INTERNATIONAL NAVIGATION

ASSOCIATION

ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE
DE NAVIGATION

; :
( î

ÉilBS:

—
« 3
'
•
irW - f: :
r 1
• < - I . » ï *; --
V
'
-
V/vr rv.' * S' :' . '
•
- .z ' ’
. . .. .. .. , ;
• I
•

? T

- ,V

Gmdelmes for tlic Dcsiiin

.
;•!
,

g K;Mf : $

»
MSHI
£ *
1
11
«

%
P

? V. -
Ét
iVî
!
i\ i

;
.1
P 4 ‘
i
; 4 ‘
'TW î

-î*--
'

—»' ! =
Ÿ H

T'

«Ï 7 a 5fc

->
?
- r ;v
\
». T.
££ • • i

i*
t
•>
>
- ’V - .*
i
v
•
t •"?. r - .
•
v
1

i
V
'f
i
« '

ï '

r
r .T
'T

h
?
- •
f.
• r*
tV

»
•:: ' « • •
.» *
•
r

T rA ri i
I 'A
V
A I.
Æ
 INTERNATIONAL NAVIGATION ASSOCIATION

GUIDELINES FOR
THE DESIGN OF FENDER SYSTEMS: 2002

Report of Working Group 33

of the
MARITIME NAVIGATION COMMISSION

INTERNATIONAL NAVIGATION
ASSOCIATION

O-

ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE
DE NAVIGATION

2002
 t .
_ •

PIANC has Technical Commissions concemed with iniand waterways and ports (InCom), Coastal and océan water-
ways (including ports and harbours) (MarCom), environmental aspects (EnviCom) and sport and recreational nav-
igation (RecCom).

This report has been produced by an international Working Group convened by the Maritime Navigation
Commission (MarCom). Members of the Working Group represent several countries and are acknowledged experts
in their profession.

The objective of this report is to provide information and recommendation on good practice. Conformity is not
)
obî igatory and engineering judgement shonld be u$ed in its application, especially in spécial circumstances. This
report should be seen as an expert guidance and State of the art on this particular subject. PIANC disclaims ail
responsibility in case this report should be presented as an official standard.

PIANC General Secrétariat

Graaf de Ferraris-gebouw - llth floor
Boulevard du Roi Albert II 20, B. 3
B-1000 Brussels
BELGIUM
http://www.pianc-aipcn.org
BTW: BE 408-287-945

ISBN 2-87223-125-0

Ail rights reserved

 GUIDELINES FOR THE DESIGN OF FENDER SYSTEMS: 2002

PIANC WORKING GROUP MarCom 5.3 Fender Support System

WG 33 FENDERING GUIDELINES 5.4 Workmanship and Detailing
5.5 Inspection and Maintenance
5.6 Future considérations
TABLE OF CONTENTS
6. Spécial Cases
6.1 Container vessels
Foreword 6.2 Ro/Ro vessels including Ferries
6.3 High Speed craft Catamarans, Swaths and
*

1. Introduction Monohulls
1.1 Terms of Reference 6.4 Large vessels including LPG and LNG
1.2 Method of Undertaking the Task 6.5 Vessel to Vessel
1.3 Summary 6.6 Flexible Dolphins
1.4 Acknowledgements
1.5 Définitions Figures and Tables
)
1.6 Symbols Figure 2.1 Energy Absorption
Figure 2.2 Compression
2. Principles of Fendering Figure 2.3 Flow Chart for Fender Design
2.1 Why use fendering Figure 2.3.1 Vessel Approach
2.2 Fendering Principles Figure 2.3.2 Fender Spacing
2.3 Fendering Design Basis Figure 2.3.3 IslandBerths
Table 3.1 Different Types of Energy Absorbing elastic
3. Fender Systems Available deformation rubber units.
3.1 Fender Systems Table 3.2 Fender Factors for different types of rubber
3.2 Fender types fenders

4. Detailed Fender Design

Figure 3.1 Effects achieved at various degrees of com -
pression of a side loaded fender
4.1 Design basis Table 4.2.1 Suggested Approach Velocity. Mean Values
4.1.1 Functional requirements ROM 0.2-90
4.1.2 Operational aspects Figure 4.2.1 Design Berthing Velocity. Mean Values
4.1.3 Site conditions Brolsma et al .
4.1.4 Design criteria Figure 4.2.2 Ce Factor
4.1.5 Corrosion Table 4.2.2 Cb Factor
; 4.1.6 Steel panels and fendering
Table 4.2.3 Cm Factor
4.1.7 Chains
Table 4.2.5 Factor for Abnormal Impact
4.2 Berthing energy; the deterministic approach
Table 4.4.1. Hull Pressure Guide
4.2.1 Energy équation for a berthing vessel
Figure 6.2.1 Ferry and RoRo Vessel Berthing
4.2.2 Mass of Vessel (M)
Figure 6.4.1 Layout of dolphins for Berthing Vessels
4.2.3 Approach velocity (v)
4.2.4 Eccentricity Factor (Ce) Table 6.5.1 Fender Standoff Distance
4.2.5 Virtual Mass Factor (Cm) Table 6.5.2 Closing Velocities
4.2.6 Softness Factor (Cs) Table 6.5.3 Quick Reference Guide for Fender Sélection
4.2.7 Berth configuration factor (Ce) Figure 6.6.1 Bending Moments and Pile Details
4.2.8 Factors for Abnormal Impacts Figure 6.6.2 Flexible Pile Example
4.3 Fenders as part of the mooring System Figure 6.6.3 Head of Dolphin
4.4 Hull Pressure
4.5 Computer Simulation APPENDICES
4.6 Fender Sélection Appendix A Spécification for solid rubber units
Appendix B Spécification for pneumatic units
5. Whole Life Considérations Appendix C Ship dimensions
5.1 Introduction Appendix D Sélection of Fender size
) 5.2 Facing Appendix E Guideline for Spécification writing

üv 3
 Leading by
example
ewircrrrmeTTt .

\J

Royal Haskoning leads by example in the planning, design Port planning and development
j
and operation of ports and maritime installations large Economie and financial évaluation
and smali. Container quays and operations
As world leaders in port consultancy we h â ve been General cargo berths
involved in many of the key port developments of recent Roll-on roil-off terminais
years. Fast ferry berths, passenger access and cruise terminais
i
)
And by forging partnerships - often spanning d é cades - Dry and lîquid bulk terminais
with port and shipyard management teams, innovative Rail container terminais i

and Shipyard planning and development

cost - effective solutions are found to meet the changing Dry docks, shiplifts and slipways !
I
I
needs of the industry. Dock and iock gates i
i
!
Royal Haskoning - where over 100 years of exp é rience Harbours and marinas t

counts... Environmental studies

!
Mechanlcal and electr î cal services
Safety audits
Royal Haskoning opérâ tes through Posford Haskoning Limited and
Haskoning Netherlands BV.
PETERBOROUGH
- .
E mail: p wright @ royalhaskonlng.com
Tel: +44 { o)i733 334455 Fax: + 44 (0)1733 262243
NIJMEGEN >
•:

,
.
E -mall: e.smit @ royalhaskonlng com
;
Tel: +31 (0) 24 328 42 84 Fax : +31 (0) 24 323 93 46
! ROTTERDAM ROYAL HASKONING
.
E -mall: h ligterlngen @ royalhaskonlng.com
Tel: +31 ( 0)10 443 36 66 Fax: +31 (0)10 443 36 88 thinking in
www.royalhaskoning.com ail dimensions
)
 im
MEMBERS OF THE WORKING Professor Aalborg Denmark
H F Burcharth University
GROUP Meetings 2&8

Mr P Acton Westmar Canada

Name Company Country Attended
Consultants
Meeting 2
Mr P Lacey Laconsult UK (9)
(Chairman)
Mr P Lebreton Service Technique France
des Ports Maritimes
Mr P D Stebbings Scott Wilson UK (6) Meetings 2 & 4
(Technical Secretary) Kirkpatrick

Mr P Vallander VBBVIAKAB Sweden (6) FOREWGRD

Mr H W Vollstedt Hansestadt Germany (4) The 1984 Report has been part of the design office since
Bremisches Hafenamt it was published and as the practice in technical organisa -
tions, International Navigation Association (PIANC)
) Mr C A Thoresen Norconsult Norway (6) MARCOM decided it was time to update this well used
document. Accordingly, Working Group 33 was formed.
Mr M L Broeken Gemeente- Netherlands (3)
werken Rotterdam These guidelines are written for a wide audience including
govemments, port authorities, private Consulting practices,
Mr S Meijer Witteveen Netherlands (3) planning agencies, universities and suppliers. Its purpose
+ Bos is to allow designers and suppliers to hâve a common
ground to plan and design.
Mr A G Treffers Witteveen Netherlands (6)
+ Bos It contains new approaches to fender design with appen-
dices to help and inform.
Professor S Ueda Tottori Japan (7)
University
This document gives guidance on types of fenders, fend -
ering Systems and layouts, mooring devices and ropes,
Mr M Tartaglini Modimar Italy (5)
mooring System layouts for commercial vessels, and rec-
Mr M Faeth Han-Padron USA (5)
ommendations as to their suitability for various applica -
tions and locations.
Associates
The guidelines are intended principally for use in respect
Mr J E P Serras Havenbedrijf Belgium (4) of commercial installations by experienced engineers.
Ghent

Miss C S St Hill Casthill UK (5)

.
NOTE 1 Application of this code to naval bases may
require additional data ffom the relevant naval authorities
Executive Administration as regards allowable hull contact pressures, especially for
submarines, and as regards the distances at which vessels
Mr C N van Schaik Gemeente - Netherlands will be off the quay and the configuration and type of
werken Rotterdam mooring arrangements.
Meetings 1-5
Sincere thanks is due to ail the members of the Working
Mr H Smitz Ministry of Belgium Group No 33 for providing their expérience and help in
the Flemish Community developing the report, writing the sections and reviewing
Meetings 1-5 and polishing the report .

Mr J Villaneuve Puerto de Bilbao Spain Meetings of the Working Group

Meetings 1 -3
Although there were national correspondence groups set
Mr J Uzcanga Autoridad Spain up, it was decided that plenary meetings were sti î l required
Portuaria De Bilbao and valuable. In ail, nine meetings were held in London ,
) Meetings 3-4 Rotterdam, Brussels, Bilbao and Rome.

5 Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM

wmi
fyfiE

1 . INTRODUCTION Fender Systems, 1984, with new testing protocols and

appendices containing basic usefiil information for the
designing engineer.
1.1 TERMS OF REFERENCE
1.4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Terms of Reference for the working group agreed by
the MarCom were as follows: Due regard is given to the manufacturers of fender materi-
als and ail members of the national correspondence groups
• collection and assessment of comparable design docu- who we thank for their unstinting help.
ments and methods used in member countries;
1.5 DEFINITIONS
• collection and assessment of current fender options
with performance and test details; For the purposes of this document, the following défini-
tions apply.
• slim down the text from the 1984 PIANC report;
1.5. 1 elastomeric fender units
• scrutinising the following
= > Formulae for Cm; Units formed of rubber that absorb berthing energy by )
= > ïnventory of fender Systems; virtue of the work required to deform them elastically by
Parameters and coefficients used in design of compression, bending or shear or a combination of such
fender Systems; effects.
=> Hull pressure;
1.5.2 pneumatic fender units
=> Approach velocities, accuracy of manufacturers
catalogue data and use of velocity correction
factors; Units comprising rubber bags filled with air under pres-
Ro/Ro, container and ferry berths;
sure that absorb berthing energy by virtue of the work
required to compress the air above the normal pressure
=> Guidelines for future fender design. obtained in the bag.
• Seek comments from industry involved in fendering 1.5.3 gross registered tonnage (GRT)
Systems, e.g. users, manufacturers and designer.
The gross internai volumétrie capacity of the vessel as
1.2 METHOD OF UNDERTAKING defined by the rules of the registering authority and mea-
THE TASK sured in units of 2.83 m3.

The method of approach selected for this updating of the 1.5.4 deadweight tonnage (DWT) \

1984 Guidelines for Fendering was to use correspondence

groups based in the working group member’s countries as The total mass of cargo, stores, fuels, crew and reserves
a means for getting the current design and construction with which a vessel is laden when submerged to the sum -
practice used for providing fendering. mer loading time.
.
NOTE Although this represents the load carrying capac-
In addition, meetings were held with fender suppliers to ity of the vessel, it is not an exact measure of the cargo
-
gather their présent methods of supply and testing of mate load.
rials and any changes foreseen in the future.
1.5.5 displacement (tonnes)
The report was split into sections which enabled every
country to participate and a lead country appointed to The total mass of the vessel and its contents.
co-ordinate each section of the final report. .
NOTE This is equal to the volume of water displaced by
the vessel multiplied by the density of the water
1.3 SUMMARY
1.5.6 vessel size
The intention of this report has been to update and reduce
the information given in the previous report of the Large vessels mentioned in this document are
International Commission for Improving the Design of in the following categories: )

6 m
SP
 c,
<1
o-

Oil Tankers, combination carriers and Ore carriers a Angle of approach of vessel
- in excess of 200,000 DWT Y Angle between the line joining the point of con-
tact to the centre of mass of the vessel (R) and
Liquid gas carriers the vessel speed vector (V)
- transport capacity in excess of 125,000 m3 5 Deflection of fender unit
A Deflection of fender unit
Container carriers Coefficient of friction
- overall length in excess of 250 m
Ferries and Ro/Ro
- overall length in excess of 90 m or 4500 2. PRINCIPLES OF FENDERING
1.5.7 lowest astronomical tide (LAT)
2.1 WHY USE FENDERING
lowest level that can be predicted to occur under average
meteorological conditions and under any combination of It was once stated, some years ago, "there is a simple rea-
astronomical conditions. son to use fenders: it is just too expensive not to do so \
;
-
Although it may be a rather pragmatic and one sided view,
1.5.8 highest astronomical tide (HAT) there certainly is a germ of truth in the statement. In addi-
tion to the financial aspect, safety is probably an even
highest level that can be predicted to occur under average more important reason to install fenders.
meteorological conditions and under any combination of
astronomical conditions. Nowadays it is common practice to apply fender assem -
blies comprising energy-absorbing rubber éléments in
ports which hâve to accommodate large vessels. However,
1.6 SYMBOLS port authorities hâve an approach which is both commer-
cial and practical; therefore, if conditions allow (relatively
The following are some of the symbols used in this docu- small vessels, mild environmental conditions), ports may
ment. If there is more than one meaning, it is given, in -
opt for the installation of low cost fenders and/or apply
each case, in the text where those symbols are used. locaî ly available material. Wooden fenders, rubber tyres or
the like are therefore still regularly encountered ail over
B Beam of vessel the world, even in major ports.
C Positive clearance between hull of vessel and face
of cope The increased necessity and the économie reasons to use
Cab Abnormal Impact factor fendering corne from various sources:
Cb Block coefficient of the vessel’s hull
Ce Berth configuration factors a) the use of fenders contributes to minimization of the
Ce
Cm
Eccentricity coefficient
Virtual dynamic mass coefficient
-
life cycle construction and operations costs;
Cs Softness coefficient b) changes in the vessels:
D Draught of ship
D Diameter of fender • vessels are becoming more and more expensive in .
E Effective kinetic energy of berthing vessel building and operation. This implies that the use of
H Height of compressible part of fender material for building a vessel is being economized,
K Radius of gyration of ship without sacrificing their seaworthiness, but the risks of
L Length of fender parallel to berthing face damage to vessels in port has increased ;
Lpp Length of vessel’s hull between perpendiculars
Ls Length of the smallest vessel using the berth • the costs of demurrage of a vessel in case of repair or
LL Length of the largest vessel using the berth in case of idle time when a vessel is not capable to
M Mass of vessel 95% confidence level berth, has increased tremendously;
M Mass of vessel
Mjy Displacement of vessel (Spécifie to confidence • windage area of vessels has increased substantially
level) (container and cruise vessels);
R Reaction force of fender
R Distance of the point of contact from the centre of • larger vessels carrying larger cargoes of hazardous
mass of the vessel goods.
)

v ï lT*

7
 7
%K

c) the deeper waters required for the modem vessels resuit f factor representing the energy absorbing efficien-
in less protected berths, thus an increase of the energy cy of the fender System (between 0 and 1)
generated by a berthed vessel as a resuit of waves, wind Rm = maximum fender reaction force (in kN)
and currents. The use of a carefully designed modem dm = maximum fender deflection (in m)
fender System may allow a berth facility to be located in
surroundings without the protection of expensive The factor f is depending entirely on the fender character -
breakwaters; istics, viz. the relation between deflection and reaction
force (see figure 2.1 & 2.2).
d) fenders, generally in combination with a compatible
mooring line arrangement, may be used to reduce the -
The R/Ef ratio (Fender Factor) provides knowledge of a
movements of vessels in considération of the unloading fender System, whereas the R and Ef values shall be taken
operations; at the design (or rated) deflection of the fender. A low
-
R/Ef ratio indicates that low reaction forces are generated
e) an important factor favouring the use of fendering to absorb the required energy which is often considered
is safety: this relates only to the safety of the people favourable. In some cases, however, it is not required that
working in the port or in the surroundings there - fenders absorb energy and then a high R/Ef is advanta -
of, but also to the prévention of damage to the port geous, e.g. for surface-protecting fenders. ( See Table 3.2)
infrastructure and the vessel and, last but not least, to
protection of the environment. Damage to vessels, and The energy that is absorbed by the fender System during )
especially to vessels carrying hazardous cargoes, as a compression is partially retumed to the vessel (the vessel
resuit of an undesired hard encounter between vessel is pushed back) and partially dissipated in the form of heat
and quay or jetty may resuit in a calamity especially within the material (hystérésis). See also figures below:
when it is not protected by fenders.

Fenders may also be used to keep the vessel at a certain

distance from the jetty or quay what may be of importance
in case of raker piles under a jetty or a shallow area in front
of a quay.

2.2 FENDERING PRINCIPLES

Fendering is basically the interface between a vessel and
the berth facility. This medium serves to absorb a certain
portion of the kinetic energy of a vessel without damage to
the vessel and the waterfront structure. In the case of rub-
ber fenders, which are generally relatively soft, the major-
ity of the energy is absorbed through elastic deflection of
the fender. But, possibly also the deflection of the berth Figure 2.1; the shaded area represents the energy absorp-
facility and/or the vessel's huî l will contribute to the tion; factor f is equal to the shaded area divided by the rec-
absorption of the kinetic energy. On the other hand, when tangulararea O-Rm-A-dm
a vessel berths against a single vertical pile the majority of
the energy will be absorbed by the deflection of the rela-
tively flexible pile (see Section 6.6). R

The deflection multiplied by the reaction force which is

generated and a certain efficiency factor equals the kinet -
î
ic energy.

For a rubber fender this relation can be expressed mathe-

matically as follows, whereas it is assumed that only the
rubber fender will absorb the kinetic energy (hence
neglecting e.g. the energy absorption through deformation 0 d
of the berth structure and the vessel's hull ): Figure 2.2 compresson

Ef = f * Rm * dm Figure 2.2: Curve 1 represents the compression of the

where: fender, Curve 2 the décompression of the fender, whereas
the area between those two curves is the energy dissipated
Ef = the vessel’s kinetic energy which is to be
(warmth generated) as a resuit of hysteresisis.
absorbed by the fender (in kNm)

Report of Working Group 33 - MARGOM 8

 / <7
< I
r\ ^

The sélection of a fender or fender System should be tuned The design process of a fender System could follow these
to the following stages of usage: steps:
• détermination of the functional programme of require -
a) during the berthing process (initial contact between ments;
vessel and berth facility);
The berthing process consists of a vessel approaching the • détermination of operational aspects;
berth facility, generally under an angle with a certain
approach velocity defined as the velocity perpendicular to • assessment of the site conditions;
the face of the facility. The impact of the vessel in motion
on the facility must be absorbed in such way that no dam- • assessment of the design criteria;
age occurs to vessel or facility.
• calculation of the energy to be absorbed by fender
b) while the vessel is moored; (during berthing or when moored);
With respect to the situation around the berthed vessel
along the berth facility, a distinction can be made between • select a suitable fender System and type based on the
the operational régime and the safety régime . energy and above criteria;
The operational régime is the régime in which it is still
possible to load and unload the vessel, the safety régime is • détermine the reaction force and related friction force;
the régime in which it is still possible to allow the vessel
alongside the berth without endangering the vessel, the • check impact of the forces on the structure and on the
berth or the fendering. vessel and the implications of the selected fender for
the face of the structure; aspects to be considered are e.g.:
In both régimes the fender should be able to absorb the The berthing model, geometry for bulbous bow and
energy generated by the vessel. The energy is partially fender spacing are shown on the Vessel Approach
transformed by the fender through elastic deformation into Figure 2.3.1, and Island Berths Figures 2.3.2 & 2.3.3.
heat and into a reaction force. This reaction force acts in
two directions, leading to a concentrated load on the berth The above process may hâve to be repeated several times
facility and to a load on the vessel's hull. This reaction to select the most optimal fender for the spécifie situation.
force is especially of importance when: There are numerous fender brands and each of those
brands offers various types of fenders and most offcen se-
• the berth facility is sensitive to horizontal forces (struc- veral standard dimensions for each fender type. It is the
ture on piles); task of the design engineer to select the fender of which
the specified characteristics meet (or corne closest to) the
• the vessel is moored and moves due to waves. design requirements.

2.3 FENDER DESIGN BASIS A flow chart for the design of a fender System or the sélec -
tion of a fender is shown in Figure 2.3.
The design of a fender System deserves as much attention
as the design of any other element of the structure of Note that the design criteria for Abnormal Berthing should
which it is a part. The sélection of fender System and type be addressed before selecting the fender layout.
and the sélection of the System and type of structure
should be interactive. 2.4
The fender should be designed in such way that: It is strongly recommended that an appropriate testing
régime is established to ensure that the final fendering Sys-
• the berthing of the vessel to the berth facility takes tem meets the design criteria.
place without damage;
Appendix A & B set out guidelines on such testing proce-
• the vessel and the berth (including the fenders) do not dures.
get damaged when the vessel is moored;
Of course, the manufacturer of the fender should arrange
• the periods of operation and safety are extended as for a qualified testing régime so that ail parties can be sure
much as possible. of the material characterstics and the fender's performance
) (as indicated in the manufacturers' brochures).

9 Report of Working Group 33 - MÀRGOM

 fender design basics programma of raqulremant »
flow ohart for design
funcflom *
functionai uM of the f»o«y (type of cargo «te)
ofe berthingfmoaring
réduction of ahj> movament»
réduction of réaction force

©perattonat:
berthing procedures
frequency of berthing
Umts ofmoorlng and operation* (adverse weothar)
range of vaseefs
spécial aspocta of vessels (Tiare, befcngs, bt, «te.)
only empty vtndi
-
sta/Kf off froen foo« of itructuro (cran* raaefi)
fonder «pacvtg
spécial requrermnte
type and orientation of vwtwfronl structure

site conditions
wfnd
waves
outrant
bathymaty
geognsphy
/
bda
«vwtl and «eiches

design crKerta
codee and standards
design vossats to be usad in calcutafiona
approach vefodfy norrmifaxtramo
opproaah angle norme l/extreme
maximum reaction force
friction ooaffictert
desbed Ife time
•maintenance
afety factors / abnormal berthing
oosts
..
environ mental considérations (s g température)
ohemreel podubon
abnormal berthing

1 fende rlayout • •

bortfUng voeaal moored veasal

cafcuiation »f barthing « nargy . moorinq lavout '

Cm : Virtual mats factor location <Jf mooring equlpmont andfer dcfphin*

Ce: eccentrictyfoctnr strength and typa of mooring fou
Ce: berth configuration factor (or cusNon factor) pre>teftstortnoof mooring Unes .. .

Ca: «offres» factor

ealcufaMon of fwMtar mrgy abaorpfkm jasa urne fonder a ÿatcro and type
• lection ofebnooneJ berthITM factor
é
"
T
compùfarsimulation (first séries )
sélection of appropriate fender a

détermination of: check résulta

I
energy absorption check veesel motions fat «tic degrees of freedom
réaction force chack VMM!accélération
détection charte détection, ensigy and réaction force
hyttoresis chede moortno Une forces
a ngufer compression
huB pressure
T
chack Impact on atrudura/vasael [computer simulation (optimizatton )
horbontaJ and vertical toadlng
dûmes gf hiffing lhe structure (bulbous boefetc.)
face of structura to accommoda» fender
Impflcatioca to Instafl fende*

final « élection of fender

détermine main cftaractort Jca of fender
*
cfteckavatabHUyof fender

Figure 2.3 Flow Chart for fender design

\

11
 3. FEND ER SYSTEMS loading or unloading of cargo. The design of fenders shall
also take into account the importance of the conséquences,
AVAILABLE suffered by the ship and the berthing structure in case of
excessive ship berthing energy.

3.1 INTRODUCTION Fender Systems can be categorised according to the mode

by which they absorb or dissipate the kinetic energy of the
The présent chapter describes the more ordinary types of berthing ship. Table 3.1 shows the various major cate-
fender Systems commonly used and the principles and gories of fender Systems in common use. As can be seen
characteristics of the major categories of fender Systems in from the table, most fender Systems are based primarily on
common use. the principle of the conversion of kinetic energy of the ship
into potential energy of the fender. Only a collapsible unit
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF VARIOUS which dissipâtes the kinetic energy through the plastic
FENDER SYSTEMS deformation of Steel or concrète between the fender unit
and berth structure, do not utilise this principle. Steel cor-
rugated units are always used in conjunction with another
3.2. 1 General
type of fender unit for which it serves as the energy
absorbing équivalent of an electric fuse.
Marine fenders provide the necessary interface between
berthing ships and berth structures. Therefore the principal
Other Systems may exist which hâve either very limited
function of fenders is to transform ships’ berthing energies
into reactions which both the ships and berth structures can application or hâve not been widely accepted. Also many
safely sustain. A properly designed fender System must existing fender Systems are variations or combinations of
therefore be able to gently stop a moving or berthing ship several of the Systems listed. A single or easy solution to
without damaging the ship, the berth structure or the fend- ail fender problems does not exist. Each combination of
er. Once ships are safely moored, the fenders shouid be vessel , type of berth structure and berthing conditions has
able to protect the ships and the berth structures from the different requirements. Factors having impact on the
motions caused by wind, waves, current, tidal changes and choice of fender are: size of ships, navigation methods, )

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM ‘2

 < /
<
] I)

location, tidal différences, water depths, etc. A ship ty of new fender units. Also, the various fender manufac-
berthing along an exposed berth structure will obviousiy turers may hâve different names for fender units of similar
hâve other demands on the fender System than if it was to appearance and performance characteristics and Table 3.2
berth along a sheltered berth structure. does not necessarily include ail names for each basic type
of fénder unit.
Table 3.1 lists the range of standard sizes, energy absorp-
tion capacities, reaction forces, rated maximum deflec- Most of the characteristics listed in Table 3.1 are based on
tions etc. for the various types of ordinary fender Systems data published by fender unit manufacturera and actual
in use. Ail are of the category that converts energy by elas- fender performance may vary by as much as ten percent.
tic deformation. Fender manufacturera are constantly car- Also, the characteristics are based on perpendicular
rying out research and developing variations and improve- impacts, and fender performance may vary considerably
ments to these Systems, so the fender System designer is when subjected to angular impacts, which is the most com-
advised to consult manufacturera regarding the availabili- mon case.

Si7<ÏS R éaction Energy

Type shnpe PflrfOfmor»ce cui ^e
fri rnpi kNrn
O /H 60 9
C

Cfrcuiar shape of
500/ 300
4
3200 /2000
4
4660
4
4340
if
CL '
Rqtcd <æmprC99ipn
the buck îng fender
wî th ponel contoct 0/ H 56 10
650 / 400 4 -I
4
3350 / 3000
H/L
5688 6570
-
47.5 52.5%

66 9
3ÛÛ/ 6G0
4 4
-
LppgUudiol shopc of 4
1708 1260
a the bucking fender
y* '
* d «m « nla 1800/2000
H/L
57
^T
O*
1 h ponel
v/| contact 140 22
4ÛÛ / 500
S 4 4
o 4
S 25ÛÛ / 400Ô
H/L
6 Q ÛÛ 7ÛÛÛ
-
50 607!

150 15
25Û /100Û
4 4
4
10Q 0/2QÛÛ 2290 940 -
50 52 > ÿT
H/L
Bucking fender*
150 10
200 /1000 4 4
vith direct contact 4
1300/5500 3400 1500
H/ L
46 6
300 / 600 4 4
J
elemprt
* - 4^
« 1000/2000 646 297 57 5* -
a

o7H 138 15
A î rblOCR
600 /450 4 4
4
3200 / 3200 6210 4990 BO and 05%

U Û /L 50 4
"
o 500 /1000
Ea Pneumoilc 4 4
4
*C
ÛL 4500 /12000 1057Û 9080
0/ L 20Û 41
Foam fTlled
10Û 0/15ÛÛ
4 4
4
3500 /8000 4050 3ÛÛÛ
S 0 /L
X ) 80 3
5
D
Cytindr î col
15Û/ 1ÛÛÛ 4 4
w 4
'O
(A 2800 / 5800 6600 5ÛÛÛ 50%

) Table 3.1 Different types of energy absorbing elastic deformation rubber units.

13 Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM

Table 3.2 indicates that fenders are either mainly transmit- structure will be 900 kN with a fender factor R/Ef
ting energy or mainly absorbing energy. As can be seen, 900/330=2.7 kN/kNm. What is interesting about these
for example, the different sizes of cylindrical fenders hâve, large fenders, which are designed for bigger ships, is that
under side loading, a fender factors R/Ef varying from they hâve a high fender factor with low compression (at
about 25 kN/kNm to about 1.3 kN/kNm. -
10% compression R/Ef = 14.0 kN/kNm). Where smalier
ships are concemed, they will hâve little energy-absorbing
Surface- Energy -
-
effect but fimction more as surface protecting fenders,
protecting absorbing The curve shows that the fender factor decreases with
fenders O fenders increasing compression, as far as 50% when it is 2.7
-
High R/ Ef ratio Low R/ Ef -rath
kN/kNm. Beyond this the factor increases with increasing
150100 50 30 20 54 3 1 kN/ kNm
Sol /d frect. )
compression
Rectangular
Cylindr. {radial load) It must be realised that rubber fenders absorb energy even
Cell-type beyond ’rated deflection’ (defined by the manufacturera),
V- type
H- type but the forces to be resisted by the berth structures will
Pneumattc then increase excessively. This is due to the fact that
beyond ‘rated deflection’ most rubber fenders begin to
transmit more reaction rather than absorb more energy,
The Fender Factor=R/ Ef «Réaction in kN to be fransferred
to the quay per kNm energy absorbad by the fenders. usually. )

Table 3.2 Fender Factors for different types As fenders or quays can only withstand a fixed reaction
of rubber fenders before failure, fender structures can be provided with
devices or overload collapsible unit to prevent overload or
damaging of the berth structure. The collapsible units can
Figure 3.1 illustrâtes what happens when a ship is be constructed either in concrète or Steel, and installed
berthing. A fender with a 1500 mm Outside Diameter between the fender and the berth structure. To prevent
( OD), 800 mm Inside Diameter (ID) and 1500 mm length failure or damage to the fender, the collapsible unit can be
will absorb an impact energy of 330 kNm at about 50 % designed to collapse for a reaction force equal to the fend-
deflection. The resulting force to be resisted by the berth er reaction at bout 55 to 60% compression of the fender

14 i p
lôffi
 <J

^ ^î
Ann

.
4 DETAILED FENDER DESIGN 4.1.2 Opcrational aspects

The following operational aspects may hâve to be consid -

4.1 DESIGN BASIS ered:

Before starting the design of a fender System it is advisable - the berthing procedures;
to make a careful évaluation of the requirements which the
fender System has to fui fil . - the frequency of berthing;

The following points shall be taken into account in the - the limits of mooring (under adverse weather condi-
fender sélection procedure: tions);

- a moored vessel may give larger forces than a berthing - the limits of operation (maximum vessel's motions
vessel; under adverse weather or sea conditions);

- a small vessel may give rise to a greater berthing ener- - the range of vessels that may make use of the facility
gy than a larger vessel; (size and type);

- spécial aspects of the design vessel (flare, beltings etc);

- a larger fender may give a larger reaction force than a
smaller fender when absorbing the same berthing
energy; - there may be only empty vessels berthing;

- the maximum stand-off from berth face;

- a relatively large fender may act as a solid wall on a
small vessel (bouncing off phenomenon).
- any spécial requirement as a resuit of the type of struc-
- corrosion: a spécifie issue to be addressed during the -
ture or method of construction (pre fabrication etc);
design of fender assemblies is corrosion. The influence
of corrosion on the Steel components of fenders is ela- - eccentric loading of a fender System.
borated and discussed in 4.1.5.
4.1 .3 Site conditions
4.1 . 1 Functional requirements
The site conditions are of importance for the sélection of
Depending on the situation where fenders are applied the fender System and the fender. With sufficient site data,
some or ail of the following functional requirements may the design of a fender System and the berth structure can
hâve to be considered: be optimized and costs can be saved in the end. Réduction
of the costs of site investigations may decrease the invest -
- the functional use of the facility (type of cargo to be ment costs, but could also resuit in higher maintenance
handled etc.); costs and/or more damage as a resuit of non-optimal
design. Collection of sufficient site data is therefore rec-
- to allow for safe berthing of a vessel; ommended, and it is the task of the designer to advise on
the extent of the data collection programme.
- to allow for a safe mooring of a vessel;
The data required about the site may concem :
- the protection of the vessel;
- wind;
- the protection of the berth structure;
- waves (long waves, swell , seiches, random waves);
the réduction of the vessel 's movements under influence currents;
of wind, waves and currents;
- water depth/bathymetry ;
the réduction of the vessel's movements under influence
of the loading or unloading operations; - tides;
température;
the réduction of the reaction force as a resuit of the
berthing and mooring of a vessel. ice conditions.
)

15 Report ofWorking Group 33 - MARC0M

!
O

4.1 .4 Design criteria (LAT) level and is sometimes referred to as Accelerated

Low Water Corrosion (ALWC) but in some cases it has
Following the assessment of the functiona! and operational occurred down to sea bcd level.
requirements and based on the site conditions, the design
criteria that will be used in the calculation of berthing and At présent, there is no method by which its occurrence or
mooring energies and the sélection of the fender System the resulting rate of corrosion can be predicted. It is usu-
can be determined. ally uneconomic to adopt a corrosion allowance as this can
be up to an order of a magnitude larger than for normal
Design criteria: corrosion.

the codes and standards to be used; For fender installations considération should be given to
facilitate the replacement of affected éléments should this
- the design vessel(s) to be used in the calculations; type of corrosion occur or, in the case of fender piles the
installation of cathodic protection which is thought to be
- the approach velocity under normal conditions and bénéficiai or physical protection in the form of concrète or
checking for abnormal conditions; other non-organic protective coatings.

- the berthing angle under normal conditions and check- c) The steady érosion of the corrosion products, such as
;
ing for abnormal conditions; rust in the case of structural steels by wave or vessel abra -
sive action or by floating fenders against their supporting
- the maximum reaction force (horizontal and vertical); structure or by cyclic deflections especially if the structure
is designed to absorb energy by deflection . The accelerat-
- the vessel's allowable hull pressure; ed corrosion referred to in (b) above may be further
enhanced by abrasive action.
the friction coefficient;
d) The inadequacy of planned methods of prévention
the desired life time; and/or maintenance by owners.

- the minimum or maximum fender spacing; Considération should be given to the influence of corro -
sion on the design of fenders and their accessories.
- the safety factors to be used; Unprotected Steel will begin to reduce in thickness imme -
diately after it is installed . The onset of corrosion may be
- whole life considérations (see Section 5); delayed by an appropriate paint System, suitably main-
tained. The design should be based on Steel thicknesses at
- maintenance periods. the time of first maintenance or, if no maintenance is
planned, at the expiry of the design life.
4.1.5 Corrosion
>
Corrosion rates will vary according to local conditions and
Ail metals suffer more from corrosion in a maritime envi - the position of the fender in the inter tidal zone and may
ronment than on shore. This is mainly due to: be significantly higher in hotter climates. The effect of
corrosion on fender integrity and safety factors will also
a) The formation of galvanic cells within the metals of the dépend upon whether the Steel is exposed on both faces, or
just one face. In the case of chains and bolts, loss of diam-
structures acting as anodes and cathodes and the solution
eter affects sectional area with very rapid loss of strength
of salts in seawater acting as the electrolyte. Corrosion can
be severe in the splash zone due to the presence of abun- -
once corrosion begins often making periodic replace-
ment more économie rather than using excessively large
dani oxygen. Differing metals form galvanic cells due to
sizes to maintain minimum safety factors throughout the
their differing electro-chemical potentials. This effect can full fender System design life.
occur between welds and the parent métal.
4.1 . 6 Steel panels and fender frames
b) Microbial action inducing galvanic cells. A phenome-
non of accelerated corrosion due to Sulphate Reducing Steel panels and fender frames are critical to the correct
Bacteria (SRB) or similar, which can cause exceptionally performance of the fender System. They may be subject to
high rates of corrosion, has been identified in a large num- a combination of uniformly distributed loads, line loads or
ber of ports in the UK and many other countries. This form point loads according to the types of vessels which use the
of attack usually occurs close to Lowest Astronomie Tide fenders.

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM 16

 îma
•\

Limit State design codes should be used to détermine the

construction of the Steel panels and frames. Input loads
4.2 BERTH Ï NC ENFJ î GY THE -
from the ship hull, the elastomeric fender unit and chain DETERMINISTIC Ai PEOACR '

connections should ail be considered .

Introduction
Design calculations should consider bending, shear and
local buckiing in the Steel panels and fender frames. Local The deterministic method is the oldest and so far most
buckling should be checked as inadequately supported commonly used method for fender design. The method is
webs in the panel grillage may be prone to collapse under outlined in detail in the following sections. The designer
line load or point load conditions. should carefully consider whether this method is indeed
suitable for the spécifie situation. Especially in cases
Recommended minimum thicknesses for Steel in fender where external forces may h âve an impact on the berthing
panels are: energies, more sophisticated methods may be required.

Plates exposed on two surfaces: 12 mm The following section concerns a vessel in the process of
Plates exposed on one surface: -
9 10 mm berthing. Energies generated by a vessel in moored con -
Internai members (not exposed): 8 mm dition are covered in section 4.5 (Computer simulation).

4.1 . 7 Chains 4.2 . 1 Energy équation for a vessel in the

process of berthing
Chains are often used to control the dynamic geometry
and enhance the performance of fender Systems. The fol- The kinetic energy of a moving vessel may be calculated as:
lowing types of chains are used:
E = 1/ 2* M* v2
• Weight chains are used to support the Steel frame and
prevent drooping of the elastomeric fender units. They where:
must also resist vertical ffictional forces where there are E = kinetic energy of the vessel itself (in kNm)
large tidal variations, changes in vessel draught during M = mass of the vessel (= water displacement) (in tonnes)
loading and discharge or where sea swell may cause the v = speed of the approaching vessel perpendicular to
ship to heave on the berth. the berth (in m/s)

• Shear chains are used to limit the latéral movement of The design energy that has to be absorbed by the fender
the Steel frames, particularly where vessels are regular- can be calculated as:
ly warped along the berth.
Ed = i M * v2 * Ce *Cm *Cs *Cc
2
• Tension chains are used to prevent excessive tensile where:
loads on the elastomeric fender units in cantilever
Ed = design energy (under normal conditions) to be
designs and to ensure the most efficient use of the elas- absorbed by fender System (in kNm)
tomer éléments. Smaller tension chains sometimes
supplément weight chains to prevent fender droop. M = mass of design vessel (displacement in tonnes), at
chosen confidence level. Usually 95 % confi-
dence level ( Refer to Appendix C for values)
• Keep chains are used to enable a fender to be recovered
easily after damage has been incurred and are addition
V = approach velocity of the vessel perpendicular to
the berth (in m/s)( use 50 % confidence level)
al to the normal support System.
Ce = eccentricity factor
Cm = Virtual mass factor
Chains may suffer higher rates of wear and corrosion than Cs = softness factor
other fender components. This can rapidly reduce load Ce = berth configuration factor or cushion factor
capacity of the chain, so considération should be given to
periodic inspection and replacement during the operating Based on the manufacturer performance curve for a
life of the System. ^
selected fender, a fender reaction force can be defined for
the calculated kinetic energy of the vessel . This force is a
If chains become overloaded, it is désirable that an easily characteristic load, which should be used as specified in
replaceable component should fail first. Care should be the code used for design of the quay structure. Berthing
taken to ensure fender integrity is not compromised due to mode may affect the choice of vessel approach speed and
the failure of an overload failure element. the safety factor for abnormal conditions.
)

17 Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM

fmt

Abnormal impact conditions can be accounted for as dis - generally less than the approach velocity of smaller ves-
cussed in 4.2.8. sels; range of vessels expected at the berth must be con-
sidered;
4.2. 2 Mass of the design vessel (M)
- berth appearance: ship masters will berth more carefiil
Generally the size of cargo carrying vessels is expressed in when approaching a desolate berth instead of a new,
Dead Weight Tonnage (DWT). modem berth;

The size of passenger vessels, cruise vessels or car ferries is - type of cargo: a vessel with hazardous cargo will ge-
generally expressed in Gross Registered Tonnage (GRT). nerally berth under better controlled circumstances, the
use of berthing aids for example;
DWT is the cargo carrying capacity of a vessel including
bunkers (fuel, water, etc.). - windage area of the vessel: a vessel with a large
windage area is considerably more susceptible to wind;
GRT is the internai capacity of a vessel measured in 100
ft3 (100 ft3 = 2.83 m3). - human factor: a most important factor, this may con -
cern the level of expérience, etc.
For the energy calculation the displacement of a vessel is
required. The displacement tonnage (M) of a vessel is the Designers must consider that the design values for the
total mass of the vessel and can be calculated ffom the vol- approach velocity should be close to the expected actual
ume of water displaced multiplied by the water density. In berthing speeds. It is the task of the designer to obtain data
most case the vessel’s fully loaded displacement is used in on the local conditions and seek out vessel operators, port
the fender design. engineers, ship owners, etc. in order to gain insight into the
applicable conditions and to décidé on the most likely
For guidance on displacement tonnage factors for various and/or appropriate approach velocity.
vessel types, see Appendix C, if more accurate data is not
available. The British Standard on Fenders (BS 6349 Part 4) has
adopted the design approach velocity as recommended by
4.2.3 Approach velocity (v ) Brolsma et al . in 1977 (see Figure 4.2.1). In line with
Baker (1953) Brolsma distinguishes five navigation condi-
The approach velocity v is the most influential variable in tions but does not elaborate on those conditions except that
the calculation of the berthing energy. The approach veloc- ail vessels berthed with tug assistance. However, to date
ity is defined as the vessel speed at initial berthing contact,
no more pertinent or accurate data has been found.
measured perpendicular to the berth.

The actual approach velocity is influenced by a large num-

ber of factors such as:

- prevailing physical boundary conditions: the influence I

of waves, wind and current should be considered;

- ease of navigation: is the approach to the berth easy or

difficult?

- method of berthing: are berthing aids used, is berthing DVk X in 1000 tonne
'
always parallel, when is the forward motion of the ves - Figure 4.2.1. Design berthing velocity (mean value)
sel stopped, etc;
as function of navigation conditions and size of
vessel ( Brolsma et al. 1977)
- type of vessel: is the vessel equipped with powerful
engines, quick reacting engines, bow thrusters, etc;
a. Good berthing conditions, sheltered
- use of tugs: are tug boats used, how many and of suffi-
b. Difficult berthing conditions, sheltered
cient capacity?

- frequency of berthing: at berths with a high berthing c. Easy berthing conditions, exposed
frequency, generally higher berthing velocities are
experienced; d.* Good berthing conditions, exposed

- size of vessel: the approach velocity of larger vessels is e.* Navigation conditions difficult, exposed

Report ot' Working Group 33 MAKCOM 18 §5

 . . +

* These figures should be used with caution as they are be distinguished :-

considered to be too high.
- a berth with continuous fendering;
Mean value is taken to be équivalent to the 50% confi-
dence level. - a berth with breasting dolphins (or island berth).

Although based on observations, the values given in An important rôle in the détermination of this factor is the
Figure 4.2.1 show low approach values for large vessels berthing angle.
which can easily be exceeded in adverse conditions.
The berthing angle is also of importance for the détermi -
For the majority of cases it is considered sufficiently accu- nation of the réduction in energy absorption capacity of
rate to distinguish the above conditions. It is assumed that fenders, as a resuit of angular compression resulting in
the environmental conditions are closely related to the non-uniform deflections.
degree of exposure of the berth (exposed, partly exposed
or sheltered). In absence of more accurate figures, the fol- Berthing angle
lowing practical values may be adopted for the approach Measurements in Japan h âve shown that for vessels larger
velocity v (in m/s): than 50,000 DWT the berthing angles are generally less

Table 4.2. 1 Suggested Approach Velocity( Mean Values) m/s

(Taken from the Spanish ROM Standard. 0.2-90 )

Vessel displacement in Favourable Moderate Unfavourable

tonnes Condition Conditions Conditions

Under 10,000 -
0.2 0.16 0.45-0.30 -
0.6 0.40

-
10,000 - 50,000

50,000 - 100,000
0.12 - j

0.08
> ^ .oS
o 0.3-0.15

0.15
0.45 0.22

0.20

over 100,000 0.08 0.15 0.20

Mean value is taken to be équivalent to the 50% confi- than 5 degrees with only occassionally an angle of 6
dence level. The figures given above are indicative, with degrees. It is therefore suggested that 6 degrees be used as
tug assistance. The full graphs are set out in the ROM a maximum approach angle for these vessels.
standard
For smaller vessels, and especially for vessels which berth
In case the berthing manoeuvre takes place without tug without tug boat assistance, the berthing angle may be
boat assistance, the above figures will be increased con- -
larger, say 10 15 degrees (e.g. feeders/coasters 8 1 0 -
siderably. degrees and barges 15 degrees).

For vessel to vessel approaches and the related closing See Figure 2.3.1, Berthing Model
velocities, reference is made in Section 6.5.
Eccentricity factor Ce
Spécial attention is to be paid to berths used by smaller The eccentricity factor can be calculated with the follow-
vessel, e.g. a tug boat jetty, as these smaller vessels tend to ing formula:
berth at relatively high speeds.
K + k** cos (p
2

Ce = K 2+ R 2
In recent décades more and more berths, especially
tanker/chemicai berths, hâve been equipped with berth
< > is 90 degrees:
or simplified, assuming |
approach détection Systems. Information lrom these Sys -
tems, if available, may be used to establish design
approach velocities for spécifie facilities. 2
K
4.2.4 Eccentricity factor (Ce ) Ce = 2
K+R
2

For the eccentricity factor two different scénarios hâve to

!

* \
19 isttfsï
^^emmm '
mm
K - radius of gyration of the vessel (depending on block For large tankers, K can be taken as approximately 0.25
coefficient, see below) (in m) L.
R —distance of point of contact to the centre of the mass
(measured parallel to the wharf ) (in m) In the case where there is no accurate data or, in case only
( j) = angle between velocity vector and the line between a quick assessment is made, the following figures may be
the point of contact and the centre of mass used:

Figure 4.2. 2 Ce Factor shows the relationship. for a continuous berth:

quarter point berthing, the berthing point of the vessel is
some 25% of the vessels length from the bow:
1.0
0.9
-
Ce 0.5

for a berthing dolphin:

0.8 The berthing point of the vessel is some 35% of the ves-

0.7
06
-
sels length from the bow:
Ce 0.7

For Ro/Ro vessels the Ce factor is taken as 1.0 for the end
fenders. /
Cg O 5 )o

0.4 5« 4.2.5 Virtual mass factor (Cm )

<i ?o
0.3 For the Virtual mass factor (also referred to as ’added mass
For berthing model factor' or 'hydrodynamic mass factor') several formulae are in
0.2
diagram see use (Stelson, Malvis, Ueda, B.F. Saurin, Rupert, Grim, Vasco
0.1 Figure 2.3.1 Costa, Giraudet) and much research work has been done.

0 Cm is generally defined as:

0 0.7 02 0.3 0.4
R/L M + Mv
Cm M
Figure 4.2.2 Ce Factor.
As a function of 0 and R/ L M = mass of the vessel (displacement in tonnes)
Mv = virtual mass (in tonnes)
K = (0.19 Cb + 0.11) * L

where:
and cb - M
L* B* D* p Some of the formulae used to obtain input for the calcula-
tion of Cm are given below.
Cb = block coefficient (usually between 0.5 - 0.9, see
below); Shigeru Ueda
M = mass of the vessel (displacement in tonnes); pLD2 *
K
L - length of vessel (in m); Mv ~ “

B - breadth of vessel (in m);

D = draft of vessel (in m); where:
p - density of water (about 1.025 ton/m3 for sea water) p = density of water (about 1.025 ton/m3 for sea water);
L = length of vessel (in m);
Lacking other data, the following may be adopted for the D = draft of vessel as used for calculation of mass of
block coefficient: design vessel (in m).

Table 4.2.2

For container vessels 0.6 - 0.8

for general cargo vessels and bulk carriers: -
0.72 0.85
for tankers: 0.85
for ferries: -
0.55 0-65
for Ro/Ro-vessels -
0.7 0.8

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM 20

 wm
. . *.

The formula of Shigeru Ueda originates from 1981 and is for very large keel clearances ie (0.5 * D):
based on model experiments and field observations. then use Cm = 1.5
for small keel clearances ie (0.1 * D):
The formula can be transformed into: then use Cm = 1.8
;r *D for keel clearances in between 0.1*D and 0.5*D:
Cm - i + 2 Cb * B
use linear interpolation

where: The above Cm values are valid for transverse approaches.

Cfo = block coefficient (see sub section 4.2.4); A Cm value of 1.1 is recommended for longitudinal
B = breadth of the vessel (in m). approaches.

Vasco Costa 4.2 .6 Softness factor ( Cs)

2D This factor is determined by the ratio between the elastic-
CM ~ *+ B ity of the fender System and that of the vessel’s hull. Part
of the kinetic energy of the berthing vessel will be
This formula was published in 1964 and is also used by the absorbed by elastic deformation of the vessel 's hull. Cs
British Standards înstitute. It is valid under the following expresses the kinetic energy portion of the berthing vessel
circumstances: onto the fender.

1) the keel clearance shall be more than 0.1 * D; and The following values are often used :
2) the vessel’s velocity shall be more than 0.08 m/s.
- for soft fenders and for smaller vessels Cs is generally
Conclusion taken as 1.0;
For the purpose of comparison, the above formulae hâve
been used to calculate the values of Cm for several vessels. - for hard fenders and larger vessels Cs lies between 0.9
From Table 4.2.3 Cm Factor, it can be seen that the values and 1.0 (e.g. for VLCC Cs = 0.9).
range between 1.45 and 2.4, whereas the average values
range between 1.51 and 1.99. The British Standard Code of Practice for Maritime
Structures (BS 6349) suggests in Part 4 on the 'Design of
Cm values are influenced by both the vessel characteristics fendering and mooring Systems' that a hard fendering Sys-
and also the amount of water under the vessel (keel clear - tem can be considered as one where the deflections of the
ance). Furthermore, it is clear that the outcome of the for- fenders under impact from ships for which the fenders are
mulae difters and shows différences between each other. designed, are less than 0.15 m.
Each formula has restrictions and must be used with care.
The earlier PIANC report (supplément to bulletin 45, In most cases the contribution of the vessel's hull to the
1984) compared the results of research and formulae. energy absorption is only limited. It can therefore be con-
Unless the designer has good reasons to apply other val- cluded that there appears little merit in maintaining the
ues, it is recommended : distinction between soft and hard fenders . This results in
i
a general value of Cs = 1.0.

Tabel 4.2.3 Cm Factor

.
Cm values for different vessels and selected formuiae The vessel dimensions are actuai ana ap proximale to the 50% confidence lirait shown in Appendix t .
Cb values produced by Akakura from the Lloyds data for the 50% confidence lunit are given beîow as a comparison

vessel 1 vessel 2 vessel 3 vessel 4 vessel 5 vessel 6 vessel 7 vessel 8 vessel 9 vessel 10
container container tanker tanker cargo omise croise ore carrier car ferry cargo
dimensions DWT* 33,000 50,000 100,000 200,000 50,000 131,000 102,000 70,000 13,000 10,000
length T, 260 290 270 325 232 310 272 244 195 144
breadth B 32.2 32.3 39 47.2 30 38.6 35.4 37.8 24 19.4
draft D 12.0 11.0 14.6 19.0 12.7 8.6 8.2 13.3 6.7 8.2
displacement MD 51,000 68, 200 119,700 233,300 68,200 64,400 63,600 84,300 13,000 13,800
Actuai Cb 0.50 0.65 0, 79 0.78 0.75 0.61 0.79 0.67 0.40 059
Akakura Cb 0.66 0.66 0.79 0.79 0.75 0.57 0.57 0.84 0.49 0.75

Cm
Shigeru Ueda 2.18 1.83 1.77 1.81 1.88 1.57 1.46 1.82 2.08 2.13
Vasco Costa 1.75 1.68 1.75 1.81 1.85 1.45 1.46 1.70 1.56 1.85
average 1.96 1.76 1.76 1.81 1.87 1.51 1.46 1.76 1.82 1.99

) * for cruise vessels use GRT

; :

21 Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM

O
’Z ,

4.2.7 Berth configuration factor ( Ce ) for a reasonable abnormal impact due to mishandling or
accident, which will occur from time to time.
The berth configuration factor (also referred to as 'cushion
factor') indicates the différence between an open structure 4.2.8.2 Normal Impact
(e.g. a jetty on piles) and a closed structure (quay wall).
A normal impact is that which is calculated for a particu-
In case a vessel is nearing a closed structure and the gap
' lar berth as set out elsewhere in this report. The energy
between the vessel's hull and the vertical quay wall is clos - calculated for a normal impact will h âve taken into
ing, the water between the vessel and the quay wall will be account the displacement of vessels using the berth includ-
squeezed away. In case it is difficult for the water to be ing the effect of added mass of water, the approach veloc-
squeezed away then the water will act as a cushion and a ity taking into account the type of vessels, frequency of
certain amount of the berthing energy will dissipate, hence use, the famiiiarity of the operator with the berth , the type
reducing the energy to be absorbed by the fender(s). The of berth and its exposure to wind and current.
extent of this cushion effect dépends on several factors:
4.2.8.3 Abnormal Impact
- quay structural support;
An abnormal impact occurs when the normal calculated
energy to be absorbed at impact is exceeded. The reasons
- keel clearance; for abnormal impacts can be mishandling, malfunction or
exceptionally adverse wind or current or a combination of
- velocity and angle at approach; them.
- thickness of the fender; 4.2.8.4 Design for Abnormal Impact

- vessel's hull shape. The factor for Abnormal Impact should be applied to the
berthing energy as calculated for a normal impact to arrive
Basically, if there is an easy way out for the water between at the abnormal berthing energy. This factor should enable
vessel and quay wall, then the cushion effect will hardly reasonable abnormal impacts to be absorbed by the fend-
occur, e.g. in case of a large keel clearance, an angular ering System without damage. It would not be practicable
approach, etc. The same is valid if the approach velocity to design for an exceptionally large abnormal impact and
is so low that the water will not be trapped between vessel it must be accepted that such an impact would resuit in
and quay. damage.

The sélection of the abnormal impact factor should take

Expérience has indicated that for a solid quay wall about into account the following:
one quarter of the energy of a berthing vessel is absorbed
by the water cushion, and therefore the following values (a) The effect that a fender faiiure would hâve on berth
appear to be justified: operations
Berths whose configuration results in dependence on a
- for open berths and corners of quay walls Ce is gene- single fender system or group such that the berth would be
rally taken as 1.0; inoperative if damage was incurred, should be attributed a
higher factor than berths with multiple fenders, or fender-
- for (solid) quay walls under parallel approach is Ce ing Systems, which can continue to operate if one or more
generally taken as 0.9. sustained damage.
N.B. Parallel approaches only occur under highly con- (b) Frequency of berthing
trolled conditions. It is important to bear in mind that for Berths which hâve a high frequency of berthing will sta -
an approach angle in excess of 5 degrees, the cushion dis - tistically h âve a higher probability of abnormal impact and
appears. should be attributed a higher factor.

4.2.8 Factors for Abnormal Impacts (c) Berths with very iow approach velocities
For use whilst the vessel is berthing. Berths which are
4.2.8.1 Introduction designed for very low approach velocities e.g. below 0.1
m/sec requiring a high degree of skill and judgement on
Fenders and fendering Systems not only hâve to cater for behalf of the mariners are more likely to incur abnormal
normal impacts due to the design vessel under maximum impact than berths designed with higher approach veloci-
design conditions, but also hâve to be capable of catering ties requiring less skill. Berths designed for very low

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCQM 22

 approach velocities should therefore be attributed a higher The following table gives general guidance on the sélec-
factor for abnormal impact (refer to Table Na in 4.2.5) tion of the factor for abnormal impact to be applied to the
unless design velocities are in the 95% confidence level. design energv.
This latter can only be achieved with suitable measuring
and feed back Systems. Table No 4.2.5
Type of Berth Impact Vessel Factor for Abnormal
The factor for abnormal impact when derived should not
be less than 1.1 nor more than 2.0 unless exceptional cir- - Impact Applied to
Berthing Energy (Cab)
cumstances prevail. If it is possible to achieve a large con-
fidence value in the approach velocity then the factor for Tanker and Bu î k Largest 1.25
abnormal impact can be 1.0. Cargo Smallest 1.75
(d) Vulnerability of the structure supporting the fender Largest 1.5
Container
or fender System Smallest 2.0
If an abnormal impact results in damage to the structure
supporting the fender or fender System, the cost and time General Cargo 1.75
involved in repairs are likely to be disproportionally large.
The type and vulnerability of the supporting structure is an Ro-Ro and Ferries 2.0 or higher
important considération in determining the factor for
abnormal impact. The fender reactions due to abnormal Tugs, Work Boats, etc. 2.0
impact should be used for the design of the supporting
structure with no réduction in safety factor or load factor Where the berth is to be designed for a range of vessels,
in carrying out the design of the structure. the largest and smallest vessels and their appropriate
berthing energies should be considered.
It is considered advisable to check the supporting structure
-
against failure for loads substantially greater, (of 2 3 times It is recommended that the factors derived from the above
table are then modified in accordance with 4.2.8.4 above.
greater), than the reactions due to abnormal impact
depending on the likely conséquences of damage to the
structure. The factor of abnormal impact when derived should not be
less than 1.1 nor more than 2.0 unless exceptional circum-
The principle of progressive failure may be employed to stances prevail.
ensure that the less expensive and more easily vulnérable
items fail first. If abnormal impacts resulting in damage occur frequently,
the design criteria may h âve been set too low and a re-
(e) Range of vessels using the berth appraisal of both the normal and abnormal criteria should
Where berths are used by a wide range of vessels and the be carried out.
largest vessels, for which the abnormal impact has been
4.2.8.6 Steel panels and fender frames
derived, only use the berth occasionally, the factor for
abnormal impact may be reduced. Conversely, if the
When using limit state codes, appropriate load factors
smallest vessels only use the berth occasionally and the
should be applied to the input loads for the design of Steel
majority are the larger vessels, a higher factor for abnor-
panels and fender frames with considération given to both
mal impact may be appropriate.
the normal and abnormal impact cases. Generally, higher
load factors should apply in the normal impact case and
In any event, care should be taken not to increase the fac-
lower load factors should apply in the abnormal impact
tor for abnormal berthing to such an extent that the fender
case. Both conditions should be checked to détermine the
capacity and consequently the fender reaction becomes worst case, which will not necessarily occur during the
detrimental to small vessels using the berth. abnormal impact case.
(f ) Hazardous cargoes 4.2.8.7 Cbains
Where berths are to be used by vessels with hazardous car-
goes, the manner of berthing should be controlled and When chains are employed, the chain sizes are determined
advantageous environmental conditions chosen such that by multiplying the calculated chain loads by a factor. For
normal impacts are not exceeded. normal impacts the factor should be between 3 and 5. For
abnormal impacts, when chain loads may be higher, the
4.2.8.5 Guidance on sélection of Factor for Abnormal Impact factor should be at least 2. The highest factored load (from
the normal or abnormal impact case) should be less than
)
The designers’ judgement should be paramount in deter - or equal to the Minimum Breaking Load (MBL) of the
mining the appropriate factor. selected chain.
i
23 Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM
 4 , 3 FEND ERS AS PART wind forces shall be smaller than the allowable value of
tension of mooring ropes. The safety factors of tension for
OF MOORING SYSTEM synthetic ropes and wire ropes shall be properly decided.
To reduce sub-harmonic motions in swaying and long peri -
(1) General procedure of fendering System design con- od oscillations in surging, the type and the size of mooring
sidering vessel motions ropes should be properly selected taking into account the
Vessel motion shall be considered against winds and externat forces.
waves, swells, and long period waves entering from the
océan. Especially, in the design of mooring Systems of (d) Strength of vessel hull
offshore deep water terminais, forces due to vessel To prevent excessive concentration of the vessel mooring
motions are also important items to be considered as well forces as well as berthing forces on the fendering Systems
as vessel berthing forces. As for permanent mooring facil - and the vessel, protection panels should be provided as
ities such as vessels used for restaurants, hôtels, musé- required to reduce the load on the unit area (face pressure).
ums, and floating terminais, the mooring Systems includ -
ing fendering Systems shall be designed taking into (e) Shear force on fender
account the motions of vessels or floating bodies due to In general, vessel motions are likely to generate shear
.
winds and waves To evaluate or improve the working forces between the hull of the vessel and the fender face,
ratio of mooring facilities constructed at the sites, adverse due to swaying.
environmental conditions such as winds and waves, the
motions of moored vessels hâve to take into account load - A resin pad (e.g. polyethylene) in front of the protector
deflection characteristics of mooring ropes and fenders. panel is recommended to reduce shearing forces acting on
To estimate mooring forces due to vessel motions, com - the fenders.
puter simulations or hydraulic mode! tests are commonly
used. The method of computer simulation is described in Sometimes the shear forces are favourable or désirable, as
the Chapter 4.5. they can limit the motion of the vessel . The facing should
be chosen to suit the situation.
(2) Items to be considered in restraining vessel motions
Further information can be found in BS 6349, Part 4 ,
(a ) General 1994.
The type and the size of mooring Systems consisting of
fenders and mooring ropes should be decided taking into (f ) Allowable vessel motions
account the following items: For the effective operation of cargo handling, vessel
motions should be smaller than the allowable values.
• deflection and reaction of fenders
• tension of mooring ropes
Allowable vessel motion varies by vessel type, cargo han -
dling equipment and component of motions. Research has
• strength of vessel 's hulls been carried out and the allowable vessel motion whilst
• shear force of fenders
cargo handling are presented in the PLANC Working
• vessel motions Group 24 report (1995) which gives the values of motion
• tidal current and suction by passing vessels
criteria for safe working conditions by compiling the
(b) Fender deflection and reaction research. The vessel motion forms part of the output of the
The maximum fender deflection due to wave and wind integrated computer programmes, described in Chapter
forces during the mooring process must not exceed the 4.5, and should be checked against the allowable motions
allowable value of deflection as well as the maximum given in Working Group Report 24 .
deflection during berthing. Maximum reaction is one of
the largest design forces for mooring facilities. For flexi- 4.4 HlfLL PRESSURE
ble dolphins, maximum fender reaction is usually the
dominant design force. The maximum reaction force While absorbing the berthing energy of a vessel the fend-
needs to be limited, taking into account the strength of a er will give a reaction force to both the vessel and water -
vessel's hull. ff ont structure. Under normal berthing conditions no plas-
tic deformation of the ship’s hull should take place.
The load-deflection characteristics of mooring Systems Unfortunately, vessels are mainly designed to sail, not to
-
shall be considered to reduce sub harmonic motions which berth. Reaction forces of a fender System appears to be of
are due to the asymmetry of load- deflection characteristics little concern to naval architects. Vessels are becoming
of the fenders and mooring ropes. larger and larger, side plate thickness is becoming smaller
and smaller and the distance between web frames is
(c) Tension of mooring ropes increasing. The permissible hull pressures given by ship-
The maximum tension of mooring ropes due to wave and owners are decreasing.
i

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM 24

 < /
<
o\
i

Table 4.4. 1 . Hull Pressure Guide

Type of vessel Hull Pressure kN/m 2

Container vesseis lst and 2nd génération <400

3 rd génération (Panamax) < 300
4th génération <250
5th and 6th génération (Superpost Panamax) <200
General cargo vesseis
=/< 20.000 DWT 400-700
> 20.000 DWT 40 <400
Oil tankers
=/< 60.000 DWT <300
> 60.000 DWT <350
VLCC -
150 200
Gas carriers (LNG /LPG) <200
Bulk carriers <200
SWATH j
RO-RO vesseis } these vesseis are usually belted
Passenger Vesseis }

It should be noted that ships with belting produce a line or vessel owners should be consulted for spécifie require -
load on the fenders and can be considerably higher than ments.
the hull pressure quoted below.
These figures include the factors of safety normally used
4.4 . 1 Hull structure by Classification Societies.

The ships hull structure is generally comprised of three However, if the side plating, longitudinal stiffeners and
components: side traverses data is given, the permissible hull pressure
can be calculated.
1. Side plating, thickness 15-20 mm;
For large vesseis as a rule of thumb the permissible pres-
2. Longitudinal stiffeners, mostly spaced at approximately sure on hull impact is at least equal to the maximum
-
0.86 m 0.90 m; hydrostatic pressure (vessel fully laden / at maximum
draft) which can act on the vesseis hull.
3. Transverse frames.
) Waming:
The dimensions of ail three components may vary with Spécial attention should be paid to the positions of the hor-
type and âge of ship and shipbuilder. izontal chains on a fender panel. When chains are installed
below the fender, the rotation of the fender panel, due to
New tendencies are: the vessel's flare, can be restricted. Line loads may occur
which exceed the permissible hull pressure.
1. the use of Steel with higher strength;
4.5 COMPUTER SIMULATION
2. increasing of distance between transverse frames, e.g.
6.28 m for 5th and 6th génération container vesseis and 4.5 . 1 INTRODUCTION
3.14 m for earlier génération vesseis);
New terminais are increasingly constructed at sites with
3. berthing energies are increasing and allowable hull pres- adverse environmental conditions. Often these terminais
sures decreasing. are without or only with little protection against wind,
waves and currents. These sites are designated to be used
Data about vesseis is hard to get. When data of the vesseis not only by small, manoeuvrable vesseis, but also by large
are not available figures of table 4.4.1 can be used as a and relatively less-equipped vesseis. Heavy demands are
general guide. therefore put on the fendering System , both during the
berthing manoeuvre as well as when the vessel is moored
) Note: Where hull pressures may be critical, naval architect alongside.

25 Report ofWorking Group 33 - MARCOM

In order to design an optimal mooring lay-out and make sophisticated mooring line and especially fender interac -
the best fender choice, it is necessary to détermine in tion which typically act on a much different (far shorter)
advance the interaction between vessel and fenders. For time scale.
difficult site conditions computer simulations provide a
good means to evaluate the complex physical processes The process of the vessel tied alongside is simulated with
and to détermine the external forces acting on fenders. a ‘ moored vessel’ program. These programs simulate the
They also provide the possibility to examine a large num- behavior of the vessel at berth, under varying conditions of
ber of design alternatives in a short period of time. wind, waves and current. Traditional moored vessel simu-
lation programs assume that the motions are relatively
4.5.2 Development of computer programs small, thereby keeping the relative direction of external
forces (waves, wind, current, fenders) constant and/or at a
(1) Traditional computer programs fixed impact point. However at exposed sites the moorings
are often designed to be flexible and the vessel is subject
The dimensions and the layout of a fender System are to relatively large motions where the normal assumption of
determined by the following two distinct processes: ‘small motions’ is no longer valid. Furthermore the vessel
is actually both active as well as moored, when consider-
a) The berthing manoeuvre where the energy to be ing current velocities over 5 knots, or using propeller and
absorbed by the fender is mostly determined by the ves- tugs. J
sel’s speed at the first contact between vessel and fender.
This speed is a fonction of the vessel’s size and the envi- Considering the above, the solution is obvious: an inte-
ronmental conditions. grated computer model for both berthing and moored ves-
sels to be used in modem day terminal design, encom-
b) The vessel moored alongside the berth where the maxi- passing the features of both the traditional models and
mum forces on the fender are determined by the vessel expanding to cope with increasing demands.
motions, generally resulting from wave action.
(2) Integrated programs
For each process a separate computer program is used: a
‘vessel manoeuvring’ program for the berthing process To correctly address the problems for fendering design at
and a ‘moored vessel’ program for the vessel tied along- difficult site conditions it is necessary to use more
side the berth. This works well in design situations where advanced simulation models. These integrated simulation
the site is reasonably protected. However, when consider- models, to be used both for berthing manoeuvres as well
ing présent day projects, more sophisticated computer pro- as moored vessel response, are now being completed and
grams are required to correctly simulate the physics of introduced on the consultancy market. They will especial-
berthing and mooring at unprotected terminal sites, along ly address the following aspects:
océan coasts with high sea and swell waves, or in large
estuaries with large tidal and current variations combined Six degrees of freedom response to first order wave forces
with waves. High velocities and accélérations during the initial contact
with the fenders during berthing and therefore high impact
Traditionally, the berthing process of the vessel is simulat- forces are the resuit of the vessel response to waves. This
ed using a ‘vessel manoeuvring’ program. These programs is of course especially so for less protected berths.
generally simulate the horizontal movement behavior (2D) Therefore, a correct simulation of the vessel berthing
of sailing vessel assisted by tugs if required. These pro- manoeuvre should include the vessel’s first order wave
grams lack a number of features, which are necessary for response in six degrees of freedom and not only mean
the severe environmental conditions at modem project wave drift forces as is commonly the case in manoeuvring
sites. Under these conditions the impact velocity is largely models.
dépendent on the vessel motion in waves during the
berthing manoeuvre, not only on the mean drift force, but -
Space varving wave forces
also on the first order and second order time-varying wave The model must compute and apply ail wave forces in
response. - -
real time within the simulation and not as time series
computed in advances as is usually done in moored vessel
Furthermore the programs mostly use constant coeffi- simulations. Phases and amplitudes of each wave compo -
cients for the hydrodynamic reactions of the vessel, where nent change according to position and orientation of the
under these circumstances only coefficients depending on vessel . This method allows for large motions, for the
the frequency of motion can reproduce the correct motion berthing manoeuvre, and flexible moorings at exposed
and damping behavior. Also they mostly lack sufficient sites or at buoys (SPM’s)

Report of Working Group 33 MARÇOM; 26 -

!
 I
O
-

Multiple wave field design parameters with large variations per parameter, for
It must be possible to model multiple irregular waves (typ- instance vessel type, size, loading condition, approach
ically sea and swell), including bound and free traveling speed, approach manoeuvre, mooring equipment, wave,
long waves. wind, current strength and directions, water level, etc. In
that case and also in cases where a deterministic approach
Time-dependent hvdrodynamic reaction forces might lead to an unnecessarily conservative design , it is
During berthing the physical process changes from a typi- préférable to follow a probabilistic approach.
cally long time-scale (manoeuvring) to a typically short
-
time scale (impact) and back again. This means that the
For the berthing manoeuvre simulation this means that
vessel’s hydrodynamic response characteristics cannot be
based on a number of pre-determined general approach
assumed constant during this process, as is commonly the
strategies, the program must be able to generate a large
case with manoeuvring models which use the added mass
coefficient for zéro speed. A correct simulation demands array of human-pilot like berthing manoeuvres and simu-
frequency-dependent hydrodynamic reaction forces. This late them under a large array of environmental conditions.
introduces, for instance, also a correct hydrodynamic Investigations aimed at generating a generally applicable
damping of the vessel motion when it hits the fender (con- method are presently being considered at universities, but
trary to using constant coefficients in which case the only are still in the early development stage.
damping introduced is that of the fender).
For the moored vessel simulation the situation is some-
-
Time dependent other environmental conditions what more simple. Here only a large number of simula-
Incorporating time-dependent wind (gusts), current flow tions has to be executed, without the necessity to emulate
-
(including dynamic effects) and water level fluctuations human control. Again statistical analysis of the results will
(tide) is important for various locations, both for berthing lead to a probabilistic design force détermination.
(especially wind) as well as for moored vessels.
4.5.3 Computer program spécifications
Detailed mooring and fender interaction
The point of contact with the fender should be determined
The computer simulation programs to be used for the
-
correctly in the three dimensional space. The fender char - design of fendering Systems should model a number of
acteristics (in-line and sheer-component) are to be mod-
eled non-linear, with hystérésis effects and with pile essential effects described in 4.5.2.
deflection characteristics when applicable. Also mooring
lines, mooring buoy facilities, anchors and other mooring (1) Berthing simulation
equipment should be modeled non-linearly.
Berthing simulation program must include effects of:
Sophisticated manoeuvring characteristics of the vessel
This should include correct vessel, propeller and rudder * vessel maneuvering characteristics depending on hull
behavior during close-quarter manoeuvring. form, rudder, propulsion and thrusters
)
Berthing aids * environmental effects such as water depth, wind, waves
Assisting tugs should be modeled at least with their cor
rect résistance and lift/drag characteristics. Also reduced
- and current (location and time dépendent)

towing or pushing effectiveness in waves and wave shield- * assistance of tugboats

ing on the vessel’s lee side should be modeled, as well as
the use of lines and winches during berthing procedure. * non-linear fender modeling and three-dimensional
détermination of the vessel's hull point of contact with
Qutput
the fender
Simulation results should be available both in the form of
-
time signals of vessel motions (incl . velocities and accél-
* actual characteristics of rudder and propeller with
érations), mooring line forces, fender forces and vessels
track, as well as visually animated both in the horizontal detailed modeling of the interaction between rudder,
and vertical plane in order to allow for a better under - propeller and hull. This allows for realistic vessel
standing of difficultés or problems encountered with a maneuvering in ail modes of operation (maneuvering
spécifie design. ahead, astern, sideways, accelerating, stopping, being or
pushed).
(3) Stochastic simulation
* use of controllable pitch propellers and multiple pro-
Sometimes design conditions include a large number of pellers

« mmmÊmmmgÊÊÊsmm
27
*detailed tug modeling with towing and pushing possibil- of motions of moored vessel becomes a second order dif-
ity; control of towing-line length, towing position and tow - ferential équation with six degrees of freedom.
ing angle; tug effectiveness must be realistically restricted
depending on the speed and relative direction of the tow, There are two simulation methods for time domain analy -
of the tugs own speed and of the waves at the tug location; sis of the équation of motions as follows.
when required for probabilistic design: use of a computer
-
pilot-emulator who steers the vessel in a human like fash- The équation of motions of T-l is shown as follow:
ion and Controls engine, rudder and assisting tugs, based
on a human of pre-determined basic strategies.

(2) Moored vessel simulation i=t - i=l i !

£=
X(M,+mÿ( M<) + Z ( 1' Li/ t-'t)X,( T )dT+Dl( t)) (4.5.1.1)

a) General idea of simulation where, Mu; Vessel’s mass, Constant added mass,
Moored vessel programs must be dynamic, six degree of Xi(t); Vessel displacement at time t, Lij(t)\ Retardation
freedom time-domain simulation models and should function, Di(t); Damping force due to mooring lines and
include effects of: viscosity at time t, Cij ; Restoring force coefficient, Gij ;
Mooring force coefficient, and Fj(t); External forces at
irregular waves from multiple directions time t. And i and j show the mode of vessel motions (1-6).

• simultaneous application of multiple wave Systems, viz. The retardation function and the constant added mass are
short waves, swell, bound and free traveling long waves calculated as follows:
and seiches
L ÿ( t )= —1 °° B
• first order wave forces and wave drift forces ^
m,{<*>)= 4 )(a)+
^^ l Ljjcosotda (4.5.1.2)

• wind, including gusts

• time-dependent current flow (including dynamic effect)

(

^ “ ( t )sinotdt

where, Aijfa ); Added mass at CT, 2?ÿ(o); Damping coeffi

cient at CT and CT, angular frequency.
(4.5.1.3)

-
and water-level fluctuations (tide)
The équation of motions of T-2 is shown as follow:
• water motions induced by passing vessels (surface,
flow, waves and wash)

• hydrostatic and hydrodynamic (added mass, damping)

.^
£ ( M +A
î=t
oWim i
/= /
(W«0 +A(0)+ i (C9+ GtfiMrFJ®
M

reaction forces (4.5.1.4)

• non-linear models of mooring lines, fenders, buoy moo- -

In T l method, radiation forces do not dépend on one
ring facilities, anchors and other mooring equipment frequency because of the retardation function. On the
other hand, radiation forces in T-2 method are set to be
• forces dépendent on the actual vessel’s location, orien
tation and velocity (commonly moored vessel models
- constant at one period, CT0 . Radiation forces are usually
represented the value at the significant wave period or at
assume the motions of the vessel to be small and keep the natural period of vessel motions. When the spectrum
the relative direction of external forces constant) of external forces is wide band, it is better to use the équa-

• fender forces applied at the correct point-of -contact in

tion of T l . -
the three-dimensional space c) Specified simulation method considering actual
fender performance (Hybrid Simulation)
• possibility for the application of spécial fender con-
In the simulation, the fender effect is regarded as com-
structions and winch layouts
pressive reaction force on one direction. But in the actual
• output in the form of time-signals of vessel motions,
usage in mooring, not only the compression but also shear -
mooring line forces and fender forces. ing and bending forces due to the moored vessel motions
act on the fenders. So, the fender performance will be
b) Ordinary simulation method changed variously by many factors such as viscous-elastic
A moored vessel has six components of motion, i.e . surge, characteristics of rubber itself and Chemical reasons. In
sway, heave, roll, pitch and yaw. Some components such as order to improve the fender performance description in the
sway and roll interact each other. Therefore, the équation simulation, a specified simulation method considering

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM 28

i
 ' -N

<1
r\ ^

the actual fender performance (hybrid simulation) is sway and yaw. But for a vessel near solid quay, ail six
developed. Hybrid simulation can be also considered the degrees of freedom of movement are coupled together by
speed factor, température factor, including compression the asymmetric flows around the vessel. It should be con-
characteristics and shearing characteristics of fender in the sidered that the radiation forces are influenced by not only
feed back procedure. It is composed of a computer and tri- the quay but also the under keel clearance of the vessel.
axial exciters (sway, ro î l, heave). In the simulation, the
external forces are calculated and stored in memory 4.6. FENDER SELECTION
beforehand. During the simulation, the computer inté-
grâtes the équations of motions using the real time fender When the energy to be absorbed by the fender has been
forces from the tri-axial exciters giving simultaneously the calculated in line with the preceding, the most appropriate
vessel motions to each exciter. fender System can be selected. Each fender manufacturer
provides in his brochures the performance data of the var-
4.5.4 External forces on moored vessel ious fender types he produces. The actual performance of
the fenders not only dépends on the type of fender, the size
(l )Wave forces and the elastomer material grade, but also on several exter -
Wave forces acting on the vessel's hull are the hydrody - nal conditions. The performance of fenders is (in most
namic forces due to incident waves to the moored vessel. cases) influenced by angular compression, by the tempér -
They are usually calculated by using a potential theory ature, by the compression speed, etc.
which is in the frequency domain analysis. Wave forces
due to irregular waves are also calculated by superposition The standard fender performance as presented in the
of component wave forces by taking phase différences into brochures is the resuit of fender tests under certain ambi-
account. The frequency spectra of Bretschneider- ent and compression conditions. The déviation from the
Mitsuyasu, JONSWAP or any other type can be used to standard fender performance, as a resuit of the different
simulate irregular waves. conditions to be experienced on site, is to be taken into
account when the final sélection of fender.
Generally, it is necessary to distinguish between short peri-
od waves (storm and swell waves, with period less than Furthermore, the manufacturer’s brochures often indicate
20s) and long period waves, also known as long waves, that the actual fender performance may deviate (e.g. some
with periods typically between 30s and 5 min. and ampli- 10%) from the figures quoted for both energy absorption
tudes smaller than normal waves.
capacity and reaction force.
(2)Wind forces
It is common practice to adopt the performance figures at
The drag coefficients by wind are determined, according
rated deflection as the reference, hence those figures
to the results of the wind tunnel test. The frequency spec-
should be higher than the calculated figures (taking into
tra of wind by Davenport, Hino or any other type are used
account the possible influences as described above).
in the simulation as a fluctuating wind speed.
J (3)Current forces The fender performance is usually valid only if the fender
Current forces are caused by pressure drag. Normally for has been preconditioned by compression to the rated val-
vessels moored in a harbour basin the current velocity is ues, at least three times before use. If not, the first maxi -
negligible, while for berth in rivers or estuaries the current mum compressions produced by a vessel, may well give
velocity may be considérable and cause problems. higher than expected reactions

(4)Added mass and damping Appendix D présents two case studies showing the effects
In the simulation of vessel motions, the effect on added of température, berthing/compression speed, etc.
mass and damping forces shall be considered. Radiation
forces are hydrodynamic forces, due to the compulsory Besides the energy and the above aspects, various other
vessel motion of unit amplitude for each component. For criteria do play a significant rôle as already indicated in
convenience in the computer simulation, these are divided Figure 2.3.
into a component proportional to the vessel's accélération
(added inertia forces) and a component proportional to the E.g. possible limitations with respect to the area to which
vessel’s velocity (damping forces). the fender can be mounted, limitations with respect to the
-
maximum reaction force, the required stand off distance,
The added mass and damping coefficients considerably etc. Furthermore, it may be even the case that the moored
dépend on the frequency. And, for a free vessel , heave, vessel conditions are more critical than the conditions dur-
pitch and surge are coupled together and, separately, roll, ing the berthing procedure.

i
29 Report of Working Group 33 - MARGOM
1

:
I JP

.
5 WHOLE LIFE Wherever possible, backing timbers should be provided
for ail facing timbers and, except in very cold environ-
CONSIDERATIONS ments, should be chosen to be résistant to marine borers.

Timber Research and Development Association (TRADA)

SJ INTRODUCTION publications (published in the UK) provide useful infor -
mation on the likely résistance of timber, species by
By its very nature any fender system will sustain impact species, to attack by marine borers.
from vessels, and thus the general philosophy of fender
design is to ensure that the whole system can cater for 5.2.2 Resin ( Polyethylene)
these impacts by, in the first instance, being robust but also
being easily repairable. What is sought in fender design is This material provides a particularly low friction surface
a cushion for the vessel which remains in place for the for facing of fender panels and is most widely used as a
maximum time possible. facing for modem fender Systems, especially Ultra High
Molecular Weight (UHMW) polyethylene.
It can be expected that rubber fender units that comply
with the Spécification given in Appendix E of these guide- 5.2.3 Steel
iines, can achieve a working life in excess of 20 years.
Fender panels should be designed to give a service life of Where frequent berthing takes place, such as ferry ports,
20 years assuming adéquate and planned maintenance, but the most appropriate fender face has been found to be
in practice this often is not achieved due to vessel damage . Steel . High friction forces can occur between the vessel’s
hull and the fender face, which can be bénéficiai when
5.2 FACING vessels are berthed at lively locations. Considération,
however, should be given to the effects of bimetalic corro -
Facing usually comprises one of the following: sion when using Steel facing for any fender system .

a) Timber Caution in design must be taken, concerning the possibil-

ity of sparks arising from Steel to Steel contact when
b) Resin (Polyethylene) designing crude oil, Chemical products and gas terminais.

c) Steel 5.3 FENDER SUPPORT SYSTEMS

Each requires particular considération in detailing to The three Systems of fender support, those of pile and
ensure longevity of the facing and consequently of the frame, chain suspension and unit support, need to take into
supporting structure. account the requirement for a fender system to remain
operative even though damage may h âve been sustained by
Facing of whichever material requires appropriate fixing
an exceptional impact. It is préférable to hâve units which
and through bolts should be used whenever possible.
are easily removed before the next berthing takes place. A
berth can usually remain in service despite a réduction in
Vessels with beiting can be particularly damaging to fac-
the fender provision, provided that the loss of a unit or its
ings. An extra wear allowance may be appropriate if ves - supporting structure does not foui the berth. For this rea-
sels with beiting are berthed frequently or if the beiting on
the vessels is poorly maintained. son, whenever possible, fenders should hâve “ keep chains”
to enable the damaged fender to be recovered including an
The use of the three facing materials is indicated below. additional keep chain where vertical chains are used to
support the fender panel.
5.2. 1 Timber
Chains are to provide support of fender panels or against
Timber is a useful facing material but care should be taken latéral loading of the fender system. These should be gal-
to ensure that material is obtained only from sustained vanised and the chain System should hâve an overload fail-
renewable forests. ure element which will fail first. Anchor plate fixings
should be substantially stronger than the overload failure
The choice of timber facing will be limited by supply but element within the chain System to avoid damage to the
in general “wild” grained timbers such as elm are préfér- parent structure. This will enable new chains to be used,
able. Greenheart and similar hardwoods are useful for with confidence, after an exceptional impact has parted
backing timbers but not for facing. the chain System. )

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM - 30

 < 1

^ OE H

The framing to any facing material should be designed to This is particularly true of fendering in ports which reçoive
enable any repairs to be undertaken easily. For instance, belted vessels. Damage to the belting or to the fender face
considération shouid be given to the type of joints for the breaks the accommodation between the two and thus the
backing members. It shouid be remembered that when a damaged face of one causes damage to the other.
fender panel is in need of repair it is usualiy because the
vessel causing the damage has approached the berth at such Timber facing must be maintained so that ad équate clear-
an angle as to impact behind the normal berthing line. ance is always provided from the timber face to embedded
boit heads. This is of particular importance at berths where
5.4. WORKMANSHIP AND Petroleum products or hazardous cargoes are handied.
DETAIL ING Steel wearing plates can be tolérant to deformation but
renewal of wearing plates shouid be considered if persis-
The longevity of any fender system is dépendent upon the tent damage is sustained.
amount of use, inspection and maintenance of the System.
In order for the berth to remain in use, it is more practica - 5.6 FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
ble to hâve fender units which can be replaced .
Nevertheless, the damaged unit shouid be repairable.
Good workmanship and detailing will assist repair and In deciding upon the fender system to be provided at a
maintenance and some examples are given below: berth, considération shouid be given to the likely advances
in vessel design. In recent years, advances in naval archi -
a) Ail bolts greased with waterproof grease prior to tecture hâve produced very different shaped hulls from the
assembly. Any coach bolts in timber similarly treated. classic ship shape.

b) Provision of spécifie overload failure éléments in the -

In Ro Ro vessel design threshold heights hâve increased
system. dramatically. This can cause the vessel’s belting to overtop
the fendering Systems provided. Damage has thus
c) Seam welding to ail plating. occurred due to the vessels belting “sitting” on the fender
units. Provision of tapered tops to the fenders can prevent
d) Care in application of any coating System. this occurrence.

The provision of capital spares shouid be considered as

5.5 INSPECTION AND manufacturers are not necessarily able to produce a
MAINTENANCE replacement fender unit up to 20 years after the provision
of those installed at inception. Berthing structures can
Inspection régimes will vary from installation to installa - thus be safeguarded by the rapid replacement of adéquate
fendering.
tion depending upon the ffequency of call of vessels and
the exposure of the berths.
) 6. SPECIAL CASES
It is suggested that for ports which are normally busy,
inspection of the fender system shouid be organised into
two sections; that provided by the operator’s mooring crew, 6.1 CONTAINER SHIPS AND
and that provided by the maintaining organisation.
BARGES
Pre-berthing and post berthing visual inspections by the
mooring crew provides some protection against accumula - 6.1 .1 Introduction
tive vessel impact damage. Such inspections must be
recorded. This section addresses the fendering requirements for ves-
sels which are dedicated to the transportation of con-
Visual inspection by the maintaining organisation is best tainerised cargo. Containerisation of cargo is generally
done on a low tide cycle and inspection will be dépendent based on 20 foot équivalent unit (TEU) or forty foot
upon occupancy of the berth, the aim shouid be for month- équivalent unit (FEU) formats. Containers are manufac -
ly inspection. If the tidal range is large and mobile sus- tured in a range of types which include dry box, refriger-
pended access is not available, boat access will be ated freight and liquids in tanks.
required.
Container vessels range in size from small feeder vessels
The prime cause of rapid détérioration of a fender system is which may carry 70 TEU, or less, up to vessels which at
) the neglect of the fender face in whatever type of material. présent carry in excess of 6,000 TEU. Large container

'
•
•
31 :
 vessels may soon exceed 8,000 or even 12,000 TEU. Container vessel hulls, like most other vessels, are not
Historically container vessels hâve been restricted to designed to take high external loads from fenders.
Panamax size, with a beam less than 32.2 métrés. The Considération must always be given to the spreading of
large vessels now constructed are Post Panamax with fendering System loads evenly along the side of the vessel.
beams in excess of 32.2 m é trés. Certain classes of vessels are constructed with large
amounts of high tensile Steel. In the more structurally sen-
Many small vessels hâve self loading and unloading capa- sitive areas of these vessels damage will generally com-
bility or Ro/Ro capacity. Larger vessels are restricted to mand a premium cost to repair.
berths in terminais where cranage has sufficient outreach.
Dedicated refrigerated cargo vessels, “Reefers”, often h âve Container berths and their fendering Systems will general -
container capacity and may be geared for self loading and ly be required to cater for a wide range in vessel sizes and
unloading. Many vessels are capable of carrying a mix of configurations, including barges. The types of port will
refrigerated and non-refrigerated containers. Containers generally dictate the type of service and therefore the ves-
are stored in the holds of vessels and on hatch covers at sels which will berth.
deck level. Some classes of vessels are hatchless and many
use cellular guides. Combination vessels are capable of Rolling motion of a vessel, especially during self unload-
transporting a mix of containers and bulk or break bulk
ing, can be reduced by selecting a high friction fender.
cargoes. Tÿpically these vessels are fitted with vessel's
gear and are not totally dépendent on quayside cargo han-
dling equipment to load and offload containers. The par-
The prévention of catching or hanging up and consequen -
tial damage of vessel sides and structures with the lower or
ticular problem associated with these vessels is the need to
higher edges of the fendering System must be considered.
keep fender panels below the quay level to permit landing
of the quarter ramps which are fitted to some vessels.
The topside tiare, both fore and aft, of ail modem seago -
ing container vessels is considérable, but as each vessel or
class of vessel is unique, guidance can not be given on the
Container barges are configured to transport a range of
expected tiare.
containerised cargoes. The vessels are used either for tran -
shipment from the vessel to shore or for shipment on rivers
or canals. Therefore these barges corne in a broad range of 6.1 .3 Design of Fenders for Container Vessels
sizes, lengths and freeboards. Not ail barges can be
assumed to be fitted with belting fenders. Generally Fender Spacing and Layout:
barges are unlikely to be fitted with their own cargo han-
dling equipment. However, there are local variations Fendering Systems should be designed to spread the berth
where transhipment barges do hâve cranage. loads evenly along as much of the vessel side as is possi-
ble. Many vessels hâve considérable amounts of topside
6.1 .2 Particular Aspects to be Considered Rare forward and ait, below main deck level. In the bow
the amount of curvature in the main deck, in plan view,
Fendering for container vessels has to consider the follow
ing spécifie issues:
- will also vary. As a resuit the parallel or fiat areas of the
side of a vessel may be reduced by as much as one third,
or more, of its overall length.
Increased eff ï ciency in cargo handling has significantly
reduced the time a vessel spends alongside a berth. Tidal range and the shape of the vessel will dictate the ver-
Reduced turn around times translate into a higher frequen- tical dimension of the fendering. The lower edge of the
cy of berthing. fendering will need to be positioned so as to prevent the
possibility of the fendering catching on low freeboard ves -
Berths at major terminais will be expected to operate year sels at low States of the tide. The upper edge of the fend -
round in a range of weather conditions. ering will need to be configured so as to prevent or accom -
modate contact being made with vessels with considérable
Large container vessels rely upon shore cargo handling amounts of flare.
equipment therefore the crâne outreach is of critical
importance. In general, the horizontal distance from Certain lengths of wharf edge may be required, additional-
wharf face to fender face should be kept to a practicable ly to permit use of quarter or vessel side ramps. It may be
minimum , in order to reduce the required crâ ne outreach. necessary to make provision to enable certain sections of
There must be sufficient clearance to reduce the chance of fendering to be removed or substituted for different types
the Rare of the vessel hitting a cr âne leg at the edge of the of vessels or means of cargo handling at container quays,
quay, for example. even though the declared traffic is initially containers.

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM 32

 6.2 RO / RO VESSELS in double contact between the vessel and the fender with
the second contact either at the top or bottom of the panel
Ï NCLUDING FERRIES depending on the level of contact. This needs to be
checked and if it is considered unacceptable then one of
6.2. 1 Introduction the following may be required:
This section considers ail roll on/roll off vessels carrying • a long lever arm pivot fender for example using a fender
freight, either unaccompanied, that is on road, rail or ves- pile to ensure that the fender face does not tilt exces-
sels’ traders or cassettes without tractor units or drivers, or sively.
accompanied, this is with individual tractor units and road
traders with drivers and trade cars. The criteria for freight • parallei movement fender System for example based on
vessels and passenger ferries hâve considérable overlap torsion bar.
with the distinction that passenger ferries may hâve more
frequent berthings and faster turnarounds. Passenger fer- It is important to ensure that the facing panel extends suf -
ries wdl generally hâve a greater number of openings such ficiently far vertically so that the belting cannot ride over
as Windows and doors as well as protubérances such as
lifeboats for which due considération must be given.
the top or get caught underneath the panel whilst the ves
sel is on the berth. The panel should be designed to cater
-
for a tidaî range from LÀT to HAT plus an allowance for
Ro/Ro vessels can be divided into two main categories as
weather variations and for operational variations in vessel
follows: draught and trim during loading/unloading.
(a) Vessels with bow and/or stem ramps which require a
In order to satisfy this requirement, the fender panels often
shore ramp structure at the bow or stem.
hâve to extend above the quay level. The effect that this
may hâve on the mooring lines should be checked to
(b) Vessels with side or quarter ramps which can be land - ensure that the vessel can be moored safely. This can cause
ed on the quay. Side and quarter ramps are particularly
problems where vessels with side or quarter ramps are to
appropriate where the tidal range is small and a fixed con-
be accommodated and where the berth is also used for
ventional quay is suitable for landing ramps. Many vessels
however, hâve the capability to cope with a range of levels,
other cargo vessels. In these cases, it may be not accept -
able to extend the fender panel above the quay in which
for example, by having long quarter ramps or side ramps
case the top of the fender panel should be sloped to pre-
which can operate off different decks within the vessel . vent the belting sitting on the fender panel . This results in
Where the tidal range is large, it may be necessary to pro- significant downward vertical forces on the fender which
vide a f îoating pontoon to land the vesseTs ramp. should be allowed for in the design.
6.2. 2 Particular Aspects to be Considered (c) Ro/Ro vessels often hâve a large windage area relative
to their displacement . This combined with the requirement
The fendering for Ro/Ro vessels when compared with to operate in ail weather conditions increases the likeli-
other vessels has to take into account the following fac - hood of a heavy berthing.
tors:
It should be noted however, that Ro/Ro vessels are usually
a) Ro/Ro vessels usually require a short tum around time
very manoeuvrable with bow or stern thrusters and / or
in port - consequently the vessels are more likely to berth
at higher approach speeds. The tight schedules that Ro/Ro
other similar equipment fitted.
vessels usually operate often resuit in them having to berth
in unfavourable weather conditions. Additionaliy, berths 6.2 . 3 Ship Berthing Manoeuvres
are likely to be subject to more berthings per year and
delays due to damage to the fendering System are less 6.2 . 3.1 Transverse Ship Approach to the Berth
acceptable when compared to other cargo berths. It is par-
ticularly important that fendering Systems for Ro/Ro Berthing alongside transverse to the berth may be consid-
berths are designed to be robust and easily maintained. ered in the following cases:

b) Ro/Ro vessels are usually fitted with a belting strip, or a) For vessels with side and quarter ramps.
multiple belting strips, which projects fforn the hull. This
belting is usually located at the level of the main trader b) For vessels with bow and/or stem ramps, when the
deck and is typically 250mm high and 300mm wide. This Ro/ Ro vessels make a transverse approach to the berth .
results in the vessels applying a line load to the fenders. The vessels then move along the quay often under moor-
ing winch control, using the side fenders for guidance until
To overcome this, the fendering usually is provided with a they are the appropriate distance from the shore ramp
) suitably stiff facing panel. Such facing panels may resuit structure.

33 Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM

i
 For new dedicated Ro/Ro facilities the berth will usually The method of departing from the berth should also be
hâve independent breasting fenders with no continuons considered. Ro/Ro vessels often leave the berth by mov-
quay. However, where the berth caters for both Ro/Ro and ing along the berth on the main engines while using a bow
conventional cargo or uses an existing berth, there may be thruster to move the bow out and then départ. This may
a continuous quay. require the fender adjacent to the shore ramp to be
designed for extra forces from the vessel during turning.
6.2.3.2 Head on Vessel Approach to the Berth
For modem vessels (last génération Ro/Ro), it is necessary
Berthing head on is normally only practised by regularly to consider the flare angle during the fender sélection
scheduled Ro/Ro ferries on shorter routes. For this process. The hull geometry, over the impact area should
berthing manoeuvre, side breasting dolphins are provided be considered in both horizontal and vertical planes.
as a guide to the vessel but the vessel berths directly
against the shore ramp structure or a separated end fender. When determining the eccentricity factor (Ce), account
should be taken that the values of the block coefficient
In principle, this method of berthing is not preferred as any
berthing accident may damage the shore structure at the
-
may be lower for Ro/Ro vessels (Cb = 0.7 0.8) than for
normal cargo vessels. It should be noted that the centre of
most critical and complex part of the Ro/Ro shore faci-lities. gravity of Ro/Ro vessels does not lie in the centre of the
vessel length, but is fiirther towards the stern.
One version of nesting fenders is where fenders guide the
) vessel into and hold the vessel in the correct transverse 6.2 .4.2 End Fenders
location. This System is generally only used on short
scheduled Ro/Ro ferry routes with dedicated vessels. The In some instances, end fenders are provided not only
fendering would be designed to suit a particular vessel and where vessels berth end on but also where vessels berth
if an alternative vessel is used, it may be necessary to mod- transversely, usually to prevent the vessel accidentally
ify the vessel so as to présent the same profile to the fend- striking the shore ramp. When this should be provided is
ering. Large transoms may hâve to be allowed for in the a matter of judgement on how far the vessel has to moor
design of any side fendering. from the shore end ramp (this dépends on the length of the
vessel’s ramp), the wind, wave and current conditions at
6.2.4 Design of Fendering the berth, the manoeuvrability of the vessels and any
manoeuvring restrictions at the berth.
6.2.4.1 Side Fenders
Operational expertise of the vessels should be considered .
Side fenders should be designed in accordance with
Section 4, taking into account the higher berthing speeds Some older Ro/Ro vessels hâve blunt ended ramps without
and frequency of use. finger flaps. The ramp is landed into a recess in the shore
ramp. In these circumstances, end fendering has to be pro-
The fender spacing should be assessed taking into account vided to ensure that excessive forces are not applied to the
the vessel characteristics and berthing procedure but shore ramp from the blunt end of the vessePs ramp.
should not normally be greater than 0.25L, where L. is the
) length of the smallest vessel using the berth. Where a con- End fenders can be installed in one of three positions as
tinuous quay is provided, the spacing will usually be dos- follows:
er than this with similar requirements for checking bow
radius, flare and quay overhang as for other vessels. 1. At the vessels end of the shore ramp.
In this case the vessel strikes the fender directly and the
Berthing mode and spacing is indicated on Figure 6.2.1. force is usually transmitted to the abutment via the
shore ramp. The large reaction force needs to be taken
Attention is drawn to the effect of the belting on the height into account in the design and maintenance of the hinge
of the fender panel (see Section 6.2.2), and if the panel has bearings.
to extend above the quay level, the effect on mooring Unes
and side and quarter ramps will need to be checked. 2. At the shore end of the shore ramp.
A fender is installed between the shore ramp and its
The lead in fender should usually be designed for a mid- abutment. The vessel strikes the shore ramp which
point berthing. At some berths this fender may also need transmits the impact into the fender. The considérable
to allow for vessels to be turned. horizontal movement of the shore ramp needs to be
taken into account in the design and construction of the
In ice conditions, ferries often hâve to berth by sliding ramp supporting System and as a resuit this arrange -
along the berth and leaning against the fender panel. This ment tends to be more suitable for buoyant or semi-
is done to push ice blocks off the berth, which may cause buoyant shore ramps rather than lift Systems. It can
) extra transverse loads to fenders. however be used for the latter.

!
35 Report ofWorkmg Grouj) .33 MARGéH? "
^
O

This System tends to be used where it is important that should be sought from the ship builder to establish Cm and
the vessel is berthed very close to the shore ramp, for model tests may be required.
example where the vessel is used to help support the
weight of the ramp. -
Where it is not possible to carry out model tests, a reason
able approximation has been observed using published
3. Independently of the shore ramp, for example on an formulae, as shown in 4.2.5 subject to the following mod -
independent fender beam. This will usually be more ifications to input data:
expensive than the other options as an independent
structure will be required. Mv = L* D* B
The independent end fender located in position 3 is pre - L = Average submerged length
ferred and in any case is recommended where end berthing D = Average draught calculated by dividing the sub-
is to be the normal method. Where vessels berth trans- merged elevational area by the average submerged
versely and the fendering is only provided in case of acci- length
dents locations, 1 and 2 may be acceptable. B =Maximum width of a single hull below water
Vessels with bow ramps (generally ferries) présent partic-
Mv = Mass of a single hull
ular problems. The end fendering has to be designed to
ensure that the vessel strikes the fender whilst providing By adopting such modifications, the effect of twin hulls is
sufficient clearance between any bulbous bow and the taken into account by using the full displacement in the
shore ramp structure. Spécial considération needs to be energy équation.
given to any facing as the bow stem produces a large con-
centrated load . It is advisable to calculate values of Cm using ail of the
published formulae before selecting a value.
End fenders should be designed in accordance with
Section 4. Where the energy équation is used the full dis-
placement of the vessel should be used and considération 6.3.2 Settine Out of Fender Line
given to the appropriate Virtual mass to be allowed .
The beltings on certain HSC ferries curve on plan and élé -
6.3 HIGH SPEED CRAFT - vation. It is important to ensure that fender faces engage
with the parallel parts of the belting. Considération may
CATAMARANS, need to be given to angling the fender faces to suit the
SWATBS AND MONOHULLS shape of the vessel .

As defined in the IMO International Code of Safety for Certain fast ferries operate with fixed stem connections to
High Speed Craft (HSC Code) Resolution MSC.36(63). purpose made linkspans such that they do not rely upon
the fenders for support whilst at the berth. With such Sys-
Spécial attention should be given for the design of berths tems it is important to establish a fixed setting out line for
for High Speed Craft (HSC). These vessels are usually con- the fender face so that the vessel can use the fenders to
structed of aluminium and as a conséquence are more sus- align itself with the linkspan before finally reversing and
ceptible to impact damage than a Steel vessel. It is impor - engaging with the attachment mechanism .
tant that the fendering contacts the vessel at the correct
.
location and not in concentrated points Particular consid- The positions of the fixed setting out line should be suffi-
ération should be given to parallel motion fenders, e.g. tor-
ciently close to the vessePs final berthed position to permit
sion bar, as fast ships are less likely to be tolérant of dou- easy engaging with the linkspan . Sufficient distance must
ble contacts. Pneumatic fendering may be appropriate in
be allowed to ensure that the vessel is clear of the fender
some instances. Berths are often specialised, designed for
line whilst it is attached to the linkspan, say 100mm.
spécifie vessels especially for fast freight vessels .
6.3 . 3 Fender Panel Heighî
6.3. 1 Virtual Mass Factor, Cm ,
for Catamaran Craft Due to the relatively light displacement, HSC ferries are
very susceptible to variations in draught during loading
Multi- hulled vessels tend to hâve a greater beam to length and unloading and are more lively when at the berth. The
ratio than conventional vessels - therefore considération designer should obtain a full appréciation of factors which
should be given to the virtual mass, which may be signifi- affect the vessel draught, when determining the fender
cantly more than for a similar mono-hulled vessel. Advice face panel height. Important considérations are:

i
Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM 36
 • light freeboard • Ensure that face panel edges incorporate an adéquate
lead in and that the face panel can rotate on plan to
• laden freeboard accommodate angled berthing without resulting in
damage due to point loads
• heel during loading
• Ensure that the face panel facing surface is of suitable
• variations in freeboard aiong the length of the vessel material and that fixing bolts are well recessed
during berthing and loading
• Where floating pneumatic fenders are used against the
• roll and heave due to environmental conditions and hulls of aluminium ferries, chain net fittings should not
passing vessels. be used . If used, the chains should be fully sleeved to
avoid Steel to aluminium contact.
Where major maintenance operations are to be performed,
such as removing water jets or repairing hul î membranes, 6.3.7 Underwater À ttachments
the abnormal draught conditions, where one part of the
vessel is ballasted clear of the water, may need to be
and Hull Construction
catered for.
Many HSC ferries hâve underwater attachments which
6.3.4 Vessel Approach Angle protrude beyond the hull line. These include:
;

Many modem fast ferries incorporate sophisticated power • ride control fins
Systems which permit a high degree of control and
manoeuvrability. High windage areas and low displace - • fixed bilge keel fins
ment increases the possibilité of manoeuvring difficulties
at low speeds in gusty conditions. Considération should • hydrofoils
be given when designing and detailing the fenders, to
accommodate initial vessel contact at relatively steep • bulbous keels
angles.
• water jets.

6.3.5 Vessel Beltings It is important to understand fully the configuration of

such projections and of the underwater hull profile to
First point of contact on HSC must be the belting. The ensure that the fender and the fender support structure do
beltings on HSC ferries are usually fabricated from alu - not conflict with them, whilst the vessel is at rest or during
minium plate or extrusions. berthing when the fender panel may be deflected .

Such beltings, which may be multiple, may hâve some of 6.3.8 Vessel Superstructure
the following characteristics:
The superstructure on HSC is usually of light weight alu -
• low allowable contact pressure minium construction, or similar. It is important to ensure
that the fenders do not contact such superstructure partie-
• susceptibility to point load damage during angled ularly during berthing at low water, when the deflected
berthing fender face panel may be angled out at the top.

• susceptibility to abrasion damage from Steel faced 6.4 LARGE VESSEL

fenders, bolts on timber or polyethene facings

• susceptibility to galvanic corrosion with prolonged 6.4.1 INTRODUCTION

contact with dissimilar metals. ‘Large Vessel is defined in 1.5.6 .
1

6.3 6 Fender Contact Face

,
6.4. 2 Layout of dolphins
Due to the nature of hulls of High Speed Craft, to avoid for berthing a large vessel
damage to the vessefs belting, the fender designer should
incorporate the following features into the fender design : For the fixed berthing facilities for large vessel, the cargo
handling platform is to be central, with a pair of breasting
• Width of fender face panel to suit berthing reaction load dolphins and inner & outer mooring dolphins arranged on
without over stressing belting each side.

37 Report of Working Group 33 - MÀRCOM

 z
Breast Lines ooring Dolphin

Loadlng Platform

Spring Lines
Breast Lines

Breastîng Dolphin

w Sub Dolphin
Stem Lines
t Bow Lines

i
Figure 6.4 . 1 Layout of dolphins for berthing large vessels
j

In case the vessel length is smaller than the nominated able, refer to Appendix C for vessel's dimensions.
berth, sub-dolphins should be positioned if necessary.
Figure 6.4.1 shows the general layout for each dolphin. The displacement of the vessel, which is the important fac-
Bow and stem lines will effect the vessel motion when tor for the calculation of berthing energy, is calculated by
alongside the berth. the équation also shown in Appendix C, and it can be
applied for 95% of the likely vessels.
As the tension in the mooring lines effect the compression
of the various fenders, this will hâve a marked effect on the 6.5 VESSEL TO VESSEL
fendering System, as a whole.
Introduction
6.4.3 Fender System for the large vessel
Design consid érations for fenders for vessel to vessel
Fender Systems should be determined considering not only
operations are somewhat different ffom those for vessel to
the absorption of the external load by the vessels berthing
dock berthings. The primary design considérations are:
and mooring, but also the hull pressure of the vessel and
the reaction load to the structure to ensure protection of
them both. • Standoff Distance

It is general for piled dolphins with vertical piles that the • Energy Absorption
energy absorption by deformation of fender and dolphin is
taken into considération. On the other hand, for the dol - • Fender Type and Style
phin with coupled, battered piles, only the fender is to
absorb the energy, because the reaction load to deform the • Vessel Operational Considérations.
dolphin is so high that it might damage the vessel’s hull
and possibly the dolphin structure. Fender reaction pressure against the vessel hull is also a
potential design considération; however, most modem ves-
Fenders should be selected taking into considération the sel to vessel fenders hâve been designed to hâve reaction
characteristics under angular compression as the large ves - pressures substantially lower than allowable vessel hull
sel usually berth with angle. It should be also considered pressures.
that ail fenders in the face line should not work under such
an angular approaching condition. 6.5.1 Standoff Distance
Hull Pressures are indicated in 4.4.
Standoff distance for vessel to vessel operations is often the
6.4.4 Dimensions of large vessel overriding considération in the sélection of the fender size
or type. The standoff distance must be large enough to keep
As dimensions of large vessels are required for the calcu- the vessel hulls or superstructures from hitting together
lation of berthing energy and these are not always avail- as the vessels roll, with an adéquate margin of safety. )
 The vesseFs hull shape, superstructure height and shape, 6.5.2 Energy Absorption
and roll angle (which is a function of sea conditions, ves-
sel dynamics, vessel forward speed, and orientation rela- The energy absorption to be absorbed by the fender System
tive to the prevailing wind and sea conditions) raust be is the second most important design considération for ves-
considered in selecting an appropriate standoff distance.
Product transfer equipment (i.e. hoses, manifolds, booms,
sel to vessel fenders. The generally accepted design prac -
etc) may also be a standoff considération . Experienced
tice is to require that each fender in the System hâve suffi-
mooring masters hâve developed their own “Rules of
cient energy absorbing capacity to absorb the largest antic -
ipated impact load. Each fender must be capable of
Thumb” for vessel to vessel standoff requirements, and absorbing the full impact load since vessels almost always
should be consulted where possible. Manufacturers of contact only one fender on initial impact.
specialised vessel to vessel fenders may also be a useful
source of data, since their catalogues often contain recom- A number of parameters go into establishing the design
mended fender sizes for different vessel sizes. berthing energy. The most significant parameters are the
two vessels displacement and the berthing velocity.
1

Approximate fender standoff in good weather as a function

of vessel size is given in the table shown beiow. For two The berthing energy that must be absorbed by a fender is
vessels of different displacement tonnage’s, “A” tons and calculated from the basic kinetic energy équation. This is
“B” tons, respectively, calculate the vessel size “C” to be given in Section 4.2.1.
used in the table from:
For Vessel-to-Vessel applications the M term becomes:
C = 2AB Ml * M2
A +B M Equation 2.
Equation 1. Ml + M2

These fender standoff distances are general and other para- Where: Ml = Ml + Mvl for Vessel No. 1
meters may need to be evaluated prior to making a final M2 = M 2 + Mv2 for Vessel No. 2
decision on the size, particularly in rough weather or under
spécial operational circumstance. Where : Ml , M2 = Vessel displacement tonnage for
Vessels 1 and 2, respectively.

Table 6.5. 1 Fender Stand Off Distance And Mvl , Mv2 = Virtual mass for Vessels 1 and 2,
respectively.
VESSEL SIZE FENDERS
STAND OFF The vessel mass M, which is used in the energy calcula-
DISPLACEMENT Tonnes DISTANCE tion, is the same as the vesseFs displacement tonnage.

) 500 0.9-1.0 m Virtual mass is the term used to account for the entrained
1000 0.9-1.4 m volume of water moving with the vessel. It may be esti -
mated in a number of ways (see Section 4.2.5).
3000 1.2-1.7 m
6000 1.2-2.0 m Using formula (2) above, the virtual mass must be calcu-
10,000 -
1.5 2.2 m lated for each vessel separately.
25,000 -
1.5 2.2 m
The relative velocity of impact, "v” or the “closing” veloc-
50,000 1.8-2.5 m ity, is the velocity normal to the berthing plane at the
100,000 2.4-3.3 m moment of vessel contact with the fender. It is influenced
200,000 2.4-3.7 m by the wind and sea conditions, skill of the pilot(s), the
size and loading of the vessels, and the type of propulsion .
330,000 3.3-4.0 m
470,000 4.0-4.5 m
An additional considération for vessel-to-vessel applica -
tions is whether both vessels are under way or one is sta-
790,000 4.2-4.5 m tionary.

Because the berthing energy is proportional to the square

Note that the table uses displacement tonnage, not DWT, of the velocity, “ v” is the single most important factor in
GRT, etc. calculating the berthing energy. Design closing approach
Appropriate conversion factors can be found in Appen- velocities for vessel to vessel transfers are generally high-
) dix C. er than those assumed for vessel to dock berthings.

39
Typical design vessel closing velocities for vessel to ves- fender sélection and is intended to be used simply to pro-
sel transfers under good weather conditions are shown vide only an indication of suitability under the conditions
below. specified. It is understood that different approach veloci -
ties would give very different berthing energy.
Table 6.5 .2 Closing Velocities
The table 6.5.3 below gives approximate numbers and sizes
Vessel Size Closing Velocities for typical fenders. Foam filied fenders may differ slightiy
(Displacement tonnes) (m/s) in size and it is strongly recommended that individual fend-
er manufacturer or vessel to vessel agencies be consulted
prior to using numbers and sizes for a particular operation.
500-8,000 -
0.3 0.5
10,000-45,000 0.25-0.4 6.5 .4 Vessel Operational Considérations
50,000-85,000 0.2-0.3
100, 000-200,000 0.2-0.25 Vessel operational considérations are highly dépendent
330,000 and up 0.15-0.25 upon the spécifies of the type of operation. Ship and port
owners should be consulted before deciding upon final
Caution should be exercised when using these values, par- details of the fender system.
ticularly when the operation is expected to be conducted
under other than good weather conditions. Often, permissible sea State conditions will be specified
for allowing an operation to commence or stop.
6.5. 3 Fender Type and Style
For lightering or other similar cargo transfer operations,
Many vessel to vessel operations use large foam-filled or one vessel is initially fully laden and the other light. The
pneumatic fenders. The fenders used in vessel to vessel berthing energy for a given approach velocity would there-
transfer operations offshore are divided into two cate - fore be less than two fully laden vessels. Some allowance
gories. for this can be made by adjusting both the displacement
tonnage and the added mass of the light vessel.
Primary fenders which are positioned along the parallel
body of the vessel to afford the maximum possible protec- Because a light vessel may présent significantly more sur-
tion while alongside, and secondary fenders which may be face area for the wind to contact, the approach manoeuvre
used to protect bow and stern plating from inadvertent may be difficult. Also, the effect of waves may be greater
contact during berthing and unberthing. on the light vessel. Both of these factors may contribute
The table is included to provide a quick reference guide to to higher approach velocities than normally anticipated .

Table 6.5.3 Quick Reference Guide For Fender Sé lection

Relative Suggested Typical
Displace- Berthing Energy Quantity Fender
ment Velocity Pneumatic Fender

Tonnes m/s kNm Métrés

1000 0.3 24 3 or more 1.0 x 2.0

3000 0.3 74 1.5 x 3.0
6000 0.3 140 2.5 x 5.5
10,000 0.25 170 2.5 x 5.5
30,000 0.25 400 4 or more 3.3 x 6.5
50,000 0.20 480 3.3 x 6.5
100,000 0.15 540 3.3 x 6.5
150,000 0.15 710 5 or more 3.3 x 6.5
200,000 0.15 930 3.3 x 6.5
330,000 0.15 1550 4 or more 4.5 x 9.0
500,000 0.15 2310 4.5 x 9.0 j

Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM 40

 m
After the two vessels are located alongside one another, 6.6.3 General technical aspects
operational considérations will dictate whether the actual
transfer operation can occur while the vessels are under- In order to provide a safety margin in case of accidentai
way (and therefore can maintain some steerage), or extreme berthing, it is recommended to increase the dis-
whether the vessels must stay in one position. For a tance between the face of the fender panel (fenderline) and
moored vessel with a second vessel alongside, the vessels the structure, e.g. a distance of twice the maximum elastic
obviously cannot be underway. These considérations may deformation of the pile enables a possible (plastic) energy
affect the seakeeping of the two vessels, and therefore, the absorption of over 3 times the “elastic” design-energy
upper limit of sea conditions under which the operations (provided that the pile has enough yielding capacity).
can continue.
The clearance between fender face and pile has to be
Rigging for mooring the two vessels together should be enough to prevent the pile from being touched by the
considered by the designer, or cargo transfer areas. Also it berthing ship. In addition to the maximum deflection, the
must be compatible with quick départ manoeuvers under heel and any belting of the ship has to be taken into
emergency conditions together with operating personnel. account.
Spring lines and breast lines may be utilized, as may bow
and stern lines. The location of the rigging must not inter- The energy capacity of a flexible pile is proportional to the
fère with the hoses. square of the Steel stress and linear to the applied wall
thickness.
6.6 FLEXIBLE DOLPHINS AND
Hence the use of high tensile Steel and a large wall thick-
BERTHING BEAMS ness is effective for high energy absorption.

6.6. 1 General When selecting the design level of the seabed bottom, the
effect of scour around the pile has to be taken into account
Flexible dolphins are vertical or near vertical piles can-
-
tilevered from the river or sea bed which absorb the 6.6 .4 Loading and load factors.
berthing energy by deflection of the pile heads horizontal- Flexible dolphins should be designed to resist the follow-
ly under the berthing impact. Dolphins may be formed of
a single pile or of a group of piles acting together. ing forces:

Berthing beams are formed of a row of flexible piles cov- a. berthing impact
ered by one or more horizontal girders which are equipped
with panels of rubbing material e.g. wood, polyethylene, b. hawser forces where the dolphins is also used for moor-
rubber, etc. Both structures can be equipped with rubber ing purposes
fenders in order to enhance the energy absorption capacity.
c. wind, wave and current effects on the ship.
6.6.2 Application
The following load factors for the limit State design
method are advised :
Flexible dolphins are commoniy used at jetties where
unloading takes place at dedicated places, e.g. for liquid
Load factor: depending on the pile capacity to resist over-
bulk, gas, oil, etc.
loads by plastic yielding.
In front of the loading platforms often berthing beams are • no yielding possible: y = 1.25
used, especially when small ships hâve to be also accom-
modated and/or large berthing angles are likely to occur. • yielding possible until a displacement of at least two
Berthing beams are also often used as guiding structures times the maximum elastic displacement: y = 1.0.
for locks and bridgepiers.
Soil parameters: the factors as indicated in geotechnical
Considérations for using flexible dolphins or berthing spécifications should be used . Material factor on Steel:
beams instead of fenders mounted on the jetties are: normally a factor of 1.0 can be adopted.

• séparation of ftmctions: avoiding fenderloads on opera- In the case of not predominantly static loading, the
tional structures, such as loading platforms in order to decrease in the fatigue strength with reference to the stat-
reduce movements and vibrations; ic strength has to be observed (especially in welds).

• safety aspects: in the case of overload due to calamities When the Working Stress Design is used, the allowable stress
etc. the operations structures can be kept intact. in the design standard of each country should be used.

41 Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM

 6.6.5 Geotechnical considérations required, it is practical and economical to construct them
-
of higher-strength, weldable fine grained structural steels.
Suitability of flexible dolphins is dépendent on soil condi - Steel qualities with yield stresses within the range of 355
tions capable of resisting the horizontal loads exerted by to 690 N/mm2 are used (ref. 6).
the embedded length of the pile during impact of the ves -
sel and retuming the pile to its original position when Piles are mostly of circular shape and built up of sections
berthing or other applied forces hâve ceased to act. with variable waî l thicknesses, see Figure 6.6.1.The upper
-
sections should be of easy weldable Steel to facilitate weld
For the pile analysis, four methods are mentioned: ing on site of the upper section, deck or other fittings. It
is recommended to select wall thicknesses large enough to
a. The methods based on the earth pressure theory under enable some plastic deformation before local buckling of
ultimate equilibrium condition of the soil, e.g. BLUM’s the pile shell occurs. Another way to reduce the local
method (EAU, ref. l ), Brinch Hansen’s method; buckling problem is to fill the pile up to a height of 6-10
m above the bottom level with a mixture of sand and
b. An elastic approach (subgrade reaction), as proposed gravel or concrète.
by Matlock and Reese (OTC 1204 & 2312, 1970 &
1975 respectively) and conform the API standards Spécial attention should be given to the horizontal welds in
using p-y curves; cases of severe corrosion attack combined with fatigue
effects. In these cases a lower strength Steel quality is
c. The PHRI method in which the soil is regarded as non- advised.
linear, as proposed by The Port and Harbour Research
Institute (See references). 6.6.7 Equipment and détails
of breasting dolphins
-
d . The best method to describe the soil pile interaction is
a three dimensional finite element model that takes The contact area between ship and breasting dolphin is
plastic deformation into account. However this ap - mostly formed by a panel of hard wood or a steel panel with
proach is elaborate and requires spécifie soil data. ultra high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMW) pads.

When adopting the design values for soil parameters, toe The size of the panel should be based on the allowable hull
level, etc. it is important to keep in mind that both stiff and pressure as described in section 4.4.
soft behaviour of the subsoil and minimum and maximum
toe level should be considered . Stiff soil and high toe level For a better distribution of the contact pressure on the ves-
with impact on a low level are important as they effect the sels hull, the panel may be designed to be able to rotate. In
-
dimensions of the cross section of the pile. Figure 6.6.2 an example is given.

6.6.6 Materials Often breasting dolphins are also equipped with bollards,
ladders, lighting and a small platform on top of the pile,
If dolphins requiring a high energy absorption capacity are see Figure 6.6.3.

YIELD WW LL ALLO WJ.

+5 ,3 -
H 46CD STRESS TH SS UOMENT

n. ÇWAPSEH) \
CHART DATUM
w
-
p ssoa
<TUMCDA
ALLOWABLE
BEND1NG
STRESS 355 30 74081
\
\ CM
'St
V CO
» V o 510 30 90544
510 32 102958
510 39 119299
510 43 131008
-25 ,5 9 ED LEVEL
510 49 148390
P 510 53 156307
CO
o\ CO
» 510 52 153512
/ 510 39 119299
P
•42 ,4 Toe LEVEL CM 355 30 74081

Figure 6.6.1 Bending moments allowable moments and pile makeup

i»»|g wm
 .
V x

< m 1

o~V p m
^
^ SE

» \m

/A
fffl t
/ :i
ii en ~U3 = ;î s
l
-I.:
I
""
I,
i
- 23,00

m/ i
1 v
.^ 00
\J
PUNVIEW
- *4» [il
CROSS- SECTION A A - ELEVATION
l.
t
Figure 6.6.2 Example of flexible dolphin

*§m _
801LARD 1CEDKl

n m hl
;
v
J

=:: EH irt"
4

AZDBEfENOER
tfcH; Q
IADDER wrrH
'ftZOBE ^ KÜTËCTON
$. I
SÛ
O
I
z> 1
m

)
—
—
\
j — IfeH —
T I i
i
u
,
i I
i I
i
CHART DATUU
= 1SÈB
H
I
I
-1J65 C": Oi::
::

) Figure 6.6.3 Head of dolphin

mSH
H BSIS
æi » ptt
Êæïîâs
 BECKETT RANKINE PARTNERSHIP
Marine Consulting Engineers
J
I i«
*
270 Vauxhall Bridge Road
Westminster
G 23 » LONDON
;
SW1V 1BB
Tel: +44 (0) 207 834 7267
&B6
Fax: +44 (0) 207 834 7267
|
§ÉSj JÎ ,PH
m purpose builterfergy danipèf V-
H 7 ineorporatdd intol - ,
^ ? JM»* .
'
•
? ïpals
^ -
»
7 44
the pontoonW
% V -% <- ëfefs capable
The sÿst
«1
;
• .•
#s
4 of absorbmg up to
(
- —
v
*- -'
.
•

11 MegaJou ï es df ship
Impactenergy.
\
i'
Increasing vessel size required a
replacement of the Heysham’s timber
.
fendering We used fender panels
t

Unusual Fendering Problems

backed by c ônes and large spacer
units. The replacement was
constructed during normal
call for innovative solutions
ferry operations. /

.•Ht
•f
\
t
m
: î
I
R
r
iS
;+îî
- ^5
n x*
m
a
î

3Ü JS? 1 M" 4 *W £?
i'

*
.
'
S I '
LH

' il
IfcS Ai
1 U
'
1
\

J M &

-
j

Lt
j. £ i

A t
»14
A
E

A,

^- 1
" ; "
m
a id : " “\
Mf l SlSfBs» * t »
%

s
*

U" "'fl
j* -
A prohibition on the use of piles for Jubilee Gardens temporary jetty required a novel solution. We deslgned a
narrow berthing pontoon 80m long which acted as a "buoyancy fender ”. The pontoon was secured by radial
arms to sunken barges.

www.beckettrankine.com
 APPENDÏXA 1.4 This protocol consists of three parts:-

a) Définition of Rated Performance Data (RPD), which

defines minimum requirements for manufacturera’ pu-
PROCEDURE TO blished catalogues data;
DETERMINE AND REPORT b) Définition of test apparatus and basic performance-test
THE PERFORMANCE OF procedures;

MARINE FENBERS c) Supporting protocols and other tests:

i. Velocity Factor (VF) détermination
ii. Température Factor (TF) détermination
1. INTRODUCTION iii. Contact angle effect détermination
iv. Durability testing
-
1.1 A marine fender is an energy absorbing device v. Température stabilization
-
that is typicaliy secured against the face of a marine facil vi. Verification/quality assurance testing
vii. Rubber property testing.
ity for the purpose of attenuating the forces inhérent in
arresting the motion of berthing vessels safety. Most mod-
em fenders fall into three general classifications based on
the material employed to absorb energy:
.
2 FENDER PERFORMANCE
AND REPORTING
a) Solid rubber fenders where the material absorbs the
energy
2.1 GENERAL
-
b) Pneumatic (air filled rubber) fenders where air absorbs
the energy 2.1 . 1 Ail testing shall define fender performance under
linearly-decreasing or sinusoidal-decreasing deflection
c) Foam filled fenders where the foam core absorbs the -
velocities to simulate actual, vessel berthing conditions.
energy.
Rated Performance Data (RPD), manufacturers’ published
1.2 This document establishes the recommended pro- performance curves and/or tables, shall be based on:
cedures for testing, reporting and verifying the perfor-
mance of marine fenders. The primary focus in this docu- a) Initial deflection (berthing) velocity of 0.15 m/s and
-
ment is on “solid type” rubber fenders, used in berthside decreasing to no more than 0.005m/s at test end;
application for commercial and naval vessels. Appendix B
deals with pneumatic fenders. The testing protocol does -
b) Testing of fully broken in fenders;
not address other fender types and materials of construc-
tion nor small fendering “ bumpers” used in pleasure craft c) Testing of fenders stabilized at 23C±5C;
marinas, mounted to hulls of work vessels, military vessels
or those used in similar applications. Its primary purpose d) Testing of fenders at zéro degree angle of approach;
is to ensure that engineering data reported in manufactur-
ers’ catalogues is based upon common testing methods e) Deflection (berthing) frequency of not less than one hour.
throughout the industry.
2.1 .2 Catalogues shall also include nominal performance
1.3 “Solid-type” rubber fenders are available in a tolérances as well as data and methodology to adjust per-
variety of basic types with several variations of each type, formance curves and/or tables for application parameters
and multiple sizes and rubber compounds for each varia- different from RPD conditions. Adjustment factors shall
tion. Depending on the particular design, “solid-type” be provided for the following variables:
rubber fenders may also include intégral components of
Steel, composites, plastics or other materials. Geometrical a) Other initial velocities: 0.001, 0.05, 0.10, 0.20, 0.25 and
and component variations of “solid type” rubber fenders
0.30 m/s deflection (approaching) velocity, decreasing
to no more than 0.005 m/s at test end;
should be performance tested and reported according to
this protocol . Ali variations of rubber compounds need
b) Other températures: +50° C, +40° C, +30° C, + 10° C,
not be tested and this is left to the manufacturées discré-
0° C, -10° C, -20° C, -30° C;
tion to test an adéquate portfolio of compounds to enable
i a particular compound performance to be predicted. c) Other contact angles : 3, 5, 8, 10, 15 and 20 degrees.

. --
•*

45
!
tt Üo
&

In addition, RPD shall contain a cautionary statement that 3. TEST APPARATUS

published data do not necessarily apply to constant-load
and cyclic-loading conditions. In such cases, designers are
to contact fender manufacturer for design assistance. 3.1 The test apparatus shall be equipped with a cali-
brated load measuring device such as load cell(s) or pres-
2.1.3 Adjustment factors for velocity and température sure transducer and linear transducer(s) for measuring dis-
shall be provided for every catalogue rubber compound or placement capable of providing continuous monitoring of
other energy-absorbing material offered by each manufac- fender performance.
turer.
The test apparatus shall be capable of recording and stor -
2.2 FENDER TESTING ing load-cell and transducer data at intervals of 0.01H -
0.05H, where H is a fender’s nominal height, and storing
This document establishes procedures to be able to stan- manually-entered inputs. The following information shall
dardize the performance characteristics of fenders being include, as a minimum:
tested using two methods:
a. Serial number and description of test item
• The traditional and widely used Constant Velocity (CV)
Method, and b. Date, tirae at start and time at end of test

• Decreasing Velocity (DV) Method. c. Location of test facility and test apparatus ID

Performance testing to establish design data may use either d. Stabilization température of test specimen
of two methods:
e. Test ambient température
2.2.1 Method CV - Constant-slow-velocity deflection of
MI size fenders with performance adjusted by velocity
f. Graphie plot(s) and tabular printout(s) of:
factors developed ffom scale model tests. This method is
i. Deflection velocity vs. deflection (optional) (If not
the preferred method of a majority of manufacturers.
plotted, deflection velocity and its characteristics
shall be separately noted)
-
Test to establish initial performance data by full size fend-
Applicable to Method DV only:
-
er under the constant slow 0.0003-0.0013 m/s (2-8 cm /
ii Reaction vs. deflection
min) velocity. Establish VF obtaining scale-model test and
-
calculate the RPD of full size fender. iii Energy vs. deflection.

Establish adjustment factors from scale model test for ini- 3.2 For fender tests, ail equipment used to measure and
tial berthing velocities other than 0.15 m/s. record force and deflection shall be calibrated, and certi-
fied accurate to within il (one) percent in accordance
Velocity Factor shall be the ratio of performance test - with ISO or équivalent JIS or ASTM requirements.
results of scale models under the following conditions: Calibration shall be performed within one year of the use
of the equipment, or less, if the normal calibration interval
a. a constant slow strain rate similar to the strain rate of is shorter than one year. Calibration of Test Apparatus
full-size fender at its test speed. shall be checked annually by a qualified third-party orga-
nization, using instrumentation , which is traceable to a
b. decreasing-speed deflection with initial strain rate si- certified, national standard.
milar to that of the full-size fender RPD and other
deflection conditions. 3.3 The test apparatus shall deflect specimens accord-
ing to the Test Protocol, (Section 4.0) below.
2.2.2 Method DV - Linearly or sinusoidally-decreasing-
velocity deflection of full-size fenders. 4. TEST PROTOCOL
Test parameters shall be as defined for published RPD.
The performance test shall deflect specimens according to
RPD tests shall start at 0.15 m/s. Tests to establish adjust- either of the two methods listed below. Clear and unam-
ment factors for initial berthing velocities other than 0.15
biguous calculations must be provided for any adjustments
m/s shall start at those other initial velocities. made to the test results.
 <1 sus
a- I

4.1 METHOD CV d - Instantaneous deflection of fender

D = Rated deflection of fender
a. Break-in specimen by deflecting three or more times to
its rated deflection or more, as recommended by the e) Stop test when deflection reaches rated deflection or
manufacturer. more, as recommended by the manufacturer.

b. Remove load from specimen and allow it to “recover” f) Àdjust performance to rated température (23°C±5°C),
for at least one hour. if required, or to desired application température by mul-
tiplying both energy and reaction results by Tempéra -
c. Before conducting performance test, stabilize fender ture Factor, TF (Section 5.3).
température, see Section 5.1. Température stabilizing
time can include time for preceding steps 4. La. and 5. SUPPORTING PROTOCOLS
4.1.b.

d. Deflect specimen once at constant slow 0.0003 - 5.1 TEMPERATURE

0.0013m/s (2-8 cm/min) deflection.
STABILIZATION
e. Stop test when deflection reaches rated deflection or
more, as recommended by the manufacturer. -
5.1 .1 Test température for full size specimens is defined
as the same as the stabilization température, as long as
f. Adjust performance to rating température (23005°C), ambient température at the test apparatus is within ±15° C
if required, or to desired application température by of the stabilization température and testing is completed
multiplying both energy and reaction results by within two hours.
Température Factor, TF (Section 5.3).
5.1.2 To stabilize rubber température, store specimen at
g. Adjust performance to desired initial berthing velocity, a constant température ±15° C. Record air température of
by adjusting both energy and reaction results by the space where specimen is stored within 3m of specimen
Velocity Factor, VF (Section 5.2).
surface, either continuously or twice a day, no less than ten
hours apart.
4.2 METHOD DV
5.1.3 Stabilization time shall be not less than 20 xl 5 days
a) Break-in specimen by deflecting three or more times to or more as recommended by the manufacturer, rounded to
its rated deflection or more, as recommended by the
the next whole day (x = dimension of greatest rubber
manufacturer.
thickness, in métrés).
b) Remove load from specimen and allow it to “recover”
i for at least one hour. 5.2 VELOCITY FACTOR, VF

c) Before conducting performance test, stabilize fender One of the following protocols shall be followed to déter-
température in accordance with Section 5.1. mine the Velocity Factors, VF, for every combination of
Température stabilizing time can include time for pre- fender configuration, initial velocity other than RPD
ceding steps 4.2.a. and 4.2.b. velocity, fender height and energy-absorbing material.
Specimens for determining VF may be either full-size
-
d) Deflect specimen once at a linearly decreasing or sinu- fenders or models, as noted below, provided they are not
soidally-decreasing variable deflection velocity as smaller than 0.1m. in height.
defined in the équations below:
5.2. 1 Method CV - Testing of scale model maintaining
V = V0(D-d)/D [EQ. 4.1] strain rates as described in 2.2.1 a) and 2.2.1 b).
or 0.005 m/s whichever is greater
or
The model should be accurately scaled to the model pro-
V = V0cos(7td/2D) [EQ. 4.2]
posed for sale.
or 0.005 m/s whichever is greater
a) Test model sized fenders as per Section 4.2 at n x 0.15
where:
V = Instantaneous deflection velocity of fender m/s initial velocity at 23° C±5° C (n : model height /
V0 = Initial deflection velocity (actual berthing condition) actual height).

•
5
Bê? 47
 fm
S ût

b) Repeat step a. (above) at other initial velocities (in - VFca = E/E^ [ EQ. 5.1]
cluding the constant slow velocity).
VFca - Rv/ RRPD [ EQ. 5.2]
c) Dérivé VF’s, from the data in steps 5.2.1a. and 5.2.1.b.
(above) per the following method: where:
Ev = Energy at other initiai velocity per Section
i. Energy Velocity Factor and Reaction Velocity
5.2.1.b.
Factor by Method CV
RRPD - Energy at the RPD initial velocity per Section
and VFra, shall be defined by the following equa- 5.2. La
VFca
tions:- Rv = Reaction at other initial velocity per Section
5.2.1.
~ EvM /ERPD [EQ. 5.1] RRPD = Reaction at the RPD initial velocity per Section
5.2. La

VFra - EvM /RRPD [EQ. 5.2] ii Corrected energy and reaction performance is
then calculated by the following formulas:
where:
Ea = ERPD x VFga [EQ. 5.3]
EVM ~ Energy absorption at other initial velocities
than as 5.2.2.b Ra - RRPD X VFfa [EQ. 5.4]
ERPD = Energy absorption at the initial velocity than as
5.2.2.a at the model where:
EVM = Reaction at other initial velocities per section Ea = Energy at alternative initiai velocity
5.2.2.b K = Reaction at alternative initial velocity
RRPD - Reaction at the RPD initial velocity per section EpRD = Energy at RPD initial velocity
5.2.2.a at the model RRPD = Reaction at RPD initial velocity

ii. Corrected energy and reaction performance is

then calculated by the following formulas: 5.3 TEMPERATURE FACTOR, TF
Ea = ERpDxVFea [EQ.5.7]
The following shall be completed for every rubber com-
pound.
Ra -RRPD X VFra [EQ.5.8]
5.3. 1 Tests of the rubber compound and fender type at
where: each of the following températures: ï
E, = Energy absorption at alternative initial velocity
Ra = Reaction at alternative initial velocity
-30°C, -20°C, -10°C, 0°C, 10°C, 23°C, 30°C, 40°C, 50°C
ERPD = Energy at RPD initial velocity
RRPD “ Reaction at RPD initial velocity 5.3.2 The preliminary Température Factor, TFp, for each
rubber at each température shall be its shear modulus at
5.2.2 Method DV - Testing of full size fender at that température divided by its shear modulus at 23°C.
-
decreasing rate deflection velocity
5.3.3 Confirm the TFp’s by conducting standard perfor-
a) Test full-size fender models per Section 4.1 at 0.15m/s mance tests, either Method CV or Method DV, Stabilize
initial velocity 23°C+5°C. specimens at the température per Section 5.1 . 2. and 5.1 .3.
Specimens may be either ftü l-size fenders or models not
b) Repeat step a. (above) at other initial velocities. smaller than 0.1m in height. Test specimens in test appa-
ratus maintained at test température for duration of test.
c) Dérivé the VFIs ffom the data in steps 5.2. La. and
5.2.1.b.( above) per the following method: Test specimens shall be stabilized at -20°C, 0°C, and
+23°C. Divide the results at -20°C and 0°C by the resuit
i Energy Velocity Factor and Reaction Velocity -
at +23°C. If these results corroborate the shear modulus
Factor by Method A DV results within +5%, the TFp’s shall be the TF’s.
 KJ v.

5.3 .4 If the performance tests do not corroborate the b. Velocity-and-temperature-adjusted reaction is no more
shear-modulus data, fiirther tests shall be conducted on than Required Reaction multiplied by the nominal reac-
specimens stabilized in temperature- controlled environ - tion tolérance (high end) specified in its catalogue data.
ments at the following températures:
6.1.3 The fender samples for energy/reaction vérification
-30°C, -20°C, -10°C, 0°C, +10°C, +23°C, +30°C, +40°C testing shall be selected according to a sample scheme
and +50°C. The TF’s for each of these températures, Tft’s, agreed between the customer and fender manufacturer. If
shall then be calculated by the following formula: a spécifie sampling scheme has not been noted, a mini-
mum qf ten percent of the fender order shall be tested for
TFt - R/R23 [EQ. 5.9] compliance with energy/reaction requirements.

where: 6.2. BREAK-IN DEFLECTION

R, = Reaction at température other than 23°C (high - Break-in deflection of actual éléments should be at least
est reaction below 35% deflection)
R23 = Reaction at 23°C (highest reaction below 35% manufacturer * rated deflection. At least one cycle should
deflection) be performed .

However, in the case of fenders whose reaction does not -

6.2. 1 Break in deflection shall be mandatory for ail fend-
drop after a peak around 30% deflection in low tempéra- ers with catalogue reaction rating of 100 tonnes or more to
ture, TF shall be based upon the ratio of maximum reac - be installed on monopiles or pile-supported pier struc -
tions when energy absorption specified by the fender man - -
tures. Break in deflection of other fenders shall be as stip-
ufacturer is achieved. ulated by the customer.

6. VERIFICATION/ QUALITY 6.3 OTHER TESTING

ASSURANCE TESTING Production fenders may be tested for conformance with
specified material properties, alternate performance
requirements, and/or durability characteristics.
6.1 ENERGY/REACTION
COMPLIANCE TESTING 6.3. 1 Verification/quality assurance testing of production
fenders may be requested by the customer to insure prod-
uct conformance with specified contact angle perfor-
Verification/quality assurance testing to détermine com - mance, durability, and/or material property characteristics.
pliance with either RPD or other, customer-specified ener-
gy and reaction requirements (Required Performance) 6.3.2 Other testing requirements, including sélection of
shall be performed in a test apparatus, as described in sampling scheme, shall be as agreed between customer
Section 3. and fender manufacturera .

Samples for vérification testing shall be actual fender élé-

ments fabricated for the project location.
7. OTHER TESTS
6.1. 1 Test Sample according to Method CV (Section 7.1 EFFECT OF CONTACT ANGLE
4.1.) or Method DV (Section 4.2 .), adjusting performance
to Required Performance as specified in Sections 4.1.f or
4.1.g and 4.2.f. 7.1 . 1 Manufacturera shall include graphs or tables defin-
ing the effect of deflecting fenders at the contact angles
6.1 . 2 A fender provides Required Performance listed in Section 2.1.2.c. This data may be generated math-
(Required Energy and Reaction) within production tolér- ematically or by testing performed on either actual fender
él éments or on scale models or arrays. It must reflect the
ances, if it meets both the following requirements simulta - effect of angle contact on an entire fender assembly, not
neously at any point during the test described in Section
6.1.1: just an individual element.

a. Velocity-and-temperature-adjusted energy absorbed in 7.1. 2 The following is the procedure for defining the
equal to or greater than Required Energy multiplied by effect of each contact-angle/configuration combination.
) the nominal energy tolérance (low end) specified in its The test shall be made on the two major axes of the fend-
catalogue data. er unit:
!
49
m
ÎN

a. Using a test apparatus as described in Section 3, exé- 7.2.5 The criterion for successful completion of the dura -
cute the steps of the test procedure defined in Section bility test is no cracks or defects visible to the naked eye
4.1. or 4.2.. after the 3.000 deflections.

b. Détermine the base-case energy rating for 0 degree- 7.3 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
contact angle of the specimen at the deflection or reac- OF RUBBER
tion limit recommended by the manufacturer.
The properties recommended in this section are those that
c. Allow the specimen to recover outside the test appara - help assure acceptable résistance to the effects of aging
tus for at least one hour or more as recommended by .
and environmental attack The following physical proper-
manufacturer. ties of rubber are recommended as standard requirements:

d. Simulate the desired contact angle and repeat the test Résistance to heat aging:
cycle only of step 7.1.2.a.
Test tensile strength, élongation and hardness per JIS,
e. Détermine the energy rating of the specimen in the con- ASTM or ISO standards. Then place a second set of sam-
tact angle test at the manufacturer recommended
^ -
ples into an oven maintained at 70°C+/ 1°C for a period of
deflection or reaction limit. 96 hours. After removing the samples ffom the oven,
repeat the same tensile strength, élongation and hardness
f. The contact-angle factor is the energy determined in the tests. Compare the results before and after heat aging.
step 7.1.2e divided by that determined in step 7.1.2.b. The following are the minimum requirements for satisfac -
tory aging résistance:
This factor is applied to energy only. No factor need be
applied to reaction, since the maximum reaction is as a. Tensile Strength after aging: not less than 80% of ori -
ginal value.
-
defined by the zero-degree-contact angle performance.
For combined horizontal and vertical contact angles, mul-
tiply the contact-angle factor for the horizontal direction b. Elongation after aging: not less than 80% of original
value.
by the contact-angle factor for the vertical direction if the
factors for both directions are different.
c. Hardness after aging: not more than 8 points Shore A of
increase from original value.
7.2 DUR À BILITY
Résistance to ozone:
7.2.1 Each combination of fender type and energy-
absorbing material shall be tested for durability to insure
Conduct a standard, ozone-exposure chamber ozone-expo-
its suitability to withstand repeated deflections without sure test per one of the following standards:
enough recovery time to retum to original performance
characteristics. _ JIS K 6259 40°C, 20% élongation and 50 pphm ozone
level
7.2.2 The test specimen may not be smaller than the
smallest fender of the same basic design offered for sale.
The specimen L/H ratio may not be less than the lowest
_ ASTM D 1171, ozone exposure, method A, 38° C

ratio of any catalogues model of the same, basic design. -

ISO 1431 1, procedure A 40°C, 20% élongation and 50
pphm ozone level.
7.2.3 Before the test begins, stabilize the specimen’s tem-
pérature to +23°C+5°C per Section 5.1, Température After 72 hour’s exposure, there shall be no visible crack-
Stabilization. Do not artificially cool the specimen during ing of the test strips.
the test.
7.4 DIMENSIONS
7.2.4 The test shall consist of 3.000 deflections of the
specimen to its rated deflection at a maximum period of Fenders shall meet manufacturer specified dimensional
150 seconds. tolérances.
^
!
 fenders is stable relating to température variations when
APPENDIX B the initial internai pressure is set to be the specified pres-
sure.

PROCEDURE TO 1.5. This protocol consists of three parts:

DETERMINE AND REPORT a. Définition of Rated Performance Data (RPD), which

defines minimum requirements for manufacturers’ pu-
THE PERFORMANCE OF blished, catalog data.
PNEUMATIC FENDERS b. Définition of test apparatus and basic performance test-
procedure.
1. INTRODUCTION c. Supporting protocols:

1.1. A pneumatic type marine fender (here in after i.) Température stabilization
referred as pneumatic fender) is an energy-absorbing ii.) Velocity Factor (VF) détermination
device that is typically secured against the face of a marine iii.) Vérification testing
facility and the ship’s hulls for the purpose of attenuating iv.) Contact angle effect détermination
the forces inhérent in arresting the motion of berthing ves- v.) Durability test
sels safety. Pneumatic fenders are designed to absorb the vi.) Puncture résistance test
berthing energy primarily by a compressive air contained vii.) Hydraulic pressure test
in the hollow space. viii.) Air leakage test
ix.) Compression recovery test
1.2. This document establishes the recommended pro- x.) Physical property of rubber
cedures for testing, reporting and verifying the perfor-
xi.) Dimension
mance of pneumatic fenders. The testing protocol does not
address other fender types and materials of construction.
Its primary purpose is to ensure that engineering data
reported in manufacturers’ catalogues is based upon com-
2. FENDER PERFORMANCE
mon testing methods throughout the industry. AND REPORTING
For the cases of ship to ship operation and/or spacer pur-
pose between ship and ship or jetty, procedure for verify- 2.1 GENERAL
ing effect of deflection (berthing) velocity may not be nec-
essary to be taken place as a fender sélection shall be made 2.1.1 Ail fender performance, except for ship to ship
by taking two main factors into considération, i.e. an ener-
operation and/or spacer purpose, shall be defined under
gy absorption of fender and an appropriate stand-off dis- linearly-decreasing or sinusoidally decreasing deflection
tance, in which the deflection velocity factor is compara-
velocities to simulate actual, vessel-berthing conditions.
tively small in the actual vessel berthing conditions.
Rated Performance Data (RPD), manufacturers’ published
1.3. “Pneumatic fenders” are made by synthetic cord performance curves and/or tables, shall be based on the
reinforced rubber sheet with compressive air inside. There following:
are two kinds of pneumatic fenders, floating types and
fixed types. Depending on the particular design, pneumat- a. Testing of fenders stabilized at the specified initial inter-
ic fenders may also include intégral components of steel, nai pressure and ambient température around 23°C.
composites, plastics or other materials. Ail variations of
pneumatic fenders should be performance tested and b. Initial deflection (berthing) velocity of 0.15 m/s and
reported according to this protocol. decreasing to no more than 0.005m/s at test end.

1.4. The performance of pneumatic fenders whose ini- -

c. Testing of fully broken in fenders.
-
tial internai pressure shall be set to be a specified air pres
sure in operational , shall be specified in tcrms of guaran- d. Testing of fenders at zéro degree angle of approach.
teed energy absorption (GEA), reaction force at GEA and
internai pressure which is equal to the hull pressure at e. Deflection (berthing) frequency of not less than five
) GEA deflection. Basically, the performance of pneumatic minutes.

SS
 âjj
fitt
'

In case of test to evaluate fender performances for the tial berthing velocities other than 0.15 m/s.
usages involving standoff distance factor, following tests
shall be applied: Velocity Factor shall be the ratio of performance-test
results of scale models under the following conditions:
a. Testing of fenders stabilized at the specified initial inter-
nai pressure and ambient température around 23°C. a. a constant slow strain rate simiiar to the strain rate of
-
full size fender at its test speed .
b. Constant deflection (berthing) velocity as static during
test. b. decreasing-speed deflection with initial strain rate si -
milar to that of the full-size fender RPD and other
c. Testing of fully broken-in fenders. deflection conditions.

d . Testing of fenders at zéro degree angle of approach. —

2.2.2 Method DV Linearly or sinusoidally decreasing
velocity deflection of full-size fenders.
e. Deflection (berthing) frequency of not less than five
minutes. Test parameters shall be as defined for published RPD.
RPD tests shall start at 0.15 m/s. Tests to establish adjust-
2.1.2 Catalogues shall also include nominal performance
N
ment factors for initial berthing velocities other than )
tolérances as well as data and methodology to adjust per- 0.15 m/s shall start at those other initial velocities.
formance curves and/or tables for application parameters
different from RPD conditions. Adjustment factors shall
be provided for the following variables:
2.2.3 Method C —
Constant-velocity deflection without
performance adjustment by velocity factor.

a. Other initial velocities: 0.001, 0.05, 0.10, 0.20, 0.25 and 3. TEST APPARATUS
0.30 m/s deflection (berthing) velocity, decreasing to no
more than 0.005m/s at test end 3.1 The test apparatus for performance testing shall be
equipped with load cell(s) and linear transducer(s) capable
b. Other contact angles: 3, 5, 8, 10, 15 and 20 degrees of providing continuous monitoring of fender perfor -
mance.
In addition, RPD shall contain a cautionary statement. If
necessary, designers are to contact fender manufacturer for The test apparatus shall be capable of recording and stor-
design assistance. ing load-cell and transducer data at intervaîs of 0.01H-
0.05H, where H is a fender’s nominal height, and storing
2.2 FENDER TESTING manually-entered inputs. The following information shall
include, as a minimum:
Performance testing to establish design data, RPD, may
use the traditional and widely used method Constant a. Serial number and description of test item
Velocity (CV) Method and Decreasing Velocity Method (
DV). Performance testing for vessel to vessel operation b. Date, time at start and time at end of test
and/or spacing purposes may use Constant Method (C).
c. Location of test facility and test apparatus ID
2.2 . 1 Method CV — Constant-slow-velocity deflection
-
of full size fenders with performance adjusted by velocity d. Stabilization of initial internai pressure of test specimen
factors developed from scale model tests.
e. Test ambient température
This method is the preferred method of a majority of man-
ufacturas. f. Graphie plot(s) and tabular printout(s) of:

Test to establish initial performance data by full-size fend- i. Deflection velocity vs. Deflection (optional) (If not
er under the constant-slow 0.0003-0.0013 m/s plotted, deflection velocity and its characteristics
(2-8 cm/min.) velocity. Establish VF obtaining scale- shall be separately noted). Applicable to Method
model test and calculate the RPD of full-size fender. DV only.
ii. Reaction vs. Deflection
Establish adjustment factors from scale model test for ini- iii. Energy vs. Deflection
)

Report ofWorking Group 33 MARCOM 52

 t

3*2 For fender tests, ail equipment used to measure and c. Defore conducting performance test, stabilize the spe-
cified initial internai pressure of fender.
record force and deflection shall be calibrated, and certi -
fied accurate to within ± 1 (one) percent, in accordance
with ISO or équivalent JIS or ASTM requirements. -
d. Deflect specimen once at a linearly decreasing or sinu -
soidally-decreasing variable deflection velocity as
defined in the équations below:
Calibration shall be performed within one year of the use
of the equipment.
-
V = V0(D d)/D [EQ.4.1]
or 0.005 m/s whichever is greater
Calibration of Test Apparatus shall be performed by a
-
third party organization, using instrumentation, which is or
traceable to a certified, national standard.
V = V0cos(7td/2D) [EQ.4.2]
3.2 The test apparatus shall deflect specimens accord - or 0.005 m/s whichever is greater
ing to the Test Protocol, Section 4.
where:
.
4 TEST PROTOCOL V = Instantaneous deflection velocity of fender
V0 = Initial deflection velocity of actual berthing condi-
The performance test to establish design data, RPD, shall tion
deflect specimens according to method CV or DV, and per- d = Instantaneous deflection of fender
formance testing for ship to ship operation and/or spacer D = Rated deflection of fender
purpose shall deflect specimens according to method C.
Clear and unambiguous calculations must be provided for e. Stop test when deflection reaches rated deflection, or
any adjustments made to the test results. more, as recommended by the manufacturer.

4.1 METHOD CV 4.3 METHOD C

a. Break-in specimen by deflecting one or more times to -
a . Break in specimen by deflecting one or more times to
its rated deflection, or more, as recommended by the its rated deflection or more, as recommended by the
manufacturer. manufacturer.

b. Remove load from specimen and allow it to “reco- b. Remove load from specimen and allow it to “recover”
ver” for at least five minutes. for at least five minutes.

c. Before conducting performance test, stabilize the spe-

c. Before conducting performance test, stabilize the spe-
cified initial internai pressure of fender.
cified initial internai pressure of fender.
j
d. Deflect specimen once at constant deflection velocity
d. Deflect specimen once at constant slow 0.0003 - -
(2 8 cm/min).
0.0013 m/s (2-8 cm/min) deflection.
e. Stop test when deflection reaches rated deflection or
e. Stop test when deflection reaches rated deflection, or more, as recommended by the manufacturer.
more, as recommended by the manufacturer.

f. Adjust performance to desired initial berthing velocity,

5. SUPPORTING PROTOCOLS
by adjusting both energy and reaction results by
Velocity Factor, VF (Section 5.2)
5.1 TEMPERATURE
4.2 METHOD DV STABILIZATION
The performance of pneumatic fenders is stable relating to
a. Break-in specimen by deflecting one or more times to température variations when the initial internai pressure is
its rated deflection, or more, as recommended by the
manufacturer.
set to the specified pressure as the performance is generat-
ed from the compressive elasticity of inside air pressure.
b. Remove load from specimen and allow it to “recover”
The body of a pneumatic fender is covered by the synthet -
ic cord reinforced rubber layer and these influences of the
for at least five minutes. température to the performance are normally negligible.

53
 5.2 VELOCITY FACTOR , VF where:

One of the following protocols shall be followed to déter- E. = Energy at alternative initial velocity
mine Velocity Factors, VF, for every combination of fend- Ra = Reaction at alternative initial velocity
er configuration, initial velocity other than RPD velocity, ERPD = Energy at RPD initial velocity
-
fender height and energy absorbing material. Specimens RRPD = Reaction at RPD initial velocity
for determining VF may be either full-size fenders or mod-
els, as noted below, provided they are not smaller than 0.1
m in height.
—
5.2.2 Method DV Testing of full size fender at
decreasing-rate deflection velocity

—
5.2.1 Method CV Testing of scale model maintain-
ing strain rates as described in 2.2.1 a) and 2.2.1 b).
-
a, Test full size fenders per Section 4.1 at 0.15 m/s initial
velocity and the specified initial internai pressure of
fender.
The model should be accurately scaled with same rubber
compound offered for sale.
b. Repeat step 5.2.2 a. at other initial velocities.
a. Test model-size fenders per Section 4.2 at n x 0.15 m/s
initial velocity and the specified initial internai pressure c. Dérivé the VFÎs from the data in steps 5.2.2 a. and
of fender. 5.2.2 b. per the following method:
(n : model height / actual height )
i. Energy Velocity Factor and Reaction Velocity
b. Repeat Step 5.2.1 a. at other initial velocities. (including Factor by Method A, VFea and VFra shall be
the constant slow velocity)
defined by the following équations:
c. Dérivé the VF’s from the data in Steps 5.2.1 a. and
5.2.1 b. per the following method: VFea ~~ FV/ERPD [EQ. 5.1]

i. Energy Velocity Factor and Reaction Velocity VFra - R/RRPD [EQ. 5.2]
Factor by Method CV,
where:
VFea and VFra shall be defined by the following équations:
_
VFea EV M/ERPD M
"
_ [EQ. 5.5]
Ev = Energy at other initial velocity per Section
5.2.2 b.
ERPD = Energy at the RPD initial velocity per Section
VFra - RV-M/F-RPD-M [EQ. 5.6] 5.2.2 a.
Rv = Reaction at other initial velocity per Section
where: 5.2.2 b.
Fy-M Energy at other initial velocity per Section RRPD = Reaction at the RPD initial velocity per Section
5.2.2 a.
5.2.1b. atthe model
ERPD-M Energy at the RPD initial velocity per
ii. Corrected energy and reaction performance is then
Section 5.2. 1 a. at the model
calculated by the following formulas:
Ry- M Reaction at other initial velocity per Section
5.2.1 b. at the model
RRPD-M Reaction at the RPD initial velocity per Ea= ERPD x VFea [EQ. 5.3]
Section 5.2.1 a at the model
Ra RRPD X VFra
~
[EQ. 5.4]
ii. Corrected energy and reaction performance is then
calculated by the following formulas: where:

Ea= ERPD- X VFca [EQ. 5.7] Ea = Energy at alternative initial velocity

Ra = Reaction at alternative initial velocity
Ra RRPD- X VFra
“ [EQ. 5.8] FRPD = Energy at RPD initial velocity
RRPD = Reaction at RPD initial velocity
)
i
m
grilla SHESSH m&sêm
 <
< 11

6. VERIFICATION /QUALITY 7.1.2 The following is the procedure for defining the
effect of each contact angle/configuration combination.
ASSURANCE TESTING The test shall be made on the two major axes of the fend -
er unit:

6.1 ENERGY/REACTION a. Using a test apparatus as described in Section 3, execute

COMPLIANCE TESTING the steps of the test procedure defined in Section 4.1,
4.2, or 4.3.
Vérification testing to déterminé compliance with either
RPD or other, customer-specified energy and reaction - -
b. Détermine the base case energy rating for 0 degree con -
requirements (Required Performance) shall be performed tact angle of the specimen at the deflection or reaction
in a test apparatus, as described in Section 3. Samples for limit recommended by the manufacturer.
vérification testing shall be actual fender or the miniature
size fender at bigger than 1/5 (one fifth) scale size of the c. Allow the specimen to recover outside the test apparatus
actual height (or diameter). for at least five minutes.

d. Simulate the desired contact angle and repeat the test

Test Sample according to Method CV (Section 4.1) or
cycle only of step 7.1.2 a.
i Method DV (Section 4.2), adjusting performance to
Required Performance as specified in Sections 4.2.f.
e. Détermine the energy rating of the specimen in the con -
tact angle test at the manufacturer recommended
6.2 BREAK-IN DEFLECTION deflection or reaction limit.
^
-
Break in deflection of actual fender, which is mandatory f. The contact-angle factor is the energy determined in the
for ail solid type fenders, is not required for pneumatic step 7.1.2.e, divided by that determined in step 7.1.2.b.
fender, as différence of the first-break-in reaction force
-
and the second-broken in reaction force is negligible. This factor is applied to energy only. No factor need be
applied to reaction, since the maximum reaction is as
6 - 3 OTHER TESTING - - -
defined by the zero degree contact angle performance.

Production fenders may be tested for conformance with For combined horizontal and vertical contact angles, mul-
specified material properties, alternate performance tiply the contact-angle factor for the horizontal direction
requirements, and/or durability characteristics. by the contact-angle factor for the vertical direction if the
factors for both directions are different.
6.3.1 Verification/quality assurance testing of produc - 7.2 DURABILITY
tion fenders may be requested by the customer to insure
product conformance with specified contact angle perfor - 7.2.1 Each combination of fender type and energy-
mance, durability, and/or material property characteristics.
absorbing material shall be tested for durability to insure
6.3.2 Other testing requirements, including sélection of its suitability to withstand repeated deflections without
sampling scheme, shall be as agreed between customer enough recovery time to retum to original performance
and fender manufacturers. characteristics.

7. OTHER TESTS 7.2.2 The test specimen may not be smaller than 0.2 m
height (or diameter) of the same basic design offered for
sale. The specimen L/H ratio may not be less than the low-
est ratio of any catalog model of the same, basic design.
7.1 EFFECT OF CONTACT ANGLE
7.2.3 Before the test begins, stabilize the specialized
7.1 . 1 Manufacturers shall include graphs or tables initial internai pressure of fender and ambient température
defining the effect of deflecting fenders at the contact around 23°C per Section 5.1. Do not artificially cool the
angles listed in Section 2.1.2.b. This data may be generat- specimen during the test.
ed mathematically or by testing performed on either actu-
al fender éléments or on scale models or arrays. It must 7.2 .4 The test shall consist of 3.000 deflections of the
reflect the effect of angle contact on an entire fender specimen to its rated deflection at a maximum period of
) assembly, not just an individual element . 150 seconds.

üisii W
55
*
' gtm

7.2.5 The criterion for successful completion of the 7.6.2 After compression of the fender to guaranteed
durability test is no cracks or defects visible to the naked energy absorption deflection, the fender shall be fold at the
eye after the 3.000 deflections. deflected condition for one minute, then release the load
instantaneously. The fender diameter (or height) shali be
7.3 PUNCTURE RESISTANCE TEST recovered more than 97% of the original diameter within
five minutes after the load to the fender released.
7.3. 1 Puncture résistance test shall be performed to
confirm that the products hâve puncture résistance 7.6 . 3 The test may be performed on miniature size
strength. fender, if the fender is too large to be mounted on the test-
ing machine. The réduction scale shall be biggerthan 1/30
(one thirtieth).
7.3 ,2 The test shall be conducted in accordance with
the standard “ISO 12236 Geotextiles and geotextile-
related products - Static puncture test (CBR test)”.
7.7 PHYSICAL PROPERTY
OF RUBBER
7.3.3 The specimen of puncture test shall be made as
same as materials, construction and production method Pneumatic fender shall satisfy requirements of physical
except number of ply of reinforcement cord layer which property of rubber, which ensure durability of the products
shall be the smallest number, i.e. normally two plies for the for long term.
)
smallest size fender.
Résistance to heat aging:
7.3.4 The force applied to brake through the specimen Test tensile strength, élongation and hardness per JIS,
based on the spécification shall be bigger than 15kN (3.4
kips).
ASTM or ISO standards. Then place a second set of sam -
ples into an oven maintained at 70°C +/-1°C for a period
of 96 hours. After removing the samples from the oven,
7.4 HYDRAULIC PRESSURE TEST repeat the same tensile strength, élongation and hardness
tests. Compare the results before and after heat aging. The
7.4. 1 Hydraulic pressure test shall be performed to following are the minimum requirements for satisfactory
confirm the endurable pressure of pneumatic fenders. aging résistance:

a. Tensile Strength after aging: Not less than 80% of

7.4.2 The internai pressure of the test shall be set as a original value.
pressure at the specified energy absorption in non-com-
pression situation. b. Elongation after aging: Not less than 80% of original
value.
7.4.3 The test shall be conducted for ten minutes and
there shall be no leakage of water and no harmful defects c. Hardness after aging: Not more than 8 points Shore A of
during the test. increase from original value.
)
Résistance to ozone:
7.5 AIR LEAKAGE TEST
7.5.1 Air leakage test shall be performed for ail pneu-
-
Conduct a standard, ozone exposure chamber ozone-expo-
sure test per one of the following standards;
matic fenders.
• JIS K 6259 40C, 20% élongation and 50 pphm ozone
The air leakage test shall be conducted with the initial level
internai pressure for more than thirty minutes and the test
results shall confirm that there is no air leakage of the ini- • ASTM D 1171, ozone exposure, method A , 38C
tial internai pressure.
• ISO 1431-1, procedure A 40C , 20% élongation and 50
7.6 COMPRESSION pphm ozone level
RECOVERY TEST After 72 hour’s exposure, there shall be no visible crack-
ing of the test strips.
7.6. 1 The fenders are compressed and released repeat-
edly at very short period of time during ship mooring. 7.8 DIMENSION
Therefore compression recovery test shall be performed to
confirm that the fenders h âve sufficient compression Fenders shall meet manufacturées specified dimensional
recoverability. tolérance. )

56
 \h
-
O V Q

APPENDIX C 3 . VESSEL DIMENSIONS WITI Ï

A GIVEN CONFIDENCE LIMIT
VESSEL DIMENSIONS When designing port facilities, the confidence limit
should be determined considering the function, the usage,
the environmental condition, the Design Vessel , etc. for
the particular facilities, using engineering expérience
1 . CONCEPT
Table Cri shows ship dimensions for 50% and 75% confi-
In designing port facilities, including fenders, the dimen- dence levels. The dimensions of the DV can be determined
sions of the Design Vessel (DV) are one of the most impor- using this table . For comparison of displacements,
tant conditions. The DV is the largest vessel among those -
including 95%, for use with the initial design, Table C 2 is
that are expected to use the facility. If the DV has been provided.
specified previously, the dimensions of this specified ves -
sel are used. If not, the dimensions are calculated by the The choice of DWT or GRT dépends upon the type of ves-
ship type and DWT (Dead Weight Tonnage) / GRT (Gross sel. A vessel carrying heavy cargo is adequately expressed
Registered Tonnage) of the DV by DWT, while a vessel carrying light cargo is adequately
expressed by GRT. Because DWT is the measure signify-
For this purpose, the relations of ship dimensions and ing weight, while GRT is the measure signifying volume.
DWT / GRT are analysed . The relation between vessel type and explanatory variable
is defined as:
2. ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
DWT: General Cargo Ship, Bulk Carrier, Container Ship,
Oil tanker and Ro/Ro Ship
2.1 PROCESSED DATA
GRT: Passenger Ship, Ferry and Gas Carrier
The processed data is mainly from Lloyd’s Register of
Shipping (June 1995) to détermine the dimensions of the The relations between Dead Weight Tonnage and Gross
DV This database of vessel dimensions is one of the most Registered Tonnage of each ship type can be taken as fol-
reliable in the world. Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, how - lows:
ever, does not provide the projected wind areas of ships.
Therefore, Ports & Harbour Research Institute (P.H.R.I) General Cargo GRT = 0.712 DWT
and Port and Harbour Bureau of M.O.T. had collected the Bulk Carrier GRT = 0.538 DWT
/
projected wind areas of ships using the results of ques - Container GRT = 0.880 DWT
tionnaires sent to Japanese shipyards and Nippon Kaiji Oil Tanker GRT = 0.553 DWT
Kyokai. It must be noted that the reliability of the analy- Ro/Ro GRT = 1.217 DWT
sis of projected wind areas is not as accurate as that of the Passenger Liner GRT = 7.657 DWT
other ship dimensions, because the number of vessel wind Ferry GRT = 4.490 DWT
areas data is much smaller than that of the other dimen - Gas Carrier GRT = 1.185 DWT
sions.
For other confidence levels it is suggested that the techni-
2.2 VESSEL TYPE cal note of the Port and Harbour Research Institute,
Ministry of Transport, Japan. No 911 September 1998,
Vessel dimensions vary according to the type. The type of “Ship Dimensions of Design Ship under Given
DV should be determined as accurately as possible. For Confidence Limits “ be used .
this Appendix, the DV is divided into 8 types, based on the
classification of Lloyd’s Register of Shipping: Ail analysis in Appendix C has becn carried out
byYasuhiro Akakura (Systems Laboratory, Planning, and
General Cargo, Bulk Carrier Vessel, Container Vessel, Oil Design Standard Division, Port and Harbour Research
Tanker, Ro/Ro Vessel, Passenger Liner and Ferry and Gas Institute, Ministry of Transport, Japan).
Carrier.
)

57 Report
m
Please note that the 95% confidence limits in that docu - -
dimensions or figures, Table C 2 has been given, as an aid.
ment should be used with extreme care. It is considered It should further be noted that PÏANC Working Group 30
that up to the 50% to 75% limits are accurate and more Report, June 1997 “Approach Channels. A guide to
appropriate to use than the dimensions given for the 95% design “ also contains a table of typical ship dimensions as
-
confidence limit for initial design purposes (see Table C l ). Appendix B p 72. This is useful as another reference but
there is no source quoted. It does give figures for much
-,
However, for deciding the mass of a vessel without actual larger vessels in each vessel type.

Appendix C. Table C-l Confidence Limit: 50%

Type Dead Disp la- Length Length Breadth Depth Maximum Wind Latéral Wind Front
Weight cernent Overall P. P. Draft Area (m2) Area (m 2)
Tonnage
(t) (t) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
FullLoad Ballast FullLoad Ballast
Condition Condition Condition Condition
General 1,000 1,580 . 63 58 10.3 5.2 3.6 227 292 59 88
cargo 2,000 3,040 78 72 12.4 6.4 4.5 348 463 94 134
605 123 172 /
Ship 3,000 4,460 88 82 13.9 7.2 5.1 447
5,000 7,210 104 96 16.0 8.4 6.1 612 849 173 236
7,000 9,900 115 107 17.6 9.3 6.8 754 1,060 216 290
10,000 13,900 128 120 19.5 10.3 7.6 940 1,340 274 361
15,000 20,300 146 136 21.8 11.7 8.7 1,210 1,760 359 463
20,000 26,600 159 149 23.6 12.7 9.6 1,440 2,130 435 552
30,000 39,000 181 170 26.4 14.4 10.9 1,850 2,780 569 709
40,000 51,100 197 186 28.6 15.7 12.0 2,210 3,370 690 846

Bulk Carrier* 5,000 6,740 106 98 15.0 8.4 6.1 615 850 205 231
7,000 9,270 116 108 16.6 9.3 6.7 710 1,010 232 271
10,000 13,000 129 120 18.5 10.4 7.5 830 1,230 264 320
15,000 19,100 145 135 21.0 11.7 8.4 980 1,520 307 387
20,000 25,000 157 148 23.0 12.8 9.2 1 ,110 1,770 341 443
30,000 36,700 176 167 26.1 14.4 10.3 1,320 2,190 397 536
50,000 59,600 204 194 32.3 16.8 12.0 1,640 2,870 479 682
70,000 81,900 224 215 32.3 18.6 13.3 1,890 3,440 542 798
100,000 115,000 248 239 37.9 20.7 14.8 2,200 4,150 619 940
150,000 168,000 279 270 43.0 23.3 16.7 2,610 5,140 719 1,140
200,000 221,000 303 294 47.0 25.4 18.2 2,950 5,990 800 1,310
250,000 273,000 322 314 50.4 27.2 19.4 3,240 6,740 868 1 ,450 \

Container 7,000 10,200 116 108 19.6 9.3 6.9 1,320 1,360 300 396
Ship** 10,000 14.300 134 125 21.6 10.7 7.7 1,690 1,700 373 477
15,000 21,100 157 147 24.1 12.6 8.7 2,250 2,190 478 591
20,000 27.800 176 165 26.1 14.1 9.5 2,750 2,620 569 687
25,000 34.300 192 180 27.7 15.4 10.2 3,220 3,010 652 770
30,000 40.800 206 194 29.1 16.5 10.7 3,660 3,370 729 850
40,000 53,700 231 218 32.3 18.5 11.7 4,480 4,040 870 990
50,000 66,500 252 238 32.3 20.2 12.5 5,230 4,640 990 1,110
60,000 79,100 271 256 35.2 21.7 13.2 5,950 5,200 1,110 1 ,220

Oil Tanker 1,000 1,450 59 54 9.7 4.3 3.8 170 266 78 80

2,000 2,810 73 68 12.1 5.4 4.7 251 401 108 117
3,000 4,140 83 77 13.7 6.3 5.3 315 509 131 146
5,000 6,740 97 91 16.0 7.5 6.1 419 689 167 194
7,000 9,300 108 102 17.8 8.4 6.7 505 841 196 233
10,000 13,100 121 114 19.9 9.5 7.5 617 1,040 232 284
15,000 19,200 138 130 22.5 11.0 8.4 770 1,320 281 355
20,000 25.300 151 143 24.6 12.2 9.1 910 1,560 322 416
30,000 37.300 171 163 27.9 14.0 10.3 1,140 1,990 390 520 )

! ? *
**
 ^7
<\M
s

a'
**
"
m
»
N

Appendix C. Table C-l Confidence Limit: 50%

Type Dead Displa - Length Length Breadth Depth Maximum Wind Latéral Wind Front
Weight cernent Overall P. P. Draft Area (m2) Area (m2)
Tonnage
(t) (t) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
Full Load Ballast Full Load Ballast
Condition Condition Condition Condition
50,000 60,800 201 192 32.3 16.8 11.9 1 ,510 2 ,690 497 689
70,000 83,900 224 214 36.3 18.9 13.2 1 ,830 3,280 583 829
100,000 118,000 250 240 40.6 21.4 14.6 2,230 4,050 690 1 ,010
150,000 174,000 284 273 46.0 24.7 16.4 2,800 5 , 150 840 1 ,260
200,000 229,000 311 300 50.3 27.3 17.9 3,290 6, 110 960 1 ,480
300,000 337 ,000 354 342 57.0 31.5 20.1 4, 120 7 ,770 1 ,160 1 ,850

Ro/Ro 1 ,000 1 ,970 66 60 13.2 5.2 3.2 700 810 216 217
Ship 2,000 3,730 85 78 15.6 7.0 4.1 970 1 , 110 292 301
s
3,000 5 ,430 99 90 17.2 8.4 4.8 1, 170 1 ,340 348 364
• . /!
. 5,000 8,710 119 109 19.5 10.5 5.8 1 ,480 1 ,690 435 464
7,000 11 ,900 135 123 21.2 12.1 6.6 1 ,730 1 ,970 503 544
10,000 16,500 153 141 23.1 14.2 7.5 2,040 2, 320 587 643
15,000 24,000 178 163 25.6 16.9 8.7 2,460 2 ,790 701 779
20,000 31 ,300 198 182 27.4 19.2 9.7 2,810 3, 180 794 890
30,000 45 ,600 229 211 30.3 23.0 11.3 3,400 3 ,820 950 1 ,080

Passenger 1,000 850 60 54 11.4 4.1 1.9 426 452 167 175
Ship 2,000 1 ,580 76 68 13.6 5.3 2.5 683 717 225 234
3,000 2,270 87 78 15.1 6.2 3.0 900 940 267 277
5,000 3 ,580 104 92 17.1 7.5 3.6 1.270 1 ,320 332 344
7,000 4,830 117 103 18.6 8.6 4.1 1 ,600 1 ,650 383 396
10,000 6,640 133 116 20.4 9.8 4.8 2,040 2,090 446 459
15 ,000 9,530 153 132 22.5 11.5 5.6 2,690 2,740 530 545
20,000 12 ,300 169 146 24.2 12.8 7.6 3.270 3, 320 599 614
30,000 17 ,700 194 166 26.8 14.9 7.6 4,310 4, 350 712 728
50,000 27 ,900 231 197 30.5 18.2 7.6 6,090 6, 120 880 900
70,000 37 , 600 260 220 33.1 20.7 7.6 7 ,660 7,660 1 ,020 1 ,040

Ferry 1,000 810 59 54 12.7 4.6 2.7 387 404 141 145
2,000 1 ,600 76 69 15.1 5.8 3.3 617 646 196 203
;
j
3 ,000 2,390 88 80 16.7 6.5 3.7 811 851 237 247
5 ,000 3,940 106 97 19.0 7.6 4.3 1 , 150 1 ,200 302 316
7 ,000 5,480 119 110 20.6 8.5 4.8 1 ,440 1 ,510 354 372
10,000 7,770 135 125 22.6 9.5 5.3 1 ,830 1 ,930 419 442
15 ,000 11 ,600 157 145 25.0 10.7 6.0 2,400 2,540 508 537
20,000 15 ,300 174 162 26.8 11.7 6.5 2 ,920 3,090 582 618
30,000 22,800 201 188 29.7 13.3 7.4 3,830 4,070 705 752
40,000 30,300 223 209 31.9 14.5 8.0 4,660 4,940 810 860

Gas 1,000 2,210 68 63 11.1 5.3 4.3 350 436 121 139
Carrier 2,000 4,080 84 78 13.7 6.8 5.2 535 662 177 203
3 ,000 5,830 95 89 15.4 7.8 5.8 686 846 222 254
5 ,000 9, 100 112 104 17.9 9.4 6.7 940 1 , 150 295 335
7 ,000 12,300 124 116 19.8 10.6 7.4 1 , 150 1 ,410 355 403
10,000 16,900 138 130 22.0 12.0 8.2 1 ,430 1 ,750 432 490
15 ,000 24.100 157 147 24.8 13.9 9.3 1 ,840 2,240 541 612
20,000 31.100 171 161 27.1 15.4 10.0 2, 190 2 ,660 634 716
30,000 44,400 194 183 30.5 17.8 11.7 2,810 3,400 794 894
50,000 69,700 227 216 35.5 21.3 11.7 3,850 4,630 1 ,050 1 , 180
70,000 94,000 252 240 39.3 24.0 11.7 4,730 5 ,670 1 , 270 1 ,420
100,000 128 ,000 282 268 43.7 27.3 11.7 5 ,880 7,030 1 ,550 1 ,730
) *) Full Load Condition of Wind Latéral / Front Areas of log carrier don’t include the areas of logs on deck.
**) Full Load Condition of Wind Latéral / Front Areas of Container Ships include the areas of containers on deck
mi
Appendix C. Table C-l Confidence Limit: 75%
Type Dead Displa - Length Length Breadth Depth Maximum Wind Latéral Wind Front
Weight cernent Overall P. P. Draft Area (m2) Area (m2)
Tonnage
(t) Ct) ( m) M (m) (m) (m)
Full Load Ballast Full Load Ballast
Condition Condition Condition Condition
General 1,000 1,690 67 62 10.8 5.8 3.9 278 342 63 93
Cargo 2,000 3,250 83 77 13.1 7.2 4.9 426 541 101 142
Ship 3,000 4,750 95 88 14.7 8.1 5.6 547 708 132 182
5,000 7,690 111 104 16.9 9.4 6.6 750 993 185 249
7,000 10,600 123 115 18.6 10.4 7.4 922 1,240 232 307
10,000 14,800 137 129 20.5 11.6 8.3 1,150 1,570 294 382
15,000 21,600 156 147 23.0 13, 1 9.5 1,480 2,060 385 490
20,000 28,400 170 161 24.9 14.3 10.4 1,760 2,490 466 585
30,000 41,600 193 183 27.8 16.2 11.9 2,260 3,250 611 750
40,000 54,500 211 200 30.2 17.6 13.0 2,700 3,940 740 895 1
•f

Bulk 5,000 6,920 109 101 15.5 8.6 6.2 689 910 221 245
Carrier* 7,000 9,520 120 111 17.2 9.5 6.9 795 1,090 250 287
10,000 13,300 132 124 19.2 10.6 7.7 930 1,320 286 340
15,000 19,600 149 140 21.8 11.9 8.6 1,100 1,630 332 411
20,000 25.700 161 152 23.8 13.0 9.4 1,240 1,900 369 470
30,000 37.700 181 172 27.0 14.7 10.6 1,480 2,360 428 569
50,000 61,100 209 200 32.3 17.1 12.4 1,830 3,090 518 723
70,000 84,000 231 221 32.3 18.9 13.7 2,110 3,690 586 846
100,000 118,000 255 246 39.2 21.1 15.2 2,460 4,460 669 1 ,000
150,000 173,000 287 278 44.5 23.8 17.1 2,920 5,520 777 1,210
200,000 227,000 311 303 48.7 25.9 18.6 3,300 6,430 864 1,380
250,000 280,000 332 324 52.2 27.7 19.9 3,630 7,240 938 1,540

Container 7,000 10,700 123 115 20.3 9.8 7.2 1,460 1,590 330 444
Ship** 10,000 15.100 141 132 22.4 11.3 8.0 1,880 1,990 410 535
15,000 22,200 166 156 25.0 13.3 9.0 2,490 2,560 524 663
20,000 29.200 186 175 27.1 14.9 9.9 3,050 3,070 625 771
25,000 36.100 203 191 28.8 16.3 10.6 3,570 3,520 716 870
30,000 43,000 218 205 30.2 17.5 11.1 4,060 3,950 800 950 /

40,000 56,500 244 231 32.3 19.6 12.2 4,970 4,730 950 1,110
50,000 69,900 266 252 32.3 21.4 13.0 5,810 5,430 1 ,090 1,250
60,000 83.200 286 271 36.5 23.0 13.8 6,610 6,090 1,220 1 , 370

Oii 1 ,000 1,580 61 58 10.2 4.5 4.0 190 280 86 85

Tanker 2,000 3,070 76 72 12.6 5.7 4.9 280 422 119 125
3,000 4,520 87 82 14.3 6.6 5.5 351 536 144 156
5,000 7,360 102 97 16.8 7.9 6.4 467 726 184 207
7,000 10,200 114 108 18.6 8.9 7.1 564 885 216 249
10,000 14,300 127 121 20.8 10.0 7.9 688 1,090 255 303
15,000 21,000 144 138 23.6 11.6 8.9 860 1 ,390 309 378
20,000 27,700 158 151 25.8 12.8 9.6 1,010 1,650 355 443
30,000 40,800 180 173 29.2 14.8 10.9 1 ,270 2,090 430 554
50,000 66,400 211 204 32.3 17.6 12.6 1,690 2,830 548 734
70,000 91,600 235 227 38.0 19.9 13.9 2,040 3,460 642 884
100,000 129,000 263 254 42.5 22.5 15.4 2,490 4,270 761 1,080
150,000 190,000 298 290 48.1 25.9 17.4 3,120 5,430 920 1,340
200,000 250,000 327 318 52.6 28.7 18.9 3,670 6,430 1,060 1,570
300,000 368,000 371 363 59.7 33.1 21.2 4,600 8,180 1 ,280 1,970
 Appendix C. Table C-l Confidence Limit: 75%
Type Dead Displa- Length Length Breadth Depth Maximum Wind Latéral Wind Front
Weight cernent Overall P. P. Draft Area (m 2) Area (m 2)
Tonnage
(t) (t) (m) (m) (m) ( m) (m)
Full Load Ballast Full Load Ballast
Condition Condition Condition Condition
Ro/Ro 1,000 2,190 73 66 14.0 6.2 3.5 880 970 232 232
Ship 2,000 4,150 94 86 16.6 8.4 4.5 1,210 1,320 314 323
3,000 6,030 109 99 18.3 10.0 5.3 1,460 1,590 374 391
5,000 9,670 131 120 20.7 12.5 6.4 1,850 2,010 467 497
7,000 13,200 148 136 22.5 14.5 7.2 2,170 2,350 541 583
10,000 18,300 169 155 24.6 17.0 8.2 2,560 2,760 632 690
15,000 26,700 196 180 27.2 20.3 9.6 3,090 3,320 754 836
20,000 34,800 218 201 29.1 23.1 10.7 3,530 3,780 854 960
30,000 50,600 252 233 32.2 27.6 12.4 4,260 4,550 1,020 1,160
ï

Passenger 1,000 1,030 64 60 12.1 4.9 2.6 464 486 187 197
Ship 2,000 1,910 81 75 14.4 6.3 3.4 744 770 251 263
3,000 2,740 93 86 16.0 7.4 4.0 980 1,010 298 311
5,000 4,320 112 102 18.2 9.0 4.8 1,390 1 ,420 371 386
7,000 5,830 125 114 19.8 10.2 5.5 1,740 1,780 428 444
10,000 8,010 142 128 21.6 11.7 6.4 2,220 2,250 498 516
15,000 11,500 163 146 23.9 13.7 7.5 2,930 2,950 592 611
20,000 14,900 180 160 25.7 15.3 8.0 3,560 3,570 669 690
30,000 21.300 207 183 28.4 17.8 8.0 4,690 4,680 795 818
50,000 33,600 248 217 32.3 21.7 8.0 6,640 6,580 990 1,010
70,000 45.300 278 243 35.2 24.6 8.0 8,350 8,230 1,140 1,170

Ferry 1,000 1, 230 67 61 14.3 5.5 3.4 411 428 154 158
2,000 2,430 86 78 17.0 6.8 4.2 656 685 214 221
3,000 3,620 99 91 18.8 7.7 4.8 862 903 259 269
5,000 5,970 119 110 21.4 9.0 5.5 1,220 1,280 330 344
7,000 8,310 134 124 23.2 10.0 6.1 1,530 1,600 387 405
10,000 11,800 153 142 25.4 11.1 6.8 1,940 2,040 458 482
15,000 17,500 177 164 28.1 12.6 7.6 2,550 2,690 555 586
20,000 23,300 196 183 30.2 13.8 8.3 3,100 3,270 636 673
30,000 34,600 227 212 33.4 15.6 9.4 4,070 4,310 771 819
40,000 45,900 252 236 35.9 17.1 10.2 4,950 5,240 880 940

Gas 1,000 2,480 71 66 11.7 5.7 4.6 390 465 133 150
Carrier 2,000 4,560 88 82 14.3 7.2 5.7 597 707 195 219
3,000 6,530 100 93 16.1 8.4 6.4 765 903 244 273
5,000 10,200 117 109 18.8 10.0 7.4 1,050 1,230 323 361
7,000 13.800 129 121 20.8 11.3 8.1 1,290 1,510 389 434
10,000 18,900 144 136 23.1 12.9 9.0 1,600 1,870 474 527
15,000 27,000 164 154 26.0 14.9 10.1 2,050 2,390 593 658
20,000 34.800 179 169 28.4 16.5 11.0 2,450 2,840 696 770
30,000 49,700 203 192 32.0 19.0 12.3 3,140 3,630 870 961
50,000 78,000 237 226 37.2 22.8 12.3 4,290 4,940 1,150 1,270
70,000 105,000 263 251 41.2 25.7 12.3 5,270 6,050 1,390 1,530
100,000 144,000 294 281 45.8 29.2 12.3 6,560 7,510 1,690 1,860

) *) Full Load Condition of Wind Latéral / Front Areas of log carrier don’t include the areas of logs on deck.
**) Full Load Condition of Wind Latéral / Front Areas of Container Ships include the areas of containers on deck
!
i i

61
Hüi
%RE
O

Appendix C. Table C-2 VESSEL DISPLACEMENTS. Confidence Limits: 50%, 75%, 95%
Type Dead Displacement Type Dead Displacement
Weight Weight
Tonnage Tonnage
(t) (t) (t) (t)

50% 75% 95% 50% 75% 95%

General 1,000 1,850 1,690 1,850 Ro/Ro 1,000 1970 2,170 2,540
Cargo 2,000 3,040 3,250 3,560 2,000 3,730 4,150 4,820
Ship 3,000 4,460 4,750 5,210 3,000 5,430 6,030 7,010
5,000 7,210 7,690 8,440 5,000 8,710 9,670 11,200
7,000 9,900 10,600 11,600 7,000 11,900 13,200 15.300
10,000 13,900 14,800 16,200 10,000 16,500 18,300 21.300
15,000 20,300 21,600 23,700 15,000 24,000 2,700 31,000
20,000 26,600 28,400 31,000 20,000 31,300 34,800 41,400
30,000 39,000 41,600 45,600 30,000 45,600 50,600 58,800
40,000 51,100 54,500 59,800 Passenger 1,000 850 1,030 1,350
Bulk 5,000 6,740 6,920 7,190 2,000 1.580 1,910 2,500
Carrier 7,000 9,270 9,520 9,880 3,000 2,270 2,740 3,590
10,000 13,000 13,300 13,800 5,000 3.580 4,320 5,650
15,000 19,100 19,600 20,300 7,000 4,830 5,830 7,630
20,000 25,000 25.700 26,700 10,000 6,640 8,010 10,500
30,000 36,700 37.700 39,100 15,000 9,530 11,500 15,000
50,000 59,600 61,100 63,500 20,000 12,300 14,900 19,400
70,000 81,900 84,000 87,200 30,000 17,700 21.300 27,900
100,000 115,000 118,000 122,000 50,000 27,900 33,600 44,000
150,000 168,000 173,000 179,000 70,000 37,600 45.300 59,300
200,000 221,000 227,000 236,000 Ferry 1,000 810 1,230 2,240
250,000 273 ,000 280,000 291,000 2,000 1,600 2,430 4,430
Container 7,000 10,200 10,700 11,500 3,000 2,390 3,620 6,590
Ship 10,000 14.300 15,100 16,200 5,000 3,940 5,970 10.900
15,000 21,100 22,200 23,900 7,000 5,480 8,310 15,100
20,000 27.800 29,200 31.400 10,000 7,770 11,800 21.500
25,000 34.300 36,100 38.800 15,000 11,600 17,500 31.900 s

30,000 40.800 43,000 46.200 20,000 15.300 23,300 42,300 /

40,000 53,700 56,500 60.800 30,000 22,800 34,600 63,000

50,000 66,500 69,900 75.200 40,000 30.300 45,900 83.500
60,000 79,100 83,200 89.400
Oil 1,000 1,450 1,580 1,800 Gas 1,000 2,210 2,480 2,910
Tanker 2,000 2,810 3,070 3,480 Carrier 2,000 4,080 4,560 5,370
3,000 4,140 4,520 5,130 3,000 5,830 6,530 7,680
5,000 6,740 7,360 8,360 5,000 9,100 10,200 12,000
7,000 9,300 10,200 11.500 7,000 12,300 13.800 16,200
10,000 13,100 14,300 16,200 10,000 16,900 18,900 22,200
15,000 19,200 21,000 23,900 15,000 24.100 27,000 31,700
20,000 25.300 27,700 31,400 20,000 31.100 34.800 40,900
30,000 37.300 40,800 46,300 30,000 44,400 49,700 58,500
50,000 60,800 66,400 75.500 50,000 69,700 78,000 91,800
70,000 83,900 91,600 104,000 70,000 94,000 105,000 124,000
100,000 118,000 129,000 146,000 100,000 128,000 144,000 169,000
150,000 174,000 190,000 216,000
200,000 229,000 250,000 284,000
300,000 337,000 368,000 418,000

mm 51 K AME m
 DWT) ie Mass of vessel (95% confidence value) M is
APPENDIX D 45,600 tonnes

-
For other confidence levels, not shown in Table C l , use
the référencés given in the Appendix C.
SELECTION OF FENDER SIZE
- CASE STUDIES
ii) Virtual mass factor (C
^
Virtual mass factor (QJ is calculated by the following
Two case studies are given showing the effect of tempéra- formula, which in this case is that of Shigeru Ueda.
ture and strain rate. See Section 4.2.5.

Case study-1 is for a 30,000 DWT vessel using the tem- Cm = 1+ ( TC/2 Cb) x (d/B)
pérature factor (TF) and the velocity factor (VF).
where Cb is the Block coefficient
Case study-2, where the berth for a 30,000 DWT vessel is
shared with a 3,000 DWT vessel, with the effect of TF and [M / (LBDp)] = 0.77
VF shown.
M: Vessel Mass, 50% confidence value
d: Draft ( m ) = 10.9 m
Each case study uses the condition that the environmental
B: Moulded breadth (m) = 26.4 m
température ranges between 10°C to 40°C. Length of the ship (m) = 170 m
L:
P- Spécifie weight of seawater (1030 N/m3)
1 . CASE STUDY-1
Cm = 1 + (it/2x 0.77) * (10.9/26.4) = 1.84
a) Design criteria:
iii) Eccentricity factor (Ce)
Vessel size: max. 30,000 DWT; Assuming quarter point berthing, Eccentricity factor (Ce)
is 0.5.
Kind of vessel: General cargo;
iv) Berthing configuration factor (Ce) and Softness
Approach berthing velocity: 0.10 m/s (Vmin). factor (Cs)
See also Table 4.2.1;
According to the design standard, both factors are to be
The 50% confidence level is adopted for the design 1.0.
berthing velocity; Ce = 1.0
Cs = 1.0
Designated maximum reaction limit: less than 980
kN; v) Calculating berthing energy (Ev)

Berthing energy is calculated by the following kinetic

The environmental température range of the quay
équation.
where the fender is to be installed is assumed as Ev = l / i Mv . V2 . Cm . Ce . Ce . Cs. Cab
follows : (Abnormal Load Factor)

Environmental températures ( 45600 /2 ) . 0.102 . 1.84 . 0.5 . 1.0 . 1.0 .1.75

Highest 40° C (Tmax)
Lowest 10° C (Tmin) = 367.1 kNm

Factor for abnormal impact: 1.75. See Table 4.2.5. c) Manufacturing tolérance

Considcring the manufacturing tolérance of a fender, it is

b) Calculating berthing energy usual that the tolérance of -10% for energy absorption and
+10% for the maximum reaction force on the performance
i) Water displacemcnt of the vessel (MD) figures in the catalogue is allowed .
Appendix C. Table C-3, dead weight tonnages and
équivalent displacement tonnages are shown. Manufacturing tolérance
)
Energy absorption; 10% -
Displacement tonnage of a General Cargo vessel (30,000 Max. reaction force; +10%

maMHÊamÊÊmwmmmœ GjSPÇÇ fü
^^
RT5

d) Température factor (TF)

1.100 1.100
The déviation of performance by the environmental tem - 1.050 1.050
pérature is corrected by the température factor (TF).
Taking the performance value at 23C as the standard val- & 1.000 i .ooo pq
ues in the catalog (TF=1), the température factors can be
£ 0.950
0,988«
7
Z 0,990»
0.950 Sî
>
shown as follows at the highest and the lowest température y R
(TF(TmaX)>TF(Tmjn )). 0.900 0.900
. I t I }]W|
0.850 0.850
Environmental température 40°C > TF(Tmax) ; 0.9451) 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
10°C, TF(Tmin) ; 1.0552) Strain rate (%/$)
Figure D.2 Velocity factor Case Study 1
1.400 1.400
1.300 1.300
TF 1.200 1.200 e) Required performance
1.100 1.100
1 055 Di ) i) At 40C
1.000
,

1.000 nn 30,000 DWT (40°C) /

0.900 0.900
-20 -10 0 10 20 40 50 30 60
Environmental température (°C)
The following energy absorption capacity (E) is required
for the fender.
Figure 1 Température Factor (TF) Case Study 1
E = Ev / ( VFE(Vrain) x TF x 0.9 )
Strain rate is defined in the following formula: = 367.1/(0.990 x 0.945 x 0.9^)= 436.0 kNm ^
Strain rate (VJ = Compression speed (Vc) / [EQ. l ] The reaction force of the fender should be less than the fol-
Fender height (H) x 100 lowing figure.

The 1 m high fender is taken as instance, the strain rate for R - Rv / ( x TF(Tmax) x 1.1 )
design berthing velocity of 0.10 m/s is calculated as fol- = 980.0 / (0.988 x 0.945 x 1.1)= 954.2 kN
lows:
ii) At 10°C
Strain rate (VJ = (0.10 m/s / lm)xl 00 = 10%/s 30,000 DWT (10C)

The déviation of performance by compression speed is Required energy absorption of the fender :
shown by the velocity factors
E = Ev / ( VFE(Vmin) x TFa-min) x 0.9 )
(VFe: for energy absorption, VFr: for reaction force). As = 367.1/(0.990 x 1.055 x 0.9)= 390.5 kNm
to the 1 m high fender, taking the performance obtained by
the compression test at a compression speed of 0.15m/s as Maximum reaction force of the fender :
the standard (VFE=1.0,VFR=1.0).
R ~ Rv / ( VFR(Vmjn ) x TF(Tmin ) x 1.1 )
In case, the fender is 2 m high and berthing velocity is
= 980.0 / (0.988 x 1.055 x 1.1)= 854.7 kN
0.10 m/s, the strain rate is 5.0%/s. Therefore, the catalog
value should be converted to the performance of 15%/s by
using the velocity factor of this strain rate. Table 1 Required performance
The velocity factors at the actual strain rate are given fforn 30,000 DWT
Figure 2.
40°C 10°C
Here, the velocity factors should be studied for the slowest
berthing velocity (VFE(Vrnin) VFR( Vmin)).
)

Minimum required 436.0 kNm 390.5 kNm

Then, velocity factors at 10%/s are defined referring to energy absorption
Figure 2
Maximum reaction 942.8 kN 854.7 kN
VF E(Vmin) ; û,9903) force
I
VF R(Vmin) ; 0,988^)

Report ofWorking Group 3^3 M ÀRCQM

.
L V ~z

64 — '

y- y- : y- -
-
. . . ':
 It means that the standard performance (compression Cm = 1 + ((71/2x0.74 ) x ( 5.1/13.9) = 1.78 •

speed : 0.15 m/s, environmental température; 23°C) in the

catalogue should satisfy the following performance for where
fender size sélection:
Cb Block coefficient [ M / (LBdp)] =
Minimum energy absorption 436.0 kNm 4,460/(82x13.9x5.1x1030)= 0.74
Maximum reaction force 854.7 kN M Mass of vcssel (50% confidence value)
d Draft ( m ) = 5.1 m
If the performance of the 1 m high fender satisfies these B Mouldedbreadth ( m ) = 13.9 m
figures, this fender is confirmed as a suitable fender. L Length of the ship ( m ) = 82 m
P Spécifie weight of sea water (1030 N/m3)
If not, the fender of different size must be selected and the
same procedure should be carried out until the required 50% confidence value is adopted for each M, d, B, L .
figures are satisfied.
iii) Eccentricity factor (Ce)
Assuming quarter point berthing , Eccentricity
2. CASE STUDY-2 factor (Ce) is 0.5.
} In this case, where the berth for 30,000 DWT vessel is iv) Berthing configuration factor (Cc) and Softness
shared for 3,000 DWT vessel, is studied, the effect of VF factor Cs)
and TF is shown clearly. According to the design standard, the both factors are
to be 1.0.
a) Design criteria Cc = 1.0
Cs = 1.0
Vessel size : min. 3,000 DWT
* Kind of vessel : General cargo v) Abnormal Impact factor (Cab)
Berthing velocity .20 m/s ( Vma* ) According to Table 4.2.5, this factor for a General
50% confidence value is adopted for the design cargo vessel is 1.75.
berthing velocity.
Designated maximum reaction limit: less than vi) Calculating berthing energy (Ev)
980 kN Berthing energy is calculated by the following
The environmental température range of the quay kinetic équation.
where the fender is installed is assumed as follows:
Ev = ( 5210/2 ) x 0,202 x 1.78 x 0.5 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.75
Environmental température = 162.3 kNm
Highest 40 C(Traax)
c) Manufacturing tolérance
Lowest 10 C(Tmin)
/
Considering the manufacturing tolérance of a fender, it is
Abnormal Impact factor: (Cab) 1.75 refer to Table -
usual that the tolérance of 10% for energy absorption and
4.2.5 that of +10% for maximum reaction force applied to the
performance figures in the catalogue.
b) Calculating berthing energy
Manufacturing tolérance Energy absorption ; - 10%
i) Water displacement of the vessel (MD) Max. reaction force ; +10%
In this case, as DWT is 3000.
Then according to table App.C-2 , the displacement d) Température factor (TF)
tonnage becomes as follows:
The déviation of performance by the environmental tem-
Displacement tonnage of the vessel(MD) 5,210 t pérature is corrected by the température factor (TF).
Mass of the vessel (M) 5,210 t Taking the performance value at 23°C as the standard val -
ues in the catalog(TF= l ), the température factors can be
shown as follows at the highest and the lowest température
A 95% confidence value is adopted for the above.
(TF(Xmax),TF(Tmin)):

)
ii) Virtual mass factor (C
^
Virtual mass factor (CjJ is calculated by the fol
lowing formula:
-
Environmental température 40°C, TF(-rmax) ; 0.9451’)
.
10»C TFfriI jn) ; 1.0552’)
)

!
65 Report ofWorking Group 33 - MARCQM ’
 Maximum reaction force for fender:
1.400 1.400
1.300 1.300 R - Rv / ( VFR(Vmax) x TF(Tmax) x 1.1 )
T 1.200 1.200 = 980.0 / (1.020 x 0.945 x 1.1)= 924.3 kN
F
1.100 1.100
1,055 «•*•> ii) AtlO°C
1.000 0,945 un 1.000 3,000 DWT (10C)
0.900 0.900 Required energy absorption of the fender :
- -10
20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Environmentaf température (°C) E = EV / ( VFE(Vmax) x TF(Tmin ) x 0.9 )
Figure D. 3 Température factor (TF) Case study 2 = 162.3 / (1.010 x 1.055 0.9) = 169.2 kNm
Maximum reaction force of the fender :
e) Velocity factor (VF)
R - Rv / ( VFR(Vmax) x TF(Tmin) x 1.1 )
The déviation of performance by compression speed is
= 980.0 / (1.020 x 1.055 1.1) = 827.9 kN
shown by the velocity factors (VFE: for energy absorp-
tion , VFr: for reaction force ).
I
Taking the performance obtained by the compression test Table 2 Required performance
at a compression speed of 0.15 m/s as the standard,
(VFE=1.0,VFR=1.0). The velocity factors at the actual 30,000 DWT
strain rate are given from Figure 4. Here, the velocity fac -
tors should be studied for the slowest berthing velocity 40°C 10°C
(VFE(Vmax)» VFR(vmax)). The 1 m high fender is taken as
instance, the strain rate for berthing velocity of 0.20 m/s is
calculated as follows:
Minimum required 436.0 kNm 390.5kN m -
Energy absorption
Strain rate (Vg) “
(0.20 m/s / lm)xl 00 = 20%/s
Maximum Reaction 954.2 kN 854.7 kN
force
Then, velocity factors at 30%/s are defined referring
Figure 4. 3,000 DWT

E(Vmax); 1.0103)
40°C 10°C
VF R(Vmax) ; 1.0204)

U CO
Minimum required 188.9 kN-m 169.2 kN m-
Energy absorption
1.050
* LOGO Maximum Reaction 924.3 kN 827.9 kN
S .
u
* 0.950 0.950 force
0.9CO 0.900
0.850 0.69) It means that the standard performance (compression
0.0! 0.1 I 10 20 100 ICQO
speed : 0.15m/s, environmental température : 23°C) in the
SI min tait (#$ )
catalogue should satisfy the following performance for
Figure D. 4 Velocity factor Case study 2- fender size sélection.

f ) Required performance Minimum energy absorption 436.0 kNm

Maximum reaction force 827.9 kN
i) At 40°C
3,000 DWT (40°C) Here, the required energy absorption for 3,000 DWT ves-
Required energy absorption for the fender. -
sel is 188.9 kN m.

E = Ev / ( VFE(Vmax) x TF(Tmax) x 0.9 ) So, it should be confirmed that the maximum reaction
force during the energy absorbing process is in the range
= 162.3 / (1.010 x 0.945 x 0.9)= 188.9 kNm
of constant reaction force range on the performance curve. )

SS m
 including astronomical levels Fender’s available fixing
APPENDIX E area (Top and bottom, width)

5) Frequency of use of the berth by different classes of

ship, draft and freeboard for largest and smallest ship,
GUIDELINES FOR whether the berth is for loading or discharge or both,
SPECIFICATION WRITING whether tugs are sometimes or always used.

6) The maximum and minimum allowable fender projection

considering reach of crâne, loading arm, etc or flare angle
INTRODUCTION which may hit the quay if the projection is not enough.

This is a guideline for engineers to provide a plain “Design 7) Type of quay structure(s) the fender would be fitted to -
Criteria” for spécifications to fender manufacturera. i.e. new or existing concrète quay, or Steel platform, etc
This is important in order to acquire economical fenders 8) The maximum reaction limit on quay structure
complying with the required performance.

The design criteria should consist, ideally, of the following

2. MANUFACTURING &
'
•
parts. They should contain the critical information QUALITY REQUIREMENTS
required by a fender manufacturer.
This section is equally important since, no matter how
1. Vessel & Berthing considérations good the theoretical fender arrangement may be, it will not
2. Manufacturing & Quality requirements for fenders last long if poorly designed or made from low grade mate-
3. Draft Spécification. Notes for design criteria rials. This section provides minimum requirements of
4. Geometrical Information quality in fender System.
Part 3. of this Appendix is a guideline draft spécification 1) Manufactures should be able to demonstrate a satisfac-
notes of design criteria, provided for engineers as a refe- tory supply record over a number of years for the type of
rence. fender being offered and the application for which it is
intended.
1. VESSEL & BERTHING
2) Manufactures should hâve published literature on the
CONSIDERATIONS product where RPD is clearly specified.

This section would cover domain the fender designer 3) Manufactures should hâve an authorized or approved
needs to know about the berth and it’s usage. It particu- quality System.
larly needs to avoid ambiguities that would permit differ -
ent designers coming up with a wide range of berthing 4) Fenders offered should hâve a satisfactory “type
energies. The customer pays for energy absorption and the approval” certificate in accordance with the new PIANC
penalty is the reaction on the structure/ship. Many fender guidelines. Time should be allowed for companies to pré-
types lose performance under certain loading conditions, paré for this - it may take some 1-2 years.
so these conditions need setting out very clearly.
5) Customers should make provision to witness quality
-
1) Energy ship spécifications together with dimensions control testing of both the fender and physical property
( 95% confidence level), berthing speeds (50% confidence tests for the materials - either themselves or using third
of mean value), safety factors, to détermine abnormal ener- parties.
gy (according to Section 4, Figure 4.2.1, and Table 4.2.5 ).
6) Manufactures should déclaré the tolérances of their
2) Types of vessels using the berth with comments on spé- -
product typically -10% from min . energy and +10% for
cial features such as berthing angles, bow flare angles, max. reaction. They should also déclaré how the fender
beltings, other protrusions or spécial shapes, permissible performs under other conditions such as angular compres-
hull pressures or belting loads etc. sion and overload (maximum deflection limits).

-
3) Environmental conditions exposure of the berth to wind, -
7) Steel panel, if any, shall be structured with suitable stiff
-
waves, currents, tides etc. Likely effects of température i.e. ening members. It shall be appropriately designed to resist
ice flows or tropical climates, range of températures etc. the reaction forces imposed by fender and its supporting
chains (if any), and keep in equilibrium with the vessel
) 4) Geometry - Tidal levels, highest and lowest levels berthing force.
8) Protective treatments of the frontal panel shall be suit- 3.1 . 3 Fender Systems shall be supplied by a reputable
able for the environment. They should also be repairable manufacturer able to demonstrate a satisfactory supply
to allow for transport damage or later damage in service. record over a number of years for the type of fender being
offered and a record of successful applications.
9) Pads are provided on face of frontal panel to reduce fric-
tion of vessel contact. Pads shall be made of a synthetic 3.2 RUBBER FENDER UNITS
resin.
3.2. 1 Rubber fender units shall be compression moulded
10) Materia î and grade of bolts, anchors need to be speci - from natural or synthetic or both rubber compounds in
fied. compliance with Appendix A of “Procedure to Détermine
and Report the Performance of Marine Fenders, Section
11) If necessary, fender support chains shall be provided.
7.3”.
Chains should be designed with appropriate factors of
safety. Any corrosion allowance used should be stated.
3.2.2 The rubber shall be fully vulcanized and homoge-
3. DRAFT neous with no foreign particles, and ffee from voids,
cracks and cuts. Steel plates shall be fully embedded and
SPECIFICATIONS fully adhered to the rubber during the vulcanization
NOTES FOR DESIGN CRITERIA process to avoid séparation between the rubber and Steel.

3.2.3 Rubber fender shall be tested in accordance with

3.1 FENDER PERFORMANCE the requirements of Appendix A of “Procedure to
Dé termine and Report the Performance of Marine
3.1. 1 The fender shall be able to absorb the required Fenders”.
berthing energy (namely largest energy stipulated) under
the combinations of direct and angular compression in the
3.3 STEEL FENDER PANELS
table below.
3.3. 1 Steel panel shall be structured with suitable stiff-
a. Vessel Size, type (if no actual figures are available,
ening members. It shall be appropriately designed to resist
then according to PIANC Appendix C)
the reaction forces imposed by fender and its supporting
chains (if any), and keep in equilibrium with the vessel
b. Berthing velocity of 50% confidence of mean
berthing force. Steel panels shall be fabricated structural
value for vessel (according to Section 4, Figure
mild Steel conforming to the latest World Standards of
4.2.1 and Table 4.2.5)
British Standard, ASTM and JIS.
c. Berthing angle (refer Section 4, Figure 4.2.2)
3.3.2 The Steel panel shall be sized to exert a hull pressure
d. Maximum reaction force at lowest température not more than ## kN/m2 (refer to Section 4, 4.4). It shall
(x 4-10% tolérance, upper limit) be located to accommodate ail possible contact élévations
of the various vessels, intending to use the facility, under
e. Min . Energy absorption at highest température the given geometry of tidal levels and quay structure.
(x - 10% tolérance, lower limit )
3.3.3 Protective treatment of Steel panel shall be coal tar
f. Environmental température, highest and lowest epoxy which is widely used in practice.
(See Section 4, 4.1.3, Appendix A, 5.3)
3.3.4 Low Friction Pads
g. Safety factor (Section 4. Table 4.2.5 ) Low friction pads materials shall be of synthetic resin.
Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMW-PE)
3.1.2 The selected fender should perform satisfactory is widely used in practice (PIANC 5.2.2)
under the given environmental conditions of température,
berthing velocity and berthing angle which ail influence 3.3. 5 Bolts fixings
the performance. Materiaî of boit fixings should be stated.

Report ôf Working Group 333 - MARCOM i 68 '

 . .... 1

-
JK .

\
< I

3.3.6 Chains
If necessary, fender restraint chains shall be provided
(Section 4, 4.1.7). Chains should be designed with a stat-
ed safety factor (Section 4, 4.2.8.7). The chain materials
shall be in accordance with British Standards, ASTM and
JIS. The chains shall be galvanized to an approved nation-
al standard.

3.4 QUALITY CONTRGL

3.4. 1 Manufacturer qualifications:
Fender manufacturers shall supply:
“Quality certificate of ISO 9002 or équivalent”
“Supply history of the offered fenders”
“ Product literature” at the time of bidding.

3.4.2 Fender performance curves

Testing report with fender performance curves shall be
supplied for each different fender type/size at the time of
delivery in accordance with Appendix A.

3.4.3 Physical properties of rubber certificate at the time

of delivery in accordance with Appendix A.

3.4.4 A mill certificate for Steel panel, chains, bolts

should be supplied at the time of delivery in accordance
with applied standards.

4 . GEOMETRICAL
INFORMATION
4.1
• Tidal range

• Extrême water levels ie HAT, LAT and surge, if

présent.

• Top quay level

• Cope thickness

• Seabed level at berth face

• Freeboard of smallest vessel

• Permitted fender reaction

69 Report of Working Group 33 - MAR.COM

i
 REFERENCES
1. EAU 1996, Empfehlungen des Arbeitsausschusses fur
Ufereinfassungen (Recommendations of the Committee
for Waterfront Structures Harbours and Waterways EAU
1996, 7th English version)

2. BS 6349: Part 4: 1994, Maritime structures, Code of

practice for design of fendering and mooring Systems

3. Port Engineering - volume 1 - Per Bruun

4. KUBO K. (1962):”A New Method for Estimation of

Latéral Résistance of Piles”, Report of Port and Harbour
Research Institute, Vol. 2, No. 3, 37 p 9 (in Japanese)

5. Technical Standards for Port and Harbour Facilities in

Japan (1991): The overseas Coastal Development Institute
of Japan, pp. 156-161

6. UEDA S, K. TAKAHASHI, S. ISOZAKI, H. SHI -

MAOKA , S. KIUCHI and H. SIRATANI (1993), ”Design
Method of Single Pile Dolphin Made of High Tensile
Steel”, Proc. Of Pacific Congress on Marine Science and
Technology (PACOM ’93) 1993.6, pp 446-475
7. ROM 0.2 - 90, Actions in the Design of Maritime and
Harbor Works, April 1990

8. PIANC WG 24 (1995): Criteria for Movements of

Moored Vessels in Harbours - A Practical Guide, supplé-
ment to Bulletin No.88, 35p.

9. UEDA S. and SHIRAISHI S. (1992), On the Design of

Fenders Based on the Vessel Oscillations Moored in Quay
Walls, Technical Note of Port and Harbour Research
Institute, 55 p (in Japanese)

10. PIANC, Report on the International Commission for

Improving the Design of Fender System, Supplément to
Bulletin No. 45 (1984).

11. THORESEN C.A, Port Design, Guidelines and

Recommendation, Tapir Publishers, Trondheim, Norway,
1988.

12 , OCIMF, Vessel to vessel transfer guide ( Petroleum)

1997

13. OCIMF, Vessel to vessel transfer guide ( Liquefied

gases) 1995

14. SHIGERU UEDA, RYO UMENMURA, SATORU

SHIRAISHI, SHUJI YAMAMOTO, YASUHIRO
AKAKURA and SEGI YAMASE, Statistical Design of
Fenders, Proceedings of the International Offshore and
Polar Engineering Conférence, June 2001, pp. 583-588

I
Report of Working Group 33 - MARCOM 70
 An established Consultant with abroad understanding
and portfolio in the Maritime Business

ÿÆ
•
•-

'v.

Fie|ds of Activity
.rV '

• infrastructure
• feasibility studies
• design and construction management
• project management
*
• environmental studies
• logistics and économie évaluation
• GIS data Systems
V
AV :
(
y .. -
•
:ï \ -y

:•
: * . - K - '-
.
ill
•5
V . .T
/
*
zr-
:*

Benefits of using Sinclair Knight Merz

• Years of expérience .

• - •
• v :è .
.
• Full range of services in-house
Diverse expérience throughout the région
VVide network of port contacts
; r Affiliations with port operators
A^ '
Complété project procurement services
v •* . •
V

* v -: .

•
.
• Understanding df client needs
A professional team approach
' •'
v
- v
*
• v>

W» Ê0l&âSiKNIGHTMÉRZ
>

iSKifiS r V ÿ Â p -ïfï J; S - .: : .
' •r - ’
-
îf
•
^
-.
. ^
MARITIME
f
.v -
,

?.- . .
.‘ J. '

„ 0,
; -Ai-
THe Americas Ahd Europe *
r-
f; y •:

www.skmconsulting.com
) m
•'
:
-
- i
*-
•
••
-•
. .. .
v
 INTERNATIONAL NAVIGATION
ASSOCIATION

< O

ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE
DE NAVIGATION

PIANC General Secrétariat Front cover:

-
Graaf de Ferraris gebouw - 1 Ith floor
Boulevard du Roi Albert II 20, B.3 A simple reason to use fenders :
B-1000 Brussels it is just too expensive not to do so.
BELGIUM
-
http://www.pianc aipcn.org
BTW: BE 408-287-945

ISBN 2-87223-125 0 - i

PIANC members receive this report for free. Additional copies may be obtained at a price of 65 (VAT included).
 Solutions. . .
Fentek is the market leader in
advanced fendering solutions.
Seing better designed, Fentek
fenders can reduce your construc -
tion and full life costs whilst help-
ing to maximise your porfs effi-
.
ciency Consistent high quality is
just as important - that's why we
make aimost every component of
our fenders
in-house to ensure total control
overthe design and engineering
of Fentek Systems.

Wherever your project is, Fentek

has sales offices, engineers or
trained agents close to hand.
We enjoy working closely with our
customers on every aspect of
fonder sélection - from initial cal-
culations and conceptual designs
through to highly detailed propos-
ais. Our goal is an optimal solution
which provides exactly what our
customers want at a highiy com-
pétitive price.

n
FENTEK
Marine Systems

FENTEK
Marine Systems GmbH
Langenstücken 36a
D-22393 Hamburg
Germany
Tel: +49 40 600 4650
Fax: +49 40 601 7217
Email: mail@fentek.net

Other Fentek offices in UK,France, Spain, •

Singapore, Australia, USA and Dubai plus global
agents. Visrt our web site for further details.

www.fentek.net
\