SNAME Transactions, Vol. 105, 1997, pp.

171-189
List Control Systems
Frank H. Sellars, Member, Flume Stabilization Systems, John P. Martin, Member, Flume Stabilization
Systems, William L. Schultz, Visitor, Hyde Marine Systems
ABSTRACT
The types of ships that normally apply automatic list control systems are reviewed and the
reasons for the application are summarized. Various types of list control systems that are
commercially available are enumerated in detail and the differences between these systems
are explained. Design Considerations that could define selection criteria are listed,
including some potential problem areas.
NOMENCLATURE
INTRODUCTION
LCS = list control system
HPU = hydraulic power unit
TDH = total dynamic head
B = distance between list control tanks
H, = port tank level
H, = starboard tank level
H, = head added by pump
c
= head loss due to friction
= blower discharge head
AD
= cross duct area
Pa
= atmospheric pressure
PP
= air pressure in port tank
P,
= air pressure in starboard tank
g
= blower discharge pressure
= liquid volumetric flow
Q, = air volumetric flow
4
= list angle
V,
= fluid velocity
V, = air velocity
2
= fluid flow loss coefficient
= air flow loss coefficient
y, = liquid specific gravity
Ya
= air specific gravity
Excess list of a ship during cargo handling operations
can be detrimental. Ferries and RO/RO vessels use
loading ramps that are installed on either the bow, stern, or
the side of the ship. These ramps usually cannot sustain
lists over 2 to 3 degrees without damage. Container ship
loading and shipboard crane operations are delayed or
interrupted if list exceeds 5 degrees.
Modern cargo liner operations depend on rapid loading
and off loading to maintain schedule. Automatic list
control systems have been developed to rapidly transfer
large quantities of water (2,000 to 110,000 gallons per
minute) from side to side for this purpose. These list
control systems consist of pairs of wing ballast tanks and
crossover piping, a mechanical device to transfer water and
an automatic electronic control system to sense list and
take the necessary corrective action. Systems that have
been developed include centrifugal or axial flow pump
configurations as well as processes that use compressed air
to move the water.
The purpose of this paper is to review the factors
that have led to the development of modem, high capacity
171
that are in use and commercially available .
Some aspects of list control system design criteria
are considered, including sizing of tanks and cross over
ducts, selection of a prime mover and system
arrangement. Automatic control system requirements are
discussed.
experienced. In the manual mode, the flow direction is
selected by hand and the flow rate may or may not be
controlled electronically, depending on the technical
capabilities of the mechanical system being controlled.
The manual mode will allow the ship to be pre-heeled to
one side in anticipation of a large load being placed on the
opposite side.
LIST CONTROL SYSTEM APPLICATIONS
All ships have some form of list control capability
using the ballast system. However, if the system is not
automated, considerable time and effort is required to line
up valves and start and stop pumps. In addition, ballast
pumps have relatively low flow rates. Ships that often
employ automatic list control systems include container
ships, roll-on/roll-off (RO/RO) cargo carriers, ferries,
heavy lift ships and side casting dredges.
MOVING A WEIGHT
RO/RO vessels deliver wheeled cargos of a variety of
sizes within tight schedules. They often use jumbo stern
ramps that are as wide as practicable (Argyriadis 1979).
The torsional flexibility of the ramp limits the list that can
be accommodated when it is deployed to 2 or 3.
Accordingly, list control systems (LCS) have been
designed to keep list below this, or on an even keel,
without interrupting cargo handling.
Considering containerships, list control systems that
maintain list within 2 will expedite placement of
containers in cells. Some operators will apply an initial
list of 1 outboard of the pier to accommodate deck cargo.
COUNTERBAL~WCING
WITH
LIST CONTROL TANKS
Heavy lift crane vessels use the LCS to keep list EFFECT OF CARGO LOADING
within crane operating limits (approximately 5). FIGURE 1
DESCRIPTION, PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS AND
APPLICABILITY OF LIST CONTROL SYSTEMS
The list control system moves water between sets of
wing ballast tanks to counter-balance an off-center load or
the transverse movement of cargo. Figure 1 shows how
loading cargo on a ship will cause list and how the
movement of water between the list control tanks will
correct this list.
The heart of the system is a reversible device which
is controlled by an electronic control system for the
purpose of moving water between wing tanks on the port
and starboard sides. There are usually options for use in
either an automatic mode or a manual operating mode. In
the automatic mode, the flow and its direction are selected
and controlled electronically to correct any list angle
An additional feature of some list control systems is
that the transverse metacentric height (GM), a measure of
the stability of the ship, can be measured in port, prior to
sailing. If a computer based electronic control system is
available, the hydrostatic characteristics of the ship and
the capacity curves of the list control tanks can be loaded
into the memory of the electronic control system. The
forward and aft draft marks either can be entered
manually or obtained via a link with a draft indication
system to determine the displacement. Water is
transferred between the list control tanks until the ship
assumes a pre-programmed angle. The computer can
determine the heeling moment from the tank capacity
tables and the change in tank levels. Since the
displacement and heel angle are known, the GM can be
calculated with reasonable accuracy.
172 Design Session
Several types of list control systems have been
developed. Those that have been installed recently
encompass systems that control an existing pump of
acceptable capacity as well as dedicated systems that
include axial flow pumps with either constant speed,
variable speed, or variable pitch drives or that use a
forced draft blower to transfer water by air pressure in
place of a pump. The type of LCS selected depends on
the vessel size and operational requirements. Electronic
control systems that use existing high capacity pumps
(such as a ballast or fire pump) have been developed to
minimize list. Such systems are generally used when
heeling moment correction requirements are relatively low
and ship operations do not require a short port stay.
Independent heeling pumps with variable speed/pitch
or blower systems are used when heeling moments are
large enough to cause uncorrected list of over 1.5
degrees. For longer cycle times and lower heel moment
requirements, but still requiring a higher capacity than can
be provided by an existing pump (such as occur on
passenger ferries or container feeder ships) a constant
speed axial flow or propeller pump system is often
selected, since its cost is relatively low. For ships with
short turn around requirements and rapid cargo handling
rates, or that handle heavier cargos, such as RO/RO
vessels that carry trains or cassettes, and military Sealift
ships, either a variable speed/pitch propeller pump or a
compressed air system is selected. Operations that
require rapid application of a large heel control moment
such as heavy lift vessels with small allowable heeling
angles, would use a compressed air system or a large
capacity variable speed/pitch pump.
The system reaction time is the time required to react
to and correct a change in list. Variable speed/pitch
propeller pump systems and compressed air systems have
reaction times as short as several seconds. Constant
speed, reversible propeller pump control systems take
longer to react.
Selection Criteria for Heeling Tanks
All of these systems transfer ballast between two
designated list control or heeling tanks. As the transverse
distance between the centers of the tanks increases, the
amount of water that must be transferred to obtain the
necessary heeling moment decreases. Therefore, these
tanks are usually narrow wing ballast tanks located
directly inboard of the shell in the parallel middle body of
the hull. Such tanks generally are readily available in
typical RO/RO or container ship arrangements. The
height between the top and the bottom of the tank will
have an impact on the required power, and should be
minimized. In addition, the vertical distance between the
bottom of the tank and the pump will influence the suction
pressure and the onset of cavitation, so it should be
maximized. These considerations lead to the conclusion
that long, shallow, upper wing tanks should be selected as
the heeling tanks, when available.
The structure of the tanks should be checked to insure
good flow to the crossover duct. The vents or air
exchange ducts should be adequately sized to ensure that
the movement of large volumes of water will not draw a
vacuum or increase the discharge head. At the start of
list control operations, each tank should be approximately
50% full to allow the maximum heel correction moment
to be realized when the entire contents of one of the wing
tanks is transferred to the other.
List Control Using Available Pumps
Many container feeder ships, passenger ferries, or
smaller RO/RO ships will use an electronic heel control
system to operate an existing ballast or fire pump. When
operating as part of the heel control system, the pump
must be isolated from all other tanks except the heeling
tanks. The main components of the system are:
- the electronic control system
- an existing centrifugal pump
- remotely operated valves
- level sensors
A schematic of the system is shown in Figure 2. When
operating as a list control system, the pump is always
running, recirculating water through the tank with the
highest level when no heel correction is required. When
a preset threshold heel angle is exceeded, the valves in
the suction and discharge lines are positioned to allow
ballast transfer to offset the load. The transfer continues
until another preset angle the shut-off angle, which is
usually much lower than the threshold angle, is reached.
The electronic control system senses the list angle,
compares it to the threshold and shut-off values and
properly positions the valves to achieve either
recirculation (no transfer) or the movement of ballast to
correct the heel angle. An example of a valve
arrangement that will meet these requirements is shown in
Figure 2. This can generally be done with reasonably
simple circuit boards and a computer based system is not
necessary.
The pump selected should be the pump that has the
highest capacity, usually the ballast or the fire pump. The
advantage of the system is economic since a dedicated
pump is not necessary. However, capacity is usually
limited when compared to a dedicated system.
List Control Systems 173
._
a one or two stage design depending on the required
discharge head.
The electric motor is connected to the pump by a
coupling and gear box. The gearbox is lubricated by an
oil bath which is connected to a header tank which is
equipped with a low oil level indication.
Between oil seals and the ballast water, there is
another sealing chamber connected to another header tank.
The fluid in this sealing chamber protects the ballast water
against oil contamination and lubricates and cools shaft
seals.
The heeling indicator is mounted in a cabinet suitable
for separate bulkhead mounting. The list angle can be
monitored on the heel indicator. Tank levels are neither
measured nor used to control the system. Tank level
switches are installed to stop the pump if either of the list
control tanks is empty.
The electromagnetic butterfly valve is installed in the
crossover pipe and is operated by the control system. To
avoid water hammer, the valve is opened when the pump
is running and closed when the pump stops.
CONTROL USING AVAILABLE PUMPS
FIGURE 2
The valves are sized to handle the maximum flow
capacity and are remotely operated either pneumatically or
electrically. These same valves can sometimes be
arranged to fill and drain the tanks if the ballast pump is
used. In order to avoid water hammer, it is important
that the valves in the suction and discharge lines are
opened and closed simultaneously.
Level sensors are necessary to inform the control
system when either of the tanks is full or empty and
which tank has the highest level. High and low level
alarms will not allow operations to continue in a direction
that will aggravate the situation. The tank with the
highest level will be selected for recirculation when
transfer is not required.
The electronic control panel contains an analog
control system. An electronic amplifier receives a signal
proportional to heel from the inclinometer. The pre-
amplifier is set to zero at zero list and any heel will offset
the signal from the pre-amplifier. A starboard or port list
is sensed by a zero comparator which is used to control
the direction of rotation of the pump. A switch is
provided to shut off the electronic control and permit
manual control of the pump. Change to either automatic
or manual operations can be done at any time in the
operating cycle. Alarms will sound if the levels in either
the heeling tanks or the lubrication and seal header tanks
arc below minimums. In addition, if actual heel exceeds
a preset maximum angle, an alarm is given.
Use of a constant speed axial flow pump usually
results in a slow reaction time, The pump must be started
and the valve opened every time the heel angle differs
from an even keel. In addition, there is a reduction in
flow as head increases for constant speed operation.
Constant Speed Pump System
Variable Speed/Pitch Pump Systems
A list control system using a constant speed reversible
pump is shown in Figure 3. Main components include;
- the reversible propeller pump,
- a heel indicator and tank level switches,
- a butterfly valve, and
- an electronic control panel.
The reversible propeller pump is driven through a
gear box by an AC electric motor. The pump is reversed
by reversing the motor direction of rotation. Available
pump diameters range between about 10 to 16 and have
A list control system utilizing a submersible, variable
speed propeller pump is shown in Figure 4. A system
using a constant speed, variable pitch propeller pump
would be similar, with differences as noted below. The
main components are:
- a propeller pump,
- a butterfly valve,
- an electronic control unit with heel sensor, and
- tank level transmitters..
174 Design Session
The pump shown in Figure 4 is a submersible unit
installed in the crossover pipe. The tube housing the
pump forms part of the crossover duct. Pump sizes range
from 18 to 42 propeller diameter. The pump is driven
by a hydraulic motor that is mounted in a pod within the
housing. The direction of flow is fully reversible and
speed is adjustable within the speed range. There is a
fixed pitch, five bladed stainless steel propeller that, along
with the pod and hydraulic motor, is supported by a strut.
The tube, pod, strut and housing are fabricated of
corrosion resistant materials. The pod and strut are filled
after assembly with a water soluble grease. The
placement of the pump and motor within the pipeline
minimizes the space required and reduces the complexity
of the installation. Hydraulic connections to the motor
are run through the strut, They include two high pressure
lines and a single, low pressure case drain.
When the LCS is shut down or has been inactive for
some time while the system is in operation, flow between
the list control tanks is prevented by a wafer type
butterfly valve installed in the crossover piping. The
valve is assembled as a unit with a hydraulic actuator and
position indicating switches. The hydraulic actuator
allows remote operation from the electronic control unit.
The position of the valve is either completely open or
fully closed, which is confirmed by one of the position
switches. The materials used in the valve and position
switches are bronze and stainless steel to permit
submersible operation. An accumulator can be added to
the hydraulic system to shut the valve in the event of an
electric or hydraulic power loss. The closing time of the
valve is adjusted hydraulically or via the electronic control
system to avoid any water hammer problems.
The propeller pump and butterfly valve are driven by
a hydraulic power unit (HPU) located near the pump and
valve. This HPU is connected to and is controlled by the
electronic control unit. There is a main variable
displacement hydraulic pump to drive the propeller pump
and a gear pump for the butterfly valve actuator, both
mounted on a common shaft and driven by an AC electric
motor.
The direction and speed of rotation of the propeller
pump is determined by a control plate in the main
hydraulic pump. The position of this plate is set by
signals from an electronic control unit. The open/close
movement of the butterfly valve is controlled by a
directional solenoid valve mounted on the HPU.
Confirmation of the valve position is provided by
magnetic position indicating switches mounted on the
valve.
The electronic control unit, which is PC based,
allows selection of the operating mode and provides
control of pump speed and direction as well as operating
information and safeguards whenever the system is in use.
The LCS is started and operated from this unit. Either
automatic or manual operating modes are available.
The electronic control unit also houses the list
indication unit. This unit is an analog type electronic
clinometer, which is accurate to within l/10 degree. The
information sensed and transmitted by this clinometer is
used by the control unit, along with information on the
tank levels, to adjust the speed of the pump when the
system is operating in the automatic mode. All vital
operating, status and alarm information from other system
components such as the HPU, the butterfly valve and the
tank level transducers are fed into and displayed on the
control unit to permit coordinated and controlled operation
of the system.
The control software is structured so as to appear as
a single DOS program. However, its internal operation
is structured to operate as several independent tasks for
the purpose of acquiring data from sensors and controls;
updating data to displays, relays and the hydraulic system;
presenting status information to the graphics display;
receiving operator information; monitoring possible alarm
conditions and executing the commanded control function.
Each and all of these functions are arranged to operate
independently and simultaneously.
A continuous, instantaneous, accurate reading of the
levels in each of the list control tanks is an important
control feature. This is accomplished by submersible
pressure transducers installed in the tanks inside pipes
leading to the low point in the tank. This pipe is located
far from the pump to avoid turbulence from this source.
The information from these transmitters allows the control
system to adjust the pump speed to obtain the desired flow
rate while operating in either the automatic or manual
modes.
A similar system using a variable pitch propeller has
also been developed. The pump is driven by a constant
speed AC motor through a gear box, similar to the
constant speed system described in the previous section.
The same flow characteristics as the variable speed system
can be obtained by varying the propeller pitch via the
hydraulic system.
These systems have an advantage over the constant
speed systems detailed previously in that they do not have
to close the valve when there are no flow requirements.
The speed or the pitch can be adjusted to a dead head
setting, maintaining any level difference between the
heeling tanks without any flow. This difference allows
the system to respond immediately to any heel correction
requirements.
List Control Systems 175
CONSTANT SPEED PUMP SYSTEM
FIGURE 3
STARTERPANEL
WATER TRANSFER
BUlTERFLY V
PROPELLER PU
VARIABLE SPEED PUMP SYSTEM
FIGURE 4
176 Design Session
Compressed Air System
A list control system using compressed air to move
water between tanks is shown in Figure 5 . Principal
components include;
- an electronic control unit. (1,2)
- an air valve group with pneumatic controls, (4)
- a forced draft blower, (5)
- a tank level difference indicator, (6)
- a high water level sensor, (7), and
- a butterfly valve, (8)
The list control tanks and crossover pipe are similar
to other systems. Tank level indicators are not included,
however a tank level difference indication is provided.
An electric motor driven forced draft blower supplies
compressed air to the air-valve group. The valves are
controlled by the electronic control unit and can rapidly
pressurize one of the list control tanks and vent the other
to create a differential pressure that moves water between
the tanks. Flow rates of up to 110,000 GPM can be
achieved, which corresponds to the output of a 42 inch
diameter variable speed propeller pump at low discharge
heads. .
Tank water level measurements are not accomplished
for this system. However, the pressure difference
between tanks is sensed and used to give water level
difference. Maximum water level sensors are provided to
stop operation if the water level is too high.
A butterfly valve is installed in the crossover pipe
between tanks. It is not controlled by the electronic
control unit and is open whenever the LCS is operated.
COMPRESSED AIR SYSTEM
FIGURE 5
The forced draft blower runs continuously
whenever the LCS is in operation and the electronic
control unit operates the air valves. Manual and
automatic operating modes are provided. In automatic
operation, list angle measurements are used to select flow
direction to correct list.
The electronic control unit contains the roll sensing
unit and list control algorithms. Auxiliary circuits are
provided to distribute control signals ,and perform
surveillance and alarm functions.
This type of heel control system can also be used in
the same tanks that are used for at sea stabilization of roll
angles. Larger cross over ducts are required for this
purpose. In addition, some of the same equipment can
be used to control the movement of the stabilizer liquid.
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
List control system design considerations include
selection of the size of the heeling tanks and the water
transfer rate necessary to counter specified cargo handling
requirements. System hydraulii: performance must then
be developed and electronic controls optimized to satisfy
these requirements. Design criteria for system definition,
hydraulic performance, and programming the control
system are summarized below. .
The list correction requirements for each individual
ship will depend on what is loaded, how it is loaded, and
how fast it is being loaded. Some examples will illustrate
the diversity of cargo and stowage considerations that
have been factors in determining the specifications for a
list control system. One of the most severe cases is the
loading of railroad cars on a train ferry. The effect of the
cars on the stem ramp and on the cars immediately behind
them that are still on shore is such that the heel angles
must be minimized. The maximum requirement develops
when the outboard lane is being loaded and is quantified
by the transverse location of the track, the average weight
of the cars, and the loading speed. If the train is 10 cars
long, each car weighs 45 tons and is 40 ft. long, the
outboard track is 35 ft. off center, and the loading speed
is 5 ft./second, the total moment required to keep the ship
on an even keel is 18,000 ft. tons (45 tons/car x 10 cars
X 35 ft.). The correction rate necessary is about 11,800
ft. tons/ minute (45 tons/car divided by 40 ft./car X 35 ft.
X 5 ft./second X 60 seconds/minute).
A container feeder ship with a shipboard mounted
crane may be required to lift a 40 ton container located on
the quay about 75 ft. off the center line of the ship.
Considering not only the weight of the container but also
List Control Systems 177
the boom of the crane and the lifting gear, the total
transverse moment can be as high as 6,000 ft. tons,
relatively high for a small ship. The slewing rate of the
crane will determine the correction rate. (In many cases,
this rate must be considered in line with practical limits
on the speed of the movement of a pendant weight.) A
practical rate would be in the range of 6,000 ft. tons/
minute, allowing the maximum cargo movement to be
completed within one minute.
The list control systems on the SEALIFT ships for
the U.S. Military Sealift Command were sized to meet the
highest of two requirements:
- moving an MlAl tank athwart ship from shell to
shell in 1.5 minutes.
- moving a side-loading warping tug by crane from the
center line to 25 ft. outboard within 2.5 minutes.
Generally, the tug is controlling, due to the weight of
the crane boom and lifting gear, and results in a moment
of about 10,300 ft. tons and a rate of 4,120 ft.
tons/minute
To properly counteract these transverse moments, the
list control system will have to transfer ballast between
the designated heeling tanks. Size selection depends on
two interrelated main factors: the transverse moment that
can be developed and the time required to transfer the
ballast.
The maximum heeling moment generally can be
developed by the tanks if they are half full and the entire
contents of one tank is transferred to the other. Selecting
long, narrow tanks directly inboard of the shell will
maximize the distance between the transverse centers of
the tanks and minimize required capacity. Considering
the SEALIFT example given above, if the distance
between tank centers on these PANAMAX ships is about
100 feet, the required capacity of each tank is a minimum
of 206 tons (half capacity, 103 tons, will provide the
required moment of 10,300 foot tons when moved the 100
ft. distance between centers). The pump must be capable
of moving 41.2 tons/minute (4120/100) or about 10,800
GPM. If the tanks were wider, with the distance between
the transverse centers decreased correspondingly, the
capacity of the tanks and the pump would increase in
proportion.
The selection of the size of the cross-over connection
between the heeling tanks is made on the same flow
velocity basis as any pipeline. However, there may be
some additional consideration to minimize losses in the
connecting piping if an axial flow pump is selected, as the
power requirements for this pump type are very sensitive
to the total design head.
Hydraulic Performance
List control system hydraulic operating conditions are
complex when variable speed/pitch pumps are applied..
At the start of loading, the ship is on an even keel and the
list control tanks are equalized. Considering a RO/RO
cargo liner with a variable speed propeller pump as an
example, loading starts on one side of the ship and the
LCS automatically transfers water to the opposite side to
minimize list. This can continue until all the water has
been transferred to one side. During this phase of the
operation, the pump is moving water against an increasing
discharge head and RPM is increasing to maintain
required flow.
The second phase of loading then starts on the
opposite side. The pump is reversed and water is
transferred from the tank with a high level to the low
level tank. In this case, there is an initial gravity flow
that acts in combination with the pump. In some cases
the control system may be required to reverse the pump
direction to retard the gravity flow to obtain a controlled
flow and prevent over correction of the list angle. The
second phase can continue until the tank levels equalize
and gravity flow is no longer present. After this the
hydraulics are similar to the first phase. These operating
cycles may be repeated numerous times during loading or
unloading operations, depending on the size of the ship
and the heeling tanks and the loading pattern.
The hydraulic design of the system requires definition
of a four quadrant set of pump head flow curves for use
in designing the control system. The sign convention
used in this paper is flow and RPM to starboard are
positive. Positive head is defined as the difference
between port and starboard tank levels (corresponding to
a positive gravity flow). Accordingly, starboard (positive)
pump flow corresponds to negative head and port
(negative) pump flow corresponds to positive head.
A set of four quadrant head flow curves developed
from shipboard tests is shown in Figure 6. In the first
quadrant head and flow are positive and the data represent
combined gravity and pump flow to starboard. The
second quadrant with positive flow and negative head is
due to the pump only. The third quadrant has negative
flow and head and corresponds to a combination of pump
and gravity flow to port. The fourth quadrant has positive
head with negative flow and represents pumping to port
without gravity flow.
In addition to developing the pump design and
determining power requirements, tank vents must be
designed for the high flows required by the system. The
internal structure must have sufficient flow openings to
allow internal air and water flow. For example,
178
Design Session
LIST CONTROL SYSTEM PUMP CURVES
?n ---- -..__ VARIA~~ESPEEDPUMP!_P_TESTDATA.. .- ..----_
30 INCH DIAMETER PUMP
+ ORPM
-20 I
-30000 -20000 -10000 0 10000 20000 3oom
FLOW (CPM)
FOUR QUADRANT PUMP CURVES
FIGURE 6
I
GRAVITY FLOW TESTS AT 0 RPM
SHIPBOARD SYSTEM TESTS
20 -
I A+----
GRAVITY FLOW TESTS
FIGURE 7
GRAVITY FLOti
SHIPBOARD SYST
I TESTS
EM TESTS
.i, i/;----
GRAVITY FLOW TESTS
FIGURE 8
List Control Systems 179
transverse web frames at the bottom of tanks can obstruct gravity head and gravity flow are reduced to the desired
flow to the pump suction. programmed flow.
The system design must be such that water hammer
is avoided. This is usually accomplished by either
controlling the valve closing speed or the sequence of
starting and stopping the pump and opening and closing
the valve.
For combined pump and gravity flow it is assumed
that the total flow is the sum of a gravity induced
component and the pump flow at constant RPM and zero
head. The gravity flow component is approximated by;
GFLOW = A,*[2g(H,-HJK,];
(4)
Systems Using a Propeller Pump
Figure 4, shows the system schematic for a list
control system with a propeller pump installed in the cross
duct between the tanks. The tanks are vented to the
atmosphere and the liquid system energy balance is given
by;
where GFLOW is in cubic feet per second and K, =
system flow loss coefficient that includes losses due to
relative flow over pump internals.
(pp-p&/y, +H,-H,+B*sin(+) +HA-HL = 0 ; (1)
System head loss; H, = K,*V,/2g
The total dynamic head is defined as
TDH =H,-Hs +B*sin(+) + & , and
HA = -TDH -(B -~)l% ;
(2)
Total dynamic head at zero list provides a basis for pump
design when vent head loss is low.
The energy balance for the air vent is given by;
Shipboard tests results have been used to evaluate the
gravity head flow characteristics. A variable speed pump
was used to establish an initial differential head. Flow
was then reversed and a constant pump RPM was
programmed. Gravity head-flow curves for zero RPM
are shown in Figure 7. Test data for flow to port and
starboard are shown together with a calculation of
GFLOW in GPM for a loss coefficient K = 7. It should
be noted that estimates of the loss coefficient without the
pump are K = 5.4.
pa-pp = ya (1 +I(,)V,,2/2g ; (flow into tank)
pa-ps = -/a (1 +I$ )v,, 2/2g ; (flow out of tank)
and the vent head loss is;
Test results for gravity assisted flow to port at pump
speeds of 400 and 500 RPM are shown in Figure 8.
Gravity flow was calculated as the difference between the
total flow in the test and previous test results at constant
RPM and zero head. Test results for flow to port at zero
RPM are also included on the Figure and slightly lower
gravity flow was observed with the pump running.
Axial Flow Pump Design
Pp-Ps = - ?/a (I +K)*(v,, * + Ys2)/2g; (3)
A vent air velocity limit of 80 ft/sec is recommended.
Assuming a 300 mm vent diameter, air density of .0764
lbs per cubic foot and a loss coefficient of 2, the air flow
in each line is 28,180 GPM and the vent head loss is
0.75 ft This is less than 4 percent of the maximum
gravity head for representative ballast tanks. It is noted
that higher air flow velocities will quickly cause
appreciable vent head loss.
The design of propeller pumps is often based on
model or full scale test data which cover variations of
design parameters such as pitch ratio, blade area, number
of blades and section shape. Pump diameter is selected
on the basis of system head and flow requirements.
Performance enhancement can be provided by adding
stators in the crossover pipe and fitting a propeller hub.
Gravity Flow
Pump design performance is checked by shop tests of
completed units set up as close as possible to shipboard
conditions. It should be noted that it may not be possible
to simulate the highest levels of shipboard discharge heads
in the shop.
In cases of water transfer from a tank with a high
water level to the low level tank, a gravity flow can act in
combination with the pump or blower. For automatic
control, this will provide a high flow rate and reduce the
time required to correct a list. For manual control
programmed to maintain a constant flow rate, the pump
may have to be reversed to slow down flow until the
Systems Using Compressed Air
Figure 5 shows the system schematic for a LCS using
compressed air to move water. Consider the case where
the blower is discharging air into the port tank and the
starboard tank is vented to the atmosphere. There is no
pump, and the liquid system energy balance becomes;
180 Design Session
(P,-P,) = /I * TDH ; (5)
Assume an isothermal perfect gas and continuity, then
the specific gravity 7b of the compressed air out of the
blower is;
-/b = ya * w h (6)
For air flow into the port tank;
pp = & - x (1 +I&)v,2/2gA
(7)
For air flow out of the starboard tank;
Ps = Pa + 19*(I+KpX2/2g G-9
The air pressure difference between the tanks is
determined from equations (7) and (8) and combined with
the water system energy balance, equation (5), to obtain
the blower design discharge pressure.
PB = yl*TDH +~a[ 1 + (~./W)(Va2/2g)(_1_+K,, (9)
--2-
I 1 - (YJP,)(V, /2g)(l + &>I
The blower total differential pressure is pa-p a and
expressing this in feet of salt water, h,,,:
h, = TDH + (R/T)*[& -I- & ]
IJ -&I
where;
(10)
x, =( %hwa2~2g)(l + Kdp)
As =( -rJP,)(V,*/2g)(I + S,)
The blower air horsepower ( for salt water) is defined as;
AHP = h, Q, i516.91
And since Q, =Q
AHP = WHP + (p, /y, )(X, + A) (Q / 516.91); (11)
Cl-x, >
Power Requirements
The basic system power required is the water
horsepower (WHP), which is defined for salt water as;
WHP = GPM*TDH/3848 (12)
where: GPM = ballast water flow
TDH = total dynamic head (ft)
For systems using a propeller pump, the required
shaft horsepower is;
The propeller efficiency varies between 50% and
80 % depending on the flow. Figures 9 and 10 show
examples of propeller test data for the same fixed pitch
pump at various RPM values.
When a forced draft blower is used to transfer water;
where :
SHP = AHP/e,
eB = blower efficiency
AHP = air horsepower
(14)
The efficiency of axial flow blowers varies from 40% to
65% (Marine Engineering, 1992).
The pump or blower drive system efficiency, es ,
must also be considered. For example, the efficiency of
a hydraulic drive is in the range of 90 % .
The required motor horsepower (MHP) is then
determined by
MHP = SHP/e,es
(15)
where: eM is the motor efficiency which, for an
electric motor, varies form 85% at l/4
load to 93% at full load.
Design of List Control Tank Vents
Undersized LCS tank vent lines can significantly
reduce the water transfer rate achieved and jeopardize the
systems ability to control list. A design procedure that
uses the maximum air velocity in the vent line as a design
criteria has been used to size vent lines. The pressure
drop in the vent line must be checked to assure that the
size selected does not produce a vacuum on the suction
side during maximum expected flow (Crane Technical
Paper 410). For commercial construction, a design limit
air velocity of 80 ft/second is used, the limit used if ball
valves are installed in the vent line is 50 ft/sec. .Using
this approach, 12 inch diameter vents were selected for a
LCS that had a maximum flow rate of 27,000 GPM.
This vent size was selected on the basis of no ball valves
in the line.
If ball valves are installed in a vent line with flow
velocities over 50 ft/sec, aerodynamic drag on the ball
can case it to slam shut. This was observed during
shipboard tests of a LCS and it was necessary to remove
the balls to achieve proper operation.
In systems that use air blowers, the air is transferred
within the system rather than to the atmosphere. Vent
lines necessary to meet the requirements of the regulatory
bodies are installed below the minimum water level to
avoid the possibility of pressurizing the tanks beyond the
design criteria.
SHP = WHP/e, (13)
where: ep = propeller efficiency
List Control Systems 181
COMPP LRISON OF SHIP AND SHOP TEST DATA
1-O PUMP STARBOARD AT 200 RPM r--.- ---.- ..-.- ----..---.._-_--__
-~- __..
I
6000
8000
FLOW (GPMI
PUMP PROPELLER EFFICIENCY
FIGURE 9
1.0
0.9
0.8
COMPARISON OF SHIP AND SHOP TEST DATA
E --- -___~-
PUblP.$TARBOARD AT 500 RPM
.
I I I
10000 20000 30000
FLOW (CPM)
182
Design Session
PUMP PROPELLER EFFICIENCY
FIGURE 10
Water Hammer
Systems that use a remotely operated butterfly valve
in the crossover pipe can experience water hammer if the
valve is closed too rapidly. Valve closing in the presence
of flow could occur, for example, during emergency shut
down procedures.
Valve operators are available that can close the valve
as quickly as 0.70 seconds and water hammer has been
experienced using this closing rate. When the valve
closing period was increased to 3 seconds, water hammer
did not occur.
Care should be taken during the overall system
design, either in the control system or in the selection of
the valve actuator, to be sure a valve is not closed rapidly
unless a corresponding valve is being opened
simultaneously or pump start and stop sequence is timed..
Cavitation
List control systems that use a variable speed or
variable pitch pump to transfer water can maintain a
differential head between the list control tanks at zero
flow with the valve open. This configuration can occur
during either automatic or manual operation and is termed
a dead head condition. Dead head increases as RPM
increases and the maximum differential head that can be
maintained by a variable speed pump is limited by
propeller cavitation. Cavitation occurs when the local
pressure on propeller pump blades falls below the water
vapor pressure. Cavitation will reduce the propeller
efficiency and more torque must be applied to maintain a
desired head. At some point, the available horsepower
limit is reached and the available dead head and RPM
reach an upper limit. Cavitation limits on head can also
affect constant speed pumps.
The cavitation number is defined as the ratio of the
difference between the static pressure and the water vapor
pressure to the dynamic pressure (Principles of Naval
Architecture, Vol II 1985).. When the cavitation number
falls below 1, the total pressure on the blades is less than
the vapor pressure. This definition of cavitation inception
has been observed to provide good correlation for dead
head test data limits.
Cavitation No. = (p,-p,)/(O.SpV,2)
where:
p, = it, +p&
P
am
= atmospheric pressure
P, = vapor pressure of water
h = suction head
P
= mass density of water
g
= gravitational acceleration
VT
= velocity at blade 0.7 radius
The local cavitation number at 0.7R has been
used to predict cavitation inception. For dead head
conditions axial velocity is zero and at the 0.7 blade
radius position;
V, = 0.7nD
D = propeller diameter
n = propeller rotational speed, rps
Figure 11 shows propeller dead head test data. Total
dynamic head and cavitation number at 0.7 radius are
shown as a function of propeller RPM. Cavitation and
power limits are observed between 500 and 600 RPM.
mxn UEan SHOP TEST RESULTS DEAD HEAD SHOP TEST RESULTS
CAVITATION NUMBER
FIGURE 11
Electronic Control System
The electronic control system discussed below is that
used for a variable speed propeller pump system. It
represents the state-of-the-art and is more extensive in
terms of variables monitored and controlled than other
systems presently available. Control of the LCS is
provided by a microprocessor based real time computer
system. This type of system, often called an embedded
system, uses the computer to acquire data from tank level
transducers, list angle sensor output, butterfly valve
position sensor and other data for the hydraulic system
which is monitored for safety and alarm purposes.
List Control Systems
183
The movement of ballast while changing either head
or flow when using a variable speed pump requires real
time computer control. Control is effected using data
from tank water level transducers and a list angle sensor.
A signal for control of pump speed is computed at
intervals based upon transducer data and the mode of
system operation. In manual control, constant ballast
flow in the desired direction is provided. In automatic
control, ballast is transferred in the direction required to
restore zero list at a flow rate proportional to the angle of
list.
The propeller pump and associated butterfly valve are
powered hydraulically. In addition to the control
algorithm necessary to maintain required ballast flow,
synchronous control of the butterfly valve is necessary to
avoid water hammer. Further, the hydraulic system must
be monitored to assure safe operation.
The electronic components include a PC-like
computer on a PC/104 standard module. The PC/104
components include the computer, a display control, a
touch panel control, A/D and D/A converter modules with
binary I/O and a PCMCIA memory card module to
contain the control program and ship characteristics data.
All together, the system is composed of the computer
assembly, a graphics display with touch panel, and an
electrically isolated interface to the transducers and ships
machinery control system.
The operator interacts with the system using the
display, touch panel and panel switches. List control tank
levels, list angle, ballast flow rate, pump RPM, and
hydraulic system pressure, together with butterfly valve
position and alarm indications, are presented both
numerically and graphically on the display.
With the addition of ship hydrostatic characteristics to
the control software, the metacentric height, GM, can be
obtained by applying a measured amount of ballast
transfer to affect an ordered change in list angle. This
feature is provided by many LCS control units as an aid
to ship operators in determining stability prior to leaving
port.
Alarms provided by the electronic control system
include hydraulic system temperature, pressure, and oil
level, high and low list control tank levels and maximum
list angle. The control system prevents components from
operating in a direction that increases an alarm error. It
allows operation in a direction that will cause an alarm to
be cleared. As a result, no override or emergency
modes are used to reset or reposition equipment after an
alarm.
Powering on and off is an important issue to the safe
control of real time embedded systems. For both turn on
and off situations, it is desirable that transient alarm
conditions be suppressed. To ensure that the systems
components are properly secured before the computer is
turned off, the electronic control system takes control of
system power upon turn on, bypassing the system power
on/off switch. It then monitors the switch in such a way
that the operators intentions are known. Should the
operator request that the power be shut off while ballast
is in motion, the butterfly valve is open, or the hydraulic
power unit is in operation, the system first attempts to
stop ballast flow, close the butterfly valve, stop the pump
and shut down the HPU before disconnecting itself from
power. In the worst case this process will take less than
5 seconds and the operator is seldom aware that this
shutdown sequence check has occurred. By suppressing
transient alarms during the startup/shutdown process, the
annoyance of the alarm sound is avoided.
COMPARISON OF AVAILABLE SYSTEMS
The comparison of the various systems that are
available can only be made on the ability of the systems
to respond immediately to a circumstance that requires
heel correction. The amount of heel correction that can
be provided within a short period of time is part of this
consideration. This quick response ability, which may not
be necessary for all types of ships, depends not only on
the control system but also on the capacity and type of
mechanical system used to physically transfer ballast.
Considering the types of systems that are commonly used
today, a brief evaluation of the reaction times shows some
significant differences.
The most basic system, using an existing centrifugal
pump with a system of automatically controlled valves to
provide heel correction, as shown is Figure 2, also has
the slowest reaction times. The fastest reaction time for
this system can be obtained by having the pump running
continuously during heel correction procedures. When no
heel correction is necessary, the pump will be
recirculating ballast through the tank with the highest
level. The control system is generally set to recognize
two list angle set points. The threshold angle is defined
as the list at which heel correction will be initiated while
the shut-off value is defined as the angle at which heel
correction procedures will stop. When the threshold
value is reached, the control system will configure the
valves to transfer ballast between the appropriate tanks to
decrease the angle until the heel angle reaches the shut-
off value, when the valves will be reconfigured to
resume circulation with no ballast transfer. The reaction
time is dependent on the value assigned to the threshold
184 Design Session
angle, which must be large enough to avoid constantly
opening and closing the valves. The time necessary to
avoid possibility of water hammer while closing the
valves must also be considered. However, since one
valve on either the suction or discharge side of the pump
is opening while the other is closing, this aspect is not as
problematic as it is with axial flow pump systems.
Generally, this type of system also has the lowest pump
capacity, since the primary purpose of the pump is
selected to fill ballast tanks in approximately 30 rather
than 3 minutes or move water through a 3 fire hose
rather than an 18 transfer pipe. Regulatory body
requirements for fire pumps, for example, are less than
1,000 GPM.
The system using a constant speed axial flow pump
has some of the same operating limits as the system using
an existing centrifugal pump. The system is inactive until
the heel angle changes from 0 or some other value
recognized by the control system, at which point the
pump is started and the valve is opened. Pumping
continues until an even keel is regained, when the pump
is shut down and the valve is closed. Since this is an
axial flow pump, the delivery can decrease as the
discharge head increases, depending on the selected speed
and power. Gravity flow is not controlled. The
advantage this system has over the existing pump
system is that the pump is specifically selected for list
control and usually has higher capacities, in the range of
3,000 to 6,000 GPM.
The remaining types of systems, the variable speed or
variable pitch axial flow pump as well as the compressed
air systems, all can maintain a head difference between
the two heeling tanks without closing the valve. This is
accomplished by adjusting either the propeller speed or
pitch or the air pressure to maintain the head difference
without any flow. This allows the system to react
immediately to any change in heel angle. The ability to
react will depend more on the sophistication of the control
system rather than mechanical response characteristics.
Figure 12 shows an example of the reaction time that
can be obtained with a variable speed pump. The system
is reacting to reverses in the slewing of a crane with a lift
of about 100 tons. As the crane changes direction and the
list angle passes through O, the direction of the pump
changes almost immediately, as evidenced by the change
in the levels in the heel control tanks.
Given the capability of the mechanical components to
provide an immediate response, the total reaction time
will depend on the ability of the electronic control system
to recognize the need for heel control, continually analyze
the input information received from various sensors (e.g.,
the inclinometer and the tank level sensors) and issue the
proper instructions to change the response characteristic
of the prime mover (air pressure, propeller pitch, etc.).
This often involves a feed back loop to determine if the
desired effect is being achieved and continuing corrections
to strive for the optimum response. The sophistication of
the electronic control system can vary from supplier to
supplier and the performance of the same type of system
can vary based on the experience and data available to the
program writer.
REFERENCES
Argyriadis,D.A. et al Design and Construction of
Modem Roll-On/Roll-Off and Container Carriers.
Transactions of SNAME, Vol 87, (1979) pp 313-350
SNAME, Marine
Blowers ,( 1992)
Engineering, Section 3
Crane Technical Paper 410, Flow of Fluids Through
Valves, Fittings, and Pipe Chicago (1960)
SNAME, Principles of Naval Architecture, Vol II.
(1988) pp 181-183.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Figure 3 is based on material provided by FRANK
MOHN AS, Nesttun, Norway
Figure 5 is based on material provided by INTERING
GMBH, Hamburg, Germany
List Control Systems
185
TEST WITH 100 TON LOAD ON CRANE
REMOVING WEIGHT FROM SHIP
I- i I I.--. I
/
I 1
24
I, .
.W.
I
22
( _.___
-1 :
,. ..-#
i-- , ,
h :\: , j -. !
, ,I , . I
I, ,
-i F ;
\
, i .%.
,I.
.J \
-i i ;
------
, 1 .
.0--.-.-.-.
-0
. . \
!
.,.*.e.*,-.
J ..: I
/ I I
/
J PORT LEVEL
-I
: -1
4
/ , /
I
I
I rl
2
I I I \ I
I 1
3900 4000 4100 4200 4300 4400 4500
TIME [SEC)
VARIABLE SPEED PUMP SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
FIGURE 12
186 Design Session
Dirk Hoflich, Visitor, INTERING GmbH, Norderstedt,
Germany
The description of the different list control systems is com-
prehensive and considers the main design aspects. Quick reac-
tion and high flow rates of variable speed pump systems and
blower systems are important features for high performance
list control.
As to the power requirements of blower anti-heeling systems
[section of the paper incorporating equations (12)-( 15)] the fol-
lowing should be summarized: INTERING anti-heeling systems
according to Fig. 5 do not use axial flow blowers with an ef-
ficiency of 40 to 65% but since 1971 we use rotary positive
displacement blowers (roots-type rotary piston blowers) with
a volumetric efficiency eB of 90% and a total efficiency of 8.5
to 88% in anti-heeling system design conditions.
Design of list control tank vents of blower anti-healing sys-
tems: Pressurizing of heeling tanks beyond the design criteria
with a blower anti-heeling system is avoided by safety valves
at the blower units. Tank structure is designed to the pressure
preset at this valve, which will not be exceeded in operation.
The system is connected to atmosphere via the air valve group
(No. 4 in Fig. 5).
Overflow prices ending below minimum water level are fit-
ted to protect the tanks against operators failure to vent the
tanks when filling or discharging.
Eugene A. Van Rynbach, Member
The authors are to be congratulated on writing a concise
and informative paper describing the types of list control sys-
tems available today. It should be a handy reference for any-
one involved in a new construction program or vessel modifi-
cation program where list control is needed. It is informative
in that it describes both the key components of a list control
system and the issues involved in designing them.
Sea-Land Service has list control systems on some of its
ships, mostly of the type that utilizes existing pumps and bal-
last piping systems. However, systems that may have been ad-
equate in the past may not be adequate in the future. Contain-
erships are getting larger and terminals are being pushed to
increase productivity, resulting in more cranes working a ves-
sel at the same time. List control is becoming of increasing
importance and can have a measurable cost impact on opera-
tions.
As mentioned in the paper for some types of heavy cargoes
and for rail cars, for example, list control is very much done
by the vessel and is a necessity for a vessel in those trades. In
container shipping, however, the answer to list problems is more
complex and not always found on the ship. One of the main
reasons for this is that the loading or discharging of a single
container does not normally cause unacceptable list. It is the
cumulative effect of loading many containers without watch-
ing the transverse balance of the ship that causes list. There-
fore, well planned load sequencing can also be used to control
list. The fact that there are two primary means of controlling
list on containerships has the potential to lead to finger point-
ing between the terminal and the vessel if list and vessel ca-
pability to respond to list are not considered during cargo op-
erations on the ship. The vessel could say their list control
system, or if an automatic one is not fitted, the list control ef-
forts by the crew cannot keep up with the changes in list brought
about by the rapid cargo operations being done by the termi-
nal without due consideration of the impact on list. The terminal
could say the ship has an inadequate list control system and is
slowing down production because the cranes have to wait for
the ship to remove excessive list. The answer probably lies
somewhere in between. It seems that when evaluating how
much list control is required a cost benefit comparison should
be done of the list control system options available on the ves-
sel versus the time and cost to properly sequence cargo oper-
ations in the terminal to reduce the listing moments. In todays
cost cutting world, when faced with the potentially high cost
of a large capacity list control system there can be a tendency
to cut the cost and scope of the list control system and say
lets do a better job of planning at the terminal to resolve the
issue since this is the solution without upfront capital expen-
ditures. However, some form of list control seems to be a ne-
cessity and the answer to the question of how big a system to
install can probably be found in the cost benefit analysis.
In order to provide insight during the initial assessments of
a potential project on the appropriate list control systems to con-
sider it would be interesting if the authors could provide some
information on the relative costs of the systems described in
the paper. This would help the readers determine on an order
of magnitude basis which types of list control systems are within
their budget and worth further study. Most of the other infor-
mation required for this type of preliminary assessment is con-
tained in the paper.
Steve Heskett, Visitor
I wish to extend my congratulations to the authors for pro-
viding the shipbuilding industry with a comprehensive paper on
the various types of list control systems that are on the market
today. The paper gives marine engineers and shipowners a
greater understanding of what may be achieved by each sys-
tem, so that they can make a more educated determination of
which system best suits their needs.
There are a couple of comments I would like to make and
receive the authors comments or concurrence:
1. This concerns statements made throughout the paper, that
the tanks are initially filled to 50% of the tank capacity, and
that maximum heeling moments are obtained by transferring
the entire contents of one tank to the other. These statements
have caused some confusion with production personnel and cus-
tomer representatives during recent installations and testing of
list control systems.
The tanks being used as heeling tanks often are of a con-
siderably larger capacity than is required to develop the nec-
essary heeling moment, and in actuality the tanks are filled to
50% of, what I would call, the transferable capacity. The trans-
ferable capacity being the volume of water between the low
level and high level pump cutout switches. The low level switch
in some instances may be at a considerable height above the
bottom of the tank, while the high level switch may be well
below the top of the tank.
Normally the water remains in the tanks after loading is com-
pleted. The distinction between 50% of tank capacity and 50%
of transferable capacity must be made, since the heeling tank
capacity figures are used to determine the ships stability and
ballast conditions prior to departure.
2. I would like to reemphasize that the location of the pump
suction bellmouths within the heeling tanks must be given care-
ful consideration. The high suction capacities of these pumps
can create numerous cavitation and air pocket problems when
the bellmouths are located in tight corners of heeling tanks.
Large lumber holes on the top and bottom of tank web frames
are a must, to ensure good tank ventilation and draining dur-
ing pumping operations. The turbulences from pump suctions
Discussion
List Control Systems 187
also create havoc with pressure transmitters for the level gag-
ing systems. In most cases the bellmouth doesnt need to be at
the lowest point in the tank and can therefore be located away
from structurally congested areas and well away from level gage
pressure transducers which would normally be located at the
lowest point in the tank.
3. The one criticism of the paper I have is that it didnt go
into a great deal of detail about the compressed air type LCS.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of a compressed
air system as opposed to a variable speed/pitch pumping sys-
tem? For example, the compressed air system would appear to
have more piping and valves, but less pumping components.
Also the compressed air system can be used for sea stabiliza-
tion while underway. The hydraulic variable speed/pitch pump-
ing system is susceptible to leakage. If the propeller pump is
in a submerged location such as a double bottom ballast tank,
these oil leaks can be of major concern to an environmentally
conscious shipownerloperator.
bor time reduction of up to one hour for a cross channel ferry,
resulting in an annual fuel saving potential up to 1700 tons.
The following comments refer to the accompanying Table
A comparison between the FLUME and INTERING systems:
3. In the INTERING blower-activated system, tanks can be
arranged in various places on various decks, while blowers are
installed where space is available.
4. Blower systems in operation on the worlds largest train
ferries enable-without hydraulic shock-reverse of flow di-
rection/start of complete flow in less than 1 set, with total power
up to 600 kW.
5. Due to the INTERING concept no moving parts in wa-
ter, together with very little and easy maintenance and possi-
ble exchange of components, the blower-activated system is
given preference where maximum reliability is requested.
6. Tank water, which is needed for anti-heeling operation,
is double-used for roll stabilization in combined INTERING
stabilizer and anti-heeling systems.
7. We appreciate that the competition follows INTERINGs
Horst Halden, Visitor, INTERING GmbH, Norderstedt,
As the worldwide leader and the only company experienced
in blower- and pump-activated anti-heeling systems, INTER-
Germany
ING thanks the authors for their efforts to bring this subject to
the awareness of a broader marine audience.
racyas the results of tie shipyard;s inclining experiments. Ex-
lead in us&g the anti-heeling system for stability measurement.
Experience since 1973 led to extreme simplification and relia-
tensive experiences are available on stability measurements at
bilitv in third-svstem generation (1996) and to the same accu-
speed.
We fully support the authors opinion about the importance
of short svstems reaction time and immediate comoensation
Additiona, reference
of cargo &eights during loading/discharging to the benefit of JONER, J., HALDEN, H., New TT-Ferries-Inclining Test in 10 Min-
the ships harbor time. As an example: In the early 1970s, utes, Schiff & Hafens July 1995.
INTERING blower-activated anti-heeling systems led to har-
Variable Speed Pump System Blower-activatkd System
FLUME INTERlkG
I Ihe authors relate INTERING to axial flow blowers with 40 - 6$ % efficiency.
INTWNG never used axial flow blowers, but ptarv oositive displacement
blowers roots tvpe witb 88 - 80 X efficiency.
1 Safetv. Block of Water Flow
No Redundancy. Redundancy.
Control and Safev in one Valve. Air Valves for Control and Safety.
Water Valve for Safety only.
1 Arranaement Flexibilitv. Redundancy
One Pump per Tank. 1 to 5 Blowers in any Tank Combination.
NO cross-over Functions fw Emergency.
I
Multiple Tasking.
I Reaction Time
?
I
< 1 see. far complete Flow Reverse
up to SO0 kW. No shocks.
i Movirm Parts. Reliabilitv. Warranty
in Water Moving Parts in Air only.
?
I
> 3OW Years accum. Operating Experience.
3 Years Guarantee since 1962.
Same Tanks for Roll Stabiliratiq
No
I
Yes
GM Accuracy
reasonable ? Within 1 % of official lndining Test Results.
Type-approved by Intl Class Societies.
Over 500 Years of accumulated Experience.
Table A
188 Design Session
Authors Closure
The response that has been received reflects
the reactions of ship operators, ship builders, and
the various manufacturers of list control systems,
which evidences the growing interest in these sys-
tems. They are becoming a standard requirement
for many types of commercial newbuildings. The
opinions and viewpoints of the ship operators are
certainly welcome. In reply to Mr. Van Rynbach,
the problems due to list angles when loading
larger containerships can certainly be avoided
by paying close attention to the loading sequence.
Loading one or two containers off center will
not cause difficulties, but a continuation of this
trend could cause loading delays, and the ensu-
ing disagreements are well described. These in-
cidences could be completely avoided with a high
capacity list control system, but the economic im-
pacts cannot be ignored and should be the de-
ciding factor. It is interesting that major problems
can be experienced not by the larger ships but
by the smaller feeder ships that often are self
loading/unloading via onboard cranes. As con-
tainers are added on deck and transverse stabil-
ity decreases, the off center moment caused by
lifting a container from the wharf can cause very
high list angles, in excess of 10 deg, and some
type of automatic compensation becomes a ne-
cessity.
Concerning the request for relative prices of
the various system types, these are difficult to pro-
vide as they are completely dependent on the
pump capacity and related pipeline sizes. Some
ballpark estimates are from 10 000 to 50 000 1997
dollars for control systems that use an existing
pump, 50 000 to 100 000 for constant speed pump systems,
150 000 to 200 000 for variable speed pump systems, and about
300 000 and over for the air controlled system, depending on
whether it is combined with a roll stabilization system.
We would like to thank Mr. Heskett for his observations
regarding transferable capacity as opposed to tank capacity. In
particular, some conversions have the luxury of very large list
control tanks that will never utilize half the full capacity for
list control. In these instances, the initial tank levels are deter-
mined by other considerations, such as trim or ballast require-
ments. The control system software can be programmed to meet
these needs. However, this is a high quality problem. In most
instances, the heeling tanks are sized to meet the specified heel
correction requirements with little excess capacity.
The reinforcement of the importance of free flow of both the
fluid and the air within the heeling tanks is very welcome. Most
problems encountered when commissioning these systems are
related to a lack of attention to these details.
The ability to use the same set of tanks to provide both roll
stabilization and list control is a point often offered as an ad-
vantage by the suppliers of air activated list control systems.
A U-tube type roll stabilization tank can be utilized for list
control. However, this type of stabilizer tank has a single pe-
riod response. The other type of passive anti-roll tank commonly
installed, a free surface type tank, has a response period that
can be varied by changing the liquid level. This single response
period disadvantage of a U-tube can be overcome in a number
of ways, all of them expensive. The most common approach
is to construct the tank so that it can respond to the shortest
expected natural roll period of the ship and use a control sys-
tem to delay the response. With an air control system, a valve
in the air cross over duct is opened and closed to hold the wa-
ter on one side and lengthen the response time. This approach
is often erroneously referred to as an active tank stabilizer
but is properly called a controlled passive stabilizer.
The response period requirement for a U-tube is determined
by the width of the wing tanks and the height of the cross over
duct (Field, 1975). The necessity of having a relatively clear
cross over duct normally means that there is a double inner bot-
tom, as the normal structure in bottom tanks will not allow proper
flow. This consideration requires additional structure that is dif-
ficult to install due to the confined spaces normally involved.
The size requirements of a list control system are determined
by what is being loaded and the rapidity of the loading process.
The size and configuration of a roll stabilization tank are de-
termined by the stability conditions (righting moment and meta-
centric height) of the ship ready for sea, after loading has been
completed. Although, because they look similar, it may initially
seem that there would be some space savings advantage in us-
ing the same tanks for both stabilization and list control pur-
poses, this usually does not prove to be the case when consid-
ering the design requirements. Trying to force the issue can
result in multiple tank arrangements, with some of the tanks
used for one purpose and others for both. In some instances,
tanks are built within tanks so that the proper response period
for the stabilizer can be obtained without losing list control
capacity (Halden, 1997).
It is our opinion that the most economical approach is to
design the anti-roll tanks to stabilize roll at sea and the list
control tanks to minimize heel during the loading process. This
usually results in two systems that are effective, simple to in-
stall, and have the lowest capital and installation costs (see
Sellars and Martin, 1992).
In response to Mr. Hbjlich, we thank him for these impor-
tant pieces of additional information and apologize for assum-
ing the use of the wrong type of blowers. The efficiency was
taken from Marine Engineering, as referenced, and is indeed
for an axial flow blower. The use of rotary positive displace-
ment blowers with a higher efficiency makes the power re-
quirements for the air controlled system about equal to the pump
systems. In addition, the safety valve on the blower units means
that the tanks for an air controlled system can be designed to
the normal deep tank standards.
It is difficult to respond to Mr. Halden as many of his re-
marks are aimed at stressing the sales advantages of systems
he supplies and appear to be less than objective. For instance,
we have no knowledge of the fuel savings enjoyed by the cross
channel ferry fitted with his system (our own experience in
this regard has shown that these claims are easy to calculate
but difficult to prove), the accumulated experience of his staff,
nor the type of guarantee he offers, nor do we believe this is
the proper forum for such claims. Many of his points are sim-
ilar to those answered above.
As far as redundancy is concerned, the valve in the vari-
able speed pump system is not used for control. The valve is
either open or shut and the speed of the pump is used for con-
trol. If the hydraulic system shuts down for any reason, there
is a fail safe accumulator that will close the valve.
The parts of a variable speed pump system that are in wa-
ter are the pump with the hydraulic motor and the valve. The
materials used are corrosion resistant: stainless steel and NI-
BRAL. In fact, in many installations these items have been sub-
merged in inner bottom tanks that are used for other purposes
to save space. However, as mentioned by Mr. Heskett, hydraulic
leakage could cause environmental concerns.
As mentioned in the paper, the response of the variable speed
pump system is immediate. The response time for this system,
and we assume the air controlled system, is limited not by the
speed of the mechanical components but by the gains pro-
grammed into the control system software. Some reaction time,
albeit short, is necessary to avoid overshoot and hunting.
Hydraulic shock or water hammer is avoided when the
variable speed pump system is active as the valve is not closed
during normal operations. When the system is shut down, the
control system automatically adjusts the pump speed to obtain
zero flow and the valve is pulsed to close in a programma-
ble number of steps to avoid shock waves. If the valve is closed
by the accumulator, the closing time is lengthened by flow
control devices.
Contrary to Mr. Haldens belief, using the list control tanks
to obtain a measure of the GM was first designed into a sys-
tem supplied by FLUME in 1970 for use on two RO/RO ships
built in Gdansk. The application of the engineering principals
is not difficult and the accuracy will depend on the accuracy
in the level sensors in the tanks, the heel sensor in the control
unit, and the determination of the displacement. Errors in the
sensors are less than 0.1%. If the displacement is obtained from
a draft indicator, the accuracy can be very good when the ves-
sel is not under way. However, if the draft marks are read from
dock side, there is considerable room for error.
We would like to thank all of the discussers for their con-
tributions to this paper and SNAME for providing a forum for
this presentation.
Additional references
FIELD, S.B. et al, Comparative Effects of U-Tube and Free Surface
Type Passive Roll Stabilization Systems, Royal Institution of Naval Ar-
chitects, April 1975.
SELLARS, F.H. et al, Selection and Evaluation of Ship Roll Stabi-
lization Systems, Marine Technology, Vol. 29, No. 2, April 1992, pp.
M-101.
HALDEN, H., Influence of Combine Stabilizer, Anti-heeling, and Sta-
bility Test Systems on RO/RO Ship Design and Operation, LS-SD, 1997.
List Control Systems 189