Assessment of the Main Challenges in the Construction and Operation of Malacca-Max Container Carrier

School of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences
Assessment of the Main Challenges in the
Construction and Operation of Malacca-Max
Container Carrier
by
Dinusha Liyanage
A Dissertation Submitted
In Partial Fulfilment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MSc in Maritime Operations and Management
Supervisor: Dr. Khalid Bichou
London
31 August 2011
a

b
Declaration
I hereby declare that the work reported in this dissertation is completely my own
work unless otherwise stated, and that it has not been submitted previously for any
award or degree at any other institute.
………………………………………..
[Candidate’s signature]
31st August 2011

Project Title: Assessment of the Main Challenges in the Construction and Operation of
Malacca-Max Container Carrier
I
Student: Dinusha Liyanage
Supervisor: Dr. Khalid Bichou
Submission date : 31 August 2011
Abstract
Since, past two decades, the steady growth of liner shipping trade has
resulted in the expansion of carry capacity in container ships. On the port
side, global terminal operators and dedicated container terminals are
emerging .On carrier side, shipping companies form consortia and alliances.
Malacca-Max series bring the economic benefit for the owners. However, it is
creating not only technical challenges for classification societies, ship
builders and ship designers, but also operational challenges for port and
terminal operators. The aim of this research is to identify the main challenges
in construction & operation of a Malacca-Max container carrier.
The infrastructural constraints in Malacca-Max series are deepening of the
access channels and harbour basin of certain ports. Certain ports will not be
able to maintain required draught, 21-metre. The operational challenges are
the development of automated handling system and high speed gantry
cranes in terminals for ship output in minimum port time, which should be
less than twenty four hours . Apart from that, the construction of container
terminals with quay walls, a berth length of 450 metre and a 21 metre
draught ,and ICT control systems, reliable transport network with feeder ship,
railways and inland barges are operational challenges for port and terminal
operators.
With the arrival of Malacca-Max series, more traffic can be expected. Thus it
is necessary to have more storage premises including more yard and
warehouse and crane facility. Moreover, the landside development with
interconnection between rail, road and ships are essential. Therefore goods

shall be moved quickly through storage areas and the yards to avoid
congestion. The automated terminal is an obvious solution in these issues.
II

III
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Dr.Khalid Bichou for his
valuable advices, guidance and encouragements throughout my work. I would also
like to thank Professor John Carlton for his useful comments which have been of
great assistance. Special thanks to staff of the Maritime Operation and
Management , City University London. I am very grateful to Seaspan
Corporation,Canada for offering me a opportunity to work onboard mega-carrier
since Cadetship.
Finally, a special thank to my parents and family members, to whom I am indebted
for their selfless support and encouragement.

Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Chapter 2: Economic Performance Analysis: Literature Review
2.1 Introduction 3
2.2 Analytical foundations of Malacca-Max Container Carrier 3
2.3 Transportation networks in shipping and ports 4
2.3.1 Cost model in Malacca-Max Carrier 4
2.4 Transit time & port time 6
2.5 Conclusion 10
Chapter 3: Aims, Objectives and Methodology
3.1 Aims and Objectives 11
3.2 Methodology 11
3.2.1 Research methodology 11
3.2.2 Research Strategy 12
3.2.3 Secondary data 12
Chapter 4: Malacca-Max Ship specification & Terminal requirements
4.1 Introduction 13
4.2 The operation structure of Ports & Terminals 13
4.3 Generic function of container terminals 14
4.4 Container terminal handling and horizontal transport equipment 16
4.4.1 Vertical transport means 16
4.4.2 Horizontal transport means 22
4.5 Container Terminal Layout 22
4.6 Conclusion 24
IV

Chapter 5: Port and Berth requirements for Malacca-Max Series
5.1 Introduction 27
5.2 Operational conditions in Harbour 27
5.2.1 Ship Movements 31
5.2.2 Tugboats 32
5.2.3 Channels- Waterways 33
5.2.3.1 Straight Channel 34
5.2.3.2 Channel With Curves 35
5.2.4 Harbour Basin 36
5.2.4.1 Turning Area 37
5.2.4.2 Berthing Area 37
5.2.5 Berth Structure 40
5.2.5.1 Impacts from ships 41
5.2.5.2 Bollard Loads 45
5.2.6 Current Pressure 46
5.2.7 Wind Forces 47
5.3 Fenders 48
5.4 Conclusion 54
Chapter 6 : Technical issues for Malacca-Max Container Carrier
6.1 Introduction 55
6.2 Brittle Crack Arrest Design 55
6.3 Whipping and Springing Responses 57
6.4 Hull strength 58
6.5 Bow flare slamming 59
V

6.6 Aft end slamming 60
6.7 Local panel strength 60
6.8 Container securing 61
6.8.1 Types of Container Securing Devices 61
6.8.2 Strength Evaluation Of Lashing Materials 64
6.9 Conclusion 65
Chapter 7 : Conclusion
7.1 Research findings 66
7.2 Port and terminal efficiency 67
7.3 Limitation of the project and further research 68
References 70
Appendices
Appendix 1: Calculation Sheet for Initial Design 75
Appendix 2: Slot costs and TCE of larger container ships 77
Appendix 3:Transport cost between Rotterdam and Singapore(deepsea only) 77
Appendix 4:Ship Motion & Ship Accelerations 78
VI

List of Figures
Figure 1: Hub- and- Spoke network 4
Figure 2 :Total transit time from hub to major port 6
Figure 3 : Basic structure of the transit time calculation model 6
Figure 4 :The structure of the transit time calculation model 9
Figure 5 :Cross-sectional view of terminal operation 14
Figure 6 :Quay Crane Layout [single trolley] 16
Figure 7 :Quay Crane Layout [single trolley with platform] 17
Figure 8 :Quay Crane Layout [dual trolley with Straddle Carrier ] 17
Figure 9 :Quay Crane Layout [dual trolley with AGV] 18
Figure 10:Quay Crane Layout [single trolley, tandem] 18
Figure 11:Quay Crane Layout [Dual trolley, tandem/single] 19
Figure 12:Quay Crane Layout [Dual trolley, tandem/single with AGV ] 19
Figure 13:Quay Cranes in three FEUs 20
Figure 14:Quay Cranes in six TEUs 21
Figure 15:End loaded and Side loaded layout 23
Figure 16:End loaded RMG arrangement 23
Figure 17:Components of depth 28
Figure 18:The frequency of yearly wind forces 29
Figure 19:Wave characteristics in deep water 30
Figure 20:Wave direction 31
VII

Figure 21:Combinations of waves 31
Figure 22:Types of ship movements 32
Figure 23:Fully and Semi restricted channels 34
Figure 24:Channel width 35
Figure 25:Channel curve 36
Figure 26:The minimum requirement of the dredged area 38
Figure 27:Layout of single piers 39
Figure 28:Layout of long piers 39
Figure 29:Layout of berth 40
Figure 30:Eccentricity effect CE as function of  and r/L 43
Figure 31:Ship alongside under own power 43
Figure 32:Length of contact area and Length Overall 44
Figure 33:Load direction on bollard 46
Figure 34:Function of fender 49
Figure 35:Fender system for container ship 49
Figure 36:Angular compression of fender 50
Figure 37:Ship Hull Curves 50
Figure 38:Characteristics of the rubber fenders 51
Figure 39:Arrangement of double fendering 52
Figure 40:Reaction/compression characteristics of double fender 53
Figure 41:Spacing of fenders 53
Figure 42:Overview of strength deck structures of container ships 55
Figure 43:Scenario 1 – To prevent a brittle crack that has occurred in the
hatch side coaming from propagating to the strength deck 56
VIII

Figure 44:Scenario 2 – To prevent brittle crack that has occurred in the strength
deck from propagating to the hatch side coaming 56
Figure 45:Container & Deckhouse Arrangement 59
IX

List of Tables
Table 1:Cost model for Malacca- Max Carrier 5
Table 2:Requirements for terminals handling in Malacca-Max Container Carrier 15
Table 3:Voyage Calculation [ Asia – North America ] 24
Table 4:Limiting criteria for ship movements under safe mooring condition 32
Table 5:The required minimum curve radius in different deflection angle
[without tug assistance] 36
Table 6:The required minimum diameters of the turning area 37
Table 7:The minimum requirement of the dredged area 38
Table 8:The Pier requirements 38
Table 9:The minimum width requirement 40
Table 10:The magnitude of Cc 47
Table 11:The average value of Cw for different wind angle 48
Table 12:Fender factor [ P/Ef ] for different types of rubber fender 52
Table 13:Brittle Crack Arrest Properties of Strength Deck for Scenario 1 56
Table 14:Brittle Crack Arrest Properties of Hatch Side Coaming for Scenario[2] 57
Table 15:Mechanical properties & brittle crack arrest toughness Kca of the tested
steel plate 5 7
Table 16:Types of Fixed Securing Devices 61
Table 17:Types of Loose Securing Devices 62
X

Glossary
FEU - Forty -Foot Equivalent Unit
ICT – Information and Communication Technology
KPI - Key performance Indicator
L.O.A – Length Overall
TEU - Twenty-Foot Equivalent Unit
RMG - Rail Mounted Gantry Cranes
RTG - Rubber Tired Gantry Cranes
STS - Ship – To –Shore
AGV - Automated Guided Vehicles
DRMG - Double Rail Mounted Gantry Cranes
RS - Reach Stacker
SC - Straddle Carrier
ShC - Shuttle Carrier
AGV - Automated Guided Vehicle
ASC - Automated Straddle Carrier
GDP – Gross Domestic Product
XI

- 1 -
Chapter1: Introduction
Container terminals and ports play a vital role in the modern maritime economy.
Containerisation since the mid of twentieth century has dramatically reduced the
cost of transport in global trade. Before implementing container concept, the
transport cost was so expensive. However in the present day, a German brand
vehicle might be designed in France, the accessories are produced in China,
Malaysia or Japan, it’s assembled in Japan.”The largely reduced transport cost
derived by containerisation means that handling goods has become highly
automated and efficient between most transport modes and transport goods from
anywhere to anywhere has therefore become a feasible operation for many
enterprises (Levinson, 2008).” ,“The rapid growth in containerisation over the last 20
years is the result of a combination of factors that includes dedicated purpose-built
container vessels,larger vessels capable of achieving increased economies of scale,
improved handling facilities in ports, and also the increasing amount of raw materials
being carried in containers(UNTCAD, 2010,p85)
The world of container port throughput is showing continuous improvement. One of
the main drivers of this boost in container port throughput is the increase of global
GDP. “The share of ESCAP member economies in world container exports is
expected to rise from 57 per cent to 68 percent by 2015, mainly as a result of the
increase expected in East Asia. Similarly, world market share of imports for ESCAP
nations is expected to increase from 47 per cent in 2005 to 56 per cent in 2015. East
Asia’s share of ESCAP container exports is expected to grow from 58 per cent in
2005 to 69 per cent by 2015, while imports will grow from 46 percent to 55 per cent”
( ESCAP 2007,pii).
The size of the largest container carriers shall be increased in the next few years to
fulfil the economies of scale. Therefore transporting containers on larger ships is
more profitable than the ones in services today. The largest container carrier in
service today in 13,000 TEUs range, and next frontier is likely to be the Malacca-
Max design , with maximum draught of Strait of Malacca ,21 metre.
However, this Malacca-Max series will bring economic benefit for the owners. But, it
will create not only technical challenges for classification societies, ship builders and
ship designers, but also operational challenges for port and terminal operators.

Moreover, there are operational challenges which have to be surmounted before the
giant ship can be running smoothly and making profits for her owners.
- 2 -

Chapter2: Economic Performance Analysis:
Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
During literature research, it has been revealed that there are few academic journal
& book references specifically about construction and operation challenges of a
Malacca-max Container Ship, which made the research more challenging as well as
unique. However the author has found materials in key areas of economic
performance.
2.2 Analytical Foundations of Malacca-Max Container Carrier
The Containerisation International Yearbook provides sources of information about
container shipping lines. The companies can be categorized into three categories
based on their size of the fleets; very small number of large companies, a fair
number of medium size companies and many small companies. Due to the
emergence of large scale container carriers, large companies had to grow their fleet
size. The bigger the ship, the lower the slot costs. “The Malacca-Max container ship,
for example, offers thirty percent lower slot costs than the Panamax container ship
(Niko and Marco,1999;Frans et al.,1999,p9)”. Apart from that, company investment
for expanding their fleet size has been increased due to container volumes increase.
“Shipping lines have to incure losses or cut rates in order to gain market share and
volume. This induces a negative rate spiral and only financially strong companies
can afford such a strategy (Niko and Marco,1999 ;Frans et al.,1999,p9)”
The slot costs consist of canal dues and fuel cost. However the bigger the ship,
lower the fuel consumption and canal dues per TEU.
- 3 -

2.3 Transportation Networks in Shipping and Ports
The calling pattern of the Malacca-Max series is an important factor in overall cost
picture. “ Pattern implies large transhipment movements of containers, but at the
same time may provide the lines with the opportunity of bring the containers closer
to the final destination by ship(Niko and Marco,1999 ;Frans et al.,1999,p24)”
W1 E1
W2 E2
Figure 1: Hub- and- Spoke network
In ‘Hub – and – Spoke’ model, Malacca-Max series will be operating as a mother
vessel between specific regions and the rest will operate in short sea services as a
feeder container ship within inter- region. In ‘Hub – and – Spoke’ model, Malacca-
Max series can give positive effect on cost picture.
2.3.1 Cost Model in Malacca-Max Carrier
- 4 -
 Fuel Consumption
Y = 0.0392 X + 5.582
Where, Y – Fuel consumption [tonnes/day]
X - TEU capacity of ship
 Gross tonnage
Y = 12.556 X + 1087.2
Where, Y – Gross tonnage
W3
W
E3
Malacca Max E

- 5 -
 Time charter rates
Y= 108.05 X – 0.3743
Where, Y – Time charter rate in Us $ /TEU/day
Y= 108.05 X 0.6257
Where, Y – charter rate of ship in Us $ /day
Table 1 : Cost model for Malacca- Max Carrier
Category Amount
Fuel Consumption 721 [tonnes/day]
Gross tonnage 230235
Time charter rates
[Time charter rate in Us $ /TEU/day]
2.75
[ charter rate of ship in Us $ /day]
50107

H2 H1
Transit Time
Sea Time Port Time
- 6 -
2.4 Transit Time & Port Time
The transit time of the Malacca-Max container carrier can be divided into three
categories; the times between mega hubs, the times between mega hubs and major
ports and the time between major ports.
H1 = Hub 1
H2 = Hub 2 Transit Feeder
M = Major port + 1 day
Transit Malacca-Max
Source: Niko and Marco,1999 ;Frans et al.,1999.p 121
M
Figure 2 :Total transit time from hub to major port
Total Transit Time = Transit Malacca-Max + 1 day + Transit feeder.
The transit time of the Malacca-Max series can calculate in transit time calculation
model
Figure 3: Basic structure of the transit time calculation model

Sea Time can be calculated according to the formula mentioned below, but it will
vary from value of Tsea
* , Va ,X tot and Tsea.
- 7 -
However, Tsea
* = ( 1 +  )* Tsea.
Where; Tsea
* - Total sea time including weather factor
Tsea. - Normal sea time
 - Weather factor in %
Va = 0.76 * Vs + 3.15
Where; Va – Average speed
Vs – Service speed
X tot = X ( O- mh1) + X(mh1- mh2) + X (mh2-d)
Where; X tot - Total distance from origin to destination
X mh1- Nearest mega hub to the port of origin
X O - Port of origin
X mh2 – Nearest mega hub to the port of destination
X d - Port of destination

- 8 -
Tsea = X tot / Va
Where; Tsea – Sea time
X tot - Total distance from origin to destination
Va - Average speed
Port Time depends on key factors, such as number of containers loaded/unloaded,
crane speed and number of cranes for one carrier. It can be calculated according to
the formula mentioned below, but it will vary from value of THS, Z and T port .
However, THS = ( Nck * Vck )
Where; THS – Total handling speed
Nck - Number container cranes
Vck - Container crane speed
Z= (( 100 – F)/ 100 )*Y + ((F/100)*Y)/2
Where; Z - Number of moves
THS - Total handling speed
PE - Port entry or exit time
T port = (Z/THS) + PE
Where; Z - Number of moves
THS – Total handling speed
PE – Port entry or exit time

T port* = (2* Tport (origin) + T port (nearest hub ) + T port ( intermediate hub) +
T port ( destination hub) + 2*Tport (destination))
Tsea Port time*
T port ( destination hub)
X tot
Figure 4 :The structure of the transit time calculation model
- 9 -
Transit time
Va
Tsea = X tot / Va
T port ( destination )
*
= ( 1 +  )
*
Tsea
THS T port = (Z/THS) + PE
(2* Tport (origin) +
T port (nearest hub ) +
T port ( intermediate hub) +
T port ( destination hub)+
2*Tport (destination))
Z
T port ( nearest hub)
T port (intermediate hub)

- 10 -
2.5 Conclusion
In this chapter I have reviewed the literature of economic performance of Malacca-
Max container carrier. I can pinpoint following key points. First, the Malacca-Max
carrier can be recognized as a low slot cost container series. Thus, the slot cost of
Malacca-Max series is thirty percent lower than the Panamax series. Apart from
that, the transport costs will be lower than the other container series which are under
present operation. Therefore the ‘Hub – and – Spoke’ model, is more suitable for
new Malacca-Max series , thus it can operate as a mother vessel, between specific
regions and the rest will operate in short sea services as a feeder container ship
within inter- region.
However, transit time play a vital role in operating new series, thus the port time
minimizing factors have to be considered with special attention. The total handling
speed can be improved by increasing the number of cranes and crane speed. But,
port entry and exit time are a constant for specific ports.

Chapter 3 : Aims, Objectives & Methodology
3.1 Aims & Objectives
Since past few decades, the biggest container ship dominated the liner shipping
industry. At present, the ship owners and ship operators are dreaming about
building new Malacca-Max series, in draft of 21 meters, the maximum permissible
draft is through the Malacca strait. Malacca-Max series bring economic benefits for
the owners. However, it is creating not only technical issues for class, ship builders
and ship designers, but also operational challenges for port and terminal operators.
The aim of this research is to identify these main challenges in construction &
operation of a Malacca-Max container carrier.
Specifically, the research focused on identify the requirements to complete container
terminal and port, to accommodate new Malacca-Max series. Apart from that, I have
given priority in my research to discuss the technical issues which are related to
classification of society, ship builders and ship designers.
While exploring the above objectives, I developed a conceptual ship model, based
on the Holtrop and Menen series of papers. Thus, the requirements in port and
terminal to accommodate new series have been based on my ship particulars in
conceptual model.
3.2 Methodology
3.2.1 Research Methodology
Research methodology can be considered as a structure or guidelines for
collecting,sorting out and organizing data in order to achieve certain outcomes.
Alvesson and Deetz are of the opinion that research methodology can be
considered as a structure or framework that enables the researcher to produce
empirical materials and additional information that can help in understanding
existing theoretical materials, (Alvesson etal, 2000,p58).
This research has been based on secondary data and conceptual ship model based
on the Holtrop and Menen series of papers.
- 11 -

- 12 -
3.2.2 Research Strategy
The researcher aims to analyse the main challenges in construction and operation
of Malacca-Max Container Carrier, using technical requirements and specification,
as well as, technical bulletin, trade magazine and academic publications which are
tackling the relevant issues.
 Objective 1 : To assess the terminal requirements and ship specification:
Secondary data have been collected from the presentation and seminars, trusted
sources of internet articles, electronic publications and websites.
 Objective 2 : To assess the port and berth requirements :
There were few resources for collecting secondary data in related topic. I have
found only one academic publication and I matched the related data with ship
particulars in my conceptual ship model.
 Objective 3 : To critically evaluate the technical issues of new Malacca-Max
series.
The work based on the secondary data which found on technical bulletins and
academic magazines.
3.2.3 Secondary Data
Secondary data is defined by Saundlers as data that have been already
collected for some other purposes (Saundlers Et al: 2007,p41). This combines a
presentations and seminars, academic publications, trade journals, professional
magazines, websites, as well as trusted sources of electronic articles. I have tried to
complete this research to the best of my capabilities and the secondary data that
where available in related in topic.

Chapter 4: Malacca-Max Ship specification &
Terminal requirements
4.1 Introduction
The new vessels require 23 meter draught water, 450 meter longer berths and high
speed gantry crane with 74 metre outreach with wider rail tracks. The automated
handing systems and ICT control systems corresponding to movement rates are
essential areas in service supply for new series. Thus, the modern port and terminal
infrastructure have to be redeveloped or replaced to facilitate new Malacca-Max
series. The objective of this chapter is to illustrate and review the main challenges of
container ports and terminals operators within the context of the Malacca-Max
container carrier service provider.
4.2 The Operation Structure of Ports & Terminals
Container ports and terminals are complex organizations, various activities take
place by various positions such as Port Managers, Terminal Planning Managers,
Terminal Operation Managers and Terminal Financial Managers. The objective of
the container terminal will be; to reduce cost per container moved, to use less
energy, to utilize the resources such as people, land and equipment in all respects
and offer a reliable and productive service to customers.
The work of Robert (2011) emphasises that the ‘Terminal Manager’s objective is:
To satisfy shareholders by making profit through providing terminal facilities which
attract and serve customers – the most important (but not the only) customers being
the Shipping Lines’. However there are five main operational components in
container terminal; Transferring containers between vessels and land , moving
containers from and to temporary storage, transferring container between land
vehicles and storage , receiving-berthing and later dispatching vessels and
Receiving and dispatching land vehicles, both rail and road.
Robert (2011) brings out the terminal manager’s objective in two levels in relation to
global and local traditional process management. The global traditional process will
be; Customer interface systems, Terminal process flow (container identification,
location and terminal management through the Terminal Operating System
- 13 -

[TOS] ) ,Administration and regulatory reporting. The local traditional process will be;
Operator support systems ( sensors, anti-sway), Remote control(unmanned cranes,
control centres) , Automation in which the human control element is removed.
Terminal financial managers are interested in increasing the return on the
fundamental physical assets. Therefore, higher throughput per hectare of yard and
metre of quay face are crucial to him. However, he has two options to achieve this
goal either by improving in technology in terminal or by increasing the numbers of
terminal equipment such as transfer vehicles, quay cranes, and yard cranes. The
increase in quay crane speeds as well as cranes per metre of quay will be positively
affecting for achieve his goals.
Port managers are more concerned about annual quay face productivity including
maximum number of TEUs in each metre of quay face in a year. He is interested in
high productivity and high efficiency in terminal operations. Thus, there are some
factors which determine the yard productivity and quay face such as ship arrival
patterns, size ratio, box exchange, vessel size and transhipment.
4.3 Generic Function of Container Terminals
Source: Monaco, Moccia and Sammarra (2009)
Figure 5 : Cross-sectional view of terminal operation
- 14 -

The two major functions of the container terminal can be classified as transhipment
and storage. While performing these two major functions, area of container storage
and stacking and handling equipments play important roles. These container
handling equipments can vary from one container port to another. In some cases, it
can vary from one container terminal to another within same port. However these
container handling equipments can be classified into two groups; yard handling
system and Quay Crane. The function of the Container Quay Cranes is to load onto
and unload from the ship. Container Quay Cranes can be either ship crane[ Ship-mounted
cranes] or Ship-to-shore [STS] which are located on the quay. However,
the new Malacca-Max series will be undertaken as a gearless container ship, hence,
STS cranes with 74 metre outreach is momentous during service in new series. The
function of the yard side is to arrange the discharged boxes to load to another ship
[transhipment] or to transfer the discharged boxes to land transport modes.
The boxes are stacked in the yard area before it’s moved away. There are some
stacking equipments such as Rail Mounted Gantry Cranes [RMGs], Rubber Tired
Gantry Cranes [RTGs], Stackers for empty containers, Reach Stackers, Straddle
Carriers. The movement of boxes between the stacking area, the Ship – to –Shore
[STS] and the landside is defined as ‘horizontal terminal transport’. Thus there are
some equipments for horizontal transport, including Reach Stackers, Trailers,
Straddle Carriers, Trucks and Automated Guided Vehicles [AGV].
Apart from the terminal handling equipments, trained labour, terminal size, storage
and berth length are key factors for servicing new Malacca-Max Container carrier.
Table 2: Requirements for terminals handling in Malacca-Max Container Carrier
Param eters R equirem ents
Berth Length 450 m
D epth Alongside 23m
Term inal Area 32 ha per berth
70-74 m outreach[ 25 row s]
70 cycles per hour
Gantry C ranes 6 per berth
62-67 m Air draft
- 15 -

4.4 Container Terminal Handling & Horizontal Transport
Equipment
The equipments in container terminals can be classified into two groups; horizontal
transportation and vertical transportation. The modern container terminals are using
various types of these equipments. But the operators are selecting the equipments
parallel to the characterizations and limitation of the terminals.
4.4.1 Vertical transport means
 Loading and unloading containers over the quay
The Quay Crane plays a vital role in loading and unloading containers for ship. Thus.
One of the main challenges encountered by the terminal operator during service of
new Malacca-Max series is the need to be more efficient in handling equipments.
However, the terminal operators have some options for selecting Quay Cranes for
their terminals. Single trolley, single trolley with platform, dual trolley, single trolley-tandem
and dual trolley-tandem are an obvious solution.
- 16 -
Source: www.tocevents-europe.com
Figure 6 :Quay Crane Layout [single trolley]

- 17 -
Figure 7 :Quay Crane Layout [single trolley with platform]
Figure 8 :Quay Crane Layout [dual trolley with Straddle Carrier ]

- 18 -
Figure 9 :Quay Crane Layout [dual trolley with AGV]
Figure 10 :Quay Crane Layout [single trolley, tandem]

- 19 -
Figure 11 :Quay Crane Layout [Dual trolley, tandem/single]
Figure 12 : Quay Crane Layout [Dual trolley, tandem/single with AGV ]

However, there are two different types of cranes. High profile type crane is lifted up
to the air to clear the ships’ berthing and un-berthing the ships. Low profile[ goose
neck] type crane ,boom is pulled/shuttled towards and over the vessel to allow the
trolley to operate the cargo operation. However, this type of cranes which are
located near the air port or flight path are suitable in terminals. The minimum
distance between the quay cranes is crucial here. The maximum performance of the
Quay Cranes varies from the type of the vessel. The available technical
performance of the Quay Cranes is, between 50 to 60 containers per hour.
However , the operation performance is between 22 to 30 containers per hour. Thus,
the berth capacity is determined by the Quay Cranes performance. Saanen
(2004,p44)states, “the trend towards larger vessels has to be followed by larger
cranes and faster cranes, hence if all other things are equal, the cycle time of the
cranes increases”.
The number of boxes per movement is significant during service for new series.
There are some quay cranes to lift three FEUs or six TEUs in one lift. These types of
Quay Cranes are good investment for new Malacca-Max servicing berths.
- 20 -
Figure 13 : Quay Cranes in three FEUs

- 21 -
Figure 14 :Quay Cranes in six TEUs
 Yard handling
The purpose of the yard handling equipments is to place the boxes into the stack
and retrieve those from the stack. There are three types of cranes available for
service in terminal- Rail Mounted Gantry cranes [ RMG] ,Rubber Tired Gantry
cranes [ RTG] and Double Rail Mounted Gantry cranes [ DRMG].
The main difference between RMG and RTG is, RMG is fully automated but RTG is
quite difficult to automate. The work of Steenken (2004) quoted APMT professionals
that “It is difficult to improve the positioning accuracy of RTG’s, because they are
moving on wheels, and therefore automating them is more costly”. Often in terminal
operation two RMG cranes are employed in one stack module (block), where one
crane can serve at the waterside, while the other one can serve the landside at the
same time. This has proved to be a productive and reliable way of operating since
one can be used as a back-up in case the technical failure happens to the other
one”.
The DRMG consists of two RMGs of different width and height. Thus they can pass
each other and it’s avoiding a handshake area. This DRMG is giving slightly higher
productivity compared to others. The operation mechanism can be either automatic
or man-driven. It can technically perform 20 moves/hour. The span can be up to 8 -
12 rows and stacking will be up to 4 - 10 containers high.

4.4.2 Purpose of Horizontal transport
There are several types of equipments such as Reach Stacker [RS], Straddle
Carrier [SC], Shuttle Carrier [ShC], Automated Guided Vehicle [AGV], Automated
Straddle Carrier [ASC] and Terminal Tracker [TT] for horizontal transport. However,
these can be use, not only stack containers but also transport containers in the yard.
Straddle Carriers [SC] are widely used in terminals. It’s twin-mode in transport/stack
and it can also transport two TEUs simultaneously. Apart from that its capable of
stacking 3 or 4 containers high and move one box over 2 or 3 other boxes. The
average speed can be up to 30 Km/h. Moreover its automatic version is also
available; it’s called Automated Straddle Carrier [ASC].
Reach Stackers [RS] have low efficiency and require more space in stacking area
compared to others .Thus it’s incompetent for high throughput container terminals.
Shuttle Carrier [ShC], Automated Guided Vehicle [AGV] and Terminal Tracker [TT]
are using transport boxes from stack area to rail and quay side to the stack area.
However loading and unloading boxes to these types of vehicles have to be done by
stacking crane or quay crane. AGV is running on robotized road network with
transponders and electric wires which are located on ground to control the system.
However, this AGV system requires giant investment and it’s more suitable for
terminals where the labour cost is high.
4.6 Container Terminal Layout
Container terminal layout will be varying from the terminal handling equipments and
efficiency of the labour force. Thus, Automated Rail Mounted Gantry Cranes [ARMG]
is available in some terminals. It has a large variety of stacking geometry. Thus it
can store boxes in 35 to 45 TEU long, 5 to 6 high and 8 to 12 wide. In addition, it
can provide highest density in stacking and work with electrical power. The electrical
power driven equipments contribute towards low cost per container move.
The two different terminal layout ;’side loaded’ and ‘end loaded’, have some
limitations. Side loaded layout can operate in RTG with high stacking density. It can
also separate waterside traffic from landside traffic. However, the crane cost may be
higher compared to the end load system. Also it can cause a risk of truck queues.
- 22 -

- 23 -
Figure 15: End loaded and Side loaded layout
The end loaded layout can separate the waterside traffic from landside traffic. Also it
can arrange parallel operation for reducing the queuing. Moreover it will reduce the
travel distance for transport. Therefore it will reduce the energy consumption. Apart
from that, its maintenance is uncomplicated in case of breakdown and allows high
utilization of terminal.
Figure 16 : End loaded RMG arrangement

- 24 -
4.6 Conclusion
The calculation mentioned below, illustrate the operational challenges for terminal
operators in new series.
 Port rotation –USLBH,HKHKG,CNSHA,KRPUS,USLBH
 Service interval -10 days
 18,250 TEU container vessels
 Round Voyage distance – 12,950 nm
 Average 85% full in each voyage
 15,500TEU per call
 Terminal throughput over 1MTEU per year
Table 3 : Voyage Calculation [ Asia – North America ]
Service
interval
Voyages
a year
Capacity
TEU
Ship
Number
Voyage
time
Port
time
Sea
time
Speed
Knots
18250 4 40 4 36 15.0
10days 36
18250 3 30 4 26 20.7
18250 4 40 8 32 16.9
18250 3 30 8 22 24.5
Source : http://www.netpas.net
Above calculations are made based on different port time [ 1 day or 2 days in each
port]. The ship servicing speed, corresponding to different port time will be varying.
Thus, the port and terminal operators have a vital role in operating new Malacca-
Max container carrier profitably. Their main challenge will be to function for new
series within 24 hours in particular terminals. However port time depends on the,
number of containers loaded/unloaded, crane speed and number of cranes in one
carrier.

The work of Khalid (2009,p 93) was widely discussed the ship operating costs
(excluding capital & maintenance costs);
Ship Operating Costs = Costs at sea(transport costs)+Costs in ports(stopping &
handling costs)
Ship oc = [ D(A+gS)] + [(B+hS)* S( + S )-1 ]
Where; D - Distance travelled by sea
S – size of ship
(A+gS) – Cost of a sea voyage
A – fixed cost
g - variable cost
(B + hS) – Ship handling costs in port
B – fixed cost
h - variable cost
( + S) – Daily tonnes moved by a ship of size S
 - constant
 - constant
S(+S )-1 – Time in port (in days)
- 25 -
However,
Total handling speed= Number of cranes* Crane speed
Number of moves = ((100-F)/100)*Y + ((F/100)*Y)/2
Where, F = share of FEUs
Y = Number of TEUs
Time per port = (Number of moves/ total handling speed) + port entry/exit time

Therefore, they have basically three options for achieve this goal ,ship output. They
can introduce more efficient handling equipments for each ship at the terminals, also
they can improve the number of movements per hour in Quay Cranes. Finally, they
can introduce both options in simultaneously. Therefore gang output is indirectly
giving massive effect for achieve required ship’s output.
The more efficient terminals suggest faster Quay Cranes, lower cost per move and
higher throughput density per unit area. Thus, the more efficient terminals contribute
towards the slow steaming for new Malacca-Max series.
The owners are complacent about higher profit margin from new series. Thus they
will focus more not only on reducing the number of port calls to minimize the
operation costs but also on slow steaming to minimize the running cost. Also they
will concentrate on highly utilizing ship cargo carry capacity by sailing with almost
fully loaded condition and hunting new customers by providing reliability service.
The terminal operators are more concerned with efficient terminal handling with not
only less fuel consumption and high utilization of available resources including land,
people and equipment but also with sailing new Malacca-Max series with almost
fully loaded condition & hunting new terminal user by providing reliable terminal
service.
The arrival of the Malacca-Max carrier at port will be a strenuous process. Thus the
vessel can arrive either in randomly or significant peaks. The number of berth
required will be depending on the berth occupancy. Therefore, the vessel arrival
pattern play a vital role in calculating the number of berth required.
However, the port and terminal operators are facing some challenges such as
inefficiency in terminal handling equipments, lack of trained labour, limitation in
terminal size, storage and berth length. Also the random pattern of ships’ arrival and
thus the available limited number of berth to accommodate new series will be a test
for port and terminal operators.
- 26 -

Chapter 5: Port & Berth Structure
5.1 Introduction
During the past 20 years, the trends in container shipping have had a great impact
on the port and berth developments. The rapid growth of containerisation has had a
vital effect on the size of berths and the layout of yards. During the port and berth
developments, ship type, ship’s destination and origins, frequency of arrivals and
times of the day have to be considered carefully. The objective of this chapter is to
illustrate and review the required port and berth structure to accommodate the new
Malacca-Max container carrier.
5.2 Operational Conditions in Harbour
The manoeuvring of Malacca-Max Container Carrier in confined water with close
proximity to other ships ,inside a harbour or in navigational channel is entirely
different from manoeuvring a such a vessel in deep water in the open sea. Thus
topographical, oceanographically and hydrographical conditions such as, tide, wind,
current and wave play a vital role together. Therefore these factors are having
massive effect on the safety of Malacca-Max carrier, not only for berthing &
navigation in harbour, but also for cargo handling operations in terminal.
The Depth of water in harbour basin and approach channel should not be less than
23 meters. However, determining the water depth, external factors such as,
atmospheric pressure, character of bottom, error in dredging, squat, movement of
the ship due to waves, trim due to loading of the ship, tidal variation, and possibility
of silting up have to be evaluated.
- 27 -

- 28 -
Source: Carl A.T(1988)
Figure 17: Components of depth
Thus, the water level change due to atmospheric pressure is approximately 0.9 cm
fall/rise of level for 1mbar rise/fall in atmospheric pressure. Apart from that, minimum
net under keel clearance [UKC] is 0.5 m for composed of soft materials and 1.0 m
for rocky bottom. However, the gross under keel clearance can be varying in the
following instances:
 Exposed Channel: The clearance should be approximately 5.25m [25% of
the maximum Draft] for exposed to strong swell.
 Protected manoeuvring and berthing areas: The clearance should be
approximately 3.15 m [15% of Maximum Draft] for protect from swell.
 Open sea areas: The clearance should be approximately 6.3 m [30% of
Maximum Draft] for exposed to strong swell and high ship speed.
 Exposed manoeuvring and berthing areas: The clearance should be
approximately 4.2 m [20% of Maximum Draft] for protect from swell.
The nominal seabed level plays a vital role in manoeuvrability of ship. In an
approach channel the ratio of channel depth to maximum draft is 1.5.

Current can arise in a port basin due to tidal effect, wind transporting water masses,
water flow from river estuaries, differences in temperature and salt contents. The
quay front shall be directed as parallel as possible to the prevailing current.
The forecasting of maximum Wind which can affect the berth is not easy. The size
and type of ship, loading condition of ship, current, the direction of the wave and
wind are governing factors of maximum acceptable wind speed.
- 29 -
Figure 18 : The frequency of yearly wind forces
The waves which are occurring in berthing area can be varying. There are different
types of waves such as, locally wind generated waves, swell or wind generated
waves, seiche or long periodic waves, waves caused by passing ships and Tsunami
or waves created by earthquakes. Apart from this, the waves can be classified
based on wave heights.
 Deep water waves – The ratio water depth d/wave length L ≥ 0.5
 Intermediate water waves- waves in which d/ L < 0.5 > 0.04
 Shallow water waves – waves in which d/ L ≤ 0.04
 Breaking waves – In deep water; when L < 7H and in shallow water, when
water depth d = 1.25 H

- 30 -
The wave heights H, is defined as;
Hm = The arithmetical mean value of all recorded wave heights during a period
observation = 0.6 H[s]
Hs = The significant wave height is the arithmetical mean value of the highest 1/3
of the waves for a stated interval.
H 1/10 = The arithmetical mean value of the height of the highest 10% = 1.27 Hs
H 1/100 = The arithmetical mean value of the height of the highest 1% = 1.67 Hs
Hmax = The maximum wave height = 1.87 Hs or rounded to = 2 Hs when high risk of
danger is present, or if storms of long duration are to be considered.
Figure 19: Wave characteristics in deep water

- 31 -
5.2.1 Ship Movements
The moored ship on pier can be continuously moved due to the impact of gusts,
wave or current.
Figure 20: Wave direction
Figure 21: Combinations of waves
The wave system can be affected by unacceptable movement on new Malacca-Max
series and finally it can damage the ship mooring system. The longer periodic waves
with a 5000 to 8000 metres wave length and wave slope of 1 in 2000 to 1 in 3000,
can be seriously harmful for mooring system. Because the risk of resonance of the
long periodic waves are having same magnitude in natural periods of Mega-Carrier.

- 32 -
Figure 22: Types of ship movements
The work of Carl A.T[1988,p76] discussed the ranges for maximum allowable
sudden movement in meters for container vessel L.O.A ≥ 200m at berth during
loading operations for wave period between 60 sec- 120 sec.
Table 4 : Limiting criteria for ship movements under safe mooring condition
Surge [m] Sway [m] Heave [m] Yaw [ degr]
+/- 0.5 +/- 0.3 +/- 0.3 0.5
5.2.2 Tugboats
The Malacca-Max Series may require the tug assistance in manoeuvring in harbour,
due to environmental conditions, or berth structure. However the tug boats can be
divided into two groups.
 Harbour tugboats- Operate in sheltered waters/ Engine power 500 HP to
2000 HP/ L.O.A – 12 m to 25 m
 Offshore tugboats – Operate in exposed waters/Engine power 2000 HP to
5000 HP/ L.O.A – 25 m to 40 m
The evaluation of tug required has been based on following assumptions.
 Malacca- Max not equipped with bow thrusters
 For the wind forces, gust factor is 1.2

 The required force to move ship against the current and wind is
approximately 30% higher than the force require to hold the ship against the
force due to current and wind.
Total bollard pull = Sf [ Fw + Fc ]
Here; Fw – Forces due to Wind
Fc -- Forces due to Current
Sf - 1.3 to 1.5
- 33 -
5.2.3 Channels- Waterways
The approach channel in a port may be required for dredging the required water
depth for safe navigation in new Malacca-Max series. However, some of the
container ports can provide required water depth for new series. But they have to
maintain continuous dredging to carry on a minimum depth ,23 meters as shown on
navigational charts. However according to the work of Carl A.T [1988,p92],
waterways or channels can be logically classified into four groups;
Group A - Main traffic arteries which have satisfactory day and night navigational
aids and where given depths are guaranteed.
Group B - Same as group A, but with navigational aids for day navigation only.
Group C - Important routes which may have navigational aids and where depths are
checked by regular surveys, but not guaranteed.
Group D – Local routes which have no navigational aids and where only estimates
of depths are given.
Apart from that, waterways or channels can be subdivided into fully restricted, semi
– restricted and unrestricted channels;
Fully restricted channels – The entire channel area is dredged as shown below
figure.
Semi- restricted channels - The entire channel area is dredged as shown below
figure

Unrestricted channels or waterways- The shallow water of width at least 10 to 15
times of the beam of the largest ship using the channel, without any dredging[ 600m
to 900m ]
- 34 -
Figure 23 : Fully and Semi restricted channels
5.2.3.1 Straight Channel
The minimum of the straight channel will depend on not only the effect of current
and wind but also on the size and manoeuvrability of the Malacca-Max carrier.
However, the channel width can be divided into three lanes or zones; the bank lane,
the ship clearance lane and the manoeuvring lane.
The width of the manoeuvring lane shall be from 1.6 to 2 times of the beam of
Malacca-Max series. Thus it shall be, 96.0 meters to 120 meters. However, more
wind age area vessel, Malacca-Max series requires more than 120 meters width for
safe manoeuvring. On the other hand, the angle of yaw of 5° in manoeuvring lane
will require half the beam of the lane. When the ship is moved towards the banks of
the channel from the centre line, it may cause bank suction.
Thus to counteract this effect, an additional bank clearance can be used 1.0 to 2.0
time of the beam of this new series. It shall be 60 meters to 120 metres.

- 35 -
Figure 24 :Channel width
To counteract the effect of interaction between two ships, the new series will
introduce the beam to clear the two lanes. Thus, it shall be 60 meters. Apart from
that, the total channel width for single lane channel shall be, 3.6 to 6 times of the
beam. Thus it shall be, 216 meters to 360 meters.
5.2.3.2 Channel with Curves
The minimum width of the curve shall be larger than the straight channel for safe
navigation. Generally if the deflection angle is more than 10° , the channel shall be
widened. The width of the manoeuvring lane shall be around 4 times of the beam of
new series. Thus it shall be 240 meters.

- 36 -
Figure 25 : Channel curve
Table 5: The required minimum curve radius in different deflection angle [without tug
assistance]
Deflection Angle Minimum Curve Radius
25°< 3 times L.O.A [ 1170 m ]
25° to 35 ° 5 times L.O.A [ 1950 m ]
35 ° > 10 times L.O.A [ 3900 m ]
Apart from, If more than one curve; the straight section shall be twice of L.O.A,
[ 780 m ]
5.2.4 Harbour Basin
The harbour basin is the protected water area which shall provide suitable and safe
accommodation for ship. The inside harbour entrance shall be allocated to turning
area or berthing. The harbour entrance shall be located on the lee side, if there is
any possibility. However the width of the harbour entrance shall be 0.7 to 1.0 time of
the L.O.A of the vessel. Thus it shall be between 273 meters to 390 meters. But the
maximum current velocity shall be less than 3 kts.If it exceeds this range, the
channel cross-section shall be adjusted. The stopping distance will be depending on
the displacement, ship speed and shape of the hull. However, the ballast vessel
requires 3 to 5 times the L.O.A [ 1170m to 1950m ] and fully loaded vessel requires
7 to 8 times the L.O.A [ 2730 m to 3120 m ].

- 37 -
5.2.4.1 Turning Area
The turning area, which is located in the central area of the harbour basin plays an
important role in manoeuvrability of a ship. Thus, it shall be protected from strong
winds and waves.
Table 6:The required minimum diameters of the turning area
Condition Minimum Diameters
Turns by Ahead engine
propulsion[ Without Bow thrusters and/or
tug assistance]
4 times L.O.A [ 1560 m]
Turns by Tug assistance 2 times L.O.A [ 780 m ]
Turn by good condition[ no strong wind &
wave]
3 to 1.6 time L.O.A respectively as a
lower limit[ 1170 m to 624 m ]
Turn by warping around a pier with tug
assistance in good condition[ no strong
wind & wave]
1.2 time L.O.A [ 468 m ]
5.2.4.2 Berthing Area
The size of the berth area will be depending on the dimension of new series and the
number of vessels to use the harbour. But the berth layout will depend on some
other factors such as availability of bow thrusters, strength and direction of current,
waves and wind, size of the harbour basin ,the available tug boats, traffic density of
arrival and departure ship from and to the berth.

Table 7 :The minimum requirement of the dredged area
Length With tugboat assistance:-
1.25 times of L.O.A [ 488 m ]
Without tugboat assistance:-
1.5 times of L.O.A [ 585 m ]
Width 1.25 times of beam [ 75 m ]
- 38 -
Figure 26: The minimum requirement of the dredged area
However more than one ship alongside the pier the clearance between adjacent
vessels shall be at least 0.1 times [39 m] of the new Malacca-Max series.
Table 8 :The Pier requirements
Single Piers The clear water area between two piers
2 times beam + 30 m [ 150m]
The length
L.O.A + 30m to 50 m [ 420 m + 440 m ]
Single Piers- Double berth
finger pier
The clear water area between two piers
4 times beam + 50 m [ 350 m ]
Long Piers The clear water area between two piers
2 times beam + 50 m [ 170m]

- 39 -
Figure 27 : Layout of single piers
Figure 28 : Layout of long piers

- 40 -
Table 9 : The minimum width requirement
Angle of berth Require Width
45 ° 1.5 times of L.O.A [ 585 m ]
90 ° 2 time of L.O.A [ 780 m ]
Figure 29 : Layout of berth
5.2.5 Berth Structure
The characteristic loads which are acting on the structure of the berth will be varying
in ship particulars.Thus,to accommodate the new Malacca- Max container Carrier,
the structure of the berth has to fulfil some requirements. However, there are three
main categories of characteristic forces or loads that can be acting on berth
structure; Characteristic loads from the sea side, characteristic loads on the berth
structure and characteristic loads from the land side. But, the ship particulars,
having massive effect on the category, the characteristic loads from the sea side
than other categories.

- 41 -
5.2.5.1 Impacts From Ships
Forces on berth which are affected by ships can occur due to some specific factors
such as, the manoeuvring, the velocity and size of the ships when berthing.
However, there are three theories to estimate the impact force related to ship on the
berths; the theoretical method, the empirical method and the statistical method.
By, theoretical method, kinetic energy E will be;
E = 0.5 M v .V² = 0.5 ( M d + M h ) V²
Where;
M v = Virtual Mass [ton] , equal to ship displacement M d + hydrodynamic mass M h
V = Velocity [m/s] of ship at the berth line.
Thus, the total kinetic energy[E] of the ship has to be absorbed by the fender
system.Thus,the energy on fender system Ef will be;
Ef= C ( 0.5. Md .V² )
Where;
C [berthing coefficient] = C H .CE.CC.CS
Where;
C H [hydrodynamic mass factor] =[ M d + M h . CHR] / [M d ]
= [M d + ( ¼. π . ρ . D2 .L). CHR ] / [M d ]
= 1 + [M h . CHR ] / [M d ]
Where;
‘ρ’ = 10.3 kN per m3 [ Specific gravity of sea water]
D = Draft of ship
L = L.O.A of ship

CHR = Reduction factor due to ship moving at an angle to longitudinal axis.
However, CHR will be 1.0 for ship moving on berth line in open water and 0.1 for
ship moving on longitudinal axis in open water
The work of Professor F. Vasco Costa assumes, the ship moves in sideways to
quay or rotates about its centre of gravity, C H value will be;
C H = 1 + [ 2D] / [ B ]
- 42 -
Where;
D = Draft of ship
B = Width of ship
However, the exact value of the hydrodynamic mass is difficult to calculate. It will
vary from the under keel clearance, the shape of ship and water depth. Thus the
value varies between 25% to 100% of the displacements of the vessel. If the water
depth is 1.5 times of the draft, C H will be 1.5 and if the water depth is 1.1 times the
draft, C H will be 1.8.
CE [eccentricity effect] = [ i2 + r2.cos2  ] / [ i2 + r2 ]
Where;
i= ship’s radius of inertia [ between 0.2 L and 0.25 L]
r = The distance of point of contact from the centre of mass

- 43 -
Figure 30 : Eccentricity effect CE as function of  and r/L
Figure 31 : Ship alongside under own power
If  is 90 °, CE = [ L ] / [ L + { r2}/{i2} ] and minimum amount of impact energy hitting
with the berth structure. Thus, CE will be 0.5 to 0.6.The vessel berthing with tug
assistance, the angle between the berth line and ship will be 1° to 5°.If the vessel
alongside is in parallel to the berth front, = 0° , the ratio r/L = 0 and impact energy
will be maximum.

Thus, the favourable value for r/L,  and  , will give the moderate impact energy.
CC [Water cushion effect ] = 0.8 – 1.0 ,respectively solid or open quay.
CS [ Softening effect ] = 0.9 – 1.0 ,[due to the elastic deformations in berth
structure and ship]
By empirical method, the British Code of Practice on Maritime Structure determined
the maximum impact energy [ kN meter]
Ef= [ 10 D ] / [ 120 + D½ ]
- 44 -
Where;
D= The displacement tonnage of the berthing ship.
Thus Ef = [ 10 * 293,488 ]/ [ 120 + 293,488½ ]
= 4436 kN
In statistical design method, measurements are calculated in impact energies
actually absorbed by the fenders in berthing operation. Thus this method is based
on data of existing berth sites and figures determined by hydrodynamic mass ,
berthing velocity and eccentricity.
When the ship alongside is parallel to the pier with tug assistance, the contact
length with fender Lsf lesser than L.O.A. It will be 20% of L.O.A.
Figure 32 : Length of contact area and Length Overall

During the vessels alongside an angle with the berth line, the fenders absorb the
longitudinal friction forces and it avoids the damage to both ship hull and berth
structure. Thus, the space of the fenders, the fender type and horizontal force acting
on ship and structure play an important role in safe berthing. It can be determined by;
F= μ. P
Where, F= Friction force on the front of berth structure
μ= friction coefficient between fender and ship [rubber to steel 0.6 to 0.7]
P= Impact force [approximately 1500 kN for 300,000 tons Displacement]
Thus, F = 0.7* 1500 kN = 1050 kN
Apart from that, if she is moored by tension mooring or moored by force to reduce
the movement of surge, the friction force F will be;
F= P/μ
Thus, F= 1500/ 0.7 kN= 2150 kN
5.2.5.2 Bollard Loads
A vessel coming to alongside pier , has two options for stopped and safe berthing;
by engine and thrusters propulsion and by the spring hawser. Thus , the total design
force on berth structure through the bollard shall equal to the breaking load of the
spring hawser. Furthermore, the breaking load will vary from the materials of the
hawsers; example steel wire, nylon rope. Thus the bollards dimensions and the
berth structure shall be designed for new series. The calculation has been based on
two assumptions; bollard loads act on any direction within 180º at the sea side and
horizontally to 60º upward.
- 45 -

- 46 -
Figure 33 : Load direction on bollard
The bollard load shall be increased by 25%, if the berth is much exposed to currents
and winds. If the bollard accommodate more than one hawser, it shall be designed
for tabulated load, thus it shall be calculated for hawsers with fully loaded and
pulling in same time in same direction. The forces on bollards will be, horizontal
force due to current and wind against the berth and vertical force due to the ship
chafing on the fenders under vertical movement.
5.2.6 Current Pressure
Current pressure on a moored Malacca-Max Carrier can be determined by;
Pc = Cc .γ c. Ac. [Vc / 2g]
Where;
Pc = Current force / kN
Cc = Current force coefficient
γ c = Specific gravity of water[Sea water 10,26 kN/m3 ,Fresh water 10,34kN/m3]
Ac = ship’s underwater area on a plane perpendicular to the direction of the current
Vc = Velocity of current/ ms-1
g = acceleration of gravity/ 9.81 ms-2

Thus, Cc will be varying from shape of the hull and water depth at the front of the
structure of berth. Cc will be between 0.2 to 0.6 If the currents is parallel to the
vessel
- 47 -
Table 10 :The magnitude of Cc
The magnitude of Cc Requirement
0.2 to 0.6 currents is parallel to the vessel
1.0 to 1.5 Deep water
2.0 Water depth= 2* ship’s draft
3.0 Water depth= 1.5* ship’s draft
6.0 Water depth = ship’s draft
5.2.7 Wind Forces
Wind force which caused by wind, on a moored Malacca-Max Carrier, can be
determined by;
Pw = Cw ( Aw Sin2Φ+ BwCos2Φ) γ w[Vw
2/2g]
= Cw ( Aw Sin2Φ+ BwCos2Φ) γ w[Vw
2/1600]
= Cw ( Aw Sin2Φ+ BwCos2Φ)p
Where;
Pw = Wind force/kN
Cw = Wind force coefficient
Aw = laterally projected area of ship’s above water in m2
Bw = front area of ships above water in m2
Φ = angle of wind direction to ship’s centreline

γ w = specific gravity of air 0.01225 kN/m3
Vw = velocity of the wind in ms-1
g = acceleration of gravity 9.81 ms-2
p = wind pressure in kN/m2
Thus , the maximum wind forces can occur when the wind blow in beam [when
Φ=90º].It can be determine by;
Pw = Cw .Aw.p
The Cw will be vary from shape of the hull above the water and the wind direction.
Table 11: The average value of Cw for different wind angle
The average value of Cw wind Angle
1.3 Wind crosswise to the ship
0.9 Wind dead against the bow
0.8 Wind dead against the stern
- 48 -
5.3 Fenders
The fenders play a vital role sitting between the berth structure and hull of the
berthing ship. It will transform the impact load from the berthing ship. A well
designed fender system shall be able to berth a ship without damage to hull or
fender or berth structure. Apart from that, it shall be able to protect these parties
from the motion or force which are caused by current, wind, tidal changes, wave or
loading/unloading cargo.

- 49 -
Figure 34 : Function of fender
Figure 35 : Fender system for container ship
The ideal fender shall absorb large amount of kinetic energy and transmit low
reactive loads into the berth structure. The fender is defined as, ratio between the
force to be resisted and the energy absorption. For an example, if fender factor is 20
kN/kNm, the fender will absorb 200 kNm energy ,the resulting horizontal force to be
resisted by the berth will be 2000 kN.The work of Carl A.T [1988],fenders can be
divided into two groups;
 Surface protected fenders; transmit a high impact or reaction force to the
berth structure for each kNm energy absorbed, the fender factor P/Ef is high
 Energy absorbing fenders; transmit a low impact or reaction force to the
quay structure for each kNm energy absorbed, the fender factor P/Ef is low

Thus, the energy absorbing fenders will be suitable to accommodate Malacca-Max
series.
- 50 -
Figure 36 : Angular compression of fender
However, non-uniform deflection can be occurred due to; the flare angle of the ship
hull, the angle of approach between the fender line and ship and the curve of the
ship hull where the ship hull contact with the fender.
Figure 37: Ship Hull Curves
The hull and fender contact point and contact angle will be varying with the height of
the fender system and the angle of approach. Therefore , the maximum safe value
of the berthing angle or angle of approach play a vital role during designing the berth
structure layout and selecting fender system. Thus, the flare angle will be varying
from approach angle. An approach angle of 5°, the flare angle will be 10° -16° and
for 10° approach angle, the flare angle will be 20 °- 40°.

The characteristic of the fender will be varying according to the type of fender.
- 51 -
Figure 38: Characteristics of the rubber fenders

Table 12 : Fender factor [ P/Ef ] for different types of rubber fender
Type Fender factor [ P/Ef ] kN/kNm
Solid( rectangular) 50 - 150
Rectangular 15 - 80
Cylinder(radial load) 1.4 - 25
Cell -type 0.6 - 8
Cord Strips (tires) 3.5 - 10
V-type 2 - 16
H- type 0.9 - 6
Pneumatic 1.2 – 13
- 52 -
The double fender system can absorb twice of the impact energy, but the impact
force on the berth structure will be the same. Regarding double fender system ,
figures mentioned below are ideal for container berths.
Figure 39: Arrangement of double fendering

The work of Carl A.T [1988], discussed the reaction/compression characteristics of
double fender
- 53 -
Figure 40: Reaction/compression characteristics of double fender
The space of the fenders, play an important role in safe berthing. However it will
vary from berth structure and size of the ship. Thus, the hull radius of curvature, the
compression of the fender and height of the fender .For Malacca-Max series,, the
space will be 25-50 %.
Figure 41: Spacing of fenders

- 54 -
5.4 Conclusion
To accommodate new Malacca-Max Container Carrier, most of the existing port
areas have to be changed. It will be a challenge to find a suitable area to build new
berths .The Harbour Master and his team have to consider the specific berthing
arrangement for new series. The space to swing ships and the depth of water with
required Under Keel Clearances are providing challenges for port authorities and
pilots. Moreover, effect of wind, wave and current in particular berth are critical
factors for safe mooring. Therefore, the additional training sessions for harbour
pilots and mooring team are essential for minimize the margins for error.
The tug boats, fenders and bollards requirements have to be critically
analysed .However automated mooring system which is manufactured by Cavotec
MoorMaster will be an obvious solution for fenders and bollards requirements.
Apart from that, harbour basin including approach channels, stopping distance,
turning circles and clearances alongside the berth play a vital role in handing
Malacca-Max series in port.

Chapter 6: Technical issues for Malacca-Max
Container Carrier
6.1 Introduction
In recent years the carry capacity of container ships has rapidly increased. However,
it’s creating greater challenges for class, ship builders and ship designers in
technological aspects. The objective of this chapter is to identify these main
challenges within the context of the Malacca-Max container carrier service provider.
The structural rigidity of Malacca-Max series can be relatively small, compared to
currently operating other series due to the increased length in overall size.
6.2 Brittle Crack Arrest Design
The structural damages on hull structure can happen due to brittle fractures. These
damages will be responsible for not only environmental damages but also fatalities.
Therefore the Malacca-Max series shall be designed and constructed to prevent
brittle cracks. Thus, most of the ship builders have been using extremely thick steel
plates, between 50 mm to 90 mm for large container ships. Therefore the fracture
toughness of the plate will decrease as plate thickness increases. However, the
large-scale failures can be occurred as a result. In most cases, brittle crack
occurring in the weld joints on this extremely thick steel plates. Apart from that, the
cracks will propagate in a straight line, without deviation on the weld joint.
- 55 -
Source: ClassNK, September 2009
Figure 42: Overview of strength deck structures of container ships.

In a research report, (classNK,2009, p1)it has been argued that, brittle crack arrest
design satisfies the two scenarios;
Source: ClassNK, Technical Bulletin vol.28, 2010
Figure43:Scenario 1 – To prevent a brittle crack that has occurred in the hatch side coaming
from propagating to the strength deck.
The Brittle Crack Arrest Design Committee which is organized by ClassNK, has
discussed the design against this issue.
Table 13: Brittle Crack Arrest Properties of Strength Deck for Scenario 1
Thickness of strength deck,t(mm)
t ≤ 75
Minimum brittle crack arrest toughness
value at - 10°C, Kca( N/mm2/3 )
6,000
- 56 -
Source: ClassNK, Technical Bulletin vol.28, 2010
Figure 44:Scenario 2 – To prevent brittle crack that has occurred in the strength deck from
propagating to the hatch side coaming.

The Brittle Crack Arrest Design Committee which is organized by ClassNK, has
discussed the design being against this issue.
Table14: Brittle Crack Arrest Properties of Hatch Side Coaming for Scenario 2
- 57 -
Thickness of hatch side
coaming,t(mm)
t ≤ 75
Minimum brittle crack arrest toughness
value at - 10°C, Kca( N/mm2/3 )
6,000
The present classification society rules have covered both arresting brittle crack
propagation and preventing the initiation of brittle cracks. But in a research report,
(classNK Technical Bulletin,2010, p55) it was revealed that the present rules do not
always guarantee the arrest of brittle crack propagation in extremely thick steel
plates.
Table 15: Mechanical properties & brittle crack arrest toughness Kca of the tested steel plate
Thickness
(mm)
Yield
Stress
(N/mm2)
Tensile
Stress
(N/mm2)
Elongation
( %)
Charpy vE-40
deg.C(J)[Longl.]
Κca
-10 deg.C
(Ν/mm 3/2)
65 409 548 29 188 2,800
Source:- ClassNK Technical Bulletin 2010
The figures in the above table denote that, extremely thick steel plates which were
produced without considering brittle crack possibility are unable to arrest a brittle
crack.
6.3 Whipping & Springing Responses
The hydro elastic responses on hull structure will be occurring due to irregular and
regular waves. The wave induced hull vibrations, whipping and springing, can be
occurred on Malacca-Max Container Carrier in more frequently. The springing is a
steady vibration on ship hull and it will be occurring even in a calm sea. In research
report, (classNK Technical Bulletin,2010, p45),the mechanism of the springing is
divided into two categories;

 Resonance of the 2-noded hull vibration with waves whose encountered
frequency is equal to natural frequency, especially for shorter wavelengths
 Resonance of the 2-noded hull vibration with waves whose encountered
frequency is equal to 1/n of the natural frequency, where’ n ‘ is an integer
owing to the n-th order harmonic frequency component of nonlinear
hydrodynamic force.
The wave-induced periodic forces and impact forces are the route cause for wave-induced
hull vibrations. However, strictly dividing the actual wave-induced hull
vibration into springing and whipping is much more difficult. Thus, the whipping can
occur due to transient hull vibration.
The acceleration, vertical bending moments, ship motions & hydrodynamic pressure
have to be measured at the tank tests of a Malacca-Max container ship model.
Springing tests in irregular and regular waves have to be carried out at the
encountered wave frequency corresponding to 1/n of the natural frequency of the 2-
noded hull vibration. Apart from that whipping tests in irregular and regular waves
have to be carried out at condition which bow flare slamming occurs.
6.4 Hull Strength
The typical life time of the vessel is based on the hull strength. Apart from that, fuel
saving can be achieved by hull design. Thus, the hull resistance is the most
important factor in hull design. The hull resistance and fuel consumption can be
minimized by increasing the hull beam and reducing the block coefficient. In addition,
increasing the hull beam ,will be effective in minimizing the hull length. Because
the number of row will be increasing due to hull beam increasing. The effect of
torsion, bending moment and shear force can be minimized. Moreover minimum hull
length will positively affect on manoeuvrability of the vessel. The vessel shall satisfy
all of the IMO manoeuvrability criteria .The IMO Manoeuvrability criteria discusses
the good visibility range for OOW . The wider beam will also improve the ship
stability, and it will reduce the ballast water capacity. In addition to these, transverse
loading of container, will be a good investment to reduce the lashing materials.
Sufficient hull strength for bending moments is an important factor in hull designing.
Therefore designing the hatch side coaming, the transverse bulkheads within the
hatches and the web frames play an important role in hull strength. The thickness of
- 58 -

the hatch side coaming needs to be not less than 65mm. The gap between web
frames needs to be not more than 10 feet.
The additional deck, will fulfil the required hull girder inertia. The passage way from
forecastle area to aft mooring deck is good solution for forces such as Torsion,
Bending Moment & Shear Force .On the other hand, it can be used as an
emergency exit.
The other hull designing issue is torsional strength, due to large opening in hatches.
The hatch covers play a vital role in minimizing torsional force. And the other
solution is ,the deckhouse locate amidship area of ship hull. On the one hand, it will
fulfil the SOLAS visibility requirements. Apart from that, it will reduce vibratory
forces.
- 59 -
Source:www.hhi.co.kr
Figure 45: Container & Deckhouse Arrangement
In addition to these, the midship compartment deckhouse can reduce the warping
stresses. The maximum peak warping stresses occur at the end of the hatch
opening region. And it will be the most critical at the engine room front.
6.5 Bow Flare Slamming
Bow flare slamming can occur due to ship speed, flare angle, location on bow,
height above the waterline and typical rolling angel of ship. Thus, the bow-flare
slamming can easily happen in rough sea. Large slamming force can act on the
ship ,when the water impact on the flare area. Specially due to roll angle and the
angle between the flare surface. Moreover when the impacting water surface is so
small, the water enter to the bow section vertically, with roll angel. When the ship
breadth increases for more on-deck TEUs, the effect of the bow flare slamming will

be more. Also height above the water level directly involves the bow flame
slamming. When the ship is moving in high speed , the bow flare slamming force will
be giving more effect for ship.
However, the designing the wave-breaker protection on bow structure, is a good
solution for damages in forward rows on-deck containers, due to green water loads
on the fore end .While constructing a containership, bow flare angel plays a vital
role, due to her high service speed. Therefore, the bow pattern is a critical factor for
the bow-flare slamming.
6.6 Aft End Slamming
Aft end slamming depend on the relative vertical motion and velocity between the
ship and the water. During navigation in heavy head sea conditions, the largest
relative motions and velocities will occur. As a result, motion of heavy pitch & heave
can occur. The reason for these motions is, having more wave length than the ship
length. Thus, the ship length is certainly an important parameter for ship motion. As
a direct result of the aft end slamming, sagging moment will be increased.
Hence, shape of the aft end will directly affect on aft end slamming. Thus, large flat
stern is more effective for aft end slamming.The effect for structure due to motion in
heave and pitch can be minimized by appropriate aft end design.
6.7 Local Panel Strength
Ship hull can apply some displacement motions such as heave, sway and surge due
to external forces from the waves. Furthermore some angular motions such as yaw,
pitch and roll can occur. The hydrostatic and hydrodynamics forces and moments
acting on the ship, can make a pressure on side and bottom of the hull. In addition
to these forces and moments, some of loads such as ballast loads, container loads,
impact loads and operational loads apply on the ship structure. And also green
water on deck giving massive effect on hull. Therefore local panel strength plays a
vital role in minimizing the damage due to fatigue.
Hence, light weight marine construction material has to be chosen during the hull
designing. The material should be light weight ,relevant yield strength and low cost,
such as Mild steel or Higher tensile steel. And also these materials, Sandwich
structure is also a good solution for new building of Malacca-Max Container Carrier.
- 60 -

The sandwich structure consists of different materials that are bonded to each other.
Thus, this sandwich structure has key properties such as, high stiffness to weight
ratio, high strength to weight ratio ,also it has properties to deal with fatigue and
corrosion.
6.8 Container Securing
Under SOLAS chapter VI Regulation 5 Stowage and securing and chapter VII
Regulation 5, paragraph 6, Malacca-Max Container Carrier shall have a Flag State
approved Cargo Securing Manual (CSM).The external forces such as wind forces,
static forces and dynamic forces act on loaded containers onboard. Parametric
rolling is an unstable phenomenon which can quickly generate large roll angles, and
the final result will be container over board or collapse. The parametric rolling will
occur when the wave encounter period is nearly one-half the ship’s natural rolling
period. Thus, new container securing arrangements, devices and methods have
been developed to enhance the efficiency of container stowage & securing
arrangements.
6.8.1 Types of Container Securing Devices
- 61 -
Table 16 : Types of Fixed Securing Devices
Type Description
Deck Socket This is a device for positioning a container. It has a hole with
the same shape as that of a container corner fitting, and it
connects decks and containers using a twistlock. There are
two kinds of deck sockets: pedestal types and flush types.
Sliding Base This is a device for positioning a container. It is used when
the container is to be stowed at a low position. However,
since the shape differs according to manufacturer, the types
of loose devices that can be actually used are limited.
Eye Plate This is installed on the hull side such as on the deck or a
hatch cover. It is a plate with holes that can be used for
connecting securing devices to restrict container movement.
The number of holes and the pitch of the holes depend on

the securing method. Types of eye plate include fixed types
and collapsible types.
Positioning Cone This is a device for positioning a container. It is smaller than
the hole of container corner fittings and has a similar shape
to the hole of such corner fittings.
Container Guide This is a device installed at the central part of the 40’
container bay when two 20’ containers are to be stowed in
the longitudinal direction using the cell guides of a 40’
container bay. It prevents the lateral movement of 20’
containers.
- 62 -
Source: ClassNK, October 2009,p21
Table 17 : Types of Loose Securing Devices
Type Description
Vertical Stacker This is a device for positioning a container, and it
prevents the horizontal movement of a container
using the hole of the container corner fitting.
Twist Stacker This has the same functions a vertical stacker, and it
does not easily detach from container corner fittings
Twistlock (Manual-Type) This is a device for connecting upper and lower
containers. Using the hole in the container corner
fitting, it prevents the upper container from
separating from the lower container, and also
prevents the horizontal movement of the container.
Twistlock (Semi-auto
Type)
This has the same functions as a manual-type
twistlock, and connects upper and lower containers
automatically when stowing containers.

Twistlock (Auto Type) This is an automatic twistlock that not only connects
upper and lower containers automatically when
stowing containers, but also does not require manual
labour to unlock.
Lashing Rod This is a device for lashing the container to prevent it
from racking and lifting. Normally, a pulling device
such as turnbuckle is assembled on a rod, and it is
used on the diagonal line in the end wall of the
container. The shape may be changed depending on
the required strength, but its weight must be such
that it accounts for handling during securing work.
Adjusting Hook This is a device for adjusting the lashing length and
is used between the lashing rod and the
turnbuckle.
Turnbuckle This is a device that retains the tension in the lashing
rod if necessary when securing a container.
- 63 -
Source: ClassNK, October 2009,p 22

6.8.2 Strength Evaluation of Lashing Materials
The loads such as wind loads, dynamic loads due to ship motion and static loads
have to be calculated for the strength evaluation of container stowage. However, the
wind loads apply on containers in transverse direction.
The wind pressure p can be calculated by formula;
P = 0.611 Cp U2.10-3 (kN/m2)
Where ; Cp – Coefficient ,depending on the wind direction
[Windward side(+ve pressure)= 1.0 & Leeward side (-ve pressure)= 0.5]
U – Design wind speed taken as greater than 36 m/sec
Thus, the wind loads P acting in transverse direction of container can be calculate
by;
P = p A cosΦ (kN)
Here, A – Area of side face of container (m2)
Stiffness constants of the lashing rods play a vital role in strength of lashing
arrangements. However, the stiffness Constant kL will be varying depending on the
material used.
kL = EA / l ( kN/mm)
E- Elastic modulus of lashing rod (kN/mm2 )
A- Cross setion area of lashing rod (mm2 )
l - Overall length of lashing rod ( mm)
- 64 -

- 65 -
6.9 Discussion
The identified main challenges for class, ship builders and ship designers in
technological aspects are invent a successful ship model with a bearable building
cost for owner and reasonable maintenance cost compared to trading income. Thus
the final product shall be higher performance vessel for ship owner. Apart from
these, there are some technical issues for new Malacca-Max container carrier. Hull
strength, whipping and springing responses, brittle crack arrest, Bow flare slamming,
Aft end slamming, local panel strength and container securing are the main
technical issues which are related to ultra large container carrier.

- 66 -
Chapter 7: Conclusion
7.1 Research findings
The Malacca-Max series will be more profitable than the available container series
due to economy of scale. Specially, the slot cost of series is thirty percent lower than
the Panamax series. On the other hand, save fuel per slot will contribute reductions
in CO2 emissions ton and environmental effects. However the transit time plays a
vital role in profitable operation. The minimum port time, less than twenty four hours
will be contributing favourable economical service speed. The port time depends on
key factors such as number of containers loaded/unloaded, crane speed and
number of cranes for one carries. Apart from that, time per port can be minimized by
increasing total handling speed and minimizing port entry/exit time. Thus required
service time [twenty four hour] can be achieved by; increasing the number of cranes
for particular ship, improving the number of movements per hour or, both
simultaneously. Therefore gang output play a vital role in achieving expected ship’s
output. But, port entry/exit time is almost constant in particular port. However the
port navigation department shall minimize the unnecessary pilotage delays, while
servicing new Malacca-Max series.
The gross under keel clearance in harbour basin and approach channel shall be
complying some minimum requirements. Besides,the depth of approach channels,
turning circles, clearance alongside the berth and berthing structure are crucial in
accommodating new Malacca-Max series. The sufficient powerful tug boats, super-strength
fenders and bollards are critical factors. Apart from that, topographical,
oceanographically and hydrographical conditions such as, tide, wind, current and
waves play a vital role .As a result, current pressure ,wind forces and ship
movement are crucial. Therefore, It may indeed be a challenge if the giant vessel
has to be moved from the route for which she was originally designed, as there may
be few alternative ports to which she can accommodate at her full draught, 21 m.
A major issue in constructing Malacca-Max series is, hull strength and local panel
strength. The ship designers, classification societies and builders have to pay
particular attention on not only brittle crack arrest design but also on minimizing the
effect of whipping and springing in their ship model. With the increases the thickness
of plate, the fracture toughness of the steel plate will decrease. However, extremely
thick steel plates have more threat to brittle fractures leading to large scale failure.

Therefore, both brittle crack propagation and brittle crack initiation have to be
considered during hull designing. The effects of the bow flare slamming and aft end
slamming can be more with hull structure. Container securing arrangements are
crucial in minimizing the container overboard scenario in heavy weather. Apart from
these, ship designers, classification societies and builders have to ,sit on one table
to conduct group discussions on higher performance ship model which consist
bearable building cost for owner and reasonable maintenance cost compared to
trading income in new series. Besides, environmental burdens are crucial in new
Malacca-Max series.
The owners are satisfied with the higher profit margin of new series. Thus they will
consider reducing the number of port calls to minimize the operation costs.
Therefore the transhipment terminal in major shipping routes has been developed.
The goals of the container terminal operators are to reduce cost per container
moved, sail the vessel almost fully loaded and to offer a reliable service for customer
by using minimum energy utilizing all the available resources including land,
equipment and labour force .The goals of the ship operators are,to reduce the cost
per container moved and to offer a reliable service for customers by using minimum
energy utilizing the all available space by sailing in almost fully loaded condition.
- 67 -
7.2 Port and terminal efficiency
More efficient terminals denote the, faster Quay Cranes, lower cost per move and
higher throughput density per unit area. Thus, the waypoints of the terminal
efficiency can be classified into three stage; Quay Cranes, transport and storage.
The each stage has to compromise with each other to minimize the unnecessary
waiting delays.
Thus, number of Quay Cranes has to be appointed to achieve desired service time.
The available option for Quay Cranes are, single trolley, single trolley with platform,
dual trolley, single trolley-tandem and dual trolley-tandem. Apart from these, there is
quay Crane in lifting capacity of, three FEUs or six TEUs.
The scope of the transport stage shall minimize the empty travel and loaded travel.
Reach Stacker [RS], Straddle Carrier [SC], Shuttle Carrier [ShC], Automated Guided
Vehicle [AGV], Automated Straddle Carrier [ASC] and Terminal Tracker [TT] are
available options for horizontal transport. However, Reach Stacker is inefficient in

high throughput terminals. AGV requires high investment, and is suitable for terminal
in high labour cost. The end loaded terminal layout has some operational
advantages than side loaded terminal layout. Thus, it can separate the waterside
traffic from landside traffic and minimize the loaded and empty travel distance.
Besides, it’s a low energy consumption method and provides good access for
maintenance in case of mechanical breakdown.
Under storage stage, number of yard cranes have to be appointed to minimize the
waiting time. The scope of this stage shall be minimizing waiting time, empty travel
and shuffle moves. The available yard handling cranes are, Rail Mounted Gantry
cranes [ RMG] ,Rubber Tired Gantry cranes [ RTG] and Double Rail Mounted
Gantry cranes [ DRMG]. The main difference between RMG and RTG is, RMG is
fully automated but RTG is quite difficult to automate. Besides, RMG allow a high
stacking density. However, DRMG is good investment to minimize the handshake
area. Apart from that, it has high productivity compared to others.
The fully electrical terminal equipments contribute to high efficiency than the diesel
driven equipment. Apart from that electrical driven equipment can contribute more to
minimize the annual co2 emissions per ton. The Alternative Maritime Power system,
[AMP] which is manufactured by Cavotec Ltd, will be an obvious solution to reduce
carbon and nitrogen dioxide emissions in container ports and terminals. However,
there are some design challenges for automated terminal. Thus it requires higher
investments and the lead time for these developments will take 5 to 6 years.
7.3 Limitation of the project and further research
I have encountered several limitations in conducting this research. Carol M. Roberts
argued that limitations in any dissertation are those aspects that are beyond the
control of the researcher, and part of the ethics of writing projects is to honestly state
the limitations so the reader could give a better judgement on the results and
outcomes (Roberts, 2004: p147).The main limitation is the lack of academic
publications and journals on the operational efficiency of the Malacca-Max container
series. Another limitation is my lack of experience in various physical configurations
of container ports and terminals.
This study was engaged in assessing the two evolving themes, the operational
challenges and constructional challenges. In this research I have studied the
minimum requirements which have to be fulfilled in port and terminal to
- 68 -

accommodate Malacca-Max series and configuration of container ports and
terminals. Besides, technical issues which are relevant in design and constructing
process of Malacca-Max series. However, statistics and date which support this
work are subject to change. Therefore, further research in this area shall be focused
on up-to date academic publication and journals.
Finally, in this research, the following questions emerge; whether and how much will
the ship owner benefit from being the owner of Malacca- Max series? Whether and
how much will the ship operator benefit from operating of Malacca- Max series ?
Whether and how much will the port and terminal operator benefit from providing
servicing for Malacca-Max series ?. My suggestion for future work is investigation of
these questions.
- 69 -

References:
Books
1] Alvesson M., Deetz S. (2000)Doing critical management research, SAGE pp 58
2] Boslaugh S. (2007). Secondary data sources for public health: a practical guide,
Cambridge University Press,pp41
3] Carl A.T(1988)Port Design, Guidelines and Recommendations ,Norway: Tapir
Publishers
4] Hilde M.,Eddy V.D.V ,Thierry V.(eds)(2009)Future Challenges for the Port and
Shipping Sector,London: Informa pp 63-155
5] Khalid B.( 2009)Port Operations,Planning & Logistcs,London: Informa
6] Niko W.,Francois B.,Frans W.,Yves G.,Dennie V.K(2000)Malacca-
Max[2] ,Container shipping Network Econom,Delft:Delft University Press Satellite
7] Niko W.,Marco S.,Frans W.(1999)Malacca-Max ,The Ultimate Container
Carrier,Design Innovation in Container Shipping ,Delft:Delft University Press
8] Roberts, Carol M. (2004). The dissertation journey: a practical and
comprehensive guide to planning, writing, and defending your dissertation, Corwin
Press.pp147
9] Robert J.M (2004)’ From ‘Anyport’ to ‘superterminal’,Conceptual perspectives on
containerization and port infrastructures’ in: David P.,Brian S.(eds)Shipping and
Ports in the Twenty-first Century,London:Routledge,pp123-141
10] Steenken D., Vob S., Stahlbock R. (2004),"Container terminal operation and
operations research - a classification and literature review",New York:Springer
11] UNCTAD (2010) Review of Maritime Transport,Geneva: United Nations.pp 85
[Online]Available from:www.unctad.org/en/docs/rmt2010_en.pdf [ Accessed 02nd
May 2011]
- 70 -

Journals/ Articles
1] ABS,Containerships-Classification,Cerification & Related Services [Online]
Available From:www.eagle.org/eagleExternalPortalWEB/ ShowProperty/../
ContainershipCp
2] Class NK( 2009)Guidelines for Container Stowage and Securing Arrangements:
Class NK,[Online]Available From:
www.classnk.or.jp/hp/Publications/Publications_image/gl_container_e.pdf
[Accessed 30th May 2011]
3] Class NK( 2011)Guidance for Undergoing Class Maintenance Surveys: Class NK
4] ClassNK(2009)Guidelines on Brittle Crack Arrest Design, September
2009,Tokyo:Nippon Kaiji Kyokai
5] Class NK( 2010)’ Development of Guidelines on Brittle Crack Arrest Design-Brittle
Crack Arrest Design for Large Container Ships’,Class NK Magazine,62nd ed,pp06-08
6] Class NK( 2010)’ Development of Brittle Crack Arrest Toughness K ca Test
Method-Brittle Crack Arrest Design for Large Container Ships-2’,Class NK Technical
Bulletin’,28,pp63-71
7] Class NK( 2010)’ Development of Guidelines on Brittle Crack Arrest Design-Brittle
Crack Arrest Design for Large Container Ships-1’,Class NK Technical
Bulletin,28,pp53-62
8] Class NK( 2010)’Validation of a Numerical Method for Whipping and Springing
Responses of a Ultra-Large Container Ship’,Class NK Technical Bulletin’,28,pp45-
52
9] ESCAP(2007)Regional Shippng and Port Development,Container Traffic
Forecast,2007 UpdatesNew York:United Nations pp ii , [Online]Available
from:www.unescap.org/ttdw/Publications/TIS_pubs/.../pub_2484_fulltext.pdf
[ Accessed 15th May 2011]
10] Levinson M. (2008) Freight Pain: The Rise and Fall of Globalization. Foreign
Affairs,87 (6), pp 133-140
- 71 -

11] Monaco M. F., Moccia L., Sammarra M. (2009) ‘Operations Research for the
Management of a Transhipment Container Terminal: The Gioia Tauro Case’.
Maritime Economics & Logistics( 11), pp. 7–35.
12] Saanen, Y. A. (2004). “An approach for designing robotized marine container
terminals,Doctoral dissertation”, Delft:Delft University of Technology. pp 27-210
[Online]Available from:www.tudelft.nl/live/binaries/6574a4d3-4a8c-
440f.../ProefschriftYvo.pdf[ Accessed 20th July 2011]
13] Verbraeck A.,Fumarola M.,Duin J.H.R,Versteegt C.( 2008) Choosing the Optimal
Mode of Operation for Marine Container Terminals [Online]Available
From:repository.tudelft.nl/assets/uuid:8eb1a894-6f17-4219.../Hu%20H.pdf
Presentations/lectures
1] ABS(2006) Overview of the development of ultra large container carrier:where
next?/ Bill S.,Donald L.,Peter T.,Wong K.M[Presented at the Boxship 2006,Shanghai]
[Online]Available from: www.eagle.org/eagleExternalPortalWEB/...
/OverviewDevUltraLarge [Accessed 10th May 2011]
2] ABS(2006) Technology advances in design and operation of large container
carriers/ Bill S.,Donald L.,Peter T.,Wiernicki C.[Presented at the Design & Operation
of Container ship conference,London] [Online]Available from:
www.eagle.org/eagleExternalPortalWEB/.../TechAdvancesDesignOperation
[Accessed 19th May 2011]
3] Lloyd’s Registry(2003) A review of prospects for ultra-large container ships and
implications for the supportfleet/ David T.,Andrew P.[Presented at the Boxship 2003]
[Online]Available from: www.osclimited.com/releases/Boxship2003.pdf [Accessed
05th May 2011]
4] Lloyd’s Registry(2006) Design challenges of large container ships/ David T
[Presented at the ICHCA 2006,Singapore] [Online]Available From:
www.lr.org/Images/ICHCAPaperv3_tcm155-175195.pdf [Accessed 07th May 2011]
- 72 -

5] Robert C.( 2011),’The Business Case for Container Port Automation’.
Unpublished conference proceedings. Paper presented at Conference on The
Future of Automated Container Terminals, Imperial College London, 5th April.
6]TOC Europe (2010)Where next for automation? Future best practice in terminal
layout and operation[Presented at the TOC-Europe,2010].[Online]Available from:
www.tocevents-europe.com/files/speaker_21_michael_richter.pdf [ Accessed 10th
May 2011]
Websites
1] Containerisation International online database(2011)[Online]Available from:
http://www.ci-online.co.uk/ [Accessed 2 July 2011]
2] Netpas Distance online database (2011) [Online] Available from:
http://www.netpas.net[Accessed 10 July 2011]
Trade Publications
1] Carly F.(2011) ‘Shipper’s Perspective in focus-Time for change’,Port
Strategy,1011(6),pp 17
2] Gaston T.,Marleen V.D.K.(2011) ‘The challenges for a port to become sustainable
and green’,Green Port, Summer ed, pp 16-17
3] Martin R.(2011) ‘Planning Innovation in Design-Meeting today’s challenges’,Port
Strategy,1011(6),pp 22-23
4] Michael K.(2011) ‘Environment Saving Energy- A bundle of energy’,Port
Strategy,1011(6),pp 24-25
5] Mike G.,Chris R.(2011) ‘Beyond the port fairways:Trends in the carbon footprint of
the deep sea container shipping industry’,Green Port, Summer ed, pp 28-29
- 73 -

Videos
1] Cavotecfilms(2008)Alternative Maritime Power Supply movie [ Online ] Available
from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_airTHnuANM [Accessed 10 July 2011]
2] Cavotecfilms(2008)Cavotec MoorMaster [ Online ] Available from:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOyHlxmFxHg [Accessed 20 July 2011]
- 74 -

Appendices
Appendix 1: Calculation Sheet for Initial Design
- 75 -
Ship Dimensions
Length between perpendiculars (Lpp) 382.00 m
Length along waterline (Lwl) 390.00 m
Moulded Breadth (Bmld) 60.00 m
Draught Fwd (Tfwd) 21.00 m
Draught Aft (Taft) 21.00 m
Mean Draught (Tm) 21.00 m
Transom Area (At) 1.00 m^2
Transverse bulb area (Abt) 0.10 m^2
Centre of bulb area above keel line (hb) 0.00 m
Wetted appendage area (Sapp) 71.00 m^2
Hull underwater surface area (S) 0.00 m^2
Half angle of entrance (Ie) 12.00 deg
Propeller Dimensions
Propeller diameter (D) 9.500 m
Mean pitch ratio (P/D) 1.000
Propeller Expanded Area Ratio (Ae/A0) 0.600
Number of propeller blades (Z) 6
Clearance of propeller with keel line 0.500 m
Number of propellers 1
Hull Form Parameters
Block Coefficient (Cb) 0.625
Midship Section Coefficient (Cm) 0.980
Prismatic Coefficient (Cp) 0.625
Waterplane Area Coefficient (Cwp) 0.750
Longitudinal Centre of Bouyancy -0.75 %
Stern shape parameter ( Cstern) 0

- 76 -
Derived Hull Factors
Length of run (Lr) 138.81 m
Ship Volumetric Displacement (Ñ) 300825 m^3
Ship Displacement (Δ) 293488 tonnes
Longitudinal centre of bouyancy -0.75 %
Half angle of hull entrance Ie) 12.00 deg
Hull underwater surface area (S) 28211.6 m^2
Form Factor (1+k) 1.142
Total TEUs Capacity 18250
Principal Speed ( Vs) 23.0 knots
Sources: Based on the Holtrop and Menen series of papers

Appendix 2: Slot costs and TCE of larger container ships
Source: Niko and Marco,1999 ;Frans et al.,1999.pp 22
Appendix 3: Transport cost between Rotterdam and Singapore
( deepsea only)
- 77 -

Appendix 4: Ship Motion & Ship Accelerations
- 78 -
Source: ClassNK, October 2009,pp 30

Assessment of the Main Challenges in the Construction and Operation of Malacca-Max Container Carrier

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie Assessment of the Main Challenges in the Construction and Operation of Malacca-Max Container Carrier

Ähnlich wie Assessment of the Main Challenges in the Construction and Operation of Malacca-Max Container Carrier (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Assessment of the Main Challenges in the Construction and Operation of Malacca-Max Container Carrier