




 Blog
 SeaQA
 Companies
 Tools
 Contact

LOGIN

How to know the worst case of damage

stability?
Written by Capt Rajeev Jassal on August 27, 2019

Since the day I have started writing, I get a lot of requests suggesting the
topics I should write on.
But do you know which question I have been asked the maximum number of
times?

No prize for guessing.

It is this question.

How to know the worst case of damage stability?

Well, It is today that I decided to write on it in detail and explain it.

Are you ready to read the answer to this most mystic question?

Let dive in.

Requirements of damage stability

A ship that can float cannot always be said to be a safe ship.

It must also be able to remain afloat even after sustaining some amount of
damage.

Damage stability calculations are all about getting to know if the vessel will
remain afloat after sustaining some damage on its hull.

That is what SOLAS, MARPOL (For tankers) and IBC code (For chemical
tankers) does.
All these regulations define two things

 the extent of damage that needs to be assumed.

 Sustainability criteria for the assumed extent of damage

For the vessel to comply with damage stability, it should be able to achieve
the sustainability criteria after the assumed extent of the damage.

Extent of damage

Let us see the defined extent of damage as per various regulations.

Assumed Extent of damage as per SOLAS

Here is the extent of damage defined in SOLAS for cargo and passenger
ships without a double bottom.
 

Below is the required extent of damage to be assumed for passenger ships

Damage stability requirements in MARPOL
The required assumed extent of damage defined in MARPOL annex 1 for oil
tankers is as below.
 

The assumed extent of damage as per IBC code

The required assumed extent of damaged defined in IBC code for chemical
tanks is as below

Damage cases as per the assumed extent of damage

Based on the damage assumption requirements, damage cases are created for
the vessel by the class.

You can see these cases in damage stability calculations, either in loadicator
or in damage stability booklet.

Here are the few of the damage cases from one of the vessel.

Damage stability for each damage case

For the vessel to comply with damage stability requirements, for each
damage case, the vessel must comply with the damage stability requirements
under MARPOL annex 1 (for oil tankers) and under IBC code (for chemical
tankers)

What does this mean?

Let us take the damage case 201.

In this case,  FPTK, 1W(P) and, 1W(S) are assumed to be damaged.

If after this damage, vessel still complied with the damage stability survival
requirements as set in MARPOL, IBC code or SOLAS (as applicable), the
ship can be said to be complying with the damage stability with reference to
damage case 201.

These calculations need to be done for each damage case and ship need to be
complying with damage stability survival requirements for each of these
damage cases.

If even one case does not comply then for this stowage vessel will not be
complying with damage stability and we need to make changes to the
stowage and again check for the damage stability.

Of course, manual calculations are not required and lodicator does these
calculations for us.

And after calculations, it just shows us if the for the intended stowage if the
vessel is complying with damage stability or not.
Survival requirements

But what are the required survival requirements?

That is, after the assumed damage under each damage case what all stability
requirements vessel need to fulfill for it to be considered complying with
damage stability?

Here are the survival requirements as per the IBC code.

 
And here are the survival requirements as per MARPOL.

Although the MARPOL and IBC code requirements are for oil tankers and
chemical tankers respectively, if you look closely there are a lot of
similarities in the two requirements.

Deciding Factors for damage stability compliance

If we need to know the worst case of damage stability, we need to first bring
all the deciding factors on the table.

Let us see which are the deciding factors for damage stability compliance.
Look at the survival requirements as per IBC and Marpol and you would
know that these are

 The distance from the waterline to the opening through which

progressive flooding can take place

 Angle of heel

 range of righting lever curve (GZ curve)

 Residual righting lever

 The area under the GZ curve

Contrary to the belief of many, GM of the vessel does not represent here as a
factor for deciding the damage stability.

But as the GZ curve and GM of the vessel has a direct relation, we can say
that GM indirectly affects the damage stability.

For the scope of this article, I will not discuss here the relation between GM
and GZ. I will leave that for some other day.

So if there is anything that decides the worst case of damage stability it has to
be one or more of the above factors.

Which one(s) is that? Let us find out.

Right Lever, Range under GZ curve, area under GZ
curve

What is GZ and why it is important?

GZ is righting lever. It is the force that brings the ship back when inclined to
an angle by an external force.

In simple words, the centre of gravity (G) of the ship for a particular
condition remains the same.

Whereas the center of buoyancy (B) changes with the heel as the underwater
area would change when the vessel is inclined.

This generates a lever (GZ) that brings the vessel back to normal.
GZ would increase as the angle of heel increases because with an increase in
the heel the center of buoyancy would shift farther from the center of gravity.

GZ curve is the curve drawn for the length of the righting lever (GZ) against
the angle of heel.
The area under the GZ curve at an angle of heel is simply the area of the
curve from 0 deg heel to that angle of heel.
The significance of the area under the GZ curve is that it represents the
amount of work required to bring the ship to that angle of heel.

In other words, it will also be the force available to bring the ship back to its
original position or the force available to counter the external force that is
causing the ship to heel.

GZ and damage stability

So when a ship is damaged and is arrived at equilibrium, one thing we want
is it to have some dynamic stability to withstand the usual weather
conditions.

In simple words, in damaged conditions, if the vessel does not have any
dynamic stability then a slight increase in the heel due to weather conditions
can capsize the vessel.
The minimum dynamic stability required after the assumed damage cases is
defined in MARPOL and IBC.

I do not have the calculations to show how severe weather conditions the
vessel can survive with these minimum values required as per MARPOL and
IBC code.

But we can believe that IMO came to these values to ensure that the ship can
withstand normal weather conditions at sea.

The distance from the waterline to the opening through

which progressive flooding can take place

Apart from GZ and related criteria, there are one more criteria that are
required to be fulfilled for the vessel to comply with damage stability.

This is…

“The distance from the waterline to the opening through which progressive
flooding can take place”.
And it is required that

The final waterline, taking into account the sinkage, heel, and trim, shall be
below the lower edge of any opening through which the progressive flooding
can take place.
So after the damage and when the vessel has arrived at the equilibrium, the
openings like air pipe and other openings that are not water-tight must be
above the water line considering
  it does not apply to the opening of the compartments that are already
flooded

 if any opening is below the waterline, the compartment needs to be

assumed to be flooded for damage stability calculations.

So if you note, a small distance of even 5cms between the waterline and the
opening is considered in compliance.

What if we have a swell of more than a few meters?

Even when we are complying with the damage stability requirements, the
compartment can get flooded in this case and everything changes.

GZ and other values that were complying with damage stability with this
compartment intact will now change and may not comply anymore.

The worst case of damage stability

Finally, I come to the concluding part.

The damage stability requirements have defined the minimum required

criteria for each element.

Except for the distance of waterline from opening through which progressive
flooding can take place.

This is a critical factor too.

If the distance is too small, the vessel will still comply with the requirements
but the whole scenario will change if the compartment gets flooded through
this opening because of weather conditions.

So the worst case of damage stability is the one that has the least distance
from the waterline to the opening through which progressive flooding can
take place.

Example of the worst case of stability

I know now you would like to see an example for the worst case of stability.

Let us take this as step by step.

Critical openings
The first thing we need to know is the critical opening for the ship.

These are the openings through which progressive flooding can take place
and these are identified by the classification society.

If you are on a vessel, do some homework to find the list of these openings.
These must be either in your approved loading conditions booklet or damage
stability booklet.

Here is the list of the critical opening of one of the vessels.

Damage stability calculations

Damage stability calculations demonstrate if the vessel’s stowage would
comply with the damage stability requirements.

And as one of the requirements is that the critical opening must be above the
waterline, the damage stability calculations are supposed to give the distance
from the waterline to these openings.

Here are the damage stability calculations for one of the vessel.
The last column (Opening immersion) gives the distance from a critical
opening (the one with the least distance for that damaged case).

It also gives the identification of the opening for each case (in the above it is
given as the identification number of that opening).

So looking at the above calculations can you guess the worst case of damage
stability?

Did you say “Damage case 301″ in which has the least distance of the critical
opening (no 40) from waterline (0.12m)?

Let us scroll to the next page of the damage stability calculations for this
same loading condition to see if you are right.
Bingo. You are absolutely right. It is damage case 301 indeed.

You see this loading computer identifies the “most severe damage case” and
provides the information in one section.

But if your loading computer does not do that then you can identify the most
severe damage case by looking at the distance of critical opening from the
waterline.

But there is one more thing that you need to be careful about.
You need to check if the damage case with the least distance of critical
opening from the waterline is not assumed to be flooded.

If it is assumed to be flooded, then the distance of this opening from the

waterline would not matter and we need to look for the next most severe
case.

For example, look at this damage stability calculations.

Which would be the most severe damage case in this?

You would probably say, damage case 408 with the least distance of 0.25m
for opening # 46.

The opening no 46 is Air vent for E/R cofferdam (S).

And the assumed damaged compartments in damage case 408 are: 5W(P),
SP(P), E/RFORDM, S/G RM, FWT(P).

The opening no 46 comes under one of these damaged compartments

(E/RFORDM). So we need to neglect this while choosing the most severe
damage case.

In this case, we need to look for the next most severe damage case and so on
till we have a damage case where the distance is the least and the
compartment of the critical opening is not already assumed as flooded.

In the above example, this would be damage case 108 as the most severe
damage case.
Conclusion

It is not a statutory requirement for the masters to know about the most
severe damage case.

However, SIRE requires masters to be aware of that.

Surely the factors that decide the compliance with the damage stability
requirements need to be the one that decides the most severe case of damage
stability too.

And these factors are

 GZ and other associated data

 angle of heel

 the distance of critical opening from the waterline

IMO has already defined the minimum required criteria for the first two
factors but not for the third one.

This is the factor that decides the most severe case of damage stability.

The damage case that has the least distance of the critical opening to the
waterline will be the most severe damage case.

The most severe damage case need not be the same for all loading conditions.

It can be different for different loading conditions but more often there will
be one damage case that would appear as the favorite for most of the loading
conditions.
 




Blog

 SeaQA
 Companies
 Tools
 Contact

LOGIN

6 Resources That Will Get You Ready for

Damage Stability
Written by Capt Rajeev Jassal on January 5, 2018

A safe ship without damage stability compliance is like peanut butter without
jelly, coffee without creamer, or ham without jam.
Okay. That last one didn’t make sense.

But you get the point.

Damage stability has been one of the buzz word in the maritime industry in
last few years.
And you’re doing yourself a massive disservice if you don’t take time to
understand damage stability.

But you already know that.

What you might not know, though,

is which resource provide what information about damage stability.
That is why I’m going to discuss about all the resources related to damage
stability.

Let us jump in.

Damage stability booklet

The information provided in damage stability booklet can be divided into

three parts

 Damage control booklet (required for all type of ships)

 Damage stability calculation (required for tankers)

 Damage control plan (required for all type of ships)

Sometime you may find all this as one booklet called “damage stability
booklet”. And on some ships, you may find three different booklets titled as
above.

Let us discuss what information each of these provides.

1) Damage control Plan

Damage control plan is required as per SOLAS chapter II-1/Regulation 19.

As per this regulation

A plan showing clearly for each deck and hold the boundaries of the
watertight compartments, the opening therein with means of closing and
position of any control thereof, and arrangement for the correction of any
list due to flooding.
In simple words, the plan needs to show the

 layout of all the compartments such as cargo tanks, ballast tanks, fuel
tanks etc.

 means of closer such as valves, watertight bulkheads, hatches or cargo

tank domes and its position

 arrangement for correction of the list during flooding. Such

arrangement could be the use of ballast pumps, Fire & GS pumps. In
this case, location & capacities of these pumps need to be shown on the
plan.
The more detailed guidelines about the information required in the damage
control plan are provided in MSC circular MSC.1/Circ 1245.
Damage control plan is required to shows the location and other details about
resources required for damage control.

For example during flooding into a compartment, we would like to check the
air pipes if air is coming out from these. Damage control plan gives the
location and details of the air pipes of all compartments.

It gives the location and details of all watertight (and weather tights) doors on
the ship.
Similarly, damage control plan gives the details of Tanks, Hatches or other
compartments on ships.

It gives the type and location of important valves that can help in damage
control or help in restricting the flooding.
And finally, it also provides the information (like capacity) and location of
pumps (such as Fire and GS pump, ballast pump etc) that can be used for
pumping out the water during flooding.
Apart from all this information, the location of these will be displayed on the
ship’s plan.
2) Damage control booklet

The name says it all. This booklet gives the information to the master about
how to control the effect of damage.

Damage control booklet is also required as per SOLAS chapter

II-1/Regulation 19.

The information required in the damage control booklet is contained in the

MSC circular MSC.1/Circ.1245.
As per SOLAS chapter II-1/19, damage control booklet need to have all the
information as per damage control plan. To comply with this, usually, a copy
of damage control plan will be included in the damage control booklet.
Apart from this, damage control booklet is supposed to provide information
and guidance to the master about actions to take in case of damage to the
ship.

These specific actions may include

 Sounding of alarms to alert the crew

 the closing of all watertight doors and compartments

 Sounding of tanks to check where the water is flooding and with what
rate

 ways to reduce the effect of flooding such as by use of pumps to pump

out water.

Along with this information, some ship’s damage control booklet may also
provide a flow chart to deal with damage situations. Below is one of such
flowchart.
Rest of the damage control booklet will consist of the information and
guidance to support required actions as per this flowchart.

For example, one of the action requires the vessel to monitor tank sounding.
Damage control booklet will have one section with the ready format for
recording tank soundings.

Another action requires the vessel to report the damage situation to the
necessary organization such as ‘Emergency response service”. For this
damage control plan will also provide a ready format for such reporting.

3) Damage stability calculations

Damage stability calculations demonstrate the compliance with the

applicable damage stability regulation.
These are the calculations made during the design stage of the ship and
verified after the construction.

For example, oil tankers need to comply with damage stability requirements
as per MARPOL Annex I, regulation 28.

Damage stability requirements for oil tankers are based on Damage

assumptions, meaning that extent of damage is assumed at locations as
mentioned in Marpol Annex I, Reg 28.
 

Damage cases are drawn based on these damage assumptions. For example
below are the damage cases for a ship.
These damages are then assumed for all the loaded conditions mentioned in
ship’s trim & stability book (intact stability conditions).

The damage cases are not applied to the ballast conditions because the
damage stability requirements apply to the tankers in loaded condition only.

For this ship below are the loaded conditions in the intact stability booklet.

Let us take damage case 101. This damage case requires assuming damage to
6 compartments.

In each of the intact loading condition, these damages need to be assumed.

After these assumed damages, the ship needs to comply with damage
stability requirements mentioned in MARPOL Annex I, Reg 28.

As per Marpol Annex I, reg 28…

And for damage case 101, we will have a total of 9 damage stability
conditions, each for one loading conditions. Let us name these conditions as

 Condition 13/ Damage 101

 Condition 14/ Damage 101

 Condition 15/ Damage 101

 Condition 16/ Damage 101

 Condition 17/ Damage 101

  Condition 18/ Damage 101

 Condition 19/ Damage 101

 Condition 20/ Damage 101

 Condition 21/ Damage 101

Each damage case will have 9 damage stability conditions. For this ship,
there are a total of 21 damage cases and total 9 intact loaded conditions.

The damage stability calculations need to be done for total 189 conditions.

The damage stability calculations need to be done for total 189 conditions.

And the end results of these calculations are supposed to comply with the
damage stability criteria as per MARPOl Annex I, reg 28.

These calculations form the part of booklet “Damage stability calculations”.

4) Damage Stability Information

SOLAS Chapter II-1/Reg 19.5 requires that

damage stability information shall provide the master with a simple and
easily understandable way of assessing the ship’s survivability in all damage
cases involving a compartment or group of compartments.
What does this mean?
Let me explain.

Damage stability calculations showed that ship will comply with damage
stability requirements when damage cases are applied to the pre-defined
intact loading conditions.

But in reality, our actual loading conditions during the voyages may be
totally different from that in intact stability condition.

Our actual loading may not match with any of the loading conditions in the
stability booklet.

This SOLAS regulation requires clear and easy instructions to be given to

check if our actual condition complies with the damage stability
requirements.

These instructions are usually in form of a graph (or table) of Draft

versus minimum GM (or maximum KG). There may be a different graph for
the different trim of the vessel.
This information will form the part of either “Damage stability calculations”
or “damage control booklet”.
If the vessel has a single “Damage stability booklet”, you will find this
information in there.

5) Emergency Response service

MARPOL Annex 1/Reg 37.4 requires that

All oil tankers of 5000 T deadweight or more shall have prompt access to
computerized shore-based damage stability and residual structural strength
calculation programs. 
In the real world, this program is usually named as “emergency response
service” and is provided by classification societies.

Though this is mandatory for oil tankers, ship owners prefer this service for
other types of vessels too, especially on container ships.

This service provides an emergency helpline number and email.

In case of a damage and breach of hull plating, the master can call this
number and update regarding the incident.
Master then need to send the initial reports, loading condition before the
damage and extent of damage by email.

The service provider will advise

 if the vessel will be able to sustain this damage

 what specific action vessel can take to reduce the effect of damage.

There is something else that ERS can be used for.

It can be used for showing the compliance with the damage stability
requirements.  Some vessels still do not have the facility in the loadicator to
calculate damage stability.

If the vessel’s actual loading condition is not matching with any of the pre-
defined loadicator conditions in the intact stability booklet, this loading
condition can be sent to the ERS.

They will check the loading condition and advise if it complies with the
damage stability requirements.

This is considered to be one of the methods for checking the damage stability
compliance.

In fact, if the condition is approved for compliance with the damage stability,
same can be added to the list of approved damage stability conditions.
6) Loadicator with damage stability

MARPOL Annex I regulation 28.6 requires the oil tankers to be fitted with
loadicator capable of calculating damage stability compliance.

The loadicator if fitted with damage stability can check compliance with all
the damage cases identified as per MARPOL or other regulations for other
types of ships.
To check the damage stability compliance on the Meca Loadicator, go to
calculations -> Stability -> Damage stability
It will show all the damage cases identified in the damage stability booklet.

Click on the “Pre-determined” to check if the ship complies with the damage
stability requirements.
 

Conclusion

A seafarer may or may not go through any incident requiring the use of
damage stability on board.

But we need to be prepared for the worst.

Knowledge of damage stability can help to take quick decisions at times

when each minute matters.

Knowing about damage stability does not mean knowing the complex
calculations. It is to know the exact actions in case of damage and knowing
about the resources on board that would help in these actions.
Damage stability calculations, damage control plan/booklet, emergency
response service and loadicator are the resources that we must know about.
Share this:

0 SHARES
 Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  Google +

Related Blogs
FOLLOW US TODAY ON
OUR SOCIAL NETWORK





About Capt Rajeev Jassal

Capt. Rajeev Jassal has sailed for over 19 years mainly on crude oil, product and chemical
tankers. He holds MBA in shipping & Logistics degree from London. He has done extensive
research on quantitatively measuring Safety culture onboard and safety climate ashore which
he believes is the most important element for safer shipping.

Search Blog