8.

PRELIMINARY WEIGHT ESTIMATE

Weight control is needed to maintain and ensure the important ship parameters and operations such as

Deadweight
Trim & Stability
Speed
Cost evaluation
Sea keeping
Sea launching

A reliable estimate ofweight and center of gravity is essential. Small deviation between real weight/CoG
compared to estimated weight always represents a cost for either the builder or operator. More significant
deviation between real weight/CoG compared to estimated weight can lead to large rebuilding of the vessel or
dramatically changed performance, both representing great costs.

In an early stage of the design process, weight and center of gravity must be estimated on the basis of past ship
data. This implies for a tool which in the greatest extent can structure and make reuse of weight data as
easy as possible.

8.1. Weight Classification

Any floating object must satisfy the following requirment (Archimedes’ principle)

∆ = ∑ Wi

where ∆ is the displacement tonnage of the ship and ∑W i represents the total weight. There are many ways
in which ship weights can be subdivided. The typical approach for commercial ships is as follows:

∆ = WLS + DWT

where WLS is the light ship weight and DWT is the deadweight tonnage which consists of

DWT = DWTC + WF + WL + WFW + WCREW + WPROV

DWTC : Cargo deadweight

WF : Weight of fuel
WL : Weight of lube oil
WFW : Weight of fresh water
WCREW : Weight of crew and passengers
WPROV : Weight of provisions

The light ship weight can be expressed as

WLS = WS + WM + WO+WMAR

WS : Weight of structure
WM : Weight of machinery
WO : Weight of outfit
WMAR : Weight margin (3% typical)

For warships the total weight may be classified as

∆ = WLS + WP

where WLS is the light ship weight and WP represents the payload which includes the weight of weapons, sensors
and outfit.

1
Ships are complex enginering structures and a preliminary estimate of total weight is a high risk calculation. In
order to reduce the risk and simplify the calculation ship work breakdown systems (SWBs) are widely used.
Using breakdown structures, the weight of a ship may be divided into weight groups containing information
on weight, center of gravity and other relevant information. To each weight group a specific formula for
estimation of weight is attached.

The weight classification system is a method by which all weight estimates are functionally organized. The
weight classification system provides the naval architect or weight engineer with a format for organizing weight
data that will be in a consistent format. The system allows for the grouping of materials, equipment and
components of the ship in a structured order to facilitate weight estimating, comparison to previous designs, and
to assure completeness. Additionally, the weight classificaton system provides guidance and definition at a
system and subsystem level and aids in the preparation of a complete and accurate estimate.

Weight estimates are generally categorized by one of several type of ship work breakdown systems (SWBs).
Typical SWBSs for commercial and naval vessels are shown in the following tables

Table 8.1. Typical commercial vessel SWBS

Group No Content
1000 Hull structure
2000 Propulsion plant
3000 Electric plant
4000 Auxiliary systems
5000 Outfit and furnishings
6000 Cargo handling gear

Table 8.2. Typical naval vessel SWBS

Group No Content
1000 Hull structure
2000 Propulsion plant
3000 Electric plant
4000 Command and surveillance
5000 Auxiliary systems
6000 Outfit and furnishings
7000 Armament

Within each group, weights are classified on several levels. For example, within Group 1

Group level 1000

Hull structure
Sub-group 1100
level Shell and Supporting Structure
Element level 1110 1130 1160 1170
Shell plating Innerbottom Longitudinal Transverse
plating framing framing
Sub-element 1113 1124
level Flat plate keel Shell plating

8.2. Weight of Steel Structure

The steel weight is the most significant percentage of the total lightship weight. This group includes all steel or
other structural material worked by the shipyard for example shell plating, longitudinal and transverse framing,
platforms and decks, superstructure, foundations, structural bulkheads, enclosures and sponsors castings,
forgings, and welds; fixed ballast; doors and closures; king-posts, masts, and service platforms. The construction
cost of a vessel is directly related to the steel weight. Hence a reliable cost estimate depends on a correct estimate
of steel weight.

There are many methods proposed for an early estimate of steel weight. The empirical methods to estimate
structural weight are usually based on cubic or quadratic similarity. There are also methods based on

2
8.2.1. Methods based on Cubic number, CN=LBD
These methods are based on the assumption that the steel weight of ships are related to their cubic numbers, i.e.

WS =CLBD e.g. WS=C(LBD)0.91

Benford (1967) proposed the following formula based on cubic number

0.9
 LBD 
WS = C  c1c 2 c 3
 2832 
Where

CB
c1 = 0.675 +
2
LS
c 2 = 1 + 0.36 LS : Length of superstructure
L
1.8
L 
c 3 = 0.006 − 8.3  + 0.939
D 
C=340

L, B, D in metres.

Kafalı (1988) reccommends the following empirical formula for structural weight of ships

 2  l l 
WS = C S N 1 + (C B − 0.70) 1 + 0.4 1 + 0.25 2 + ...
 3  L L 
CS is defined as follows
 L 
C S = [0.210 − 0.026Log10 N ]1 + 0.025 − 12 
 D 
Where

N : LBD [m3]
CB : Block coefficient
L : Lenght [m]
B : Breadth [m]
D : Depth [m]
l1 : Effective length of superstructure on main deck [m]
l2 : Effective length of superstructure on upper levels [m]

8.2.2. Methods based on Quadratic number, CQ=L(B+D)

These methods are based on the assumption that the steel weight of ships are related to their quadratic numbers,
i.e.
WS = CL(B + D) e.g. WS=C(L(B+D))1.36

Watson-Gilfillan (1976) proposed the following formula based on quadratic similarity.

WS = KE1.36

3
Where E is the Lloyd’s equipment numeral give as

E = L(B + T ) + 0.85L(D − T) + 0.85∑ l 1 h 1 + 0.75∑ l 2 h 2

where
l 1 , h 1 : length and height of full width erections
l 2 , h 2 : length and height of deck houses

The values of K are given in the following table

Ship Type Mean K Range of E

Tanker 0.032 1500-40000
Chemical tanker 0.036 1900-2500
Bulk carrier 0.031 3000-15000
Container ship 0.036 6000-13000
Refrigerated cargo 0.034 4000-6000
Coaster 0.030 1000-2000
Offshore supply 0.045 800-1300
Tug 0.044 350-450
Research ship 0.045 1300-1500
Ro-Ro ferry 0.031 2000-5000
Passenger ship 0.038 5000-15000
Balıkçı 0.044 250-1300
Frigate and Corvette 0.023 -

Some part of ships may be constructed of aluminium, FRP, or high tensile steel. Then, the following conversion
shall be aplied

1 tonne of high tensile steel will replace about 1.13 tonnes of mild steel
1 tonne of aluminium will replace about 2.9 tonnes of mild steel
1 tonne of FRP will replace about 2.9 tonnes of mild steel

Example 8.1.
Estimate the total steel weight of a new design as described in the table below. A parent ship is chosen with
design characteristics as nearly like the new design as possible, as described in the table below.

Variable New Ship Parent Ship

L (m) 137.16 124.05
B (m) 14.33 13.72
D (m) 8.23 8.00
CQ = L(B+D) 3094.3 2694.4
CN = LBD 16176.1 13615.7
Full Load ∆ 4,600 3,900
Steel weight ????? 952 tons

Cubic number method:

CN 16176.1
WS = W0 = × 952 = 1131 tons
C N0 13615.7

Quadratic number method:

CQ 3094.3
WS = W0 = × 952 = 1093 tons
C Q0 2694.4

Correction for differences in main dimensions

4
 L1 − L 0 B − B0 D − D0 3094.3
WS = WS0 + WS + 1 WS + 1 WS = × 952 =
L0 B0 D0 2694.4
952 + 100.6 + 42.3 + 27.4 = 1122.3 tons

Steel weight/Displacement coefficient

WS0 952
WS = ∆= × 4600 = 1122 tons
∆0 3900

8.2.3. Methods based on Classification Society Rules

This method uses the Classification society rules contining equations for determining the minimum scantling
sizes for structure and components.

Johnson-Hagen-Overbo (1967) developed formulas utilizing the det Norske Veritas Rules for oil tankers
constructed of mild steel.

 L 22.8 35.9  L
WS = 4.04cZ 0.65 L1.108 − 0.016  ⋅ ⋅ 1.120 − 0.0163 
 B L L
14 + 
D
35.8 −
D D
0.73
with c = 1 +
L
Z is determined for the section modulus as defined in DNV rules as presented below.

C B + 0 .7
Z = 2.1FL2 B
10 6
the F value is obtained from the following table.

L [m] F L [m] F L [m] F

90 4.12 170 4.93 250 5.52
100 4.24 180 5.02 260 5.57
110 4.36 190 5.10 270 5.61
120 4.48 200 5.18 280 5.64
130 4.57 210 5.26 290 5.66
140 4.67 220 5.33 300 5.68
150 4.76 230 5.40 310 5.69
160 4.84 240 5.47 320 5.70

Det Norske Veritas developed the following formula for oil tankers

  L  L 
WS = ∆ α L + α T 1.009 − 0.004 0.06 28.7 − 
  B  D 
where,

 L
0.97  0.054 + 0.004 
 B ∆
αL = 0.78
α T = 0.029 + 0.00235
 L 100000
0.189 100 
 D

L L
Range of validity = 10 − 14, = 5 − 7, L = 150 − 480 m
D B

5
The DNV formula for bulk carriers

 L  L  L − 200  L  L
WS = 4.1274Z 0.62 L1.215 − 0.035  0.73 + 0.025 1 +  2.42 − 0.07 1.146 − 0.0163 
 B  B  1800  D  D

Kupras adopted the dNV formula for bulk carriers as follows

 L  L  L  L
WS = 3.28cZ 0.69 L1.104 − 0.016  0.53 + 0.04 1.98 − 0.04 1.146 − 0.0163 
 B  D  D  D

Here Z is the section modulus of the midship section area

0.73
c = 1.0 +
L

C B + 0 .7
Z = 2.1FL2 B
10 6
F is given in the following table

L F
L<240 m. 3.0408175 + 0.014826515L − 0.0000173469L2
240 m ≤ L ≤ 300 m 1.32 + 0.0298333L − 0.00005L2
L>300 m 5.77

8.2.4. Empirical Methods

These methods are usually based on regression analysis of multiple ship designs. The regression analysis can be
linear, logarithmic, polynomial, or exponential.

Dry Cargo Ships

Kafalı ∆Log 7.3

WS = DWT < 30,000
1.615
Hadler WS = L1.16 B 0.7 D 0.5
Wehkamp/Kerlen −7 L2BP B 1 / 3
WS = 0.0832Xe −5.73X10 where X = CB
12
Carryette
LB 0.72  
2
L 
WS = C 2/3
B D 0.002  + 1
6  D 

Tanker

Kafalı ∆log10.6
WS = DWT < 30000
7.231
Mandel WS = 2.107[0.00986L(B − D)]
1.19

Sato 1/ 3
C   L3.3 B 2
−5
WS = 10  B  5.11 + 2.56L2 (B + D )  supertankers DWT>150,000
 0.8   D 

6
Container Ships

Chapman WS = 0.007 L1BP

.759 0.712
B D 0.374
Miller
 
0.9 1 .8
 LBD   C L 
WS = 340   0.675 + B  0.00585 − 8.3  + 0.939 
 100000   2    D  

Bulk Carriers

Murray
.56  B T  0.5C B + 0.4
WS = 0.0266L1BP  +  L in feet
D 2 0.8

Example 8.2
Calculate the steel weight of the tanker with following particulars. Actual steel weight is 6968 t.

L = 201.17 m
B = 27.43
D = 14.33 m
CB = 0.815

Solution

a) Johnson-Hagen-Overbo
L [m] F L [m] F L [m] F
90 4.12 170 4.93 250 5.52
100 4.24 180 5.02 260 5.57
110 4.36 190 5.10 270 5.61
120 4.48 200 5.18 280 5.64
130 4.57 210 5.26 290 5.66
140 4.67 220 5.33 300 5.68
150 4.76 230 5.40 310 5.69
160 4.84 240 5.47 320 5.70

By interpolation F=5.184. Minimum section modulus of the midship section area is

C B + 0 .7
Z = 2.1FL2 B = 18.308 m 3
10 6
0.73
c = 1+ = 1.0515
L
 L  22.8 35.9  L
WS = 4.04cZ 0.65 L1.108 − 0.016  1.120 − 0.0163  = 6698 t
 B L L D
35.8 − 14 + 
D D

b) Benford

CB
c1 = 0.675 + = 1.0825
2
L
c 2 = 1 + 0.36 S = 1 superstructure is ignored
L
1.8
L 
c 3 = 0.006 − 8.3  + 0.939 = 1.0785
D 

7
CN=340

0.9
 LBD 
WS = C N   c1c 2 c 3 = 7944 t
 100,000 

c) Kafalı
N = LBD = 79074 m3
 L 
C S = [0.210 − 0.026Log10 N ]1 + 0.025 − 12  = 0.0869
 D 
 2  l l 
WS = C S N 1 + (C B − 0.70) 1 + 0.4 1 + 0.25 2 + ... = 7396 t
 3  L L 

The weight of superstructure is ignored.

d) Wehkemp/Kerlen

L2BP B 1 / 3
X= C B = 86409 m 3
12
−7
WS = 0.0832Xe −5.73X10 = 6842 t

e) Carryette
LB 0.72  
2
L 
WS = C 2/3
B  
D 0.002  + 1 = 7609 t
6  D 
Example 8.3
Calculate the steel weight of the dry cargo ship with following particulars. [ Kafalı (1988)].

LBP (m) 160.00

B (m) 20.00
D (m) 12.20
T (m) 7.59
CB 0.684
∆ (t) 16430

Actual steel weight (WS) = 4820 t

Solution

a) Kafalı

∆Log 7.3
WS = = 2700 t
1.615

b) Kafalı

N = LBD = 39040 m 3
 L 
C S = [0.210 − 0.026Log10 N ]1 + 0.025 − 12  = 0.093
 D 

8
  2  l l 
WS = C S N 1 + (C B − 0.70) 1 + 0.4 1 + 0.25 2 + ... = 3592 t
 3  L L 

c) Watson-Gilfillan

E = L(B + T) + 0.85L(D − T) + 0.85∑ l 1 h 1 + 0.75∑ l 2 h 2 = 5041.1

K=0.033

WS = KE1.36 = 3581 t

d) Carryette :
LB 0.72  
2
L 
WS = C 2/3
B D 0.002  + 1 = 3371 t
6  D 

Example 8.4
Calculate the steel weight of the coaster with following particulars. [ Kafalı (1988)].

LBP (m) 59.60

B (m) 10.00
D (m) 5.00
T (m) 3.50
CB 0.70
∆ (t) 1515

Actual steel weight (WS) = 360 t

Çözüm

a) Kafalı

∆Log 7.3
WS = = 345 t
1.615

b) Kafalı

N = LBD = 2980 m 3
 L 
C S = [0.210 − 0.026Log10 N ]1 + 0.025 − 12  = 0.119
 D 
 2  l l 
WS = C S N 1 + (C B − 0.70) 1 + 0.4 1 + 0.25 2 + ... = 354 t
 3  L L 

c) Watson-Gilfillan

E = L(B + T ) + 0.85L(D − T) + 0.85∑ l 1 h 1 + 0.75∑ l 2 h 2 = 880.6

K=0.03

9
WS = KE1.36 = 303 t

d) Carryette :
LB 0.72  
2
L 
WS = C 2/3
B D 0.002  + 1 = 320 t
6  D 

8.2.5. Parent Ship Method

It is essential in using this method to already have a detailed and reliable weight estimate for an existing parent
vessel. Suppose that a small change in length is required. Then the steel weight of the new ship is

∂WS
WS1 = WS 0 + (L1 − L 0 )
∂L
where

WS0 : steel weight of the parent ship

WS1 : steel weight of the proposed design
L0 : length of the parent ship
L1 : length of the actual vessel
∂WS
: length correction factor.
∂L
It may be assumed that the variation of steel weight with the length is linear, i.e.

∂WS WS
= =a
∂L L
Similarly the variation of steel weight with beam, and depth may also be assumed as linear. For the cases where
block coefficient varies, the following correction is applied

∂WS 1 + 0.5C B1
=
∂C B 1 + 0.5C B0
Example 8.5
Calculate the steel weight of the proposed design by using the parent ship data.

Parent ship Proposed ship

L (m) 190 200
B (m) 28 30
D (m) 14 15
CB 0.780 0.815
WS (t) 6424 ?

Solution

WS 6424
KL = = = 33.81
L0 190
WS 6424
KB = = = 229.43
B0 28

10
 WS 6424
KD = = = 458.86
D 14
1 + 0.5C B 1.408
K CB = = = 1.013
1 + 0.5C B0 1.390

Correction for length K L (L − L 0 ) = 33.81(200 − 190) = 338.10 t

Correction for beam K B (B − B 0 ) = 229.43(30 − 28) = 458.86 t
Correction for depth K D (D − D 0 ) = 458.86(15 − 14) = 458.86 t
Correction for CB (K CB − 1) WS = (1.013 − 1)6424 = 83.51 t

Steel weight of the proposed design

WS1 = 6424 + 338.10 + 458.86 + 458.86 + 83.51 = 7763.33 t

8.2.6. Steel Ratiocination Method

Provided that a similar ship with detailed weight estimate is available, the steel weight of a new ship can be
estimated by developing various factors and ratios. The method multiplies a parent ship system weight by a
scaling factor to create the current ship system weight estimate. The scaling fraction is usually based on a
parameter such as ship length, beam, etc.

Before starting steel raticination a table should be set up to compare the parent ship and proposed ship
characteristics. A typical table is shown below.

Item Parent ship weight Ratio Weight coefficient Proposed ship weight
Shell plating and 2258 L(2D+B) 0.0194 2356
longitudinals
Deck plating and 942 LB 0.0166 986
longitudinals
Longitudinal 646 LD 0.0217 673
bulkheads
Main transverse 763 No x BD 0.0183 697
bulkheads
Main transverse 965 L(B+D) 0.0111 1004
frames and webs
Misc. steel 693 LBD 0.0261 729
Sub total
Welding 157 % 0.025 161
Total steel weight 6424 6606

8.2.7. Midship Extrapolation Method

This method requires the naval architect to develop a preliminary sectional modulus of the midship section for
the ship along with estimated scantlings for the main transverse bulkheads and web frame. An algorithm that
describes the bow, midship, and stern sections of the hulls as fractions of the midship section are multiplied by
the respective lengths.

11
8.3. Machinery Weight
The first step towards assessing the machinery weight is the prediction of the required power. The second step
involves taking a decision on the type of machinery best suited to the service conditions of the ship under
consideration. Therefore, the main factors that affect the weight of machinery are

• Type of propulsion unit (diesel engine, steam turbine, gas turbine)

• Type of main engine (series engine, V-type engine,..)
• RPM of main engine and propulsion unit
• Propulsion power

The almost universal choice of for the machinery of most medium to to large cargo ships is a slow speed diesel
engine. Medium speed geared diesel engines are the general choice for smaller cargo ships, ferries, tugs, and
supply boats. Large cruise vessels are frequently fitted with diesel electric installations as are many specialist
vessels such as fishery research, oceanography vessels, and warships. Gas turbines and/or high speed diesels are
the choice for warships where the need for high power/weight ratio is all important. An unusual feature of
warship machinery is the fact that it usually has to provide both a high speed sprint capability and a reasonable
endurance at a slow to medium speed. The machinery provided for these two roles may be arranged so that the
two component parts always separately (the OR configuration) or combine together (the AND configuration) for
the high speed role.

The major components of the machinery group are

• Maine engine(s)
• Main engine lubricating oil and water
• Main engine control system
• Gearing
• Shafting and bearing
• Propeller(s)

In the absence of manufacturers’ specifications, the following values relating to the dry engine, without cooling
water and lubricant, can be used as approximate unit weights for diesel engines

Slow speed diesel engines (110-140 rpm) 35-46 kg/kW

Medium speed diesel engines in series (400-500 rpm) 15-20 kg/kW
Medium speed V-type engines (400-500 rpm) 11-15 kg/kW

Alternatively, the following empirical formula can be used

Watson and Gilfillan 0.84

 MCR 
WM = 12  MCR [kW ]
 RPM 
Watson and Gilfillan WM = 8.8PB0.3
Barras BHP
WM = + 300
18
Barras P
WM = B + 300
13.5
Kafalı 5.2BHP
WM =
RPM
Kupras PB
WM = (895 − 0.0025PB )
10 4
Machinery weight will also include the weight of auixiliary machinery in the engine room

• Generators
• Compressors
• Boilers
• Heat exchangers

12
• Purifiers
• Pumps
• Pipework
• Lubricating oil and water in auxiliary machinery and systems
• Workshop plant, spare gear

The weight of auixiliary machinery can be estimated as follows

WYM = 0.56(BHP )
0.70
Dry cargo and bulk carrier
WYM = 0.59(BHP )
0.70
Tanker
WYM = 0.65(BHP )
0.70
Passenger ship and ferry

8.4. Outfit Weight

The outfit weight greatly depends on the ship type and a reliable estimate requires to consider individual areas of
the outfit. The major components of the outfit weight are

• Structural castings or fabrications (sternframe, rudder etc)

• Small castings or fabrications (bollards, fairleads)
• Steel hatch covers
• Watertight doors
• Cargo insulation and refrigeration machinery
• Cargo ventillation
• Firefighting
• Paint
• Plumberwork
• Joinerwork
• Deck coverings
• Galley gear
• Lifts
• HVAC
• Lifeboats and equipment
• Nautical instruments
• Stores and sundries
• Electrical work
• Steering gear
• Thrusters
• Stabilisors
• Anchoring and mooring machinery
• Anchors, cables, and mooring ropes
• Cargo winches, derricks and rigging
• Cranes

The following empirical formulae are proposed for a preliminary estimate of the weight of outfit.

Proposed by Outfit weight (t)

Kafalı 0.18N0.18 N=LBD
Benford LB
(4.7 − 0.0034L )
100
Katsoulis 1.3 0.8 0.3
kL B D
k=0.045 Bulk carrier and oil tanker
k=0.065 Dry cargo ship
Watson-Gilfillan 0.45LB
Kupras 277+0.115LB Bulk carrier
Mandel 0.15(0.00986LB)
1.60

13
Schneekluth (1987) recommends the following general formula for cargo ships

WO = KLB

where the K coefficient is given in the following table

Ship type K (t/m3)

Cargo ships 0.40-0.45
Container ships 0.34-0.38
Bulk carriers without cranes (length around 140 m) 0.22-0.25
Bulk carriers without cranes (length around 250 m) 0.17-0.18
Crude oil tankers (length around 150 m) 0.28
Crude oil tankers (length around 300 m) 0.17

For passenger ships Schneekluth recommends the following general formula:

WO = K × ∑ ∇

where ∑ ∇ is the total ‘converted volume’ corresponding to the measurement system applicable – expressed in
cubic meters. K is to be taken 0.036 to 0.039 t/m3 . For passenger ships with large car transporting sections and
passenger ships carrying deck passengers K to be taken 0.04 to 0.05 t/m3 .

Carryette reccommends the following formula for the weight of equipment and outfit for refrigerated ships of
between 90 m and 165 m in length.

2 2/3
 L   V 
WO = 550  + 163 
 100   1000 
where L is the length between perpendicuşars and V is the gross volume of insulated holds.

Example 8.6
Estimate the outfit weight of the following vessel [Kafalı (1988)].

LBP (m) 81.60

B (m) 13.20
D (m) 7.90
CB 0.758
∆ (t) 4570

Actual weight of outfit is (WO) = 259 t

WO = 0.18 N 0.8 = 0.18(81.60 × 13.20 × 7.90 )

0.8
a) Kafalı = 251 t
LB
b) Benford WO = (4.7 − 0.0112L ) = 438.5 t
9.3
c) Watson WO = 0.45LB = 484.7 t

d) Katsoulis WO = KL1.3 B 0.8 D 0.3 = 0.065 × 81.601.3 × 13.20 0.8 × 7.90 0.3 = 291 t

1.6
 LB 
e) Murphy WO = 0.15 = 294 t
 9.43 

14
8.5. Fuel Weight
For modern diesel plants an overall specific fuel consumption rate may be assumed as 210 g/kWh. Then the
weight of fuels

 t  R [nm ]
WF = 0.000210   PB [kW ] [ 1.05
 kW h  V knot ]

Where R is the range in nautical miles.

Lube oil weight is an additional lost deadweight item which for diesel engines, can be estimated as follows

slow speed engines 0.0010 lb/hp hr

medium speed 0.0015 lb/hp hr
high speed 0.0025 lb/hp hr

8.6. Other Weight Groups

Fresh water 0.1 - 0.5 t/person.day
Provisions 0.01 t/person.day
Passenger, crew 0.17 t/person

8.7. Estimating Centres of Gravity

Many of the weight estimating schemes have parallel models for the centre of gravity. The KG is usually
modeled as some fraction of the depth D.

8.7.1. Structure

a) Kupras-Dökme yük

 L 
2
L 
KG S = 0.01D 46.6 + 0.135(0.81 − C B )   + 0.008D − 6.5  L>120 m
  D   B 

 L 
2
L   L − 60  L≤120 m
KG S = 0.01D 46.6 + 0.135(0.81 − C B )   + 0.008D − 6.5  + 0.001D1 − 
  D   B   60 

Add -0.002D for bulbous bow.

b) Mandel-Tanker KG S = 0.61D

c) Kiss - Container KG S = D(0.725 − 0.0007218L )

8.7.2. Machinery

a) Kupras - Bulk carrier

KG M = h DB + 0.35(D − h DB )

where hDB is the height of double bottom.

b) Mandel-Tanker
KGM =0.55D
c) Kiss - Container
KGM =0.47D

15
8.7.3. Outfit

Many of the larger outfit items should best be estimated and located separately. For example, a heavy stern ramp
is a dominant item with known location and significant effect on trim so it should be handled as a separate
weight item from the very beginning.

a) Kupras - Bulk carrier

L (m) KGO (m)

L ≤ 125 D+1.25
125 < L < 250 D+1.25+0.01(L-125)
L ≥ 250 D+2.50

b) Mandel – Tanker KGO = D

c) Kiss – Container KG O = D(1.005 − 0.000689L )

8.7.4. Fuel

Double bottom tankage will have a KG of about 2/3 hDB.

a) Kupras – Dökme Yük KGF = 0.67 hDB

b) Mandel – Tanker KGF = 0.11D+4.80

It is desirable to have the KG not change too much during burnout so the GM and roll period is roughly the same
throughout the voyage. The use of deep tanks and wing tanks for fuel and ballast will help to stabilize the KG.

8.8. Weight and Centre of Gravity Margins

Weight and centre of gravity (KG) margins are of major importance for commercial and military vessels. There
are two basic types of weight margins. The first is a design margin to account for uncertainty in the design
estimate. The second margin is a service life growth margin to allow improvements in vessel use over life. This
is used in naval vessels where sensors and weapon systems evolve rapidly over the life of the vessel.

Watson and Gilfillan recommend only a design margin of 2 % of light ship for commercial designs. Kiss uses 3
% of light ship and 0.3 m KG margins. Marad reccomends 3% for weight and 3 % for KG margins.

For warships typical design margin is about 3 –5 %, while minimum service life margins are about 5 %. KG
margins for warships are about 4 % for design and 0.15-0.45 m for service life.

Example 8.7.
The parent LPG carrier has the following characteristics

LOA (m) 65.00 Steel weight (WS) (t) 360.00

LBP (m) 59.20 Machinery weight (WM) (t) 42.50
B (m) 10.00 Outfit weight (WO) (t) 51.00
D (m) 5.00 Fuel weight (WF) (t) 40.00
T (m) 3.50 Cargo weight (t) 1016.00
CB 0.70 BHP (max) 1100
∆ (t) 1509.5 BHP (service) 900
V (knots) (max) 12 V (knots) (service) 11.5

Structural changes are to be made in the new design, which, if made on the parent ship, would reduce the steel
weight by 20 tons. What is the approximate displacement, weight groups and the dimensions of the new design.
[ Kafalı (1975)].

16
Solution
The displacement of a cargo ship can be expressed as a sum of light ship and deadweight as follows

∆ = WLS + DWT

the componens of light ship are: the steel weight, weight of macinery and the outfit,

WLS = WS + WO + WM

The major components of DWT are the cargo and fuel weights.

∆ = WS + WO + WM + WF + DWTC

The weight statement for the new design can be written as follows

∆' = WS '+ WO '+ WM '+ WF '+ DWTC

Steel weight

∂WS
WS ' = WS + (∆'−∆)
∂∆

∂WS
Since WS = a∆ and =a
∂∆

360 − 20
WS ' = a∆' = ∆ = 0.22524∆'
1509.5
Outfit

It may be assumed that WO = b∆ , hence

51
WO ' = b∆' = ∆ = 0.033786∆'
1509.5
Machinery

We will asume that WM = c∆

2/3
V 3 , hence

∂WM
WM ' = WM + (∆'−∆)
∂∆
where
1
∂WM 2 − 3 3 2WM
= c∆ V =
∂∆ 3 3∆
by substituting

WM 2 WM
WM ' = + ∆'
3 3∆
Thus

17
WM ' = 0.01877 ∆ '+14.1666

Fuel

We may assume that WF = d∆

2/3
VS3 , hence

∂WF
WF ' = WF + (∆'−∆)
∂∆
where

1
∂WF 2 − 3 3 2 WF
= d∆ VS =
∂∆ 3 3∆
by substituting

WF 2 WF
WF ' = + ∆'
3 3∆
Thus

WF ' = 0.017666∆'+13.333

The weight equation for the new design is

∆' = 0.22524∆ '+0.033786∆ '+0.01877 ∆ '+0.017666∆ '+14.1666 + 13.333 + 1016

The solution yields the new displacement

∆'= 1481.1 t

The weight groups of new design are

WS ' = a∆ ' = 0.22524 × 1481.1 = 333.6 t

WO ' = b∆' = 0.0033786 × 1481.1 = 50.04 t
WM
WM ' = c∆' 2 / 3 V 3 = ∆ ' 2 / 3 V 3 = 41.97 t
∆ V3
2/3

W
WF ' = d∆' 2 / 3 VS3 = 2 / 3 F 3 ∆' 2 / 3 VS3 = 39.50 t
∆ VS

The ratio for the parent and new designs is

1/ 3 1/ 3
 ∆'   1481.1 
α=  =  = 0.994
∆  1509.5 
Thus, the dimensions of new design are

L BP = 59.2 × 0.994 = 58.84 m

B = 10 × 0.994 = 9.94 m
T = 3.5 × 0.994 = 3.48 m

18
Example 8.9
The parent fast attcak craft has the following particulars. Estimate the displacement and weight groups of a new
FAC which is to be similar in all respects to the parent but to have a speed of 35 knots [ Kafalı (1988)].

LBP (m) 37.95 Steel weight (WS) (t) 61.875

B (m) 7.25 Machinery weight (WM) (t) 40.95
T (m) 1.98 Outfit weight (WO) (t) 44.325
∆ (t) 218.0 Weapon-sensor systems (t) 70.35
V (knots) 40 BHP 13300

Solution

The weight equation for the parent form is

∆ = WS + WO + WM + Cons tan t

A reduction in speed will effect the steel, machinery and outfit weight. The weight equation for the modified
form is

∆' = WS '+ WO '+ WM '+ WF '+Cons tan t

Syeel weight

∂WS
WS ' = WS + (∆'−∆)
∂∆
∂WS 61.875
Since WS = a∆ , =a WS ' = a∆' = ∆' = 0.284∆'
∂∆ 218
Outfit weight

44.325
Since we assume WO = b∆ WO ' = b∆' = ∆' = 0.203∆'
218
Machinery weight

We assume WM = c∆
2/3
V3
3
 ∂WM  V ′ 
WM ' =  WM + (∆ ′ − ∆ )  
 ∂∆  V 
where

1
∂WM 2 − 3 3 2WM
= c∆ V =
∂∆ 3 3∆
Then
3
 2 × 40.95  35 
WM ' = 40.95 + (∆ ′ − 218)   = 9.144 + 0.08374∆ ′
 3 × 218  40 

Substituting into the weight equation, we get

∆' = 0.284∆'+0.203∆'+0.08374∆'+9.144 + 70.35

Then the new displacement is

19
∆' = 185.2 t

The new weight groups are

WS ' = a∆' = 0.284 × 182.6 = 51.8584 t

WO ' = b∆' = 0.203 × 182.6 = 37.0678 t
W
WM ' = c∆'2 / 3 V 3 = 2 / 3M 3 ∆'2 / 3 V 3 = 24.377 t
∆ V
1/ 3 1/ 3
 ∆'   182.6 
The ratio of similarity between the new and original designs ia α =   =  = 0.943
∆  218 
Then the new dimensions are

L BP = 37.95 × 0.943 = 35.79 m

B = 7.25 × 0.943 = 6.84 m
T = 1.98 × 0.943 = 1.87 m
Exercise
A cargo ship has the following characteristics and weight groups. The carrying capacity is required to increase
by 10%. Estimate the new weight groups.
No ∆ DWT V (knot) WS W0 WM WF
80000101 4250 2550 13 850 212.5 425 212.5
80000102 4300 2600 13.5 875 230 450 220
80000103 4350 2650 14 900 240 475 230
80000110 4400 2700 13 925 250 450 240
80000111 4450 2750 13.5 950 260 475 250
80000114 4500 2800 14 975 270 500 260
80000117 4550 2850 13 1000 280 475 270
80000118 4600 2900 13.5 1025 290 500 280
80000119 4650 2950 14 1050 300 525 290
80000122 4700 3000 13 1075 310 500 300
80000130 4250 2550 13 850 212.5 425 212.5
80000137 4300 2600 13.5 875 230 450 220
80010113 4350 2650 14 900 240 475 230
80010114 4400 2700 13 925 250 450 240
80010117 4450 2750 13.5 950 260 475 250
80010122 4500 2800 14 975 270 500 260
80010131 4550 2850 13 1000 280 475 270
80980105 4600 2900 13.5 1025 290 500 280
80980112 4650 2950 14 1050 300 525 290
80980115 4700 3000 13 1075 310 500 300
80980131 4250 2550 13 850 212.5 425 212.5
80980134 4300 2600 13.5 875 230 450 220
80980135 4350 2650 14 900 240 475 230
80980137 4400 2700 13 925 250 450 240
80990101 4450 2750 13.5 950 260 475 250
80990109 4500 2800 14 975 270 500 260
80990111 4550 2850 13 1000 280 475 270
80990112 4600 2900 13.5 1025 290 500 280
80990114 4650 2950 14 1050 300 525 290
80990116 4700 3000 13 1075 310 500 300
80990127 4250 2550 13 850 212.5 425 212.5
80990129 4300 2600 13.5 875 230 450 220
80990134 4350 2650 14 900 240 475 230
80990137 4400 2700 13 925 250 450 240
4450 2750 13.5 950 260 475 250

20
21