A Simplified Method for the Estimation of the Natural Roll Frequency of Ships in Heavy Weather S.Krger, F.

Kluwe, TU Hamburg- Harburg

1. Background and Motivation

Several incidents where either cargo was lost or the ship capsized have drawn the attention of the Maritime community to the fact that under certain conditions, sudden large roll angles can occur. These sudden large roll angles typically occur in head or following seas, and they are related to significant alterations of the stability of the ship in waves. In extreme cases, the stability may become negative on the wave crest and the ship experiences large roll angles simply due to the related stability loss. However, it is also possible that even if the ship has sufficient (or excessive) stability, large rolling angles can occur which then result in large transversal accelerations and cargo damage. Typically, these situations occur if the encounter frequency of the waves is in resonance to the natural roll frequency of the ship. As the rolling of ships in heavy weather is equivalent to a forced oscillation, it is obvious that a resonance situation will always occur if the excitation frequency is equal to the systems eigenfrequency or to higher orders of that eigenfrequency. Most dangerous is the so called 2:1 resonance, where two pitch cycles coincide with one roll cycle. If the stability of the ship is low, the related roll period takes large values and this situation can occur in following sea scenarios at slow or medium ship speeds, where also the encounter period takes large values. If on the other hand the roll period is small due to high stability, this situation can be found at slow or medium speeds in head seas. In the so called 1:1 resonance, the eigenfrequency of the ship coincides with the encounter frequency of the waves, which results in a situation where one pitch cycle coincides with one roll cycle. For typical ships, this situation is possible in followings seas at higher speeds when the stability is more on the low side. However, not all possible resonances or close to resonance situations must necessary result in the occurrence of large roll angles. If the exciting forces are sufficiently small (this means that stability alterations are below a certain threshold value) or if the roll damping is large enough, the roll motion may remain moderate. On the other hand it is also possible that large roll angles may occur in situations that are far beyond a resonance situation. Therefore, the only accurate way to actually judge upon the roll angles in a specific head or following sea scenario is actually a full numerical simulation. On the other hand, there are some practical applications where it would be useful if a decision could be made to check if a critical resonance situation is actually met. This would require a comparison of the encounter frequency (or period) and the natural roll frequency (or period) of the ship. The latter is mostly computed based on the still water situation for small roll angles. Based of the comparison of that natural roll period and the encounter period it is then often decided whether a situation may be potentially dangerous or not. In some cases, this procedure may be successful, but there have been also many cases been identified where this rough assumption does not lead to correct results. This is due to the fact that even in still water, the roll period

may actually depend on the roll amplitude, and further, that the ship may significantly alter its roll period when operated in waves. As a matter of fact, for these reasons it is practically not possible to judge upon a potentially dangerous situation if the estimation of the ships natural roll period is based on the still water approach for small roll angles only. But it may be useful to improve this simple estimation of the natural roll period to get closer to potentially dangerous situations in possible resonances, although the method which is suggested below will not be accurate enough to fully replace a dynamic simulation.

2. The Principle of Natural Roll Period Determination

Fig. 1: Determination of natural roll period by roll decay test (left) and relevant righting levers for Stillwater, crest and trough The principle determination of the natural roll period is shown in Fig.1. The left side shows a typical roll decay test which may also (theoretically) be performed with a full scale ship. The ship is inclined to an initial heel o (which is small for practical reasons) and then released. The result is an oscillation around the static heel of equilibrium, and the ship oscillates in its own natural roll period. As the oscillation is damped, the amplitudes decrease. From such a test, the natural roll period and the damping increment can be determined. As the ship may be idealized as a one degree of freedom oscillation system, its natural period can also theoretically be determined based on a characteristic restoring moment and a characteristic mass moment of inertia. This leads to the well known formula of Weiss:

GM denotes the metacentric height of the ship and i the roll radius of gyration, which is obtained from the mass moment of inertia around the x- axis of the ship and the actual deplacement. For most ships, the roll radius of gyration (including section added mass) can be approximated by 0.4 times ships beam, but for some ships having a high superstructure or large amount of deck cargo, i can amount up to 0.45B. It is very important to note that the formula expresses the restoring lever by the metacentric height, which is only possible if the righting lever follows roughly the

GM - line. For the given roll decay test with a small initial roll angle of 5 Degree, the roll oscillation takes place between the points denoted by 1 and 1 in Fig. 1, right. For this oscillation with a small amplitude, the linearization of the righting h lever by GM is sufficiently accurate, as both points 1 and 1 lie more or less exactly on the GMline. But it is well known that the righting lever h follows that linearization only for small roll angles, and consequently, the roll period determined by such kind of linearization becomes then inaccurate for a large amplitude roll motion. E.g. for a roll oscillation between the points 2 and 2 the actual restoring moment would be significantly smaller than the linearization, as the actual righting lever is completely below the GM-line. Consequently, the related natural roll period must be larger. This is shown in Fig.2.

Fig. 2: Roll decay test for a large initial Roll angle (left) and principle of the determination of an effective GM There, a roll decay test for the same ship as Fig.1, left was simulated, but for a large initial roll angle. In comparison to Fig.1, the roll damping was reduced to keep the large roll amplitudes for a longer time. The initial roll oscillation is equivalent to the points denotes by 2 and 2 in Fig. 2, right. It can clearly bee seen that initially, the natural roll period amounts to roughly 3 roll cycles per 50 s (16.7s), whereas after the decay of the roll amplitude the natural roll period is decreased to about 4 roll cycles in 50 s (12.5s). This is in line with the non linear characteristics of the related righting lever curve in Fig.1, right: At larger heeling angles, the righting lever is significantly below the GM-line. Consequently, if the initial GM-value is used to determine the natural roll period, this will result in a roll period being too small for a large angle roll oscillation. From the resulting roll periods it can be seen that a correct roll period determination for the large roll oscillation should be based on a GM value of about 56% of the initial GM valid for small roll angles. Taking into account the characteristics of the righting levers, this becomes obvious. If on the other hand the ship has a significant positive amount of form stability (the righting levers will be above the GM- line), then the linearization of the problem with respect to the initial GM will always result in roll periods being too large. As the area below the righting lever curve is a measure of the energy which is stored in the oscillating system, a so called effective GM can be determined by the principle of area balance as shown in Fig 2 right: The effective GM for the oscillation 2 2 is

determined by obtaining the same area under the righting lever curve A2 compared to A1.

3. Natural Roll Periods in Waves

If the ship operates in either following or head seas, the still water righting lever curve is not relevant any more. The effect of the waves may be approximated by the crest curve (the wave crest is at mid ship) or the wave trough curve (the trough is at mid ship). As it can be seen from Figs 1. or 2., right, the righting levers may differ significantly from the still water curve. In extreme cases, the initial stability may even become negative on the wave crest. If the initial GM is negative, a roll period determination by the Weiss formula is impossible. In this condition, the ship will not oscillate around the unstable upright condition, but around the static equilibrium which is denoted by EQ in Figs.1 or 2. But with respect to the roll motion in waves, the oscillation around that static equilibrium is not of interest, as the ship in waves oscillates roughly around the upright position at about zero heel. With respect to that condition, the momentary value of the roll acceleration is not obtained from an oscillation, but simply from the formula:

The roll acceleration is obtained from an effective heeling moment (based on the negative righting lever and the damping) and the vessel simply heels to the static equilibrium EQ and then starts to oscillate around this condition. For this oscillation around that equilibrium, the Weiss formula could again be used. But as mentioned above, this kind of oscillation is not of interest in this context. Because for all situations where the ship is close to a critical resonance, the crest is at mid ship when the vessel is nearly in an upright position, and the vessel simply starts to heel close to the static equilibrium. The ship is then rightend up again when the crest passed towards her end. In this condition, the trough curve is valid. As in this position the ship has sufficient positive initial stability, the roll oscillation is again well defined. So the vessel permanently is in one extreme situation where the roll oscillation around the upright position is not existent or the other one where the roll oscillation is governed by the trough righting levers. Therefore, it is suggested to use an averaged crest- trough righting lever curve instead of the still water righting lever to better take into account the effects of the sea state. This concept follows a well known approach by Wendel that was used to define the stability standard of the German Navy BV 1033. Therefore, according to the present proposal, the natural roll period of a ship in a natural seaway should be determined as follows: The natural roll period shall be based on an artificial stability curve which is the average of the crest and trough righting lever curve in a reference wave. Not the initial GM shall be used as input for the Weiss formula, but an effective GM which is based on the area equality below this artificial righting lever curve and the linearization for a certain angle of interest.

This concept is tested on two extreme cases in the following sections.

4. Test applications
4.1. Negative form stability

Fig. 3: Polar diagrams of numerical capsizing simulation of a capsizing accident (left) and related righting levers (right). The concept is applied to a full scale capsizing accident of a RoRo ferry. The ship capsized in following seas at about 16 kn speed and an encounter angle of abt.15 degree in waves having a significant period of abt. 7.5-8.5s (equivalent significant wave length 88- 113m). The polar diagrams, left, show the limiting significant wave heights as function of course and speed which lead to a capsize. The numerical simulations of that accident (Fig.2, left) show two areas in following seas where the ship is extremely endangered: One area at about 6-8 knots and one area at about 15- 17 knots. These are related to the typical resonances, namely 1:1 at about 16 kn and 2:1 at about 6 knots (the rough centre of these areas). From Fig. 2, right, the fact can be derived that the initial GM of the still water righting lever curve amounts to 1.68 m and is valid for small angles only. Based on the still water righting lever curve and the related initial GM, a still water natural roll period of 13.3. s can be computed for small angles. If the 1:1 or 2:1 resonance in a wave having a significant period of 8.5 s shall be met, this would result in the following critical ship speeds: The 1:1 following sea resonance should be found at a speed of 9.63 kn, and the 2:1 should not be possible in following seas (it is computed at 7.5 kn which means head seas). Compared to the directly computed resonance areas, these results are completely wrong. The reason for this becomes clear when the righting levers are regarded, as the still water curve does not at all represent either the trough or crest condition, and that further, the initial GM does not represent even the still water stability at all. Based on the approach suggested in this paper, the problem should be linearized based on the crest trough average (the magenta curve in Fig. 3, right) and the area equivalent. This would in fact lead to an effective GM of about 0.68m (if an angle of 40 Degree is used as reference) and a natural roll period of 21s. Based on these 21s

natural roll period computed for 113 m wave length and 5m wave height, the 1:1 following sea resonance is computed at 15.9 knots and the 2:1 resonance at 5.1 knots. This fits much better to the real situation and shows that a simple approach can in principle give useful results if the problem is linearized more accurately. 4.2. Positive form stability

Fig. 4: Polar diagrams of numerical roll motion simulation of a cargo loss accident (left) and related righting levers (right). The right polar diagram is valid for a roll angle of 15 Degree, the left for a roll angle of 40 Degree. As alternative test case, a cargo loss event is analyzed. Large roll angles on a large container vessel occurred in following seas at a speed of about 21 kn, encounter angle 10 Degree, equivalent significant wave length about 170m, significant wave height abt 5-6 m. The polar plot indicates the 1:1 following sea resonance clearly at about 18 kn and the 2:1 following sea resonance roughly at about 4-5 knots. Based on the still water righting lever curve and an initial GM of 0.65m, a natural roll Stillwater roll period of 32.1 s is calculated (for small angles). Based on this value, the 1:1 resonance should be found at 21.7 kn and the 2:1 at 11.30 knots. These values are actually not as bad as for the previous case, but still remarkably inaccurate It must be noted that the difference between the still water righting lever and the trough crest average is not very large for this example, which makes the approximation better than before. However, if the natural roll period is determined from the crest trough average and 40 degree area equivalent, this results in an effective GM of 1.1 m and a roll period in waves of about 24.4 s. Based on these 24.4 s, the 1:1 resonance should be at 18.7 kn and the 2:1 resonance should be at about 4.7 knots. Both values are much better in line with the numerical simulations for both large and smaller roll angles compared to the estimation by using still water initial metacentric height.

4. Conclusions
A simple straightforward method was suggested to better estimate the natural roll period of a ship in heavy weather. The method is still based on the linearization of the roll motion in waves, but uses an effective GM which is based on the crest trough

average of the righting lever curves in a specific reference wave. The reference wave length may be derived from the significant period of a given wave spectrum. As the method still linearizes the roll problem, the results are not correct enough to actually replace fully nonlinear simulations. But two practical applications have shown that the estimation of critical resonance situations will in most cases be more reliable than a simple guess based on the still water roll period for small roll angles.