to the conditioning room controlled at the standard temperature ± ֯, allow it to
‘recover’ and to be thermally stabilized for the duration defined by Eq. (10.1).
g. Deflect specimen again at the standard conditions and temperature. This cycle shall be considered
as a ‘Standard compression’ cycle. The reaction force is termed as RSC and the energy absorption
is ESC .
h. The temperature factor TF is determined by Eq. (10.4) and (10.5).
For reaction force: TFR = 2×RV / (RS2 + RSC) (10.4)

For energy absorption: TFE = 2×EV / (ES2 + ESC) (10.5)
LY
i. Repeat steps from d) to h) for each specimen and for each recommended temperature. (see note
below)
N
Note:
O
• The recommended temperatures: +50°C, +40°C, +30°C, +10°C, 0°C, -10°C, -30°C, -40°C
• The test specimen can be a scaled model which has the same material and geometry as the actual size fender
TS
in manufacturer's catalogue. The minimum size of scale model should be the smallest size published in the
catalogue or decided by the manufacturer. At least three different rubber grades, the softest, medium and the
hardest of each type shall be tested.
•
EN
The Eq. (10.4) and (10.5) is a recommendation to cancel the compression history of the specimen. Different
methods could be acceptable as far as the reasonable explanation is stated.
• Compression velocity and angle shall be at standard condition for all tests.
M
10.7.5 Test Protocol for Angular Factor
M
This compression test protocol is intended to create Angular Factors as a part of the Fundamental
testing in a wide range of angles. The angle means the inclination of vessel hull due to the berthing
O
angle or hull flare. Hence, the direction of compression shall be parallel to the compression axis of
C
fender.
a) Prior to the angle factor tests, Thermal stabilization of the specimens (23± ֯ C) is mandatory. (See
R
section 10.4.3)
b) Complete Break-in compression cycle by deflecting the specimen once to its rated deflection. (See
FO
section 10.4.1)
c) Complete Stabilizing compression cycles of the break-in specimen by deflecting twice (at the
ED
energy absorption is ES2
d) Bring the specimen in to the conditioning room controlled at the standard temperature ± ֯ C allow it
SU
to ‘recover’ for a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 2 hours in the conditioning room.
e) Install a properly designed angular jig in the compression testing press.
f) Deflect the specimen once to its maximum deflection for a recommended design angle (See note
IS
below), at standardized condition (compression speed and temperature). The reaction force of this
cycle is termed as RV and the energy absorption is EV.
T
g) Bring the specimen into the conditioning room controlled at the standard temperature ± ֯ C to allow
it to ‘recover’ for a minimum of one hour and a maximum of 2 hours.
AF
h) Remove the angular jig from the compression testing press.

i) Deflect specimen at the standard condition. This cycle shall be considered as a ‘Standard
compression’ cycle. The reaction force is called RSC and the energy absorption is called ESC
R
j) The Angular Factor (AF) of this condition is determined by Eq. (10.6) and (10.7).
D
For reaction force: AFR = 2×RV / (RS2+RSC) (10.6)

For energy absorption: AFE = 2×EV / (ES2+ ESC) (10.7)
Note:
• The recommended design angle: 5, 10, 15 and 20 degrees.
• The test specimen can be a scaled model which has the same material and geometry as the actual size fender
in manufacturer's catalogue. The minimum size of scale model should be the smallest size published in the

catalogue or decided by the manufacturer. At least three different rubber grades, the softest, medium and the
hardest of each type shall be tested.
• A new specimen for each angle for each rubber grade shall be used for testing.
• If the fender is not axisymmetric, test is required in two orthogonal directions, and the centre position for
deflection shall be defined.
• The Eq. (10.6) and (10.7) are a recommendation to cancel the compression history of specimen. Different
method could be acceptable to cancel the compression history as far as the reasonable explanation is stated.
• Normally, AFR at any angle does not exceed 1.0 at zero-degree-compression, so AFE is more important for
fender design than AFR.
10.8 Rubber compounds for Pneumatic fenders
LY
Sample type: Un-vulcanized rubber compound from the production floor and vulcanized in the
laboratory in accordance with the standards for sample preparation. Recommended tests: Refer to
N
table- 3 in BS ISO 17357-1:2014(E)
O
10.9 Performance tests of Pneumatic fenders
•
TS
Performance of a pneumatic fender is stable relating to temperature variations when initial internal
pressure is set to the specified pressure.
• For performance confirmation of prototype fender tests refer to BS ISO 17357 - 1:2014, section 8.
EN
10.10 Material tests for foam fenders:
M
10.10.1 Foam core
• Sample type:
M
o Resilient closed cell foam sheet from the production floor taken from the manufacturing lot
O
intended to use for a specific project.
o Foam samples from the actual product (refer section 10.11.4)
C
• Sample collection method: Suitable size (e.g., 300mm x 300mm x 6 mm) from each batch is
recommended or according to a sampling scheme agreed between the customer and fender
R
manufacturer.
FO
Recommended tests:
Table 10-6: Foam core physical properties
ED
PROPERTY TESTING STANDARD CONDITION REQUIREMENT
Tensile Strength ISO 1798 Unaged As specified in manufacturer’s

SU
catalogue
Elongation at break ISO 1798 Unaged Min. 140%

IS
Compression set ISO 7214 Unaged As specified

T
Compressive strength ISO 7214 Unaged

AF
Density ISO 2781 Unaged As specified

R
Water absorption ISO 2896 Unaged Max. 1.0kg/m2 of cut surface

D
10.10.2 Polyurethane (solvent free) outer layer elastomer or similar material

• Sample type: Sheet from the production floor prepared during spraying outer layer of a fender
• Sample collection method: Suitable size (e.g., 300mm x 300mm x 2 mm) from each batch is
manufacturer.

Recommended tests:
Table 10-7: Polyurethane properties
Tensile Strength ISO 37 Unaged Min. 13.8 MPa
Hardness ISO 48-4 Unaged As specified
LY
Tear Strength ISO 34-1 Unaged Min. 32.4kN/m
N
Flex Fatigue life (Ross) ASTM D-1052 Unaged Min. 250,000 cycle
O
Abrasion resistance (NBS) ASTM D 1630 Unaged Min. 100
TS
10.10.3 Reinforcement layer:
EN
The recommended reinforcing filaments in the outer skin shall be nylon tire cord of 2520 or equivalent
with the physical properties listed in table 10-7.
•
M
Sample type: Raw filaments from the production floor or from the storage area.
• Sample collection method: suitable size (e.g.,0.56mm dia. x 300mm) from each batch
M
manufacturer.
O
Recommended tests:
C
Table 10-8: Nylon reinforcement filaments properties

R

FO
Breaking Strength ISO 37 Unaged Min. 231N

ED
10.11 Performance Tests of Foam Fenders

SU
10.11.1 Verification tests for Foam Fenders

Verification tests shall be performed for the fenders to be used for a job site to determine compliance
IS
with the published performance or customer specified energy and reaction requirements.
Performance verification:
T
The performance test shall deflect specimens according to the standard condition (slow and constant
AF
velocity) testing method.

a) Before conducting performance tests, thermal stabilization for minimum 48h is required to
R
stabilize fender temperature at standard temperature within 23± ֯ C.

b) Break-in the test fender by compressing it once, up to design deflection (60% or more of its
D
original diameter) at constant slow 0.0003-0.0013 m/s (2-8 cm/min) velocity.

c) Rotate the test fender 90 degrees from the base orientation
d) After a recovery period of minimum one hour and maximum 24 hour, deflect the test fender
once to its design deflection, at constant slow 0.0003-0.0013 m/s (2-8 cm/min) velocity.
Note:
• Test Apparatus: as per section 10.3

• Sample size/type: Actual fender elements fabricated for the project locations, smaller than
1800mm diameter.
• For fenders larger than 1800mm diameter by 3600mm long, the tests of a 1200mm diameter
by 2000mm long or larger fender may be selected to determine the energy and reaction ratings
of the fender. The projected fender and the test fender shall both be contracted with the same
materials, have the same general configurations of the ends, and have the same skin thickness-
to-diameter ratio. Scaling shall be conducted per the following equations:
o Energy = test fender energy x diameter ratio squared x overall length ratio
o Reaction Force = test fender reaction x diameter ratio x overall length ratio
LY
Table 10-9: Verification tests for Foam Fenders
N
Fundamental Testing Verification testing
O
a) Testing should be carried out in manufacturers’ site, and/or
a) For performance determination repeat step b
fitted with 3rd party independent testing jig or in a 3rd party
four times. Remove the load from the test
TS
testing facility.
specimen and allow it to recover for minimum
b) Fenders shall be free from surface damage, cuts or cracks
24 hours. Deflect the test fender once, at a
before testing. Folding marks developed during testing shall
constant slow 0.0003-0.0013 m/s (2-8
EN
be acceptable. A fender provides the required performance
cm/min) velocity. Stop the test when the
only if it meets 85% of the energy (CV test), before exceeding
deflection reaches to design deflection or
115% of the reaction force (CV test), at any given point during
more.
M
the second compression.
c) Number of samples shall be selected according to a sample
b) Tests shall be carried out for every M
scheme agreed between the customer and fender
combination of fender configuration and
manufacturer. If a specific sampling scheme has not been
energy absorbing material (fender grades/
O
noted, a minimum of 10% of the fender order shall be selected
densities).
randomly and tested for compliance with energy and reaction
C
requirements.
c) Specimens shall be either full-size fenders or
d) Inspectors shall be allowed to witness the compression
R
scaled-down models (not less than minimum

procedure (near the testing press) without compromising on
size to be reported in the catalogue).
safety.
FO
e) Fenders shall be tested in the standard condition. VF, TF, and

AF should not be used to correct the performance results.
ED
10.11.2 Velocity (VF), Angular (AF) and Temperature factor (TF) for foam fenders
See section 10.7.3-5. Same principle should be applied to create VF, TF and AF.
SU
Length of the specimens for angular correction factors shall be determined based on L/D ratio = 1.5 to
2.0. Angle factors for larger L/D ratios shall be determined by the manufacturer for specific project
requirements.
IS
10.11.3 Durability Tests (see section 10.6)

T
• For fundamental tests, each fender type and grades published in the catalogue shall be tested for
AF
durability to ensure its suitability to withstand repeated deflection without enough recovery time to
original performance characteristics.
• Sample fender should be catalogue smallest fender or larger and of the same basic design and
R
material.
•
D
Specimens may be rotated 90 degrees after every 500 cycles of compression.
10.11.4 Skin thickness and foam density verification and testing

The following protocol shall be followed:
• Skin thickness should be specified in the project specification. It will be calculated considering the
reaction force and friction coefficient of the PU skin with an additional allowance for normal wear.
The required data shall be obtained from the manufacturer.

• 10% of fenders from the production lot shall be taken for testing or the number of samples shall be
agreed between the manufacturer and the client.
• Using a Core drill 6mm (minimum) diameter to 12mm diameter (maximum) drill 6mm diameter
(minimum) to 12mm diameter (maximum) core from the fender skin, which can be removed from
the skin and examined for thickness of elastomer and placement of reinforcement layer.
• Additionally, drill may extend to 40% of the fender diameter to facilitate collection of foam samples
for foam density verification. As heat generates during the drilling process, the foam density may
change, hence, samples should be selected from the pieces which best represent the core foam
used for manufacturing process.
• Test locations shall be mid-body and at one conical end of each testing fender for skin testing.
•
LY
Skin thickness shall be measured on the core samples and recorded. Placement of reinforcing shall
be observed and noted.
• Skin thickness measurement shall be within the range of specified thickness -10%.
N
• Fenders shall be rejected if the skin thickness measurement is less than the specified thickness -
O
10% value. If the tested fender is rejected the manufacturer shall conduct thickness tests for an
additional 10% of the production lot fenders.
• Rejected fenders shall be replaced with fenders meeting the provisions of the specification. Skin
TS
thickness test shall be performed for replacement fenders.
• Tests should be witnessed by a certified, independent inspection agency or needs to be agreed
between the manufacturer and the client. The manufacturer shall provide notification at least 10
EN
working days prior to conducting skin thickness tests.
• After skin thickness testing, core holes shall be patched with elastomer of the same composition
and thickness as the specified elastomer skin. Nylon reinforcing is not required in core patches.
M
• Before delivery of all the fenders to the job site, a minimum of 2 skin thickness tests per test fender
shall be performed.
M
O
10.12 Tests for accessories
C
10.12.1 Fabricated Steel Structures Air-Leakage/ pressure test procedure

R
This test should be conducted during manufacturing of panel structures.

FO
1. Drill hole/s of suitable diameter and install M16 or suitable connections on the back of the panel.
2. Install pipe nipple-valves and connect air line
3. Put panel under Pressure with1.0 kg/sq.cm (100kPa) air pressure (Higher or lower air pressure
values may be agreed between the customer and the manufacturer).
ED
4. Spray all external welds with soapy water solution.

5. Hold pressure for 15 minutes (Higher or lower time may be agreed between the customer and the
manufacturer).
SU
6. Identify any signs of leaks and then depressurize panel.

7. At each leak point, grind out at least half of existing weld depth and reweld.
8. Repeat above steps until no leaks are evident.
IS
9. Remove pipe nipple and seal valve with gasket and plug bolt.
10.12.2 NDT (Non- destructive testing -All fabricated steel parts)

T
Table 10-10: NDT test of all fabricated steel parts

AF
Description Acceptance Criteria Type of Record

R
Die Penetration (DP) or Magnetic particle As per relevant standard and DP Report or MPI report
D
Inspection (MPI) test approved procedure
Ultra-Sonic (UT) Testing As per relevant standard and UT Report

approved procedure
Note: Designer should decide and specify the type of test applicable for the steel components.

10.12.3 UHMW-PE RESIN and PADS
Table 10-11: Physical Properties of UHMW-PE resin and pads
No. Property Test method Unit Requirement Requirement Comments

(virgin) (regenerated)
1 Density ISO 1183-1 g/cm3 0.920-0.945 0.930-0.955

2 Tensile strength ISO 527-2 MPa Min. 17 Min. 17
at yield
LY
3 Elongation at ISO 527-2 % Min. 150 Min. 150
break
N
4 Hardness ISO 868 HDD 60-70 60-70 Shore D
O
5 Double notch ISO 21304-2 KJ/m2 Min. 120 Min. 70 Average of four
Charpy Impact samples
Strength
TS
6 Abrasion ISO 15527 ml/g Max. 110 Max. 150 Average of min. two
resistance (sand samples. Sample
EN
slurry test) preparation: ISO
11542
7 Mass Melt-flow ISO 1133 g/10min 0 to 0.1 0 to 0.3 Samples from the
M
rate (MFI) (@190̊ C, pads can be used
21.6Kg M for testing.
8 Friction ISO 8295 — Min. 0.2 Min. 0.2
O
coefficient (Static, (with Steel)
Dry)
C
9 Molecular weight ISO1628-3 g/mol Min.3.5 x 106 Min.2.0 x 106 For selection of
material, testing is
R
not needed.
FO
Notes:
1. Pads are manufactured from granular UHMW-PE resins by compression moulding at high temperature and
pressure.
ED
2. The supplier should provide a material testing certificate for properties: Density, Tensile, Elongation, wear,
hardness and Charpy impact strength. The material certificate should be a 3.1 certificate as per EN 10204 or
equivalent.
3. The end user may verify the quality by obtaining samples from randomly selected pads and testing density,
SU
impact strength, Abrasion resistance and MFI in a 3rd party laboratory.

4. UHMW-PE moulder should supply molding size and number. Frequency of testing: 1 test per production lot or
according to a sampling scheme agreed between the customer and manufacturer.
IS
5. Regenerated UHMWPE could be a sustainable option for virgin material, however, for heavy duty applications
such as belted vessels use of virgin material is recommended.
T
AF
R
D

11 INSTALLATION, INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE
The performance of a fender system throughout its design life is subject to the correct installation and
maintenance procedures specified by the designer and manufacturers. It is essential that the end users,
under guidance of manufacturers, ensure that these are implemented.
Considering the loads and the demanding environment of operation of the various components of the
fender systems, these cannot be maintenance-free.
A lack of fender system maintenance is commonplace on numerous facilities. It is important that due
consideration is given at the design stage to this key topic and a low-maintenance design should be
favoured whenever economically possible.
LY
11.1 Installation
N
11.2.1 Handling and installation
O
It is essential that fender systems are always handled correctly to avoid any damage that could affect
TS
performance. In advance of the delivery of the fender systems, the fender manufacturer is expected to
provide detailed handling and installation guidelines, to ensure that the installation contractor may
develop the relevant detailed method statements accordingly.
EN
Depending on the fender system complexity and/or the teams experience, the installation contractor
may also consider training of their staff by the fender manufacturer for the assembly and installation of
the first fender systems.
M
Checks shall always be performed upon receipt of the fender systems on site to confirm that no damage
M
occurred to the fenders and their accessories during shipping.
O
For large fender systems that require crane lifting, it is essential that the manufacturers include in their
design the necessary lifting lugs for safe installation.
C
Upon completion of the installation, and depending on the project size or complexity, the end user may
invite the fender manufacturer to visually inspect the works and issue an acceptance report confirming
R
that the fender systems have been adequately installed and free of damages, ahead of the issue of any
FO
warranty or insurance certification.
11.2.2 Accessibility
ED
Particular attention should be given at the design stage of the berthing structure to safely, practically,
and economically access each fender system location. This should consider installation, inspection,
maintenance, and replacement activities and should include consideration for suitable sized cranes.
SU
For fenders mounted directly onto the berthing structure (such as cone or arch fenders), installation
contractors typically use suspended temporary structures for safe access to the fender rubber and chain
fixing locations. End users and port facility operators may consider taking possession of these work
IS
platforms after installation, so as to benefit from this safe system of access for inspection or
maintenance activities of the fender systems in the future.
T
11.2 Spares and Storage

AF
11.3.1 Spares
R
Due consideration should be given for the provision of spare parts for the fender system. This may
typically consist of items subject to wear and tear or accidental damages, such as:
D
• Facing pads
• Facing pads fixings
• Chains
• Chain fuses (when installed)
It is recommended that the end user, with the support of the fender systems designer and the
manufacturer conduct a risk assessment to identify the recommended list of spare parts. These spare
parts can then be included within the purchase order for the complete fender system.

For facing pads, end users may prefer to order large sheets to cut out the replacement facing pads that
are needed, as fender panels are typically fitted with various pads sizes depending on their position.
Considering the rubber aging process, it is not recommended to order spare fender units; on facilities
with a large number of fenders systems installed, such as continuous quays, damaged units could be
replaced with end-units, with limited operational impact during the replacement units procurement
process.
For critical facilities with a limited number of units installed, end-users may however consider ordering
a spare fender system; the same would need to be adequately stored, and the maintenance team
attention drawn on the durability aspect.
LY
11.3.2 Storage
Rubber elements can be stored, for a period that depends on their composition and the storage
N
conditions, which are of the utmost importance for fender systems. It is therefore essential that fender
O
manufacturers provide detailed packing and storage guidelines for the products supplied in order to
minimize unwanted changes in properties or surface deterioration. This guidance (including the
recommended storage durations) should be developed according to ISO 2230 “Rubber products -
TS
Guidelines for storage” or an equivalent standard.
In the maintenance manual provided by the fender manufacturer, the end user’s attention must be
EN
drawn to the fender rubber natural hardening process during storage, which will often result in a
temporary hardening; while the resulting higher reaction forces would not exceed hard berthing
conditions, it is essential that the first berthings against stored units are carefully controlled to remain
M
within the overall safety margins.
M
The same requirement applies to un-used installed units or units where installation has been delayed
at construction stage.
O
11.3 Inspection and Maintenance
C
Any fender system will deteriorate with time due to aging, environmental conditions, operational loads
R
and/or unforeseen events such as hard or accidental berthing events. These could affect the
performance of the fender system and increase the risk of failure. They may also lead to additional
FO
incidents and/or disruption to operations of the berth. As such, the routine inspection and maintenance
of fender systems is essential to ensure their durability and performance throughout their design life
and potentially reducing lifecycle costs.
ED
An effective inspection and maintenance regime should consider as a minimum:

• the age of the equipment,
•
SU
the criticality and occupancy of the berth,

• the availability and accessibility of the spare parts,
• the environmental conditions, the operating philosophy,
•
IS
and the fender manufacturers’ recommendations.

Given these parameters vary from site to site, definitive inspection and maintenance intervals can be
T
difficult to recommend. Due consideration should be given to all these factors while developing the
inspection and maintenance programs, in addition to any specific local regulations or port authority
AF
requirements.
This section therefore provides general guidance only, and operators may refer to more detailed
R
documents to develop their specific inspection and maintenance plans, such as

D
• Japanese Guidelines for the Maintenance of Rubber Fenders Systems (CDIT, 2019).
• PIANC report 103, “Life Cycle Management of Port Structures” (PIANC, 2008).
• The upcoming PIANC MarCom WG233 guidelines, “Inspection, Maintenance & Repair of
Waterfront Facilities”.
• The American manual on Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment (ASCE, 2015)

11.4.1 Inspection
The prime causes of fenders systems deterioration are harsh environment, excessive berthing loads
and facing panels degradation; deterioration processes accelerate when these are neglected.
Inspection regimes typically vary between ports; the frequency of the inspection will depend on the port
use and port exposure; as a minimum, an annual inspection of all fender systems should be carried out,
irrespective of port operations.
Regular inspection of fender systems provides a mechanism for early detection of fender system
deterioration. This enables planned maintenance to be carried out to ensure safe operation and
minimise berth downtime. As such, inspections should be conducted at recurring intervals and
LY
before/after certain activities, considering the potential failure modes of each of the components.
11.3.1.1 Pre-Berthing / Post-Berthing inspections
N
Port operators are recommended to regularly visually inspect all the fender units from the supporting
structure to inspect for signs of obvious damage and/or deterioration before any vessel arrival and/or
O
after vessel departure. This includes the rubber fender and all its accessories, and is not limited to the
following:
TS
• Significant cracks
• Signs of over-compression
EN
• Unit drop due to lose support connection
• Non-vertical panels
• Loose chains
M
• Broken chains / fuses
• Missing fixings / fittings M
11.3.1.2 Regular inspections
O
Regular visual overview inspections should be carried out at recurring intervals to detect early signs of
C
deterioration. For systems with low-elevation, these are best undertaken on low tides. If the tidal range
is large and mobile suspended equipment is not available, boat access will need to be considered.
R
Table 11-1 lists the common failure modes for typical rubber fender components, affected by
environmental conditions such as splashing water, UV exposure, extreme temperatures, marine growth,
FO
etc., that deteriorates fender components over time. Operators should follow the fender manufacturer
recommended inspection regimes, adjusting the same to the specific site conditions to arrive at a cost-
effective inspection regime.
ED
Table 11-1: Common failure modes for typical rubber fender components.
Deterioration / failure modes
Component
SU
• Tear / chipping
Rubber Body
• Cracking / splitting
• Ozone cracking
IS
• Burn
• Sagging
•
T
Steel inserts separation

• Permanent distortion / deformation
AF
• Hardening
• Atmospheric/splash zone corrosion
R
Steel Frames and

Structural Members • Weld crack
D
• Dent / impact damage

• General deformation
• Loss of air tightness
• Wear / cuts / cracks
Panel Facing (Low friction)
• Burn
• Missing pad
• Loose / missing / protruding fasteners

• Decay / rot
Panel Facing (Timber)
• Marine borer attack
• Splitting /cracking
• Chipping / uneven facing
• Loose / missing / protruding fasteners
• Puncture / deflation
Pneumatic fenders
• Cracking
• Missing / damaged tyres
• Excessive wear of outer skin
•
LY
Loose end fittings
• Puncture
Foam Fenders
•
N
Permanent deformation
• Loose end fittings
O
• Excessive wear of outer skin
• Severe corrosion
TS
Fender Chains and Fittings
• Localized wear (diameter reduction)
• Missing/damaged fittings
EN
• Broken fuse (weak link)
• Corroded bolts / nuts
Fixings - general
• Loose / cut
M
• Missing bolts / nuts
11.3.1.3 Post Abnormal Event

M
O
Hard berthing, extreme storms, tsunamis, or earthquakes may damage rubber fender components and
C
these potential damages may lead to unexpected safety and environmental issues as well as financial
consequences. It is recommended to carry out a thorough inspection of the fender system before
resuming berth operation after significant abnormal events.
R
FO
11.4.2 Maintenance
The results of each inspection should be evaluated to determine the next recommended course of
action. In addition to the manufacturer’s recommendations, which must be adhered to so as to maintain
ED
any warranty validity, there are numerous guidelines available to assist in the evaluation of the
deterioration of various components. Recommended remedial actions are also provided as documented
in, “Guidelines for the Maintenance of Rubber Fender Systems” by the Coastal Development Institute
SU
of Technology. Operators should however also refer to any specific local regulations or Port Authority
requirements.
As a general approach, and irrespective of the fender type or specific findings, attention should be given
IS
to the following elements:

• Structural steel members (such as panels) are generally protected from corrosion by coating
T
systems, in addition to sacrificial material thickness and/or cathodic protection. It is

AF
recommended that any coating damage is promptly repaired to maintain the overall structure
durability as exposed steel can corrode rapidly in an exposed marine environment, especially
within the splash zone.
R
• In case of significant corrosion and/or a major overhaul event, closed box panels should be
pressure-tested to verify their integrity and prevent the risk of internal corrosion.
D
• Low friction facing pads are subject to wear and tear. Regular maintenance and replacement
must be considered, as surface degradation increases friction forces with vessels over time.
Attention must also be given to the minimum pad thickness, below which the fixings are
exposed, resulting in possible hull damage and/or risks of sparks. This is of utmost importance
at berths where petroleum products or hazardous cargoes are handled. Partial replacement of
low friction pads is not recommended due to the localized high stress and scraping the paint of
vessel hull by the edges of new pads.
• Chain corrosion impacts the chain link diameter and weakens the chain capacity. Some cost-
effective designs may consider chain replacement during the fender system design life. In such

cases, particular attention must be brought to the chains integrity, especially in the absence of
any safety features (such as a weak link).
• Under certain conditions (e.g., wave or vessel engine induced vibrations), fixings and fittings
could become lose and may need to be tighten up. If not identified and dealt with at design and
fabrication stage, loosening of components can be addressed using non-permanent thread-
locker.
• In areas with a risk of severe ice formation, ice should be regularly cleared from fenders
systems as it adds weight that could affect their overall performance and prevent the fenders
from being compressed. While doing so, care should be taken in order not to not damage the
fender components. Refer Chapter 6.20.
LY
For pneumatic fenders installed in ports, particular points of attention are as follows:
• check the air pressure on regular basis and adjust as required (after identification and repairs
N
of the possible leak source)
• loose or worn rubber sleeves can damage the net of the fender; in such cases, fibre rope or
O
fibre jacket can be used temporarily until the rubber sleeves are replaced.
• apply grease when necessary to ensure the proper rotation of the swivels.
TS
• If present, inspect and clean the safety valve on annual basis (as a minimum)
For foam fenders, the following recommendations would apply:
EN
• inspect for damages to the fender skin; cuts, gouges, or cracks should be repaired as soon as
possible; repair kits are typically available from Vendors for minor damages.
• cuts that go through the skin to reveal the foam core need immediate repair
M
• inspect for marine growth that developed on the fender body; it should be removed when
M
appearing to be detrimentally affecting the flotation, stability, or rotation or the fender; pressure
washing / scraping shall however be used cautiously to avoid damages to the fender skin.
O
Under specified operational conditions, and sub ect to adequate design and maintenance, a fender’s
C
service life should meet the minimum design life requirements. Though rubber fenders may appear to
be in sound condition, care should always be taken when the design life is exceeded, as rubber hardens
over time and increases the fender reaction forces. This may lead to damage to both the berth structure
R
and the vessel hull structure. Hardness tests using a ‘durometer’ can be performed to compare the
FO
current fender hardness values against the original fender hardness, to detect potential aging and the
potential need for replacement. Alternatively, some fender units can be removed for load testing, but
this is likely to incur significant additional costs.
ED
11.4.3 Emerging Technology

Inspections are traditionally performed by port and terminal maintenance staff by physically inspecting
SU
the installed fender systems. This method can be time-consuming and can be subject to reading /
recording errors or omissions.
Operators may therefore consider some of the emerging technologies that now have the potential to
IS
capture real-time data, provide instant system status, analyse the operational performance, and deliver
historical records in order to help improving berth utilisation, extend the fender system life and reduce
the overall life cycle costs.
T
AF
These systems typically consist of sensors that can be easily installed on or near the fender system,
possibly without the need for power and data cabling. These sensors allow the measurement of
numerous parameters such as vessel berthing speed, fender deflection, compression duration, berthing
R
angle, fender shear movement, panels air tightness, etc. The data can be either stored locally or
transferred in real-time to the Cloud for storing and remote processing. The analysis of this data may
D
allow greater insights to the fender system performance over time for operators, maintenance teams,
and future design considerations.

12 SUSTAINABILITY OF FENDERS
In 2015, the United Nations set the Sustainable Development Goals. The Sustainable Development
Goals are the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. In total there are 17
Sustainable Development Goals and they address the global challenges we face, including for fenders
relevant goals like “Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure”, “Reducing Inequality” and “Responsible
Consumption and Production” (UN, 2022) .
Sustainability in general has seen a growing focus in the last decade and has a priority within PIANC.
Reference is made to the “PIANC Declaration on Climate Change” in which PIANC recogni es the
importance of the climate change challenge and said it will actively peruse the sustainable future of the
LY
waterborne industry.
Report EnviCom WG150 (PIANC, 2014) create awareness about the advantages of implementing a
N
green port philosophy and about what this philosophy means at present for ports and port authorities
around the world and community support for port growth. This will be achieved by supplying tools and
O
guidance that show how proactive environmental measures and strategies can contribute to obtaining
consent for future operations and developments, how opportunities can be created through own
TS
initiatives (thereby remaining ahead of legislation) and how green growth can be realized.
A growing number of Ports have a sustainability program and require their investments and new builds
to be sustainable and meet their internal and national minimum requirements. When designing or
EN
acquiring fender systems the full life cycle and recyclability of fender system to work towards
sustainability development goals should be considered.
M
12.1 Circular economy with rubber fenders M
Many countries are taking steps towards a full circular economy. This means that a product should be
100% recycled and reused in the same or similar applications. With the current state of technology this
O
is not possible yet for rubber products / fenders. However, given the public importance of the circular
C
economy and the responsibility that manufacturers have, this is something that fender (rubber) industry
should strive for. Furthermore, end-users have the responsibility to require a certain level of recyclability
R
of the fender system as manufacturers generally follow the market demand.

When the sustainability of a fender system is considered all the relevant UN Sustainable Development
FO
Goals should be taken into account. The full lifecycle of the fender system needs to be looked at – from
cradle to grave which includes material sourcing, manufacturing and recycling all fender components
after it service life.
ED
12.2 Carbon Footprint

Greenhouse gas (GHG) are the main contributors to global warming and climate change. Carbon
SU
Dioxide is instrumental in adding to the greenhouse effect. A carbon footprint is the total greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions caused by an individual, event, organization, service, place or product, expressed
as carbon dioxide equivalent (Carbontrust, 2009).
IS
Being the main contributor to global warming reduction of the carbon footprint is essential and the fender
industry should develop programs to reduce their carbon footprint with clear goals.
T
Carbon footprint reduction start with understanding the current footprint. Fender manufactures can
AF
consider to perform a Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and obtain a 3 rd party certified Environment
Performance Declaration (EPD) for its products.
R
Reducing emissions should consider the full life cycle: Raw materials, production, logistics and
D
recycling. Sometimes CO 2 emissions are unavoidable. Fender manufacturers could consider

compensation for residual CO2 in carbon dioxide balancing projects.
12.3 Rubber Sourcing

Sourcing sustainable raw material is a general rubber industry challenge. The main two types of virgin
rubber that is used for fender production are Natural rubber (NR) and Synthetic Rubber (SBR) with each
their own challenges:

i. Natural rubber may come with irresponsible farming methods, deforestation and human
right abuses. Global platforms for Sustainable natural rubber fenders (GPSNR, 2022) are
being developed and this is something PIANC encourage to consider when specifying /
purchasing fenders.
ii. SBR is petroleum based and therefore not considered to be sustainable. No good
alternatives are available since Butadiene is a key intermediate in the production of
synthetic rubber. Rather than sourcing it from petroleum innovative alternatives are being
developed but not currently available (ACS, 2022)
Generally, a blend of NR + SBR is being used, however not all applications require this blend and a NR
only compound from a sustainable source can be considered.
LY
Besides from the most common source “Rubber tree” (Hevea Natural Rubber) NR can also come from
alternative plants such as Russian Dandelio, Juleton, Goldenrod and Guayule providing a sustainable
N
alternative to synthetic rubbers. These alternative have been used i.e. in car tires however the use is
limited due to different material properties and limited availability (considering the global demand)
O
(Sarkar & Bhowmick, 2018).
Besides rubber a rubber product and thus fender also consists of other ingredients (reference to chapter
TS
8.2.1). More sustainable alternatives are being developed and used such as recycled carbon black and
sustainable oils. Today the application of these alternatives are limited due their impact on the final
EN
rubber product properties (Sarkar & Bhowmick, 2018).
12.4 Fabrication
M
ISO14001 sets out the criteria for an environmental management system manufacturers can implement
and be certified to. It maps out a framework that a company or organization can follow to set up an
M
effective environmental management system (ISO). It is recommend that this is considered as
O
requirement for manufacturers of fenders and all components of a fender system.
C
12.5 Fender design & materials selection

The end-user, designer and fender manufacturers can make a positive impact on the sustainability
R
through design and fender selection. When selecting and designing fender systems the following are
FO
worth considering:
• Minimize materials by avoiding over designing fender systems, reference is made to chapter 5
“Berthing Energy” & Chapter “Fender Design”.
•
ED
The future design requirements, it is more sustainable to buy bigger fenders once than
upgrading every few years
• Measuring berthing speeds to avoid unneeded fender replacement or over/under designing.
SU
Also installing berthing aid systems influence the design berthing speed such that fenders need
no replacement.
• An efficient fender (i.e. cone fender system) that will absorb more energy with less rubber than
IS
a less efficient fender (i.e. a cylindrical fender system)

• Materials that can be easily re-used or recycled (i.e. the steel fender panel)
• Optimize fender rubber grade. A smaller but stiffer fender will result in less rubber but to meet
T
the hull pressure requirements it will result in a larger steel panel.

AF
• Various fender solutions such as foam fender, pneumatic fender, fixed fender at it full life cycle
including recycling or re-use.
• Increase design life of the fenders by specifying a high-quality rubber fender as well as other
R
high quality materials that help to extend the life time of the fender system.
•
D
When selecting materials the wear and tear and impact on the environment should be
considered. A high quality UHMWPE will wear less than a grade with a low wear resistance
meaning the UHMWPE needs to be replaced earlier and more microplastics will find its way
into the environment.
• Avoid harmful materials where possible, i.e. avoid coal-tar epoxy based paint systems (which
already forbidden in most countries) that can be easily replaced with other (epoxy) paint
systems.

12.6 Recycling
Fenders are found in almost every port and commonly being used for several years. A growing number
of berths are being upgraded and fenders are being replaced on a regular basis.
A sustainable way to deal with old fenders is to reuse them on a new berth. This is something that can
be considered for fenders that are not at the end of its design life yet i.e. in case where fenders need to
be upgraded to accommodate a different range of vessels.
After an initial visual examination of the fenders to understand the state of the fenders a more in dept
examination can be made by checking the original test records, understanding the frequency of use,
checking surface conditions for cracks, ozone cracks and damages. For berths in a more demanding
LY
situation it is recommended that a performance test is being carried out. Reference is made to chapter
6.4.7 on aging of fenders and performance loss of a fender during its life time and 10.6 on testing of
fenders.
N
In most cases a fender cannot be re-used and needs to be recycled. A fender system consists of various
O
components made from various materials, commonly used materials in fender systems are rubber,
foam, PU, steel and UHMW PE. All these materials have very different possibilities in recyclability.
TS
12.6.1 Current Practise of fender recylcing
EN
Ports struggle with the disposal of the old fenders in a sustainable way. The current infrastructure for
recycling rubber products is focused on thin rubber products such as car and truck tyres and conveyor
belts. Due to the size of the fenders and the large steel inserts, it is difficult to process old fenders and
M
grind them into small useable particles.
M
In practice ports either store their old fenders, they are used for landfill or they are taken by waste
disposal companies that burn them as a fuel. This burning is typically done (or should be done if this
O
form of disposal is chosen) at extreme high temperature to limit the environment impact and maximize
energy gain. Due to the high level of oil in rubber and other additives that burn easily burning rubber
C
generates a lot of energy. Nevertheless, burning fenders is not considered as an environmentally

friendly or sustainable solution.
R
12.6.2 Rubber recycling

FO
There are various solutions of processing used rubber to a re-usable product. The choice of one of
these solutions have an impact on quality of the recycled material as well as an impact on the processing
costs.
ED
Typically, the following types of recycled rubbers are available:

• Rubber crumbs. Reclaimed mechanically or via waterjet. Rubber crumbs are larger in particle
SU
size than powder which means that they are technically less usable or the use is limited to less
demanding applications. This process for reclaiming is more cost efficient compared to the
other processes.
IS
• Grinded rubber. This is achieved cryogenically, via waterjet or a mechanical process and results
in powder or small granules. Typically, a rubber powder with a small particle size is preferred
as this increases the usability by adding a small percentage in new applications or a higher
T
percentage in less demanding applications. This process is a more expensive and requires
AF
more energy.
• Reclaim by mechanical & chemical process. This results in uncured rubber slabs, well usable
in all sorts of applications but the process is expensive, require more energy and chemicals
R
The use of recycled rubber in general is limited despite the large availability of recycled rubber.
D
Recycled rubber has a great impact on the rubber properties of the final product (reference is made to
section 9.2.3). The reduced properties in reality means that the lifetime expectancy is greatly reduced
with increased recycled content. The reduced lifetime expectancy make the use of recycled rubber less
sustainable.
This means that a recycled rubber compound can only be used in small percentage in new products, in
a higher percentage in low quality applications or as additives in various other application areas, for
example as a filler of concrete and asphalt.

Due to this rubber is currently not truly recyclable however is re-usable in a different form and
applications. This above results in that reclaimed rubber is not really recycled as intended with a fully
circular economy but used for low duty applications or as filler / additive. Examples of low duty
applications are rubber playground mats, sports surfaces, flooring, etc. Reclaimed rubber is used as
filler / additive in cement and asphalt.
Pneumatic fenders have an additional challenge where the pneumatic fender body is reinforced with
nylon fabric. It’s hard to impossible to separate the nylon fabric from the rubber meaning that the
reclaimed rubber crumbs or granuals will be polluted with nylon. This is strongly limiting the further use
this .
LY
12.6.3 Foam fender recycling
A closed cell foam fender is a fender that can be refurbished. The skin can be repaired, or an entire
N
new skin can be applied over the old foam. The closed cell foam has a very high durability although
some performance loss after refurbishment should be considered. By adding new hardware, the fender
O
is like in new condition. However, logistics sometimes prevent this to be an economical solution.
Biodegradable foams are being developed and offered but haven’t found their way yet to fenders due
TS
to the degrading nature of the material and additional costs.
i. Foam
EN
Typically EPE (Expanded Polyethylene) type of foams are being used for foam fenders EPE foam
can be recycled by hot melting it to granulate PE pellets which can be used in various applications
(Greenmax, 2022)
M
ii. PU Skin
PU in general is recyclable (i.e. mattresses) (Americanchemistry, 2022) however the PU skin of
M
a foam fender has similar recycling challenges than rubber with a limited infrastructure to recycle
this kind of PU waste. The nylon reinforcement in the PU skin results in an additional challenge.
O
When the skin is being scrapped the nylon reinforcement pollutes the scrapped material limiting
C
a wider use of it. Currently this is being disposed via channels similar to rubber recycling. Since
the foam fender skin is relative thin compared to a solid fixed rubber fender the amount of disposal
R
material is less and easier to process.

FO
12.6.4 Steel recycling

Fender panels as well as various other fender components are typically made from steel. Steel is the
most recycled material even more than all other material combined. Approximately 86% of the steel is
ED
currently being recycled (Steel, 2022).

Steel is 100% recyclable and generally new steel contains up to 25% recycled steel (Recycle, 2022).
The use of scrap steel saves up to 74% of the energy needed to make steel from virgin materials
SU
(Recycle, 2022).
12.6.5 UHMW PE recycling

IS
UHMW PE becomes available for recycling at the end of its lifetime which can be at the end of the
lifetime of the fender systems or, since UHMW PE is a wear item, at some point during the lifetime of a
T
fender system.
AF
UHMW PE can be easily reprocessed into a re-usable material. Pure UHMW PE can be processed in
to a reprocessed / regenerated grade of UHMW PE that can be used for fender application again. The
R
material properties generally are less (including wear resistance) compared to virgin UHMW PE. A
positive exception is the coefficient of friction that is the same for virgin as for regenerated. Generally
D
regenerated UHMW PE is broadly accepted for fender applications.

Generally regenerated UHMW is produced from recycled material that comes from production scrap at
the manufacturing ensuring them full control of the quality of the recycled raw material.
Reusing recycled material that comes from disposal UHMWPE that has reached the end of its life cycle
is generally not used for regenerated UHMW-PE. Since in most cases the original quality of the disposal
UHMW-PE is unknown, manufactures are not keen on producing regenerated UHMW PE with this
recycled material since they do not know the origin and quality of the material. Hence, they cannot be

sure that the quality of the regenerated UHMW PE manufactured with this disposal UHMW-PE will meet
their standards.
Still UHMW PE fender pads can be recycled and re-used in the plastic industry but then often is re-
used for low spec applications (outdoor plastic furniture, traffic poles) or used in other industries like in
the paper industry.
12.7 Recommendations for fender sustainability

The increasing global focus on sustainability and the need for real change also makes its way to Ports
and the manufacturing industry. Rubber manufacturing including fender manufacturing still have various
LY
challenges to face such as recycling of their products and mapping their carbon footprint.
The fender industry together with the end-users as well as designers and other stake holders should
N
take the lead and challenge each other and co-operate to come to the most sustainable solution for
their projects and develop ways to dispose fenders in the most sustainable way possible.
O
If the sustainability of fender systems is considered for a project than all parties involved in the process
of selecting, designing, purchasing and manufacturing the fender systems should make their
TS
contribution to design and manufacture the most sustainable fender the industry can do at the moment.
Although there are limitations as it currently stands there are things than already can be done by all
EN
stake holders in the process of fender system selection, designing and manufacturing. By being smart
with materials and engineering the impact on our environment can be reduced and the sustainability of
the fender system can be improved.
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

13 SPECIFICATION WRITING
13.1 Introduction
The minimum recommended specification quidance for fender systems are given in this chapter.
Accurate and complete specification is important to acquire an economical and durable fender system
complying with the required performance.
Specificaton should contain sufficient information to perform a complete design of the fender system.
As a minimum, a fender system specification should contain the critical information required by fender
manufacturers, designers, and end users. It is recommended that the required information is provided
LY
as given in Table 13-1: .
Table 13-1: Required Fender System Design Information
N
Fender System Information Purchaser Supplier Chapter
O
(designer, (contractor,
contractor, manufacturer)
end user, port
TS
authority)
General port and quay information X -
EN
Water levels, berthing pocket depth and met ocean conditions X -
M
Basis of Design X X 4
Fender system selection

M X X 2, 6
O
Design vessel information such as displacement, draught, X 3
C
LBP, beam, hull characteristics, etc.
Consequence class and design lifetime X 4.7

R
FO
Vessel berthing consideration, navigation condition at berth, X 5

velocity, berthing angle, tug assisted or not, etc.
Manufacturing, durability and quality requirements X 9

ED
Testing requirements X 10
SU
Additional design specification notes (optional) X -
Predesign (optional) X -
IS
Final design including rubber fender compound X -

T
Installation, maintenance and storage manuals X 11

AF
Recycling, rubber sourcing, carbon footprint, etc. note X X 12

R
Approval of final design criteria X -

D
It is recommended a Basis of Design document in line with Chapter 4 is produced and agreed with all
parties before the fender system design commences.
13.2 General
13.2.1 Qualification of Manufacturer

Specification should clearly indicate the required qualifications of the manufacturer and acceptable level
of experience. These may include the following:

• Possession of adequate test data of all materials
• Be able to predict and verify product performance
• Track record with the client’s reference letters and own production facilities
• Valid product liability insurance
• Claim records, if requested
Further information on the qualification of manufacturer and workforce qualification can be found in
section 9.1.
Manufacturers with no track record (new manufacturers) are recommended to provide additional
documentation prior to qualification such as general company information, production line process,
LY
quality control, source of materials, prior testing/rubber verification, etc.
13.2.2 Standards and Codes of Practice
N
All relevant national or international Standards, Codes of Practice and other specified standards should
O
be referenced and ranged clearly.
TS
13.2.3 Quality Control
If requested, the manufacturer should present Inspection Test Plan, refer to Chapter 9.1.
EN
13.2.4 Submittal Requirements
Specification should clearly outline required documentation to be submitted at each stage in the supply
M
process, i.e. tender submission, prior to fabrication, post-fabrication and post-delivery.
M
As a minimum, it is recommended that the tender documents should include the following information:
•
O
Experience - experience of executing similar projects, past performance with similar projects;
• Design capability - proven design experience with projects of comparable size;
C
• Manufacturing methodologies - design solution and compliance with the project requirements
and specifications;
R
• Manufacturing facility – indicate where fender system will be manufactured;

• Programme and testing regime - realistic planning and testing sequencing;
FO
• Source of rubber - natural rubber, preferably from a sustainable source. Proposed rubber
compound, i.e. natural, synthetic, mix, etc.;
• Type approval testing - manufacturers catalogue.
ED
Further submittal requirements (after contract award) should be detailed in the specification. These
submittals may include:
SU
Fender unit
• Quality assurance certification and all documents in English language (Local language migth
be accepted by both purchaser and supplier);
IS
• Actual location of manufacturing;

• Method and date of manufacturing;
• Size and rubber grade of fender unit;
T
• Date of delivery;
AF
• Verification test results;

o Physical property test results (hardness, tensile strength, elongation at break, etc.);
o Chemical composition for rubber traceability (TGA – polymer, carbon black, ash as a
R
minimum). The values are manufacturer specific, and generally should not be posted in the
D
specification.
o Load deflection graphs
o Durability test results (if applicable)
• Confirmation that the fender unit has been subject to a break-in cycle, if required (See
Chapters 10.4 and 11.3.2)
• Foam skin density and skin thickness (nylon reinforcement check)
Fender panel and accessories
• Calculations showing the requirements and designs of the fender panel. This should include
sketches of various anticipated loading conditions, formulas and design principles;

• Confirmation and results of the fender panel pressure test;
• Coating materials and application methods, Dry Film Thickness (DFT) certifications;
• Calculations showing the requirements and designs of accessories such as chains, anchors,
panels, etc.;
• Internal and/or third-party records of low friction UHMW-PE facing properties including the
friction coefficient.
Other
• Design computations that indicate the fender system meets the project specified criteria;
• Calculations or diagrams showing the fenders and mooring lines interaction at all states of the
tide in loaded and ballasted condition;
LY
• Installation, Maintenance and Removal manuals;
• Internal and/or third-party records of coatings DFT for all painted elements or galvanization
N
certificates;
• Any other relevant information agreed upon between the purchaser and supplier.
O
All input should be provided and reviewed prior to manufacturing and both design and manufacturing
must be carefully planed to avoid delaycaused by factors such as additional testing or manufacturing
TS
acceptance.
EN
13.2.5 Records
Project record requirements should clearly given it the specification, which I most cases means full
record of manufacturing and installation to be kept and provided to the user upon request.
M
Fender rubber units should be permanently marked so that they can be individually identified, and
M
marking should include the following:
• Rubber unit name and size
O
• Manufacturing date (month and year)
C
• Serial number (unique to the individual rubber unit)

• Rubber grade
R
• Name of manufacturer
Showing two identification marks opposing each other on the rubber unit is recommended.
FO
13.2.6 Warranty, Product Liability and Compliance

Specification should clearly state the required warranty period and minimum product liability insurance
ED
for the project. Appropriate warranty type and period may vary depending on the vessel type, number
of berthing operations per year and the design vessel characteristics (i.e., with belting or not), port
conditions and operations.
SU
It is recommended that the contract also includes provisions regarding countermeasures for the product
and compensation for damages incurred in case testing or quality fraud is discovered.
IS
13.3 Vessel, Berthing and Quay Structure Considerations

T
Pertinent information about the vessel, berthing operations, and terminal structures as necessary for
design as stated in table 13-1 shoud be provided and which designer is responsible for berthing energy
AF
calculation should be clearly stated.

Many fender types change performance under certain loading conditions such as fatigue loading,
R
partially compressed fenders, etc.. So these conditions need to be set out very clearly.
D
Pertinent information to be included in the specification may include:

• Operational requirements including design vessel(s), design life limitations for operation of the
berth, both during berthing and mooring conditions;
• Assessment of acceptable reliability levels for the fendering system;
• Vessel specifications and hull shape characteristics, together with dimensions to be selected
from the shipping table (refer to Chapter 3);
• Special features such as bow flare angles, beltings, other protrusions or special shapes,
allowable mean hull pressures or belting loads, etc. (refer to Chapter 6);

• Metocean conditions. Exposure to wind, waves, currents, tides, etc. Likely effects of ice flows
or tropical climates, passing ship influence, etc. (refer to Chapter 7);
• Tide levels, highest and lowest astronomical levels, surge, sea level rise, location of fixings,
etc.;
• Range of temperature;
• Navigation condition (refer to Chapter 5.1.4);
• Berthing angles and berthing velocity (refer to Chapters 5.5 and 5.4);
• Frequency of use of the berth by different classes of ship, draught and freeboard for largest
and smallest ship;
• Whether the berth is for loading or discharge or both;
LY
• Tug assisted or not;
• The maximum and minimum allowable fender projection considering; the reach of crane,
N
loading arm, collision caused by flare angles etc.;
• Mooring lines interference, i.e. size of fender panel, fender elevation, etc. (refer to Chapter 8);
O
• Type of quay structure, i.e. open, closed, dolphin, etc. (refer to Chapter 6.4.8);
• Type of support structure(s) the fender system would be fitted to, i.e., new or existing structure,
TS
steel or concrete, including check space requirement for installation (chains, connections);
• Seabed level near the berth, berth cope level;
• The maximum allowable (design) reaction force on existing quay structure, if any.
EN
The designer should give special consideration to the permanently moored vessels. In those
M
circumstances, issues with the fender system fatigue, rubber longevity, inspections and maintenance
need to be studied and allowed for in the design. M
O
13.4 Manufacturing, Testing and Quality Requirements for Fender Units
C
It is crucial to ensure that fender units are designed correctly and manufactured to high quality. Both
incorrect fender system design and low grade materials might lead to premature failures,. The
R
purchaser should carefully consider to include the following requirements in the specification, as
appropriate:
FO
• The fender systems manufacturer should apply a certified system of Quality Management which
conforms to ISO 9000/9001 or a recognised equivalent. ;
•
ED
Design life should be considered prior to committing and environmental standards capturing a
whole life cycle of the fender system should be followed as given in Chapter 12;
• Materials and workmanship should conform to current standards and good practice and should
SU
be deemed suitable for use in aggressive marine / tidal environments;

• Testing report with fender performance curves, physical properties of rubber certificate, mill
certificate for steel panel, low friction facing, chains and bolts should be supplied for each
IS
different fender type/size at the time of delivery (refer to Chapter 10);

• Fender system including accessories should be fabricated, assembled, installed and tested in
accordance with Manufacturer’s instructions and PIANC recommendations (refer to Chapter
T
11);
•
AF
The production facility of materials should not be changed from the first technical submission
or during a project, unless the Manufacturer has demonstrated that the materials from the new
source at least equally can meet the requirements;
R
• Manufactures should provide comprehensive documentation on the fender products where, as

a minimum, the base performance properties are clearly specified (refer to Chapter 10);
D
• Purchasers should be able to witness (or measure independently) quality control, testing of
both the fender and physical property/TGA tests for the materials either themselves or using
independent, experienced, third parties using their measuring equipment (refer to Chapter 10);
• Purchasers that hires a third party to witness and verify fender testing and production is
recommended to select a reputable company;
• Calibration of the testing equipment;
• Manufactures should provide information on the tolerances of their product for both energy
absorption and reaction force and also indicate how the fender unit performs under other

conditions like angular compression, under water and overload (maximum deflection limits)
(refer to Chapter 10).
If rubber fenders performance needs to be verified by the third party selected by the purchaser, the
supplier must allow the third party an access to the factory and fully cooperate with the testing. It is
recommended the following information is specified between the purchaser and the third party:
• Proven independence
• Knowledge and experience with the testing set-up
• ISO 17025 certified with the corresponding credentials
• Equipment used and methodology
LY
• Quality and accuracy
• Thirds party scope – fundamental, durability, type approval, verification testings
• Verification scope
N
a. Verify that fenders meet the project specifications, i.e., material and performance
O
testing, dimensions, visual check, etc.
b. Ensure 3rd party equipment is working properly and identify the standard deviation
between 3rd party and manufacturers equipment
TS
c. A clear and agreed test set-up is crucial to obtain comparable values
• A clear and unambiguous acceptance procedure should be agreed in terms of test results
between 3rd party and manufacturer. The Purchaser have to be aware that results between test
EN
facilities can differ for both performance testing and material testing. Acceptance criteria should
be based on the manufacturer's catalogue values plus tolerance values. Tolerance values
should be agreed upon prior to the verification testing
M
13.5 Delivery, Installation and Storage
M
Specification should detail the requirements regarding delivery, installation, and storage. The following
O
requirements should be considered:
C
• Handling, storing and installation should be in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions
and recommendations in order to prevent them from being distorted, overstressed or damaged
R
in any way.
•
FO
All slings, ropes or chains for handling fenders should be rubber or nylon sheathed.
• Great care should be taken to prevent cutting or tearing of the rubber, particularly in the area
of embedded plates, around bolt holes and washer recesses in the fender base, flanges or fins.
Fender system should normally be stored in the transport packings. (Chapters 9.1.4 and 11.3). Fender
ED
system maintenance and inspection programs are needed to identify any wear and damage and the
likely causes at an early stage. Therefore, it is recommended that the Fender system should be
maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and recommendations given in Chapter
SU
11.
Part of the tender submission, the fender manufacturer should provide instructions on what
IS
maintenance and inspections are required for the fender system.
13.6 Sustainability
T
AF
At the end of the design life of the fender system, or components that need to be changed, they should
be easily replaced, and as much as practical, all components of the fender system should be recycled.
Further guidance is available in Chapter 12.
R
D

14 REFERENCES
ACS. (2022). ACS Green Chemistry Institute. Retrieved from https://www.acs.org/greenchemistry.html.
Americanchemistry. (2022). https://www.americanchemistry.com/industry-groups/center-for-the-
polyurethanes-industry-cpi. Retrieved from https://www.americanchemistry.com/industry-
groups/center-for-the-polyurethanes-industry-cpi.
ASCE. (2015). Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment. ISBN (print): 9780784413579. Reston,
Virginia,: American Society of Civil Engineers.
ASCE 7. (2022). ASCE 7. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. American Society
LY
of Civil Engineers. Reston, USA. ISBN: 978-0-7844-1085-1.
Berendsen, E. A. (2022). Impact resistance of ship hull to berthing loads: quantifying critical fender
N
impact, Delft University of Technology, November 1, 2022.
O
Berendsen, E. A., Roubos, A. A., Wiliams, R., & Broos, E. J. (2023). Structural capacities of ships
parallel hull subject tofender-induced berthing impact loads. to be decided.
TS
Brolsma, J. U., Hirs, J. A., & Langeveld, J. M. (1977). On Fender Design and Berthing Velocities,
Proceedings PIANC International Navigation Congress, Sect II, Subject 4, pp.87-100,
Leningrad.
EN
Broos, E. J., Rhijnsburger , M. P., & Vredeveldt, A. W. (2018). The safe use of cylindrical fenders on
LNG, Oil and Container Terminals. PIANC-World Congress Panama City. Panama : PIANC.
M
Broos, E. J., van Schaik , C., & Huitema, S. (2013). Innovative Rigid Concrete Fender System Reduces
Life Cycle Costs., ASCE COPRI Ports ‘13 conference Seattle.
M
BS6349. (2014). BS 6349-4:2014, Maritime works – Part 4: Code of practice for design of fendering
O
and mooring systems. London: The British Standards Institution .
C
Carbontrust. (2009).
https://web.archive.org/web/20090511102744/http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/solutions/CarbonF
ootprinting/what_is_a_carbon_footprint.htm.
R
CDIT. (2019). Guidelines for Design and Testing of Rubber Fender Systems, No.51E. Coastal
FO
Development Institute of Technology (CDIT), Japan.

Childs, K. M. (2001). ASCE MANUAL OF PRACTICE NO. 101, Underwater Investigations: Standard
Practice Manual.
ED
DNV. (1992). Structural reliability analysis of marine structures. Classification notes NO. 30.6. Hovik,
Norway: Det Norske Veritas.
SU
EAU. (2020). Empfehlungen des Arbeitsausschusses "Ufereinfassungen" Häfen und Wasserstraßen

EAU 2020,. Ernst & Sohn ISBN: 978-3-433-03316-6.
EN 1990. (2011). NEN–EN 1990. Eurocode – Basis of structural design. European Committee for
IS
standardization. Brussels, Belgium.

GPSNR. (2022). Global Platform for Sustainable Natural Rubber (GPSNR). Retrieved from
T
https://sustainablenaturalrubber.org/.
AF
Greenmax. (2022). https://www.greenmax-machine.com/what-kind-of-polyethylene-material-can-be-

recycled.html. Retrieved from https://www.greenmax-machine.com/what-kind-of-polyethylene-
R
material-can-be-recycled.html.
D
Heemskerk, I. (2020). Determining the mechanisms causing the hydraulic damping during ship
berthing, Delft University of Technology, May 28, 2020.
ISO. (n.d.). https://www.iso.org/iso-14001-environmental-management.html.
ISO2394. (2015). General principles on reliability for structures. International Organization for
Standardization. Geneva, Switzerland.
JCSS. (2001). Probabilistic model code. Part 1. Joint Committee on Structural Safety.
www.jcss.byg.dtu.dk.

Ligtvoet, A., & Lei van der, T. (2012). Analyse bedrijfswaarden HbR. Delft, the Netherlands: Technische
Universiteit Delft.
Lloyd's. (1989). Strength of side shell structure to resist quayside fender loads, Class Computational
Services Group, Report no. CSD 89/24, SEPT 1989, CONFIDENTIAL . London: Lloyd's
Register of Shipping.
OCDI. (2009). Technical Standards and Commentaries for Port and Harbour Facilities in Japan. Tokyo,
Japan. The Overseas Coastal Area Development Institute. . Tokyo, Japan: The Overseas
Coastal Area Development Institute.
PIANC. (2002). Guidelines for the Design of Fenders Systems, report of PIANC MarCom WG33.
LY
Brussels: PIANC.
PIANC. (2008). Life Cycle Management of Port Structures, Recommended Practice for Implementation,
N
report of PIANC MarCom WG103 . Brussels: PIANC.
O
PIANC. (2014). Sustainable Ports - A Guide for Port Authorities (2014), report from PIANC EnviCom
WG150. Brussels: PIANC.
TS
PIANC. (2016). Guidelines for Cruise Terminals, report of PIANC MarCom WG 152:.
PIANC. (2019). Design Principles of Dry Bulk Marine Terminals, report of PIANC MarCom WG184.
EN
Brussels: PIANC.
PIANC. (2023). Mooring of Large Ships at Quays (2023), report of PIANC MarCom WG186. Brussels:
PIANC.
M
PIANC WG145. (2022). Berthing velocity analysis of seagoing vessels over 30,000 dwt (2022), report
of PIANC MarCom WG 145.
M
PIANC WG235. (2022). Ship Dimensions and Data for Design of Marine Infrastructure (2022), report of
O
PIANC MarCom WG235. Brussels: PIANC.
C
Rackwitz, R. (2000). Optimization – the basis of code making and reliability verification. Structural
Safety. 22. pp. 27–60.
R
Recycle. (2022). Recycle-more.co.uk . Retrieved from Recycle-more.co.uk .

FO
ROM. (2002). ROM 0.0 2002 General procedure and requirements in the design of harbor and maritime
structures. Part I. Spain: Puertos del Estado, ISBN: 84-88975-30-9.
ROM. (2008). ROM 0.5-05, (2008), Geotechnical Recommendations for the Design of Maritime and
ED
Harbour Works. Madrid, Spain: ROM. ISBN 978-8488975622. Madrid.

ROM. (2012). ROM 2.0-11; Recomendaciones para el proyecto y ejecucion en Obras de Atraque y
SU
Amarre. Puertos del Estado (2012): . Puertos del Estado.

Roubos, A. A., Roussel, L., Gaal, M., Blankers, G., Mirihagalla, P., & Groenewegen, P. (2023). Effect
of PIANC WG211 design method on fender dimensions. PIANC America 2023 Conference.
IS
Fort Lauderdale: PIANC USA.

Roubos, A. G. (2018). Design values for berthing velocity of large Seagoing vessels, PIANC World
T
Congress Panama 2018.

AF
Sarkar, P., & Bhowmick, A. K. (2018). Sustaintable rubber and rubber additives. Journal of applied
polymer science, 135(24), 45701. Wiley Online Library.
R
Steel. (2022). Steel Recycling Institute. Retrieved from https://www.steel.org/.

D
TNO. (2019). Ship side - cylindrical fender contact characteristics, a systematic investigation, TNO 2018
R10427 | Final report. Delft: TNO.
Ueda, S. Y. (2010). Reliability Design of Fender System for Berthing ships. PIANC MMX Congress
Liverpool UK.
UN. (2022). https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/.

To be drafted in final report / or removed:
Orlin, F., Reliability-based Assessment for Fender Systems, Delft University of Technology, 2020-11-
26 or Paper to be produced
Chapter 10 (Test procedures to determine the material quality, performance and durability of marine
fenders)
CDIT guidelines: "Guidelines for Design and Testing of Rubber Fender Systems"pp.16-21.
LY
CDIT guidelines: "Guidelines for Design and Testing of Rubber Fender Systems"pp.78-80.
A Study of durability for marine fenders with reclaim rubber and calcium carbonate. Kentaro Shimizu
N
Marine Fender Development, Bridgestone Corporation. Yokohama , Japan
O
Motohiro Yasui Marine Fender Development, Bridgestone Corporation. Yokohama , Japan
Dr. Seigi Yamase Engineering Department Bridgestone Engineered Products of Asia Sdn. Bhd Kuala
TS
Lumpur , Malaysia
The average life of arch shaped fenders without panel is around 20 years.
EN
(Terauchi, K., Koizumi, T., Yamamoto, S., Hosokawa, K.: The deterioration actual state and the function
evaluation of the rubber fender, Technical note of the Port and Harbour Research Institute,
M
No.878, Sept., 1997 (in Japanese))
The average life of buckling fenders with panel is around 30 years and the reaction forces slightly
M
increase by year with large variance (0.4 - 1.4 %/year, See Fig.AA.1).
O
(Akiyama, H., Shimizu, K., Ueda, S., Kamada, T.: Investigation on service years of large size rubber
marine fenders, Journal of JSCE, Vol. 5, pp.392-401, 2017)
C
Akiyama, H.: Study on aging of circular hollow rubber fender in long term usage, Osaka University
R
Doctoral Thesis (in Japanese).

FO
"Kentaro Shimizu, Motohiro Yasui, Seigi Yamase: A study of durability for marine fenders with reclaimed
rubber and calcium carbonate, Proceeding of 25th ISOPE, pp.1506-1512, 2015"
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

APPENDIX A: RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR FENDERS
Load and resistance factor design approach
While the load and resistance factor design approach is widely adopted in the design of marine
structures, the work of PIANC WG33 (2002) incorporated safety using a global safety factor. It was
unclear, however, whether this design approach results in an appropriate reliability level. Several
aspects that significantly influence the reliability level, such as berthing frequency, correlations between
design variables and multiple fender contact, were not embedded in the design approach of PIANC
WG211.
LY
In accordance with other design codes and standards, PIANC WG211 considers a fender system to be
reliable when the design value of the energy absorption capacity (Ef;d) is greater than the design value
for the kinetic energy (Ek;d).
N
O
𝐸𝑓,𝑑 ≥ 𝐸𝑘,𝑑 (1)
TS
where,
Ef,d = Design value for the capacity of the fender system [kNm].
EN
Ek,d = Design value for kinetic energy exerted by the approach vessel [kNm].
Since uncertainties are present in the energy absorption capacity of a fender system as well as in the
M
kinetic energy exerted by the approaching vessel acting on the fender system, PIANC WG211
introduced partial material factors and a partial energy factors. These partial factors can be applied to
M
the characteristic values of fender capacity Ef;c (Chapter 6) and kinetic energy Ek;c (Chapter 5) of the
approaching vessel in order to determine the associated design values Ef;d and Ek;d.
O
𝐸𝑘,𝑑 = 𝛾𝐸 𝐸𝑘,𝑐
C
(2)
𝐸𝑓,𝑐 (3)
R
𝐸𝑓,𝑑 =
𝛾𝑚
FO
Where,
ED
Ek,c = Characteristic value of kinetic energy of the approaching vessel [kNm].

Ef,c = Characteristic energy absorption capacity of fender system [kNm].
SU
γE = Partial energy factor [-].

γm = Partial material factor related to the resistance of the fender system [-].
IS
Reliability and failure consequences

T
The allocation of a reliability target is crucial when designing or assessing a fender. When the failure
AF
consequences of a fender are high, higher factors of safety representing a higher reliability level need
to be taken into consideration. In general, the acceptable probability of failure is expressed by a specific
R
target reliability level. Deriving a project-specific reliability target is fairly complex, since multiple aspects
need to be taken into account. Consequently, design codes and standards incorporated reliability and/or
D
consequences classes. This principle is also considered here, since the target reliability of a fender
system is largely influenced by the consequences of failure, which can significantly differ per berth or
type of support structure.
Table A-1 presents target reliability indices for different consequences classes, e.g. class A, B, C, D,
and E. In this table, the reliability level of a fender is related to the probability of failure during a certain
reference period, for instance the design lifetime of 25 years. Since uncertainty in berthing velocity
generally dominates the uncertainty in fender reliability individual failure events are largely independent

(Ueda, 2010). Hence the probably of failure and the associated reliability target can be determined
using the following relations.
𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑛𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑃f;𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 1 − (1 − 𝑃f;𝑡1 ) = 1 − (1 − 𝑃f;𝑖 )
𝑃f;𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑓 = Φ (−𝛽𝑡;𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑓 )
Where,
= Probability of failure during a certain refence period [-]
= Annual Probability of failure [-]
LY
= Probability of failure single berthing event i [-]
N
= Reference period [years]
O
= Number of berthings during a certain reference period [years]
= Reliability target related to a certain reference period [-]
TS
= Standard normal cumulative distribution function [-]
An important step in the design basis for a fender system is deciding on the appropriate reliability level
EN
for the design. Many factors can influence this reliability level, but the most important one is the
consequence class for the fender system.Table A-1 presents an overview of the reliability targets for
M
different consequence classes and reference periods and can be used in combination with national
codes and standards, such as the ASCE, BS, EAU, Eurocode, ROM or OCDI, which often provide
M
recommendations for the reliability targets or acceptable probability of failure.
O
Table A-1: Probability of failure and the associated reliability target for different consequence classes
C
Name tref Class A Class B Class C Class D Class E

R
Negligible/ Considerabl Very

Some High
low e high
FO
Probability of failure Pf
tref = 1 year 1 1.08E-04 1.33E-05 5.41E-06 1.30E-06 9.96E-08

ED
tref = 25 years 25 2.69E-03 3.34E-04 1.35E-04 3.25E-05 2.49E-06

SU
tref = 50 years 50 5.38E-03 6.67E-04 2.71E-04 6.50E-05 4.98E-06
Target reliability index βt

IS
tref = 1 year 1 3.702 4.201 4.401 4.701 5.20

T
tref = 25 years 25 2.78 3.40 3.64 3.99 4.57

AF
tref = 50 years 50 2.554 3.214 3.464 3.834 4.424
1
) Reliability indices are based on (ISO2394, 2015)
R
2
) Reliability index is based on (Rackwitz, 2000)
D
3
) Reliability indices is based on (EN 1990, 2011)
4
) Values are in the range of the values suggested in several national and international codes and standards all over the world,
such as (ASCE 7, 2022), (OCDI, 2009), (EN 1990, 2011) and (ROM, 2008).
4
) Based on a berthing frequency of 100 berthings per year.
Understanding the position and failure consequences of a fender system is of great importance. In
general, when failure consequences are high the required reliability level increases. In some
circumstances, failure of a single fender will not result in economic repercussions, whereas in other

situations major accidents may occur. When national recommendations regarding reliability targets are
lacking, Chapter 4 presents typical examples of fender systems for different consequence classes. Most
of the fender systems installed on marine structures correspond to class A or class B. Table A2 lists
typical descriptions of failure consequences in literature, which can serve as background information
when selecting a consequence class.
Table A-2: Description of failure consequences in literature
Description Consequence class
A B C D E
LY
Qualitative Negligible/ low Some Considerable High Very high
N
Human safety
O
- Number of fatalities N≤1 N≤5 N ≤ 50 N ≤500 N > 500
TS
(ISO2394, 2015)
- Number of people at NPAR <5 NPAR <50 NPAR <500 NPAR <1500 NPAR >1500
risk (ASCE 7, 2022)
EN
- Degree of warning Progression of Redundant Progression of failure Widespread Widespread
(ASCE 7, 2022) (DNV, failure is not structural is mitigated, but progression of progression,
M
1992) possible and response and failure is sudden damage is likely to induced by
people at risk progression of without M providing occur and failure is unexpected and
are able to failure is warning signals. sudden without sudden
escape in time. mitigated and providing warning environmental
O
failure is not signals. disasters, is
sudden providing possible.
C
adequate warning
signals.
R
- Social and SERI ≤ 5 SERI ≤ 15 SERI ≤ 25 SERI ≤ 30 SERI > 30

environmental
FO
repercussion index
(ROM, 2002)
Economic
ED
- Description (ISO2394, Predominantly Material damages Material losses and Disastrous events Catastrophic
2015) insignificant and functionality functionality losses causing severe events causing
SU
material losses of of societal losses of societal losses of societal

damages. significance for significance, causing services and services and
owners and regional disruptions disruptions and disruptions and
operators and low and delays in delays at national delays beyond
IS
or no social important societal scale over periods in national scale over

impact. services over several the order of periods in the order
weeks. months. of years.
T
AF
- Accessibility (Ligtvoet Very little Small Short period of Damage to Loss of main
& Lei van der, 2012) hindrance to consequences for barricade with navigation navigation
shipping, availability of regard to navigation channels, railways, channels, railways,
R
railway navigation channels, railways, roads or pipeline roads or pipeline

transport, channels, roads or pipeline corridors. (The corridors. (Main
D
pipeline railways, roads or corridors. (The availability is lower transport routes

systems (Very pipeline corridors. availability is lower for a period of are unavailable for
short period, (Barricade for a period of one weeks) a period of months)
less than one measures for a week)
day). period of one
day).
-Ratio between direct ρ≤1 ρ ≤2 ρ ≤5 ρ ≤10 ρ >10

failure costs and costs
of safety investments

Description Consequence class
A B C D E
ρ= Cf;direct/CInvestments
(JCSS, 2001)
Environmental Damages to the Damages to the Damages to the Significant damages Significant
(ISO2394, 2015) qualities of the qualities of the qualities of the to the qualities of damages to the
environment of environment of an environment limited the environment qualities of the
an order that order that can be to the surroundings contained at environment
LY
can be restored restored of the failure event national scale but spreading
completely in a completely in a and that can be spreading significantly
matter of days. matter of weeks. restored in a matter significantly beyond beyond the
of weeks. the surroundings of national scale and
N
the failure event that can only be
O
and that can only be partly restored in a
partly restored in a matter of years to
matter of months. decades.
TS
Reputation (Ligtvoet & No negative Very short period Short and limited Period of negative Long period of
Lei van der, 2012) attention in of negative period of negative attention in local, negative attention
EN
media and no attention in local, attention in local, regional and in local, regional
damage to the regional and regional and national national media and national media
image of the national media media (>2 days). (>week), Serious (>month). Very
port. (>1 day). Serious Serious concerns concerns among serious concerns
M
concerns among among people living people living in the among people
people living in in the vicinity, local
M vicinity, local living in the vicinity,
the vicinity, local government, government, local government,
government, national government national national
O
national or external clients. government or government or
government or Damage to image of external clients. external clients.
C
external clients. the port for some Damage to image of Permanent damage
Damage to image time. the port for some to image of the
of a few time. port.
R
stakeholders.
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

APPENDIX B: THERMAL CONDUCTION OF RUBBER FENDERS
Rubber is a material with low thermal conductivity, and it takes a long time for heat to penetrate inside
fender body. During compression tests, measuring surface temperature is not enough and the thermal
stabilization time is important to estimate. The following theory is used to estimate time for thermal
stabilization.
1．Theory of heat conduction:

One dimensional heat conduction theory is used to predict heat transfer inside a rubber body. Fig. B.1
LY
shows the calculation model of fender which is infinite rubber plate of thickness: 2L.
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
Figure B-1: Fender model for heat conduction (Source??)
C
The equation of heat conduction will be as follows:

R
FO
ED
Assuming that the temperature difference is θ (θ＝T0－TW), the equation will be:
SU
IS
Initial conditions and boundary conditions are:
Initial condition at t=0 and 0≦x＜2L, θ＝θ0＝T0－TW

T
AF
Boundary condition at x=0 and t＞0, θ＝0
Boundary condition at x=2L and t＞0, θ＝0

R
The temperature difference at the center of rubber body at t=t will be:
D
(B.1)
2．Calculation of thermal stabilization time, Background of Eq. (10.1)
The time until the temperature at the center of rubber plate approaches 23℃ when the specimen is
moved from the initial temperature (ambient temperature, vulcanization temperature, etc.) to the

standard temperature (23℃), can be estimated by using the Eq.(B.1). The calculation conditions of
rubber material were set as follows. These values may be changed due to the actual materials.
・Thermal conductivity： k =0.15 W/m·K
・Density： ρ=1200 kg/m3 (see table 10-1)
・Constant pressure specific heat： Cp =1900 J/kg·K

The result is shown in Fig. B.2. The number of required days is close or shorter when the initial
temperature is daily atmosphere (-10 to 40℃), but longer when the initial temperature is as high as
LY
vulcanization temperature especially for large size fenders.
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
Figure B-2: Thermal Stabilization Time (source?)

SU
3．Determining Design Temperature for Rubber Fenders.

IS
The performance of rubber fenders is affected by ambient temperature. So, the design temperatures
have a large influence on the choice of fender system. The ideal information should be the temperature
data recorded at the site where the fender is located. In practice, the meteorological records in websites
T
are very useful, but the designer should be careful on the selection of appropriate temperature data for
AF
the fender design.

The above heat conduction theory is used to determine the design temperature from statistical weather
records. The record of air temperature in February 2018 at the Kushiro port in Northern Japan is used
R
as an example.
D
The lowest was -16.5 ℃ and the highest is 4.1 ℃. The temperature was recorded with one-hour
increments and displayed in Fig. B.3 with orange dots and line. The red curve is the time history of
rubber temperature at the depth of 10 cm and the yellow curve is at 20 cm deep. The black line is the
mean daily temperature.

LY
N
Figure B-3: Time history of inner temperature and ambient temperature
O
(Depth 10 cm, 20 cm), February 2018 at Kushiro port, Japan (source?)
TS
The response of temperature depends on the thickness of rubber but according to Fig. A.3, the highest
and lowest daily average look appropriate for the highest and lowest design temperature for rubber
EN
fender. But some extreme low temperatures are lower than the lowest daily average. So, the fenders
for the very cold weather, e.g. below -10 ℃ and the port is in operation, actual measurement at site is
recommended.
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

APPENDIX C: GLOSSARY, ABBREVIATIONS SYMBOLS AND UNITS
Fill this list from your chapter if considered to be essential.
C.1 GLOSSARY
Several terms, expressions and abbreviations have been used in this report which may not be familiar
to all users. A glossary of such terms is given below:
LY
Trim Variation in vessel draft along the length
N
Ships with their own deck cranes for loading and unloading cargo. Most of
O
these vessels are handy size and handymax class and are used for smaller
Geared
volume trade products and/or servicing ports without quayside ship loaders
TS
and unloaders.
Ships with materials handling equipment on board to enable self-unloading.
EN
They are usually designed for a specific product such as cement, coal,
Self- Discharging
aggregates, etc. and are often engaged on a specific project or trade as a
dedicated vessel.
M
Aframax <to be defined?> M
Maximum vessel that can transit the old Panama Canal, beam = 32.26m.
O
Panamax Maximum LOA = 289.6m. Maximum Draft = 12.04m in tropical fresh water.
C
Generally, vessels range in size from 65,000 dwt to 85,000 dwt.

R
Maximum vessel that can transit the new Panama Canal, beam = 51.5 m.
Neo Panamax Maximum LOA = 366 m. Maximum Draft = 15.2 m in tropical fresh water.
FO
Generally, vessels range in size from 85,000 dwt to 165,000 dwt.
Handymax <to be defined?>

ED
Handysize <to be defined?>
New Panamax <to be defined?>

SU
Post Panamax <to be defined?>

IS
Suezmax <to be defined?>

T
Material (usually water) that is used to provide stability to a vessel.

AF
Ballast Ballast Tanks are compartments within the ship’s hull that can be filled or
emptied with ballast water as necessary for ship stability and management
of hull stresses.
R
D
Displacement Actual weight of the vessel and all its cargo (metric tonnes).
Maximum Laden Displacement at maximum load capacity.

Displacement
Displacement of fully loaded volume cargo vessels at typical mixed cargo
Typical Laden
density. This is not a fixed value and will vary with cargo density.
Displacement

Displacement carrying only ballast water.
Ballast Laden
These values are best calculated from ship dimensions using the mid-ships
Displacement
arrival draught. Guidance should be sort from the port operator.
Dimensionless coefficient that defines the shape of a vessel below the

Block Coefficient
water line compared with a rectangular prism.
Note: Block coefficient can vary by 10% or more depending on the specific
vessel design parameters.
Life expectancy to first major maintenance of a fender element ??

Design life
LY
N
C.2 ABBREVIATIONS
O
BS British Standard
TS
CADET Dennis in his early years?
EN
DWT Deadweight Tonnage (metric tonnes)
EAU Empfehlungen des Arbeitsausschusses "Ufereinfassungen" , German standards
M
GT Gross Tonnage M
O
LNG Liquefied Natural Gas
C
LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas

R
MarCom Maritime Navigation Commission (PIANC)

FO
MBM Multi Buoy Mooring (also known as Conventional Buoy Mooring)
OGV Ocean Going Vessel

ED
PIANC World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure (previously Permanent

International Association of Navigational Congresses)
SU
PPU Portable Pilot Unit
ROM
IS
Recomendaciones de Obras Marítimas, Spanish Standards
Ro/Ro Roll-on/roll-off
T
SPM
AF
Single Point Mooring
STS Ship-to-Ship
R
TEU Twenty foot equivalent Unit (container unit)

D
ULCC Ultra Large Crude Carrier
ULCV Ultra Large Container Vessel
VLBC Very Large Bulk Carrier
VLCC Very Large Crude Carrier

WG Working Group (PIANC)
C.3 SYMBOLS
Symbols cover all Chapters and Appendices except for Appendix X.
(Based on ITTC Symbols and Terminology List, version 2011, September 2011 and IAHR List of Sea
State Parameters, January 1986)
LY
Symbol Unit Definition
N
𝑎 (-) Logarithmic regression coefficient
O
aw (m) wave amplitude
TS
𝐵 (m) Beam (breadth moulded) of vessel
𝑏 (-) Constant
EN
𝐶𝑏 (-) Block coefficient of vessel
M
𝐶𝑒 (-) Eccentricity factor
M
𝐶𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑒 (-) Eccentricity factor (ship-to-ship berthing)
O
𝐶𝑚 (-) Virtual mass factor
C
𝐶𝑚𝑖 (-) Added mass factor of ith vessel

R
FO
𝐶𝑜𝑉𝑀 (-) Coefficient of variation of displacement of the vessel
𝐷 (m) Draught of vessel

ED
𝐷𝐹 (m) Forward draught
𝐷𝐴 (m) Aft draught

SU
f (1/s) frequency, = 1/T

IS
𝐾 (m) Radius of gyration of vessel

T
𝐸𝑣 (kNm) Kinetic energy of berthing vessel at the time of impact

AF
𝐸𝑘 (kNm) Kinetic energy to be absorbed by the fenders and structure during the
impact
R
𝐸𝑘,𝑐 (kNm) Characteristic energy to be absorbed by fenders in contact (and the

D
supporting structure where applicable) during the impact
𝐸𝑘,𝑑 (kNm) Design energy to be absorbed by fenders in contact during the impact
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 (kNm) Characteristic ship-to-ship berthing energy that needs to be absorbed

by fender system at the time of impact
𝐿𝐵𝑃 (m) Length between perpendiculars of vessel

𝐿𝑐 (m) Distance to centre of mass of vessel from the stern
𝐿𝑂𝐴 (m) Length overall of vessel
𝑀 (tonnes) Mass equivalent to the water displacement of berthing vessel
𝑀𝑖 (tonnes) Mass equivalent to displacement of ith vessel
𝑀𝑚 (tonnes) Mean displacement of approaching vessel
LY
𝑀𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 (tonnes) Characteristic mass for energy of ship-to-ship berthing, including the
effects of the displacement and added mass of both vessels
N
𝑛 (-) Annual berthing frequency
O
𝑅𝐵 <to be defined>
TS
𝑅𝐹 (kN) Resultant reaction force of the fenders in contact
EN
𝑟𝐹 (m) Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to the resultant fender
reaction force
M
𝑅𝑓𝑖 (kN) Reaction force of the ith compressed fender
M
𝑅𝑓𝑛 (kN) Reaction force of the nth compressed fender
O
(m) Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to the hull contact point of
C
𝑟𝐿
resultant fender reaction force parallel to the berthing line
R
𝑟𝐿𝑖 (m) Distance from the centre of mass of the vessel to compressed ith
FO
fender perpendicular to the berthing line
𝑟𝐿𝑛 (m) Distance from the centre of mass of the vessel to compressed nth
fender perpendicular to the berthing line
ED
𝑟𝑠 (m) Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to the hull contact point of
resultant fender reaction force parallel to the berthing line
SU
𝑟𝑠𝑖 (m) Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to compressed ith fender
parallel to the berthing line
IS
𝑟𝑠𝑛 (m) Distance from the centre of mass of vessel to compressed nth fender
T
parallel to the berthing line

AF
𝑥𝐹 (m) Distance from hull bow point (corresponding to 𝐿𝐵𝑃 ) to the hull contact
point of fender reaction force (𝑅𝐹 ) at the level of fender contact
R
𝑦𝐹 (m) Distance from vessels centre of mass to the hull contact point of
D
fender reaction force (𝑅𝐹 )
𝑈𝑐 (m) Vessel underkeel clearance
𝑉 (m/s) Berthing velocity of vessel at the time of impact
𝑉𝐵 (m/s) Berthing velocity of vessel at the time of impact, perpendicular to the

berthing line

𝑉𝐵,𝑐 (m/s) Characteristic berthing velocity of vessel at the time of impact,
perpendicular to the berthing line
𝑉𝐵𝑖 (m/s) Berthing velocity of the ith vessel
𝑉𝐿 (m/s) Berthing velocity of vessel at the time of impact, parallel to the

berthing line
𝑉𝐿,𝑐 (m/s) Characteristic berthing velocity of vessel at the time of impact, parallel
to the berthing line
LY
𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑠,𝑐 (m/s) Characteristic closing berthing velocity between vessels
N
𝛼𝑐 (radians) Characteristic berthing angle
O
𝛼𝑖 (radians) Incidental berthing angle
TS
β (-) channel reach risk level in CADET
EN
𝑔 <to be defined>
𝛾𝐸 (-) Partial energy factor
M
𝛾𝐸,𝑟 (-)
M
Reference partial energy factor for 100 berthings per year
O
𝛾𝑛 (-) Correction factor for alternative annual berthing frequencies
C
𝛾𝑝 (-) Correction factor for berthings without pilot assistance

R
𝛾𝑐 (-) Correction factor for correlations between design variables

FO
Ñ (m3) Ship volume displacement
𝑛𝑓 (-) Number of compressed fenders

ED
ra (kg/m3) density of air

SU
ρfw (kg/m3) density of fresh water
𝜎𝑚
IS
(tonnes) Standard deviation of the displacement of the approaching vessels
𝜌𝑤 (tonne/m3) Density of water

T
AF
∅ (radians) Angle between velocity vector and the line between the hull contact
point of the resultant fender reaction force and the centre of mass of
vessel
R
𝜔0 (radians/s) Initial angular velocity of the berthing vessel

D

APPENDIX D: TERMS OF REFERENCE WG211
Terms of Reference Updating Of WG33 – Guidelines For The Design Of Fender Systems
1. Background
Marine fenders are a critical component in maritime infrastructure, absorbing the energy of vessels
during berthing and while moored, and protecting both vessels and berth structures from damage.
In 1984 PIANC published a Supplement to Bulletin No. 45, containing improved design methods for
fender systems.
This guideline was followed in 2002 by PIANC WG33, which included more advanced fender design
and testing methods, taking into account performance modification factors for manufacturing
LY
tolerances, temperature and velocity.
Since the WG33 guideline was published:
• there have been further advances in design methods for fender systems
N
• vessel dimensions and hull shapes have further evolved
O
• WG145 (being finalised) has collected and analysed berthing velocities and angles
• WG145 has also addressed reliability design, vessel dimensions and container vessel flare
TS
angles
• WG186 (in progress) is considering mooring requirements for large ships at quay walls
• an update of WG24 is proposed (Criteria for Movement of Moored Ships in Harbours)
EN
• manufacturers have undertaken further research into fender materials, performance, durability
and impacts of aging
• improvements toWG33 guidelines have been suggested by users, including improved fender
M
testing and verification procedures, performance requirements for fender system elements
M
and the addition of maintenance and repair guidelines
• automated mooring systems are increasingly being used in conjunction with conventional
O
fender systems.
C
Under these circumstances it is proposed to update WG33.

R
2. Objectives and Scope

FO
Prepare a general update of WG33, including:

• update the basis of design and design guidance in relation to:
• alignment with current practice including reliability design methods
ED
• latest simulation software for evaluation of fender/vessel interaction

• recent vessel trends including increases in vessel sizes, developments in hull shapes
and the implications for fender engagement
SU
• vertical and horizontal forces on fenders

• hull pressures
• outline consideration of special issues applying to wheel fenders and foam filled
IS
fenders
• consider and incorporate relevant outcomes of other working groups including:
T
• WG145 in relation to analysis of berthing velocities and angles

AF
• WG145 in relation to reliability design

• WG145 in relation to the problem of hull flare angles on large container vessels
• WG186 in relation to mooring requirements of large vessels at quay walls
R
• WG24 (update proposed) in relation to acceptable movements of vessels at berth

D
• review recent research by fender manufacturers and update guidance in relation to durability
and performance, including:
• fender materials composition and influence on performance factors
• fender durability and causes of failure
• impact of aging on fender performance and reactions
• review the WG33 guidance in relation to testing procedures for fender materials and fender
performance, with specific reference to:
• representative scope of testing,

• consistency of test procedures and compliance in testing facilities,
• representative quality and quantity of samples to be tested,
• independence of testing and verification of fender materials and performance
• clarify that PIANC is not a fender certifying body and cannot endorse certification of
compliance by third parties using the guidelines
• provide guidance on design of other fender system components including facing panels,
chains and fixings
• provide guidance on durability, maintenance and repair of fender system components
• provide guidance on the implications of automated mooring systems used in conjunction with
fender systems.
LY
3. Documents to be Reviewed
Documents to be reviewed include, but are not limited to, the following:
N
• Report of the International Commission for Improving the Design of Fender Systems,
Supplement to PIANC Bulletin No. 45, 1984
O
• Guidelines for the Design of Fender Systems, PIANC MarCom Working Group 33, 2002
• EAU Recommendations of the Committee for Waterfront Structures, Harbours and
TS
Waterways, 2004
• Technical Standards and Commentaries for Port and Harbour Facilities in Japan, 2009
• Spanish ROM 0.2-11, Recommendations for the Planning and Execution of Berthing and
EN
Mooring Works, 2011
• Code of Practice for Design of Fendering and Mooring Systems, Maritime Structures Part 4,
BS6349, 2014.
M
• Berthing Velocities and Fender Design, PIANC MarCom Working Group 145 (in preparation)
M
• Criteria for Movement of Moored Ships in Harbours, PIANC MarCom Working Group 24, 1995
(update proposed)
O
• Mooring of Large Ships at Quay Walls, PIANC MarCom Working Group 186 (in preparation)
• Maintenance Guideline for Rubber Marine Fenders: Coastal Development Institute of
C
Technology Library, No.40, 2013

• Recent technical papers and presentations including the following presented at the PIANC
R
Australia Fender Workshop and PIANC/IEAust Ports and Coasts Conference, 2017:
• Approaches to Life Evaluation of Rubber Marine Fender, by H Akiyama, T Shiomi, K
FO
Shimizu, S Yamamoto, S Ueda, and T Kamada

• Life Evaluation of Fenders including Effect of Compounding Fillers, presentation by
Hitoshi Akiyama, Bridgestone Corporation
ED
• Large Vessel Profile and Fender System Design Study, presentation by Hitoshi
Akiyama, Bridgestone Corporation
• Ensuring Fender Performance through Compression and Material Testing,
SU
presentation by Mishra Kumar, Trelleborg Marine Systems

• Fender Compression and Durability Testing – First Hand Experience and Room for
Improvement, presentation by Harvinder Singh, CH2M.
IS
4. Intended Product
• The intended product is an update of WG33 providing concise and clear design guidance for
fender systems, in alignment with current practice, together with updated guidance in relation
T
to fender materials, performance, testing, durability and maintenance.

AF
5. Working Group Membership

Working Group members should be drawn from:
• Marine terminal owners/operators
R
• Marine infrastructure designers

• Marine fender and mooring system manufacturers
D
• Relevant research organizations.

6. Relevance to Countries in Transition
The updated guideline will be of value to countries in transition by providing practical guidance on
fender system selection, procurement and maintenance, and on the impact of aging on fender
performance.
7. Relevance of Climate Change

• The activities of this working group will not be related directly to climate change.

APPENDIX E: FAQ ABOUT DIFFERENCE WG33 & WG211
To be added after review round and publication of (Roubos, et al., 2023)
LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D

LY
N
O
TS
EN
M
M
O
C
R
FO
ED
SU
IS
T
AF
R
D
PIANC HQ: Boulevard du Roi Albert II 20 B. 3 | 1000 Brussels | Belgium
http://www.pianc.org | VAT BE 408-287-945 | ISBN 978-2-87223-XXX-X
© All rights reserved
COVER PICTURE: XXX


WG211-1.0 For MarCOM Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WG211-1.0 For MarCOM Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

WG211-1.0 For MarCOM Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PIANC

The World Association for Waterborne

MarCom Working Group Report N° 211 – 2023

PIANC MARCOM WG 211 1

Cover Picture : Siebe Swart - www.siebeswart.nl

PIANC MARCOM WG 211 2

Boulevard du Roi Albert II 20 B. 3

© All rights reserved

PIANC MARCOM WG 211 3

2.6 FENDERS AND STRUCTURES .................................................................................................... 24

3 PARTICULAR ASPECTS REGARDING DESIGN VESSELS ..................................................... 25

3.1.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................... 25

3.1.4 Cruise Ships .................................................................................................................. 26

3.1.8 General Cargo, Refrigerated Cargo and Livestock Carriers ......................................... 28

3.1.11 Offshore Supply Vessels & Harbour Tugs .................................................................... 29

3.2 DISPLACEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 29

3.3.1 Hull Shape Influence on Fender Design ....................................................................... 30

4 BASIS OF DESIGN ...................................................................................................................... 34

4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 34

PIANC MARCOM WG 211 4

6.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 59

6.2 FENDER SELECTION OVERVIEW ............................................................................................... 59

6.3 FENDER SYSTEM SELECTION ................................................................................................... 61

6.4.2 Fender System Pitch ..................................................................................................... 64

6.4.5 Multiple Fender System Contact ................................................................................... 67

6.4.8 Type of Supporting Structure ........................................................................................ 70

6.4.11 Vessel Hull Structure ..................................................................................................... 72

6.4.13 Submerged Fenders ..................................................................................................... 72

6.4.15 Mooring Analysis ........................................................................................................... 73

6.4.17 Ageing Effects on Fenders ............................................................................................ 74

PIANC MARCOM WG 211 5

8.1 FENDER PANEL DESIGN ......................................................................................................... 102

8.1.3 Edge chamfers ............................................................................................................ 104

8.1.4 Panel Size and Position .............................................................................................. 104

8.2.3 Support Chains for Foam and Pneumatic Fenders..................................................... 108

8.3 LOW FRICTION FACING DESIGN .............................................................................................. 109

8.3.3 Fixation ........................................................................................................................ 111

8.6 WHOLE LIFE CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................................. 112

8.7 CORROSION OF FENDER COMPONENTS .................................................................................. 112

9 MANUFACTURING OF FENDER SYSTEMS ............................................................................ 114

9.1 MANUFACTURER QUALIFICATIONS .......................................................................................... 114

PIANC MARCOM WG 211 6

10.6 PROTOCOL FOR DURABILITY TEST .......................................................................................... 127

10.7.1 Rubber compound: Physical properties ...................................................................... 129

10.8 RUBBER COMPOUNDS FOR PNEUMATIC FENDERS .................................................................... 134

10.11.1 Verification tests for Foam Fenders ............................................................................ 135

10.11.3 Durability Tests (see section 10.6) .............................................................................. 136

10.12 TESTS FOR ACCESSORIES ...................................................................................................... 137

10.12.3 UHMW-PE RESIN and PADS ..................................................................................... 138

11 INSTALLATION, INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE ............................................................. 139

PIANC MARCOM WG 211 7

13.6 SUSTAINABILITY ..................................................................................................................... 153

APPENDIX A: RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR FENDERS ..................................................... 157

APPENDIX B: THERMAL CONDUCTION OF RUBBER FENDERS ................................................ 161

C.2 ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 165

APPENDIX D: TERMS OF REFERENCE WG211 ............................................................................. 169

Figure 2-1: Typical buckling fender deflection curve ............................................................................ 17

Figure 2-2: Side loaded fender deflection curve ................................................................................... 17

PIANC MARCOM WG 211 8