Abstract
This paper presents a brief summary of the work carried out by SSRC and Brookes Bell Safety at Sea within the EC-funded project GOALDS on the development of a new formulation for assessing the survivability of damaged ships in waves. The proposed formula is meant to be an alternative or replacement to the s-factor in use within the current SOLAS regulations for probabilistic damage stability. The authors briefly discuss concerns related to the current survivability model and present the process of development that led to the re-engineered formulation.
Highlights
The current measure of survivability of a damaged ship in a seaway has been shown to be inaccurate and inadequate practically from the moment of its introduction within the probabilistic framework of damage stability, known commonly as SOLAS 2009 [1]
Some research indicated existence of a safety gap between the new SOLAS and SOLAS90 + Stockholm Agreement (SA [2]), e.g., [3] where in conclusions, the authors state that “Applied to two new RoPax designs, it has been revealed that the safety level provided by the new SOLAS 2009 rules is significantly lower compared to the old damage stability rules SOLAS 90 in conjunction with the Stockholm Agreement.”, while other suggested that the new regulations were more demanding
Given the controversies associated with the s-factor it is important to make a clear distinction between findings of and subsequent recommendations by the project HARDER and the formula adopted by the IMO
Summary
The current measure of survivability of a damaged ship in a seaway has been shown to be inaccurate and inadequate practically from the moment of its introduction within the probabilistic framework of damage stability, known commonly as SOLAS 2009 [1]. These are usually complex cases, difficult to deal with, resulting from design limitations and/or conflicting objectives and in these cases the s-factor fails at least twice This is by failing to provide an accurate assessment of survivability ( for the ships of watertight arrangements deviating significantly from that of HARDER’s sample) in dynamic environment. It fails because the GZmax and residual range of positive stability cannot be readily linked to the measurable design attributes, such as freeboard or compartment length (the relationship between these parameters and the GZ curve exists through several other parameters), which could be used by a designer to resolve the technical problems at hand. In the following the authors present briefly the work carried within GOALDS and leading to formulation of a new proposal for the factor s
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
