University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System
Ocean Class
Science Mission Requirements
March 2003
|
Download
Ocean Class SMRs: Word
Document - 548 KB Adobe
Acrobat - 2.1 M |
University-National Oceanographic Laboratory
System (UNOLS)
Science Mission Requirements for Ocean Class
Oceanographic Research Vessels
These Science Mission
Requirements (SMR) were developed as part of the Academic Fleet Renewal effort
outlined in the Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee (FOFC) report: Charting
the Future for the National Academic Research Fleet A Long-Range Plan for
Renewal published in December 2001. Funding for development of the
SMR was provided to UNOLS through NSF Co-operative agreement number OCE 9988593
and through ONR Grant number N000140010742. Support and guidance for this
project was provided by the following agencies:
|
·
National Science
Foundation Division of Ocean Sciences |
|
|
·
Office of Naval Research |
|
|
·
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration |
|
|
·
United States Geological
Survey |
|
|
·
Minerals Management
Service |
|
|
·
Department of Energy |
|
Science Mission Requirements
The timely replacement of the
academic research fleet is vital to oceanographic research in the United
States. The ships age and become more expensive to operate and they become less
capable as scientific missions evolve. The Fleet Improvement Committee has over
the past few years presented to the community compelling data showing that
systematic replacement of the fleet must begin soon. If not, we will be using
old and possibly unsafe ships and certainly ships that are not as capable as is
needed.
The process used to construct
new ships is many faceted, but a fundamental action is the formulation of the
Science Mission Requirement: the SMR. The SMR states with as much specificity
as possible what attributes the ship must have to perform the science
envisioned. For example What is the maximum sea state that a CTD cast can be
taken in? or Is a core storage freezer needed and how big should it be? The
SMR provides a science capability framework for the steps between community
input, vessel concept design, and final construction. It is not meant to serve
as a final list of specifications, but as a list of science needs that may face
prioritization during the funding and construction phase for the Ocean Class
vessels.
This document gives the best
estimate of what the Science Mission Requirements are for a Ocean Class
Research Vessel. The document represents the work of over 70 people over the
past 12 months. A meeting was held in Salt Lake City on July 23 and 24, 2002.
Later the draft SMR was posted for public comment. Finally the Fleet
Improvement Committee reviewed and finalized the document. The final document
is then submitted to the UNOLS Council for approval, which it has received.
Although Mission Requirements
and technology change with time this SMR represents a community consensus of
what a Ocean Class vessel should be capable of in the coming years. This
document should be considered a living document that should be updated as new
science requirements are identified and as new technical solutions become
available.
This SMR should serve as the
guiding document for concept designs, preliminary designs, and construction of
new Ocean Class Research Vessels.
|
|
|
|
Dr. Tim Cowles |
Dr. Larry Atkinson, Chair |
|
UNOLS Chair |
UNOLS Fleet Improvement Committee |
|
March 6, 2003 |
March 6, 2003 |
Ocean Class Research Vessel
Science Mission Requirements
Table of Contents
|
1 |
21 |
||
|
5 |
22 |
||
|
6 |
22 |
||
|
Science Mission Requirements Detail |
7 |
Science and shipboard systems |
22 |
|
7 |
22 |
||
|
Accommodations and habitability |
8 |
23 |
|
|
8 |
23 |
||
|
8 |
24 |
||
|
Operational characteristics |
9 |
24 |
|
|
9 |
25 |
||
|
10 |
25 |
||
|
10 |
26 |
||
|
11 |
27 |
||
|
11 |
Construction, operation & maintenance |
28 |
|
|
11 |
28 |
||
|
12 |
28 |
||
|
Over-the-side and weight handling |
12 |
28 |
|
|
12 |
28 |
||
|
13 |
29 |
||
|
14 |
32 |
||
|
14 |
35 |
||
|
Science working spaces |
15 |
36 |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
Laboratories |
16 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
- Layout & construction |
17 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
OCEAN CLASS RESEARCH
VESSEL SCIENCE MISSION REQUIREMENTS
Executive summary
This new class of general
purpose research vessel, designed to support integrated, interdisciplinary
research, should have many of the capabilities of modern Global class vessels, though
Ocean class vessels will not be globally ranging. The primary requirement is a
maximum capability commensurate with ship size to support science, educational,
and engineering operations in all oceans, with improved over-the-side equipment
handling, station keeping, and acoustic system performance while providing a
stable laboratory environment for precision measurements. These vessels
should be designed to be reliable, cost effective, and flexible.
These vessels will support
scientific (non-crew) parties as large as 25. Attention to the details of
habitability and the design of crew and technician berthing should promote crew
retention and the resulting expertise for supporting the scientific
missions. The vessel should support expeditions up to 40 days and a total
range up to 10,800 nautical miles (20,000 km) at optimal transit speeds. The
ship should be able to sustain 12 knots through sea state 4 with fine speed
control. The vessel must have effective dynamic positioning relative to a fixed
position in a 35 knots wind, sea state 5 and 2 knot current.
The design should maximize the
sea-kindliness of these vessels and maximize their ability to work in sea
states 5 and higher. It is desirable for these vessels to operate 75% of
the time in the winter in the Pacific Northwest and in the North Atlantic. In
sea state 4 the vessel should be fully operational for all but the most
demanding deployments and recoveries.
The stern working area, with a
minimum of 1,500 sq ft aft of deckhouses and total space equal to at least
2,000 sq ft, should be open and as clear as possible from one side of the ship
to the other and highly flexible to accommodate large and heavy temporary
equipment. In addition, a contiguous work area along one side should
provide a minimum of 80 ft clear deck area along the rail. The area should be
designed to provide a dry working deck with provisions for allowing safe access
for deployment and recovery of free-floating equipment to and from the water.
Additional deck areas should be
provided with the means for flexible and effective installation of incubators,
vans, workboats and temporary equipment. There should be maximum visibility of
deck work areas and alongside during science operations and especially during
deployment and retrieval of equipment. Voice communications systems between the
bridge, labs, working decks and machinery spaces should be designed to
effectively enhance ship control during science operations.
The design of weight handling
appliances to safely and effectively deploy, recover, and sometimes tow a wide
variety of scientific equipment should be considered at the earliest stages of
the design cycle. The entire suite of over the side handling equipment
including winches, wires, cranes, frames, booms and other appliances should be
considered as a system. Designs for over the side appliances and equipment
should include innovative thinking and consider ideas that will reduce the
amount of human intervention necessary for launch and recovery of equipment,
both on wires and un-tethered, and that will control packages from the water to
the deck. This will enhance personnel safety, reduce manning level
requirements, increase operability in heavier weather and protect science and
ship's equipment. The winches should provide fine control and have maximum
speeds of at least 100 m/min. The ship should be capable of towing large
scientific packages continuously for extended periods of time. A suite of
modern cranes should be provided to handle heavy and large equipment and that
can reach all working deck areas. The capability of offloading vans and
equipment weighing up to 20,000 lbs to a pier or vehicle in port is desirable.
Total lab space should be
approximately 2,000 sq ft including: Main (dry) lab area designed to be flexible
for frequent subdivision providing smaller specialized labs; separate wet
lab/hydro lab located contiguous to sampling areas; climate controlled work
space or chamber and an electronics/computer lab. A high bay/hanger space
for multiple purposes adjacent to the aft main deck should support protected
set up and repair of equipment, sample sorting and other related functions.
Flexibility and support for different types of science operations within
limited space are the important design criteria for these vessels. Benches and
cabinetry should be flexible and reconfigurable. A separate electronics
repair shop/work space for resident technicians should be included. Storage
space for resident technician spares and tools should be defined in the design and
not part of useable laboratory space. There should be some provision of
dedicated storage/ workshop space for science and ship use. There should
be accessible safe storage for chemical reagents and hazardous
(non-radioactive) materials.
Lab areas need to have separate
electrical circuits on a clean bus with un-interruptible power available
wherever needed. Seawater systems should be designed to provide uncontaminated
seawater to all science work areas and higher volume seawater to maintain
incubation experiments at ambient surface temperatures. The best available
navigation systems will be provided for geo-referencing of all data, for
dynamic positioning and ship control as part of an integrated information
system. Internal and external communications systems will provide
high-quality voice communications and continuous high-speed data communications
throughout the ship and with shore stations, other ships, aircraft, and data
sources.
Space should be available to
carry two standardized 8 ft by 20 ft portable deck vans that may be laboratory,
berthing, storage, or other specialized use and up to two additional portable,
possibly non-standard size, vans on superstructure and working decks is
required. At least one 16-ft or larger inflatable boat located for ease of
launching and recovery is also required. The variable science load should be
between 100 and 200 LT.
The ship should be as
acoustically quiet as practicable in the choice of all shipboard systems, their
location, and installation. Propeller(s) are to be designed for minimal
cavitation, and hull form should attempt to minimize bubble sweep
down. Design criteria for noise reduction should take into account
reducing radiated noise into the water that may affect biological research
objectives, acoustic system performance and habitability.
Heating, ventilation, air
conditioning and lighting appropriate to berthing, laboratories, vans, and
other interior spaces being served should be carefully engineered and designed
to be effective in all potential operating areas.
A thorough evaluation of
construction costs, outfitting costs, annual operating costs and long-term
maintenance costs should be conducted during the design cycle in order to
determine the impact of design features on the total life cycle cost.
The design should ensure that the vessel could be effectively and safely
operated in support of science by a well-trained but relatively small number of
crew. The regional conditions, available ports and shore side services should
be considered during the design process.
Summary of Ocean Class Science Mission
Requirements
|
Parameter |
Capability or Characteristic |
|
Accommodations and
habitability |
|
|
Accommodations |
20 to 25 non-crew personnel |
|
Habitability |
Attention to details that ensure effective work and living spaces. |
|
Operational characteristics |
|
|
Endurance |
40 days (20 transit and 20 station) |
|
Range |
Up to 10,800 nautical miles at optimal transit speeds. |
|
Speed |
12 knots sustainable through sea state 4 |
|
Sea keeping |
Maximize ability to work in
sea states 5 (2.5 to 4 m wave heights) and
higher. |
|
Station keeping |
Dynamic positioning relative to a fixed position in 35 knot wind, sea state 5, and 2 knot current |
|
Track line following |
Maintain a track line within ± 5 meters of intended track and with a heading deviation (crab angle) of less than 45 degrees with 30 knots of wind, up to sea state 5 (2.5 - 4 m wave heights), and 2 knots of current. |
|
Ship control |
Design for maximum visibility and effective ship control |
|
Ice strengthening |
May be needed for two vessels work near 1st year ice |
|
Over-the-side and weight
handling |
|
|
Winches, wires, frames, and cranes |
New generation oceanographic winches, frames, cranes, and other weight handling equipment that are integral parts of an equipment handling and deployment system. Winches should provide fine control (0.1 m/min under full load); maximum winch speeds should be at least 100 meters/min. A crane that can reach all working deck areas and that is capable of offloading vans and equipment weighing up to 20,000 lbs to a pier or vehicle in port is desirable. |
|
Towing |
The ship should be capable of towing large scientific packages up to 10,000 lbs tension at 6 knots, and 25,000 lbs at 4 knots. Winches should be capable of sustaining towing operations continuously for days at a time. |
|
Science working spaces |
|
|
Working deck |
Stern working area - 1,500 sq
ft minimum aft of deck houses open as possible. Contiguous waist work area
along one side that provides a minimum of 80 ft clear deck area. Total amount of clear working
area available on the main deck aft should be at least 2,000 sq ft. |
|
Laboratories |
Total lab space should be
approximately 2,000 sq ft including: Main (dry) lab area (1,000 sq
ft) designed to be flexible for frequent subdivision; Separate wet lab/hydro lab
(400 sq ft) located contiguous to sampling areas; An electronics/computer lab (300
sq ft); A separate electronics repair
shop/work space for resident technicians; High bay/hanger space for
multiple purposes adjacent to the aft main deck; Climate controlled work space
or chamber (approx.100 sq ft) |
|
Vans |
Carry two standardized 8 ft by
20 ft portable deck vans and the capability to carry up to two additional
portable, possibly non-standard size, vans (500 sq ft total); |
|
Storage |
Approximately 5,000 cubic feet
of storage space that could also be used as shop or workspace when needed
would be desirable. |
|
Science load |
Variable science load should
be 200 LT. |
|
Workboats |
At least one 16-ft or larger
inflatable boat located for ease of launching and recovery |
|
Masts |
Design criteria are presented so
these science operation areas are not overlooked |
|
On deck incubations |
|
|
Marine mammal & bird
observations |
|
|
Science and shipboard
systems |
|
|
Navigation |
Navigation, computing, voice and
data communications through the best available systems using current expert
advice. Systems should be specified as close to actual delivery as
possible. |
|
Data network and onboard
computing |
|
|
Real time acquisition |
|
|
Comms internal |
|
|
Comms external |
|
|
Underway data collection &
sampling |
Promotes design of flexible
and functional systems for data collection and sampling using advice from
experts at the time of design and specification. |
|
Acoustic systems |
|
|
Visiting science systems |
Build in capability to
accommodate a variety of equipment |
|
Discharges |
Ensure discharges do not
impact science, health and environment. |
|
Construction, operation
& maintenance |
|
|
Maintainability |
Statements to ensure that the
design and construction of these vessels take into account the ability to
maintain and operate within domestic and international regulations in a
reliable and cost effective manner. |
|
Operability |
|
|
Life cycle costs |
|
|
Regulatory issues |
|
This is a new class of vessel
proposed by the Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee (FOFC) Long-Range
Plan for Academic Fleet Renewal and further defined by these science mission
requirements. Designed to support integrated, interdisciplinary research, Ocean
Class ships will be ocean going, with many of the capabilities of modern Global
Class vessels, though not globally ranging. They will be somewhat smaller and
more efficient to operate than the Global Class vessels. However, they will
substantially expand the existing capabilities provided by most of the older
Intermediate Class UNOLS ships.
These ships are to serve as
general-purpose research vessels. The primary requirement is a maximum
capability commensurate with ship size in order to support science,
educational, and engineering operations in all oceans, with improved
over-the-side equipment handling, station keeping, and acoustic system
performance while providing a stable laboratory environment for precision
measurements. These vessels will provide for larger scientific parties and greater
flexibility in use of laboratory/deck spaces than are now available aboard
intermediate-size ships. Some may be configured to accommodate ice-margin
research, fisheries related oceanography, underway survey operations or other
specialized missions.
To accomplish these goals there
are several features that should receive high priority during the early design
cycle phases. These vessels should be acoustically quiet in terms of radiated
noise and so that hull mounted acoustic systems can function at their maximum
capability. Sea-keeping and station-keeping capabilities will be important
design drivers as well. Education and public outreach is becoming an important
function during research cruises and the personnel and equipment to carry out
this mission should be considered during design. Paying attention to
habitability issues such as noise control, vibration, ventilation, lighting,
and aesthetics will also increase the effectiveness and health of the crew and
science party.
The specification of scientific
and operational equipment outfitting should be carefully planned so that the
delivered vessel is equipped with the currently best available equipment.
Expert scientific, technical, and operational groups should provide guidance
and advice on design criteria for all key scientific and operational systems.
Experience with the design of past research vessels as well as innovative new
approaches should be used to provide designs that will serve the community well
for three decades.
These vessels should be designed
to be reliable, cost effective, and flexible. The ability to easily maintain
these vessels with minimal manning during full operating years should be a
design criterion. Designs should also anticipate major machinery overhaul and
replacement, as well as future improvements. Fuel efficiency and reliability of
machinery and equipment will serve to reduce the life cycle cost of these
vessels. The design cycle should consider carefully the tradeoffs between
initial acquisition costs and long term operating costs.
The purpose of the science
mission requirements is to set down design features and parameters that should
be used as guidelines during the various design phases. There are some areas
where there will be tradeoffs between two or more desired capabilities. By
allowing more than one concept design, the possibility of finding ways to
minimize these tradeoffs will be enhanced. A key concept is that ship systems
are completely integrated with the science mission for these vessels. Sample
mission profiles are included in Appendix I to provide examples of how these
vessels might be used. It is possible that not all requirements can be fully
realized in any one design and it will be necessary to refine priorities during
the design phases. Concept, Preliminary, and Construction design efforts should
consider all elements in these requirements and make conscious decisions on how
and if they can be addressed. These science mission requirements are organized
with the following elements.
Mission
statement
Overview of
SMRs
Size, cost,
and general requirements
Accommodations
and habitability
Accommodations
Habitability
Operational
characteristics
Endurance
Range
Speed
Sea keeping
Station keeping
Track line following
Ship control
Ice strengthening
Over-the-side
and weight handling
Over the side handling
Winches
Wires
Cranes
Towing
Science
working spaces
Working deck area
Laboratories
Type &
number
Layout &
construction
Electrical
Water & air
Science
working spaces (cont.)
Vans
Storage
Science load
Workboats
Masts
On deck incubations
Marine mammal & bird observations
Science and
shipboard systems
Navigation
Data network and onboard computing
Real time data acquisition system
Communications - internal
Communications external
U/W data collection & sampling
Acoustic systems
Project science system installation and power
Discharges
Construction,
operation & maintenance
Maintainability
Operability
Life cycle costs
Regulatory issues
Mission
Scenarios
Science Mission Requirements - Details
The design phases will determine
the overall size and cost of this vessel. However, the target size and cost
were set in the FOFC Academic Fleet Renewal Plan and serve as a benchmark for
the design of this class of vessel. In general, these vessels will serve the
science demands falling between those services provided by the existing Global
Class vessels and the new Regional Class vessels. The FOFC parameters were
defined as:
|
Endurance: 40 days |
Length: 55-70 m (180- 228) |
|
Range: 20,000 km (10,800 n.
mi.) |
Science berths: 20-25 |
Cost: $50 million (This is
interpreted to mean the total cost for design, construction, and outfitting in
2001 dollars).
These parameters are defined
further by the science mission requirements described in this document. It is
envisioned that all or most of these vessels will fall in the middle of the
size range defined, that endurance will be 40 days, and that science berths
will be at least 20 with surge capacity to 25 or more. The specified range has
the potential for driving the size of the vessel beyond what is economical and
may be an area where compromise will be needed.
Draft is a design element that
should be considered carefully as the size of the vessel evolves. A shallower
draft, less than the 19-foot draft of the THOMPSON Class vessels is desirable
for operations in shallow waters and to allow shallow depth mounting of ADCP
transducers. On the other hand, a deeper draft could increase sea-keeping
capabilities (which is a high priority for these vessels) and allow for
increased endurance. The OCEANUS Class vessels that these vessels will replace
have a draft between 18 and 19 feet, which contributes to their sea-keeping
ability. Access to normal ports of call should be considered so that the
operation of this vessel is not too severely restricted because of a draft that
precludes all but a few ports.
Cost will be a significant
factor influencing the design, construction, and outfitting of these vessels.
The budget and funding mechanisms available to the sponsoring agency for these
vessels will determine the total budget for design, construction, and
outfitting. The FOFC plan sets this number at approximately 50 million dollars
per vessel in 2001 dollars. The actual amount available for detailed design and
construction will be less than 50 million depending on how much is required for
project management, outfitting and preliminary design costs. Long term
operating costs should be considered carefully in the design process so that
decisions are not made that would drive up the yearly operating and maintenance
costs. These vessels should be nearly as capable as Global Class vessels, but
should use a smaller portion of the funds available for ocean science support.
Twenty to 25 non-crew personnel
in one or two-person staterooms with every attempt to keep the number at the
upper end of the range is highly desired. The number of crew and therefore the
total complement will be determined by the Coast Guard Letter of Inspection,
the support requirements for the scientific mission, and proper maintenance of
the vessel. The concept of including temporary accommodations that can be used
when needed (i.e., surge capacity) is important to the flexibility of these
vessels to support a wider range of potential projects.
The design of accommodations
needs to be for optimum habitability for the normal science party size, but
with the ability to expand to larger science party sizes when needed.
Supporting infrastructure would be designed around the largest possible
complement. Shower and toilet facilities should support no more than four
people per unit when there is a normal size of science party. Staterooms should
be designed to optimize the available space. Providing basic storage,
washbasins, and limited workspace should be attempted in the design. Additional
storage and larger workstations could be provided in common space elsewhere.
Provisions should be made to accommodate gender imbalance.
The maritime crew and resident
technicians should be berthed in single person staterooms to the maximum extent
possible in order to promote crew retention and the resulting expertise for
supporting the scientific mission.
The non-crew personnel (i.e.,
the Science Party) would consist of the personnel from the various scientific
programs, the assigned marine technicians, technical support personnel for
certain types of instrumentation (e.g. JASON II group, OBS groups, coring
groups, etc.), foreign observers, education and outreach personnel, and anyone
else not part of the maritime crew.
Heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning (HVAC) appropriate to berthing, laboratories, vans, and other
interior spaces being served should be engineered and designed to be effective
in all potential operating areas. Laboratories shall maintain temperatures of
70-75° F, 50% relative humidity, and 9 to 11 air changes per hour in all
intended operating areas, taking into account the full range of external sea
water and air temperatures. Maintaining internal environmental conditions
should consider the anticipated number of door openings (in a given period of
time), and/or the normal door positions (open or closed) for each compartments
intended purpose.
Air circulation rates should
meet shore lab standards and SNAME standards for HVAC.
At least some lab space should
be clean for chemical analysis. This analytical lab space requires separate
ventilation and/or organic filters, and, if possible, located in a separate lab
space or specialized van.
The design should support
maintaining acceptable noise levels throughout the ship and utilize
specifications and standards applicable to vessels (USCG NVIC 1282, IMO
Resolution A.468 (XII) and OSHA regulation: 29CFR1910.95). These noise
standards should be met as closely as possible at normal cruising speeds or in
Dynamic Position (DP) mode, with ventilation systems operating at maximum
levels, acoustic systems operating at maximum power, and with deck machinery
operating. Noise reduction engineering should be integrated with design efforts
at the earliest stages in order to incorporate noise level considerations in
decisions about layout and arrangement of spaces.
Vibration should be minimized
using ABS and/or SNAME standards, and provisions should be made for mounting
sensitive instrumentation in a manner to compensate for vibration and ship
motion. Ships motion is an important design criterion that will affect
habitability and is addressed in the sea-keeping section.
Lighting levels should meet
shore laboratory or office standards (OSHA). Lighting levels should be
controllable for individual areas within labs to accommodate requirements for
microscope work or other low light requirements. The ability to maximize the
amount of natural lighting through the use of a sufficient number of port
lights in lab spaces, staterooms, and common spaces should be included in the
design.
HVAC performance, noise,
vibration, and lighting standards should be defined for all occupied spaces on
the vessel.
The productivity of all
personnel sailing in these vessels can be enhanced by providing comfortable,
aesthetically pleasing spaces, and by including, to the extent possible, areas
for off-hour activities other than staterooms and workspaces such as a library,
lounge, or conference room with tables, good lighting, video capability, and
etc. Providing equipment and space for exercise should be considered.
Staterooms should include connections to the ships network and entertainment
systems, but they need also to be separated from the noise associated with
off-hour activities.
Total endurance should be forty
days, providing the ability to transit for 20 days at cruising speed and for 20
days of station work (see station keeping and towing). Some mission profiles
will require continuous underway survey or towing operations at speeds from 4
knots up to the normal cruising speed. The ability to conduct this type of
cruise for up to 30+ days is desired. The design process should consider the
impacts on engines, water making capability, and other factors when on station
or moving at slow speeds for extended periods of time.
Up to 10,800 nautical miles
(20,000 km) total range at optimal cruising speed is desirable. A minimum of
8,000 nautical miles at optimal cruising speed is required. Range should be
maximized without sacrificing sea-keeping ability and without driving the size
and cost of the vessel beyond available funds.
14 - 15 knots maximum speed at
sea trial in calm seas and 12 knots sustainable through sea state 4 (1.25 2.5
m wave heights) is desirable. An optimum cruising speed of at least 12 knots is
desired, but should not come at the cost of decreased sea-keeping ability,
excessive fuel consumption, or excessive noise.
Speed control in sea state 4 or
less (< 2.5 meters wave height) should be
0.1 knot in the 0-6 knot range
and
0.2 knot in the 6-14 knot range.
Sea-keeping is the ability to
carry out the mission of the vessel while maintaining crew comfort and safety,
and maintaining equipment operability. It is an important design criterion to
maximize the sea-kindliness of these vessels and maximize their ability to work
in sea states five (2.5 4 m wave heights) and higher within the constraints
of their overall size. It is desirable for these vessels to operate 75% of the
time in the winter in the Pacific Northwest and in the North Atlantic. Bilge
keels, anti-roll tanks or other methods to reduce the motions of these vessels
should be used to enhance sea-keeping.
In sea state four (1.25 2.5 m
wave heights) the vessel should be fully operational for all but the most
demanding deployments and recoveries.
In sea state five these vessels
should be able to:
At sea state six (4 6 m wave
heights) these vessels should maintain 7 knots and be capable of station
operations 50% of the time.
At sea state seven and greater
(> 6 m wave heights), these vessels should be able to operate safely while
hove to.
These motion criteria
specifications should be verified as adequate and achievable during the
earliest concept design phase. Otherwise, other motion criteria that result in
ship motions that allow personnel and equipment to work effectively can be
utilized during the concept design phase as long as the intent of the above sea
keeping specifications is not sacrificed. Tables showing sea state and the
practical effects of ship motion are included as appendices V and VI.
Station keeping is the ability to maintain a
position and heading relative to a station or track line that allows the
mission of the vessel to be completed. These vessels should be able to maintain
station and work in sea states up through 5 (2.5 4 m wave heights) at best
heading.
Dynamic positioning, using the best possible
and multiple navigation inputs, should be possible, in both relative and
absolute references in the following conditions:
-
35 - knot wind
-
Sea state 5
-
2 - knot current
The maximum excursion allowed should be ± 5
meters (equal to navigation accuracy) from a fixed location for operations such
as bore hole re-entry through sea state 4 at best heading and up to ± 20 meters
at best heading through sea state 5.
DP system design and operation should
minimize noise, vibration, and adverse effects on the operation of acoustic
systems as much as possible, and these issues should be evaluated early in the
design process.
The vessel
should maintain a track line while conducting underway surveys for spatial
sampling and geophysical surveys within ± 5 meters of intended track and with a
heading deviation (crab angle) of less than 45 degrees with 30 knots of wind,
up to sea state 5 (2.5 4 m wave heights) and 2 knots beam current. This
target may be required for ship speeds as low as 2 knots. Straight track
segments shall be maintained without large and/or frequent heading changes.
The chief requirement for ship control is
maximum visibility of deck work areas and alongside during science operations
and especially during deployment and retrieval of equipment. This should be
accomplished with a direct view to the maximum extent possible and enhanced
with closed circuit television systems. Portable hand-held control units or
alternate control stations could also be used at various locations that enhance
visibility and communications with the working deck during over the side
equipment handling. The functions, communications, and layout of the ship
control station should be carefully designed to enhance the interaction of ship
and science operations. For example, ship course, speed, attitude, and
positioning should be integrated with scientific information systems. Voice
communication systems between the bridge, labs, working decks, and machinery
spaces should be designed to effectively enhance ship control during science
operations. Also, an integrated bridge management and collision avoidance
system should be provided to help ensure safe and efficient science operations
in traffic congested coastal waters. Autopilot and DP systems should be
integrated with sophisticated control settings that allow appropriate response
levels for the type of work being conducted. These systems should also be designed
to enhance manual control of the vessel whenever needed.
It is desirable that two vessels (one in
Atlantic & one in Pacific) in this class have the capability to operate in
the presence of 6/10 coverage of first year ice and should be designed to meet
the criteria for the appropriate ice classification.
The design of weight handling appliances to
safely and effectively deploy, recover, and sometimes tow a wide variety of scientific
equipment should be considered at the earliest stages of the design cycle so
that they are integrated in the earliest layout of spaces. The entire suite of
over the side handling equipment including winches, wires, cranes, frames,
booms, and other appliances should be considered as an integrated system and
perhaps engineered and designed by a single contractor/manufacturer. Designs
for over the side appliances and equipment should include innovative thinking
and consider ideas that will reduce the amount of human intervention necessary
for launch and recovery of equipment, both on wires and un-tethered, and that
will control packages from the water to the deck. Heave compensation and other
techniques designed to minimize stress on cables and equipment should be
included in designs of these systems. These systems should be developed to
enhance personnel safety, reduce manning level requirements, increase
operability in heavier weather, and protect science and ships equipment.
The Stern Frame should be designed for a
dynamic safe working load of 30,000 lb through its full range of motion, and it
must structurally engineered to handle 1.5 times the breaking strength of
cables up to one inch, such as the tether for large ROV systems (up to 120,000
lbs breaking strength). The stern A-frame should have a 15-ft minimum
horizontal and 25-ft vertical clearance from the attachment point for the block
to the deck. At least a 12-ft inboard and outboard reach is required.
Side weight handling appliances or frames
should be designed to handle the loads for piston coring (e.g. 9/16 inch 3 x 19
wire) and have a safe working load of at least 20,000 lbs. Multiple locations
and/or multiple devices should be provided that will facilitate deploying
coring equipment, equipment from either side, and from the bow area. Portable
weight handling appliances should be located to work with winch and crane
locations, but be able to be relocated as necessary. The design of frames and
other weight handling equipment should allow removal to flush deck foundations.
The capability to carry additional over the
side weight handling appliances along working decks from bow to stern should be
included in the design.
Control stations(s) need to give the
operator protection, provide operations monitoring, and be located to provide
maximum visibility of over the side work.
The need for any human-rated systems should
be identified early in the design process.
These vessels should be designed to operate
with a new generation of oceanographic winch systems that are an integral part
of the equipment handling and deployment system. The winches should provide
fine control (0.1 m/min under full load); maximum winch speeds should be at
least 100 meters/min; and constant tensioning and other parameters, such as
speed of wire, should be easily programmable while at the same time responsive
manual control must be retained and immediately available at any time. Manual
intervention of winch control should be available instantly for emergency stop
and over-ride of automatic controls. Wire monitoring systems with inputs to
laboratory panels and shipboard recording systems should be included. Wire
monitoring systems should be integrated with wire maintenance, management, and
safe working load programs. Local and remote winch controls should be
available. Remote control stations should be co-located with ship control
stations and should be located for optimum operator visibility with reliable
communications to laboratories and ship control stations. Winch control and
power system design should be integrated with other components of over-the-side
handling systems to maximize safety and protection of equipment in heavy
weather operation and to maximize service life of installed wires. Adequate provisions
for connecting slip rings and ships power and data network to the E-M and F-O
cables should be included in the design.
Two hydrographic-type winches capable of
handling up to 10,000 meters of wire rope, electromechanical or fiber-optic
cables having diameters from 1/4" to 1/2" should normally be
installed. Winches should be readily adaptable to new wire designs with sizes
within a range appropriate to the overall size of the winch.
A heavy winch complex capable of handling
12,000 meters of 9/16" wire/synthetic wire rope and/or 10,000 meters of
0.68" electromechanical cable (up to 10 KVA power transmission) or fiber
optics cable should be permanently installed. This complex is envisioned as one
winch with multiple storage drums that could be interchanged in port or are
installed such that wire could be led from either drum to the traction winch.
Overall space and weight limitations would dictate whether or not more than one
storage drum could be installed simultaneously or may make it necessary to carry
somewhat shorter lengths of wire or cable.
Winches handling fiber-optic cable should be
traction winches that allow storage of the cable under lower tension unless new
technologies in wire construction allow otherwise. This includes winches for
both 0.68 and smaller cables.
Additional special-purpose winches (e.g.,
clean sampling, pumping, multi-conductor) may be installed temporarily at
various locations along working decks. Winch sizes and power requirements
should be considered during the design phase in order to establish reasonable
limits for the vessel size.
Permanently installed winches should be out
of the weather where feasible to reduce maintenance and increase service life.
The trawl/tow winch should be below the main deck, but smaller winches may be
located in semi-protected areas of the 01 deck to allow for better fairlead.
Wire fairleads, sheave size, and wire train
details need to be integrated with the general arrangement as early in the
design process as possible in order to increase the possibility of limiting
wire bends and overly complicated wire train. Sheave sizes, number, and
locations should be designed to maximize wire life and safe working load. It
should be possible to fairlead wires from permanent winches over the side or
over the stern.
Details of winch location should include
provisions for easily changing wire drums, spooling on new cable, and changing
from one storage drum to another, and for major overhaul of winches so that
these operations can take place with minimum time and effort in port. Some
operations, such as re-reeving wires through fairlead blocks or switching the
wire being used through a frame or with a traction winch, should be factored
into designs so that the operations can be performed at sea safely and
efficiently.
A suite of modern cranes should be provided
to handle heavier and larger equipment than can be handled by previous vessels
of this size and should be integrated with the entire over-the-side handling system.
A crane that can reach all working deck areas and that is capable of offloading
vans and equipment weighing up to 20,000 lbs to a pier or vehicle in port is
desirable. This will generally mean being able to reach approximately 20 feet
beyond one side of the ship (usually starboard) with the design weight. At
least one crane should be able to deploy buoys and other heavy equipment
weighing up to 10,000 lbs up to 12 feet over the starboard side at sea in sea
state 4.
One or two smaller cranes, articulated for
work with weights up to 4,000 lbs at deck level and at the sea surface, with
installation locations forward, amidships, and aft should be provided. They
would also be usable with re-locatable crutches as an over-the-side, cable
fairlead for vertical work and light towing. If the design includes the need to
store and launch boats or to deploy equipment from the foredeck, then design
for cranes or weight handling should accommodate those needs. Cranes may need
to have servo controls, motion compensation or damping as part of the
integrated over the side handling systems discussed earlier in that section.
The ship should be capable of installing and carrying portable cranes for
specialized purposes.
The need for any human-rated crane should be
identified early in the design cycle for that vessel.
The ship should be capable of towing large
scientific packages up to 10,000 lbs tension at 6 knots, and 25,000 lbs at 4
knots. Winch control should allow for fine control (± 0.1 meters/min) at full
load and all speeds. Winches should be capable of sustaining towing operations
continuously for days at a time.
Towing operations include mid- to low-load
operations with mid-water equipment such as towed undulating profilers, single
and multiple net systems, and biological mapping systems. Other systems may
involve larger loads and spike loads such as deep towed mapping systems, bottom
trawls, camera sleds, and dredges.
A spacious stern working area with 1,500 sq
ft minimum aft of deckhouses, open and as clear as possible from one side to
the other, is required. In addition, a contiguous waist work area along one
side (starboard preferred) that provides a minimum of an 80 ft length of clear
deck along the rail should be available. This area will to allow for 20 meter
piston coring and other operations. A minimum width of eight feet is needed for
the coring operations and the overall width of the waist deck should be wide
enough to accommodate all planned operations. The total amount of clear working
area available on the main deck aft should be maximized and equal to at least
2,000 sq ft. Among the possible van locations, the ability to install one ISO
standard van with room for passage along the starboard side should be
considered.
Deck loading should meet the current ABS
rules (i.e. designed for a 12 foot head or 767 lbs/sq ft) and provide a minimum
aggregate total of 60 tons on the main working deck. Point loading for some
specific large items (such as vans and winches) should be evaluated in the deck
design since these may generate loads of 1,500 lbs/sq ft or higher.
All working areas should provide 1-8NC (SAE
National Coarse Thread) threaded inserts on two-foot centers with a tolerance
of ± 1/16 on center. The bolt down pattern should be referenced to an
identifiable and relevant location on the deck to facilitate design of
equipment foundations. The inserts should be installed and tied to the deck
structure to provide maximum holding strength (rated strength should be tested
and certified). Tie down points should be provided for any clear deck space
that might be used for the installation of equipment including the foredeck,
0-1 deck, bridge, and flying bridge and should extend as close to the sides and
stern as possible.
Stern deck area should be as clear as
possible and highly flexible to accommodate large and heavy temporary
equipment. Bulwarks should be removable and all deck-mounted gear (winches,
cranes, a-frames, etc.) should be removable to a flush deck to provide flexible
re-configuration.
The design should provide a dry working deck
with provisions for allowing safe access for deployment and recovery of
free-floating equipment to and from the water. Traditionally low freeboard and
stern ramps have been provided as means to accomplish this goal. The use of
stern ramps has been limited and should be included in new designs only if
required by specific planned operations. Low freeboard facilitates launch and
recovery operations, but results in wetter decks and less reserve buoyancy. The
use of innovative design features to facilitate safe and effective equipment
launch and recovery while maintaining dry and safe weather decks should be
carefully considered. Removable bulwarks with hinged freeing ports to provide
dry deck conditions in beam or quartering seas have proved effective. The use
of a moon pool can be considered. The use of wood or synthetic decking material
to protect equipment, promote draining of water, and to provide for safer
footing should be considered.
A clear foredeck area should be capable of
accommodating small, specialized towers, booms, and other sampling equipment as
much as possible. Providing tie down sockets, power, water, and data
connections will facilitate flexible use of this space.
Additional deck areas should be provided
with the means for flexible and effective installation of incubators, vans,
workboats, and temporary equipment. (See relevant SMRs below for details)
All working decks should be equipped with
easily accessible power, fresh and seawater, air, data ports, and voice
communication systems. Adequate flow of ambient temperature seawater for
incubators should be available on decks supporting the installation of
incubators.
All working decks need to be covered by
direct visibility and/or television monitors from the bridge. Gear deployment
areas should maximize direct clear visibility.
The majority of the lab space should be
located in one or two large lab(s) that can be reconfigured, partitioned, and
adapted to various uses to allow for maximum flexibility. This flexibility is
an important design criterion.
To the maximum extent possible, labs should
all be located on the same deck adjacent to each other and adjacent to the main
working deck areas. Labs should be located so that none serve as general
passageways. Doors and hatches should be designed to facilitate installing
large equipment, loading scientific equipment, and bringing equipment to and
from the deck areas. Doorsills should be temporarily removable.
The total lab space should be approximately
2,000 sq ft (dimensions below are approximate guidelines).
A main (dry) lab area (1,000 sq ft) should
be designed to be flexible for frequent subdivision providing smaller
specialized labs.
A separate wet lab/hydro lab (400 sq ft) is
to be located contiguous to CTD/rosette launching and sampling areas.
An electronics/computer lab (300 sq ft)
should be provided as a separate lab or as a defined area in the main lab. This
space should be dry and separated as much as possible from sources of
electronic noise. It may include a central watch standing space that should
accommodate visiting science equipment as well as normally installed equipment.
Provisions for remote displays in other labs should be part of lab designs.
A separate electronics repair shop/work
space for resident technicians that includes provision for repair bench space
for visiting technicians is required. Storage space for resident technician
spares and tools should be defined in the design so that it is not taken from
useable laboratory space. A small separate room or partitioned space for IT
(server, telephone, and network) equipment is desirable.
A high bay/hanger space for multiple
purposes adjacent to the aft main deck should be included. This space should
support protected set up and repair of equipment, sample sorting, and other
related functions.
A climate controlled workspace or chamber
(approx. 100 sq ft) is required. This can be accommodated by providing a
separate walk-in space, or it can be provided with a laboratory van. If
provided as a permanent space this area should be useable for other purposes
when not needed as a climate controlled space. This space should be capable of
controlling temperature to ± 0.5°C and as low as 2°C. Lighting levels should
be controllable and programmable.
Design of HVAC systems should be integrated
with designed partitioning of laboratory spaces so that temperature control can
be achieved. Lighting control should also take into account partitioning plans.
Refrigerator/freezer space (100 sq ft)
should be built in to the lab space with provisions for temporary additional
space. Two units with similar configuration, and refrigeration equipment
capable of maintaining temperatures between 15°C and 10°C (these temperature
requirements should be verified during design) would allow for flexible use by
science projects needing freezer and/or refrigerator space. A 80°C freezer
should be available.
Flexibility and support for different types
of science operations within limited space are the important design criteria
for these vessels. Benches and cabinetry should be flexible and reconfigurable
(e.g. SIO erecter set and/or Unistrut). Bench and shelving heights should be
variable to allow for installation and use of various types of equipment. Bench
tops should be constructed of materials that will allow equipment to be tied
down or secured easily and that can be cleaned and replaced as necessary. The
ability to easily install or remove cabinets and drawers as needed should be
included. Provisions for large, flat chart/map tables including a light table
should be incorporated in the lab design.
Refer to the section on habitability for
guidance on the importance of lighting, air circulation, etc.
Labs should be fabricated using
materials that are uncontaminated and easily cleaned. Furnishings, HVAC, doors,
hatches, cable runs, and fittings must be planned to facilitate maintaining
maximum lab cleanliness. Spaces and materials that may trap chemical
spills should be avoided.
Static dissipative deck coatings to reduce
static damage to electronics should be required in ET shop and computer/electronics
spaces, and recommended in other lab spaces. Deck coatings should protect the
ships structure, be easily cleanable, easily repairable, and resistant to
damage from chemical spills. Deck materials or padding should provide safe
footing and minimize fatigue to working personnel that need to stand for long
periods.
The distance from the deck to the underside
of the finished overhead should be 7.5 to 8 feet. Headroom space and room for
the installation of tall equipment should be maximized while balancing the need
for cable trays, adequately sized ventilation ducts, lighting, etc.
Through the design process, minimize the
incursion of ship stuff (e.g., air handlers, gear lockers, and food freezers)
into the lab space.
Labs should have bolt downs (1/2-13NC on
two foot centers) in the deck in addition to Unistrut on the bulkheads and in
the overhead. Deck bolt downs on one-foot centers should be considered for some
areas.
Locations for two fume hoods in the main lab
and one in the wet lab should be included in the laboratory layouts. Exhaust
ducting, electrical connections, and sink connections should be permanently
installed in place to allow for easy installation and removal of fume hoods.
Fume hood locations should accommodate hoods at least four feet wide.
Sinks should allow for flexible
installation, removal, and additional sinks when needed. At least two locations
in the wet lab and four locations in the main lab (some of which are located
with the fume hoods discussed above) should be provided with stubbed out
plumbing at convenient locations. More locations can be provided if possible.
Drains should be designed to work at all times, taking into account operating
conditions that create various trim and list conditions, rolling, etc. Drains
should be capable of being diverted over the port side, into holding tanks, or
to the normal waste system, and should allow for continuous discharge of
running water. Sinks should be large enough to accommodate five gallon buckets
and the cleaning of other equipment.
Work with radioactive materials should be
restricted to radiation lab vans that remain isolated from the interior of the
vessel.
Each lab area is to have a separate
electrical circuit on a clean bus with continuous delivery capability of at
least 40-volt amperes per square foot of lab deck area (the amount of power
needed will be verified at the time of design). Un-interruptible power should
be available throughout all laboratory spaces, bridge/chart room, and science
staterooms. The use of modular UPS design can be considered. Separate circuits
should be available for tools and other equipment that will not interfere with
clean power circuits. Use current IEEE 45 or equivalent standards for shipboard
power and wiring and current IEEE standard for UPS and clean power
specifications.
Electrical service for the labs should
include:
-
110 VAC, single phase 75-100 amps
service for each lab;
-
208/230 VAC, 3-phase, 50 amps, readily
available (i.e., in the panel, or 1-2 outlets); and
-
480VAC, 3-phase available on demand
(for example, run into the lab from auxiliary outlets on deck).
There should be dedicated science wire-ways with
dedicated transits to all science and instrumentation locations, including
locations at the bow, at the seawater intake locations, and at winches. Science
wire ways should be separated from power and other signal cables. There should
also be non-energized wiring installed and dedicated to supporting project
science systems (appropriate gauge and number of conductors determined during
design phase). Provisions for easy installation and removal of temporary wiring
should be made.
Uncontaminated seawater should be supplied
to most laboratories, vans, and several key deck areas. This water must be
collected as close as possible to the bow and piping must be made from
materials acceptable to the majority of science users. Provisions for keeping
piping clear and clean should be included in the design. Provisions for
changing pumps, valves, and piping when necessary should be included in the
design. Provisions for connecting multiple users in addition to semi-permanent
equipment should be provided. A backup or alternate system should be
considered. Provision of space and connections as close to the intake as
possible are desired.
Clean hot and cold water should be provided
to sinks and equipment in labs and on deck. Good feed water to instrumentation
to make 18 mega-ohm water (e.g., Millipore Milli-Q) is required. Ships water
made with commercial reverse osmosis equipment is not adequate without further
treatment. Space or equipment for adequate clean water (18 mega-ohm) supply
should be provided.
A separate, higher volume seawater source
with temperature control or high enough flow to maintain ambient surface
seawater temperature for incubations should be provided. Sea chest location and
maintenance should be designed for proper operation on a continuous basis. This
system should be separate from fire fighting, ballast, and ship service
saltwater systems, or designed as part of a flexible and redundant seawater
supply system that allows operation of ships service systems without interfering
with science operations.
The ships service compressed air supply
(@100 psi) should be available in the labs and have the ability to add filters
as needed. Clean dry air needs are to be handled by bottled air or user
supplied filter systems. Volume of air and whether or not a continuous supply
will be required should be considered during the design stages in order to
ensure that installed compressors are properly rated. The need to support high
volume or specialized air requirements such as seismic work, driving air
powered pumps, or SCUBA tank recharging should be clearly specified and
carefully considered early in the design process. Provisions for removable
fixtures in the lab spaces designed to secure compressed gas tanks need to be
included.
Design of seawater systems should be
integrated with instrumentation requirements and should be conducted with
review and input by expert user groups. In particular, current advice on
acceptable materials and specifications for providing bubble-free
uncontaminated seawater under all steaming and sea conditions should be sought.
The vessel should be capable of carrying two
(2) standardized 8 ft by 20 ft portable deck vans that may be laboratory,
berthing, storage, or other specialized use. Also it is desirable that it
include the capability to carry up to two (2) additional portable, possibly
non-standard size, vans (500 sq ft total) on superstructure and working decks
(total of four vans).
-
Hookup provision for fresh water,
uncontaminated seawater, compressed air, drains, Peck and Hale fittings,
communications, data, and shipboard monitoring systems. Connections and other
provisions for vans should be designed around UNOLS standard vans.
-
Electrical connections for 20 amps 480
VAC 3-phase, 40 amps 230 VAC 3-phase, and 40 50 amps 208 VAC single phase
should be provided. 110 VAC single phase may also need to be provided, but
usually can be provided by panels in the van from step down transformers.
(Verify requirements at time of design.)
-
Van should have direct access to ship
interior, but located in wave-sheltered spaces. Safe access to and from vans is
a primary design consideration.
-
Radiation vans should be capable of
installation so that they can be isolated from the interior of the vessel while
still allowing safe access for personnel.
-
Supporting connections at several
locations around ship is desirable.
-
Ship should be capable of offloading
vans using own cranes.
Although storage space for multiple legs may
not be required for this class of vessel as often as on Global Class vessels,
the provision of dedicated storage/workshop space for science and ship use will
enhance the effective utilization of lab space and allow for some expeditionary
cruises. Approximately 5,000 cubic feet of storage space that could also be
used as shop or workspace when needed would be desirable. Storage space on this
class vessel would be used for shipboard technicians tools and shared use equipment
in addition to project related equipment. Some open space for large items and
some space with shelving would be desirable. Access to the storage space should
be safe and effective from the labs and working deck. The ability to load and
remove large, heavy items and to properly secure them in the storage area
should be provided.
Adequate provisions should be made for ships
stores and spares and may need to be included as a separate defined area in the
same storage area. Providing adequate and specified storage for both the
science projects and ships needs will help to ensure maintainability,
operability, and prevent encroachment into science areas by required ship
needs.
Provide accessible safe storage for chemical
reagents and hazardous (non-radioactive) materials. The use of lockers or
storage containers outside the lab space should be considered. Accommodating
required separations of certain materials needs to be provided. Provisions for
storing gasoline safely should be identified in the design. Radioactive
materials would be stored and used only in radiation vans. Only working
quantities of other hazardous materials would be stored in the labs. Provisions
for safe storage of gas cylinders should be considered. (See lab water and air
section above.)
A variable science load of 200 LT is desired
and should be at least 100 LT. This load would include science related
equipment, supplies, and instrumentation not normally installed on the vessel.
Examples are mooring equipment, ROV systems, temporary winches, rock and mud
samples, lab equipment, temporary cranes or frames, vans, and extra workboats.
Items that would NOT be included are regularly installed winches (permanent and
removable), Stern A-Frames, other normally installed handling equipment, rescue
boats, and ships workboats.
To prevent losing this variable science load
to the inevitable growth in light ship displacement, a service life allowance
of approximately 5% additional load capacity should be included in the design.
The ships ballast system should have the capacity and capability to compensate
for a changing science load during a cruise.
At least one (1) 16-ft or larger inflatable
(foam collar or semi-rigid) boat should be located for ease of launching and recovery.
Include the capability to carry and deploy a scientific workboat 25-30 ft LOA
outfitted specially for supplemental operations at sea.
Required rescue boats may be capable of
serving as a science workboat with careful planning. Otherwise, workboats will
be required in addition to any IMO/USCG required rescue boats.
The main mast and a second lightweight and
removable mast will both have yardarms capable of supporting up to five
scientific packages weighing between 30 and 100 lbs. Radar, radio, and other RF
frequency generators will not be installed on these yardarms, but
meteorological packages could be. Meteorological packages should be mounted in
locations where the air mass is disturbed as little as possible by the ships
structure. Use modeling to determine the best configuration. Provisions for
mounting the lightweight mast in the least disturbed air possible should be
included in the design.
The main mast should be designed such that
ships crew/technicians can easily/safely/comfortably work aloft on the mast to
change sensors and instruments. Any secondary mast should be similarly designed
or be easily lowered to service instruments. Connections and wiring will be
installed to allow easy connection between sensors and instruments located on
the masts and the vessels fiber-optic data transfer network.
A crows nest may be considered to support
science operations such as marine mammal work, bird surveys, and others.
Clearance under bridges should be considered
on a regional basis for determining the maximum allowable height (air draft) of
the vessel. The use of innovative designs should be considered if bridge
clearance is a limiting factor.
Design of deck layout and science
infrastructure should include consideration for carrying out a certain amount
of deck incubation or optical experiments without interfering with other deck
operations. This deck area must receive as much unobstructed sunlight as
possible. At the same time, the weight of wet incubators may need to be
considered for decks that are high above the baseline. Specifying deck area to
be used for these experiments early in the design process will help to ensure
that other design decisions do not have a negative impact on providing this
capability and will ensure that the required services are provided. Other
important design considerations are that a continuous flow of near surface
seawater at ambient temperatures (< 1 degree C above ambient) is available
with adequate flow (e.g., minimum 50 gals/min) using a dedicated system (i.e.
not fire pump or flushing pump) in order to maintain the proper temperature for
the experiments.
The advice and input of expert scientific
user groups should be sought as part of the design process to ensure current
requirements are met.
Design of the pilothouse area and/or flying
bridge should include provisions for obstruction free (at least a combined180
degrees forward of the beam) observations by two to three scientific personnel.
These bird and mammal observers may be on watch continuously during daylight
hours and observation locations should include chairs, access to
navigation/data network, and a protected location for portable computers and/or
logbooks. Mounting locations for big eyes or similar devices may be required
for some observers. Observer locations should be free from radiation hazards
generated by RADARS and other communication equipment.
Best available navigation (real-time
kinematics, differential, P-code, and 3-axis GPS) capability shall be provided
with appropriate interfaces to data systems and ship control processors for
geo-referencing of all data, dynamic positioning, and automatic computer
steering and speed control. Back-ups and redundant systems should be provided
to ensure continuous coverage.
Best available electronic charting (e.g.,
ECDIS) and bridge management system shall be provided.
GPS aided attitude heading reference system
(AHRS) and/or other available systems for determining ship heading, speed,
pitch, roll, yaw, etc. as accurately as possible should be installed and
integrated into ship and science systems.
Bridge navigation, management, and safety
systems will meet all regulatory requirements and facilitate effective science
operations with minimal manning. Systems should be designed so that any changes
to bridge navigational display and control systems will not have any effect on
science data collection processes. Communication of waypoint information
between science and bridge system should be an integral part of the system.
Specification, purchase, and installation of systems should take place as close
to delivery as possible to ensure the most up-to-date systems.
Provisions for temporary installation of
short or ultra short baseline acoustic systems and other navigations systems
when necessary should be included so that they can be integrated with existing
systems.
A modern and expandable data network should
be integrated into the design for all spaces on the research vessel including
labs, deck areas, instrument mounting spaces, bridge, machinery spaces, common areas,
and staterooms. Wireless networks should be available in laboratories.
Connecting cables/wiring should be installed to all areas and include
provisions for growth.
Specifications for actual cables/wiring
should be made as close to installation as possible in order to assure the most
up-to-date equipment. Routers, connectors, and associated equipment necessary
to operate the network should be specified, purchased, and installed as close
to delivery as possible for the same reason. The design and specifications for
the data network, general computing capability, and on board post processing
capability should be completed by a knowledgeable user and operator group based
on best available equipment and technology at the time that it is compatible
with equipment commonly used by ship users.
High performance computing systems that are
reliable and redundant will be needed for data logging, processing, plotting,
and display, especially for multibeam swath mapping cruises. These systems will
be used by shipboard technicians as well as by the scientific party. Final
selection of computers, disks, tapes, plotters, and screens should be delayed
as long as practical, to keep current with technological advances and to insure
compatibility with the vessels operating institution.
Standards for shipboard wiring
(IEEE 45 or current guidelines) address keeping signal and power wiring
separate and should be adhered to. During the design phase routes for wires to
be installed should be planned and layouts should include permanent
non-energized wires as well as provisions for temporary wiring. Such
plans should add flexibility and accommodate growth in equipment and temporary
project equipment.
A well designed system for real time
collection of data from permanently installed sensors and equipment as well as
provision for temporarily installed sensors and equipment that allows for
archiving, display, distribution, and application of this data for a variety of
scientific and ship board purposes should be designed and specified by a group
of knowledgeable science users and operators. This system should be
integrated with the data network and other onboard systems with access to data
and displays available in staterooms and all working spaces. While planning for
this system should begin at early stages to ensure that it is integrated into
the ships infrastructure, the actual specification of hardware and operating
system should be made as close to delivery of the vessel as possible to ensure
an up to date system. Final location of intakes for
underway seawater sampling should be determined following final hull design to
minimize thermal contamination, bubbles, intake blockage, and to maximize water
flow.
Internal communication system providing high
quality voice communications throughout all science spaces, working, and
berthing areas should be provided. Point to point and all-call capabilities are
required such as 21mc and 1mc systems. A sound powered phone emergency system
should be included.
All staterooms should have phones for
internal communications. A primary and backup (spare) telephone switch capable
of providing one voice line to every space on the ship and access to off-ship
services such as INMARSAT or equivalent equipment should be provided. Voice
telephone wiring to all spaces on the vessel should be installed. Consideration
should be given to including installed equipment to support pagers, mobile
phone/radio (UHF) communications, or other versatile methods for contacting key
(or all) personnel.
Alarm and information panels should be
installed in key workspaces, common areas, and all staterooms. The alarm system
and information panels should connect to vans seamlessly.
The ability to install closed circuit
television monitoring and recording of working areas should be provided to
improve operations and safety.
The ability to install monitors (flat
screen) for all ship control, environmental parameters, science and over the
side equipment performance should be available in all, or most, science spaces
and common areas.
Infrastructure for internal communications
and data networks should adhere to IEEE 45 standards (or current guidelines)
for keeping signal and power wiring separate and other safe reliable design
considerations.
Reliable voice channels for continuous
communications to shore stations (including home laboratories), other ships,
boats, and aircraft should be provided. This includes satellite, cellular, VHF,
HF, and UHF (best available and required by regulations).
Voice and data communications should be
provided through the best available systems (currently cellular (near shore)
and satellite based systems). Plans should include high-speed data (best current
capability) communication links to shore labs and other ships on a continuous
basis; data transmission systems should be connected to internal networks and
phone systems to provide accountable calling, network (internet), and email
access. Transmission of video, photographs, and large data sets, as well as
access to data sources and web sites ashore on a continuous basis, should be
available.
Facsimile communications or other methods to
transmit graphics and hard-copy text at high speeds on demand are also
required.
A programmable VHF and UHF radio-direction
finder capable of supporting frequencies utilized by transmitters on drifters,
AUVs, buoys, and other science systems should be available. Current and up to
date requirements should be verified as close to delivery as possible.
Locations for satellite, cellular, and other
line of sight antennas should be clear and as high as possible. The design
should minimize interference between systems, provide for installation of
additional systems, and ease of maintenance as much as possible. Provisions for
some permanently installed wiring from temporary antenna mounting locations or
from permanently installed antennae to the laboratories to facilitate
user-installed antennae or receiving equipment should be included.
Design should include capabilities for
acoustic communication with submersibles, data buoys, and underwater sensors
based on currently utilized technology as well as the ability to tie underwater
data transmission and voice signals with other communications systems.
Provisions should be included for changing or installing underwater acoustic
transducers as needed.
Plans need to provide locations for
installing temporary antennae including antenna to receive direct satellite
readouts of environmental remote sensing data. External communications systems
should be completely integrated with internal voice and data systems to the
maximum extent possible.
The infrastructure and space for continuous underway
sampling and data collection for as many ocean and atmospheric parameters as
possible should be included in all design phases and construction details. This
would include, but not be limited to surface (or near surface) seawater
temperature, salinity, fluorescence, chemical, and biological measurements.
Provisions for adequate continuous flow of seawater in all underway conditions
to all permanently installed and temporary sensors should be included. System
design including proper location for equipment, pump materials and design,
de-bubblers, screening, intakes, and plumbing materials that ensure accurate
measurements should be made based on current advice from science experts.
Provisions for sampling clean,
uncontaminated, and ambient temperature seawater while underway at all speeds
should be included in the design.
Acoustic capabilities and quiet operation
are important design criteria for this class of vessel. Each ship should be as
acoustically quiet as is feasible considering the choice of all shipboard
systems, their location, and installation. Special consideration should be
given to machinery noise isolation, including heating and ventilation.
Propeller(s) are to be designed for minimal cavitation, and hull form should
attempt to minimize bubble sweep down. Consideration of specialized mounting
arrangements for transducers to enhance system performance should be part of
the design process utilizing past experience and expertise of equipment
manufacturers and expert users. Design criteria for noise reduction should take
into account reducing radiated noise into the water and ship that may affect
biological research objectives, acoustic system performance, and habitability.
Other design considerations should be directed at maximizing the performance of
installed acoustic systems. Guidance, advice, and operational criteria from
appropriate experts should be used during the design and construction process
to accomplish these high priority goals and to identify the future scientific
requirements.
Installed systems should be based on the
currently best available systems and should include the following types of
systems:
-
12 kHz single beam deep-sea echo sounder
that meets the International Hydrographic Office (IHO) standards for accuracy.
-
Sub-bottom profiler operating in the 2
to 8 kHz frequency range with an array suitable for use with a 10 kW
transmitter, or best available system at acquisition time. System should
include frequency and amplitude modulated transceiver with capability to
operate at fixed frequency with variable ping length. Allocate transducer space
for a parametric sub-bottom profiler.
-
A multi-beam swath mapping sonar system
capable of one degree or better resolution at full ocean depth for bathymetric
mapping (meet IHO standards), and for guiding seafloor sampling/photography and
deep tow geophysical profiling studies. The system should be capable of
obtaining reasonable data at depths as shallow as 50 meters.
-
Acoustic Doppler Current Profiling
system with transducer wells for more than one frequency (i.e. 38, 75 or 150
kHz); hull mounted with a combined capability of 1000 meter depth and fine
scale shallow water performance.
-
Systems for acoustic navigation,
tracking and communications with submersibles and other underwater systems.
Transducer wells, void spaces, or dagger
boards should include the following provisions:
-
Locations fore and aft to optimize
transducer operation.
-
The ability to change and service
transducers easily while the vessel is at sea.
-
Several transducer-mounting locations
that can be adapted to a wide variety of transducers within a reasonable size
range. Use of centerboard or other innovative methods to place transducers in
location for optimum performance.
-
Design for expanding transducer numbers,
changing requirements, and equipment to ensure the ability to change and add
acoustics systems over the life of the vessel.
Provisions should be made in the structure
of the hull and/or deck for mounting temporary transducer/transponder poles on
one or both sides of the vessel.
Provisions are required for installing
equipment that is brought on board occasionally such as SeaSoar, MOCNESS, MR1,
Deep Tow, towed sonars, portable seismic reflection systems, gravimeters, and
specialized ADCPs. Taught and slack tether ROVs, AUVs, remotely piloted
aircraft, and other systems should also be readily accommodated. The types of
equipment will need to be defined during concept and preliminary design cycles,
and as much flexibility as possible should be designed. Generally providing
power sources, deck space, mounting locations, and data connections will
accommodate most needs, however, in some cases it may be necessary to provide
fuel, hydraulic power or other services.
The electrical system capacity and design
should take into account provisions for the cruise variable connection of
systems with large electrical motors or power demands. Provision for multiple
simultaneous connections should be possible for 480V 3-phase, 208 230V
3-phase and single phase, and 110V single phase with up to 50 amps service for
vans, laboratories, and on deck. Final design specifications should take into
consideration common electrical requirements for currently used and planned
equipment, and excess capacity should be designed in to the maximum extent
possible.
All liquid discharges from sinks, deck
drains, sewage treatment systems, cooling systems, ballast pumps, fire fighting
pumps, and other shipboard or science systems should be on the port side, with
tanks capable of holding normal discharges for a minimum of 24 hours. Design
should allow for zero discharges on the starboard side, including deck drains,
when required during normal operations.
A well thought out waste management plan
should be developed during the design phases so that these vessels can prevent,
control, or minimize all discharge of garbage and other wastes at sea. The use
of all appropriate and best available systems and methods such as compactors,
incinerators, vacuum toilets, low flow showers, oily water separators,
efficient marine sanitary devices, recycling, adequate holding tanks, and
others should be used to prevent, reduce, and control waste discharges. The
location of garbage storage areas should be well defined. The vessel should be
designed and equipped so that it can effectively adhere to all local, state,
federal, and international (MARPOL) pollution regulations, to prevent
contamination of science experiments, protect the environment, and to ensure
the health and safety of embarked personnel.
An on-deck hazardous storage capability for
chemicals plus a holding capability for class C waste should be provided.
Provisions for low-level radioactive waste storage will be incorporated in the
radiation vans.
Discharges of engine exhaust, tank and
sewage system vents, exhaust from fume hoods, and ventilation systems should be
designed so they do not re-enter the ships interior or ventilation systems,
and so they can all be directed away from the ship at the same time with proper
placement of the relative wind (i.e. all on the port side aft). Exhaust and air
system discharges should be separated from sensor locations as much as
possible.
Starting with the earliest elements of the
design cycle, the ability to maintain, repair, and overhaul these vessels, and
the installed machinery and systems efficiently and effectively with a small
crew should be a high priority. This ability is a science mission requirement
in the sense that increased reliability and fewer resources and man-hours
devoted to maintenance and repair means more time and personnel support for
science. Ship layout should include adequate space for ship repair and
maintenance functions such as workshops with proper tools, spare parts storage,
and accommodations for an adequate number of crew. Design specifications should
include provisions for reliable equipment (including adequate backups and
spares) that are protected from the elements to the maximum extent possible.
Equipment monitoring systems and planned maintenance systems combined with
configurations that provide for reasonable access by repair and maintenance
personnel will help ensure that equipment remains in the best possible
condition. Specifications for equipment should require all
equipment vendors to provide parts lists, manuals, and maintenance procedures
in electronic form for integration with a Computerized Maintenance Management
System (CMMS). This will all reduce the overall cost and effort for
maintaining a reliable research vessel.
Design should ensure that the vessel could
be effectively and safely operated in support of science by a well trained, but
relatively small crew complement. The regional conditions, available ports, and
shore side services should be considered during the design process. The impact
of draft, sail area, layout, and other features of the design on the ability to
operate the vessel during normal science operations should be evaluated by
experienced operators, technicians, scientists, and crewmembers.
A thorough evaluation of construction costs,
outfitting costs, annual operating costs, and long-term maintenance costs
should be conducted during the design cycle in order to determine the impact of
design features on the total life cycle costs. Economy of operation has been a
big benefit of the smaller classes of research vessels, and this aspect should
be retained as much as possible in the new Ocean Class designs.
The impact of USCG and international
regulations on the design and outfitting of these vessels should be carefully
considered.
Mission Scenarios
|
Type
of work: |
2D and 3D high resolution chirp sonar
(deep towed) profiling |
||
|
Number
in science party: |
13 |
||
|
Time
of year: |
Year round |
||
|
Area
of operations: |
Mid-Atlantic U.S. (New Jersey shelf) |
||
|
Dist.
from nearest port: |
100 nm |
Transit speed: |
12 knots. |
|
Dist.
Survey/towing: |
3,000 nm |
Towing/survey spd: |
4.5 - 5.5 knots. |
|
Days
on station |
Days
towing/survey |
Days
transit |
Total
days |
|
2 |
30 |
2 |
34 |
|
Major
or special equipment: |
We will bring our own tow-body and towing
winch. We will also install our own WAAS/DGPS navigation equipment and
install a boom over the side (stbd) to track the fish. |
||
|
Type
of work: |
Piston coring up to 15 meter long in up
to 4km water depth. |
||
|
Number
in science party: |
12 |
||
|
Time
of year: |
Spring - Fall |
||
|
Area
of operations: |
Eel River/Santa Barbara/Monterey |
||
|
Dist.
from nearest port: |
100 nm |
Transit speed: |
9 + knots. |
|
Dist.
Survey/towing: |
- |
Towing/survey spd: |
- |
|
Days
on station |
Days
towing/survey |
Days
transit |
Total
days |
|
20 |
- |
0
4 |
20
24 |
|
Major
or special equipment: |
Heavy gear handling and rigging for piston
coring |
||
|
Type
of work: |
Launching & servicing gear on MARS
(NEPTUNE) type observatories. Supporting observations |
||
|
Number
in science party: |
16 |
||
|
Time
of year: |
Summer for most, some operations year
round |
||
|
Area
of operations: |
Monterey Bay/ Juan de Fuca Plate |
||
|
Dist.
from nearest port: |
30 100 nm |
Transit speed: |
9 + knots |
|
Dist.
Survey/towing: |
- |
Towing/survey spd: |
- |
|
Days
on station |
Days
towing/survey |
Days
transit |
Total
days |
|
5
6 |
7 |
0
1 |
12
14 |
|
Major
or special equipment: |
Dynamic positioning, heavy gear handling
on deck, and lowering to bottom. |
||
Type
of work: |
Current meter moorings, ADCP &
Triaxus/Sea Soar type survey, CTD transect, productivity experiments |
||
|
Number
in science party: |
24 |
||
|
Time
of year: |
Spring or early summer, upwelling season
or winter |
||
|
Area
of operations: |
Coastal shelf off Point Arena,
California |
||
|
Dist.
from nearest port: |
100 nm |
Transit speed: |
12 knots |
|
Dist.
Survey/towing: |
1,500 |
Towing/survey spd: |
8 knots |
|
Days
on station |
Days
towing/survey |
Days
transit |
Total
days |
|
14 |
10 |
3 |
27 |
|
Major
or special equipment: |
Crane and anchor sled for mooring work,
ADCP, CTD, towed undulating profiler, incubators |
||
|
Type
of work: |
Intensive biological and physical survey
and drifter following on the continental shelf |
||
|
Number
in science party: |
22 |
||
|
Time
of year: |
Spring and Summer |
||
|
Area
of operations: |
Northeast US coastal waters |
||
|
Dist.
from nearest port: |
200 nm |
Transit speed: |
14 knots |
|
Dist.
Survey/towing: |
|
Towing/survey spd: |
|
|
Days
on station |
Days
towing/survey |
Days
transit |
Total
days |
|
7 |
2 |
1 |
10 |
|
Major
or special equipment: |
MOCNESS, light profilers, CTD/rosette, incubators,
ship-to-shore data link for satellite data, ADCP. |
||
|
Type
of work: |
Deployment/turn-around of moorings |
||
|
Number
in science party: |
6 |
||
|
Time
of year: |
All |
||
|
Area
of operations: |
South Atlantic |
||
|
Dist.
from nearest port: |
2000 nm |
Transit speed: |
10 knots |
|
Dist.
Survey/towing: |
|
Towing/survey spd: |
|
|
Days
on station |
Days
towing/survey |
Days
transit |
Total
days |
|
4 |
1 |
20 |
25 |
|
Major
or special equipment: |
Anchors and hardware for 3 moorings |
||
Type
of work: |
Lagrangian Float Studies |
||
|
Number
in science party: |
11 |
||
|
Time
of year: |
Any/All times |
||
|
Area
of operations: |
Open Ocean |
||
|
Dist.
from nearest port: |
>1000 nm |
Transit speed: |
12+ knots |
|
Dist.
Survey/towing: |
3500 nm |
Towing/survey spd: |
10+ knots |
|
Days
on station |
Days
towing/survey |
Days
transit |
Total
days |
|
|
27 |
8 |
35 |
|
Major
or special equipment: |
4 Sound Source moorings, CTD casts with bottles,
ADCP to 1000 m, RAFOS float deployments |
||
|
Type
of work: |
Open Ocean Biophysical/Chemical
Interactions |
||
|
Number
in science party: |
12 |
||
|
Time
of year: |
Summer |
||
|
Area
of operations: |
North Atlantic |
||
|
Dist.
from nearest port: |
300 nm |
Transit speed: |
12+ knots |
|
Dist.
Survey/towing: |
|
Towing/survey spd: |
6 knots |
|
Days
on station |
Days
towing/survey |
Days
transit |
Total
days |
|
|
26 |
|
28 |
|
Major
or special equipment: |
Pumping SeaSoar, RF/ARGOS-tracked surface
drifters, incubations, radioactive tracers, ADCP |
||
|
Type of work: |
Laying cable in support of
observatories (e.g., NEPTUNE) |
||
|
Number in science party: |
20 |
||
|
Time of year: |
Prefer all year, but bias to
summer |
||
|
Area of operations: |
NE Pac |
||
|
Dist. from nearest port: |
500 nm |
Transit speed: |
12 knots |
|
Dist. Survey/towing: |
100 nm |
Towing/survey spd: |
5 knots |
|
Days on station |
Days towing/survey |
Days transit |
Total days |
|
10 |
5 |
5 |
20 |
|
Major or special equipment: |
Cable laying equipment, ROV |
||
|
Type of work: |
Moving ship tomography |
||
|
Number in science party: |
15 |
||
|
Time of year: |
All year |
||
|
Area of operations: |
North Pacific, North Atlantic |
||
|
Dist. from nearest port: |
500 nm |
Transit speed: |
|
|
Dist. Survey/towing: |
|
Towing/survey spd: |
|
|
Days on station |
Days towing/survey |
Days transit |
Total days |
|
15 |
|
15 |
30 |
|
Major or special equipment: |
Acoustic sources and power
supplies, navigation |
||
Science Mission Requirements Study Process and
Participants
Federal agencies were urged by
the Academic Fleet Review (Schmitt et al., 1999; conducted for the National
Science Foundation and approved by the National Science Board in May 1999) to
begin the process of long-range planning for the renewal of the fleet. As a
result of this report, the Federal agencies, through the Federal Oceanographic
Facilities Committee (FOFC), and with input from the academic community (via
UNOLS), produced a plan entitled "Charting the Future for the National
Academic Research Fleet" <http://www.geo-prose.com/projects/fleet_rpt_1.html>.
Over the next 20 years, the Plan calls for a fleet that is more capable than at
present, but fewer in number. In the Plan, four classes of ships (Global,
Ocean, Regional and Local) were used to describe the future fleet. The
"Ocean Class ships will fulfill a critical need in fleet modernization, by
replacing the aging "Intermediate" ships with vessels of increased
endurance, technological capability, and number of science berths. These will
be ocean-going vessels, though not globally ranging."
An Ocean Class steering
committee was appointed by the UNOLS Council in February 2002 to lead the
process of developing science mission requirements for this new class of
vessel, which is the first step towards design and construction. The
steering committee members were:
|
Dave Hebert (Chair) University of Rhode Island |
|
|
Joe Coburn Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution |
James Cochran Lamont-Doherty Earth
Observatory |
|
Tim Cowles Oregon State University |
Charles Flagg Brookhaven National Laboratory |
|
Dennis Hansell University of Miami |
Bob Knox Scripps Institution of
Oceanography |
Starting with the parameters
outlined in the FOFC fleet renewal plan and with previously published SMRs an
online questionnaire was created and publicized widely in the UNOLS
community. More than sixty researchers, ship operators and technicians
provided input that was used in preparing the initial draft of a new SMR.
A workshop was held on July
23-24th in Salt Lake City, Utah to draft comprehensive science
mission requirements for the Ocean Class. This workshop was funded
through the UNOLS office grants and was attended by researchers, technicians,
ship operators, funding agency program managers and naval architects.
As a result of the workshop a
draft Ocean Class SMR report was prepared and has been available for community
review and input on the UNOLS web page. A summary description based on the SMR
as well as a table of major characteristics is provided (Appendix II). The
detailed SMR is a more comprehensive document that attempts to provide enough
detail to guide the design and build cycle from concept designs to outfitting
of the finished vessel. This makes for a much longer document than previous
versions of SMRs, but we hope this will serve to ensure that important details
are considered starting at the earliest stages of design.
All interested members of the
community were asked to review the complete SMR document and provide feedback
to help produce the final report. The online version provides comment blocks
for each section. Community input to the Ocean Class SMR Questionnaire is
posted on the UNOLS website at <http://www.unols.org/fic/ocean/ocsmrinput.html>.
This document and further
developments in the academic fleet renewal process are posted to the UNOLS
Fleet Improvement Committee web page:
UNOLS and the Fleet Improvement
Committee would like to thank all of the participants of the Ocean Class
Workshop and those who participated by providing community input.
Ocean Class SMR Workshop
Participants:
|
Thomas S. Althouse |
SIO |
Shellene Johnson |
NAVSEA |
|
John F. Bash |
URI |
Pete Kilroy |
NAVSEA |
|
Dale Chayes |
LDEO |
Robert A. Knox |
UCSD |
|
Joe Coburn |
WHOI |
Craig M. Lee |
U Washington |
|
Bill Cochlan |
SFSU |
Paul Ljunggren |
LDEO |
|
James, R. Cochran |
LDEO |
James M. Meehan |
NMFS |
|
Timothy J. Cowles |
OSU |
Stephen P. Miller |
SIO |
|
Emma R. (Dolly) Dieter |
NSF |
Tim Pfeiffer |
ONR |
|
Charles N. Flagg |
BNL |
Rob Pinkel |
SIO |
|
Daniel J. Fornari |
WHOI |
Mike Prince |
UNOLS |
|
John S. Freitag |
ONR |
Michael R. Reeve |
NSF |
|
Dennis Hansell |
RSMAS/MAC |
Daniel Rolland |
JJMA |
|
David Hebert |
URI |
|
|
Ocean Class SMR Community Input
Participants:
|
Mark Altabet |
SMAST/U Mass |
Robert Knox |
SIO/UCSD |
|
Robert Ballard |
URI |
James Ledwell |
WHOI |
|
Richard Barber |
Duke University |
Craig Lee |
U Washington |
|
Jack Barth |
OSU |
Paul Ljunggren |
LDEO |
|
Jack Bash |
URI |
Peter Lonsdale |
SIO |
|
Igor Belkin |
URI |
Michael McCartney |
WHOI |
|
Joan Bernhard |
U South Carolina |
Craig McNeil |
URI |
|
Kevin Briggs |
NRL |
James Meehan |
NMFS |
|
Brian Buest |
WHOI |
Anthony Michaels |
USC |
|
Bob Campbell |
URI |
Stephen Miller |
SIO |
|
Ed Carpenter |
SFSU |
John Orcutt |
SIO |
|
John Christensen |
Bigelow |
Capt. Page |
|
|
Joe Coburn |
WHOI |
Rob Pinkel |
SIO |
|
William Cochlan |
SFSU |
Richard Pittenger |
WHOI |
|
James Cochran |
LDEO |
Al Plueddemann |
WHOI |
|
Jeremy Collie |
URI |
Steve Poulos |
U Hawaii |
|
Bob Collier |
OSU |
Mark Prater |
URI |
|
John Collins |
WHOI |
Clare Reimers |
OSU |
|
Ruth Curry |
WHOI |
Thomas Rossby |
URI |
|
Mary-Lynn Dickson |
URI |
Frank Sansome |
U Hawaii |
|
Edward Durbin |
URI |
Ryan Smith |
NOAA |
|
David Farmer |
URI |
Sharon Smith |
RSMAS |
|
Rana Fine |
RSMAS |
Fred Spiess |
SIO |
|
Charles Flagg |
BNL |
Carey Steven |
URI |
|
Daniel Fornari |
WHOI |
James Swift |
SIO |
|
Bill Hahn |
URI |
Brian Taylor |
U. of Hawaii |
|
Dennis Hansell |
RSMAS |
John Toole |
WHOI |
|
Tetsu Hara |
URI |
Elizabeth Venrick |
CalCOFI/SIO |
|
Paul Hargraves |
URI |
Bess Ward |
Princeton |
|
Dave Hebert |
URI |
Randy Watts |
URI |
|
John Hildebrand |
SIO |
John Whitehead |
WHOI |
|
Bruce Howe |
U Washington |
Sean Wiggins |
SIO |
|
Bill Johns |
RSMAS |
Marc Willis |
OSU |
|
Terrence Joyce |
WHOI |
Mark Wimbush |
URI |
|
Grace Klein-MacPhee |
URI |
|
|
Beaufort Wind Scale & Sea State
|
# |
Wind [knots] |
Description |
Sea State |
Wave Ht [feet] |
Effects at Sea |
|
0 |
< 1 |
Calm |
0 |
0 |
Sea like a
mirror |
|
1 |
1-3 |
Light air |
Ripples with
appearance of scales; no foam crests |
||
|
2 |
4-6 |
Light breeze |
1 |
< 0.3 |
Small wavelets: crests
of glassy appearance, no breaking |
|
3 |
7-10 |
Gentle Breeze |
2 |
0.3-1.6 |
Large wavelets: crests
begin to break, scattered whitecaps |
|
4 |
11-16 |
Moderate
breeze |
3 |
1.6-4 |
Small waves,
becoming longer; numerous whitecaps |
|
5 |
17-21 |
Fresh breeze |
4 |
4-8 |
Moderate
waves, taking longer form; many whitecaps; some spray |
|
6 |
22-27 |
Strong breeze |
5 |
8-13 |
Larger waves
forming; whitecaps everywhere; more spray |
|
7 |
28-33 |
Near gale |
6 |
13-20 |
Sea heaps up;
white foam from breaking waves begins to be blown in streaks |
|
8 |
34-40 |
Gale |
Moderately
high waves of greater length; edges of crests break into spindrift; foam is
blown in well-marked streaks |
||
|
9 |
41-47 |
Strong gale |
High waves;
sea being to roll; dense streaks of foam; spray may reduce visibility |
||
|
10 |
48-55 |
Storm |
7 |
30-30 |
Very high
waves with overhanging crests; sea surface takes white appearance as foam is
blown in very dense streaks; rolling is heavy and visibility reduced |
|
11 |
56-63 |
Violent storm |
8 |
30-46 |
Exceptionally
high waves; sea covered with white foam patches; visibility seriously
affected |
|
12 |
> 63 |
Hurricane/typhoon |
9 |
> 46 |
Air filled
with foam; sea completely white with driving spray; visibility greatly
reduced |
Description of Ship Motion Criteria
Source: Marintek
|
DESCRIPTION |
CRITERIA RMS-Value |
COMMENTS |
REFERENCE |
|
|
VERTICAL
ACC.: |
|
|
|
|
|
Exposure: |
0.5 hour |
0.10 g |
10% motion
sickness incidence ratio (MSI) (vomiting) among infrequent travelers general
public |
ISO 2631/3 |
|
|
1.0 hour |
0.08 g |
1987 &
1982 |
|
|
|
2.0 hours |
0.05 g |
|
|
|
|
8.0 hours |
0.03 g |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simple Light
work possible |
0.27 g |
Most of the
attention devoted to keeping balance |
Connoly 1974 |
|
|
Light manual
work might be carried out |
0.20 g |
Causes fatigue quickly.
Not tolerable for longer periods |
Mackay 1978 |
|
|
Heavy manual
work might be carried out |
0.15 g |
Limits in
fishing vessel |
|
|
|
Work of more
demanding type |
0.10 g |
Long term
tolerable for crew |
Payne 1976 |
|
|
Passenger on
a ferry |
0.05 g |
Limit for
persons unused to ship motions |
Goto 1983 |
|
|
Passenger on
a cruise liner |
0.02 g |
Older people. Lower
threshold for vomiting to take place |
Lawther 1985 |
|
|
ROLL: |
|
|
|
|
|
Light manual
work |
4.0° |
Personnel
effectiveness |
Comsrock 1980 |
|
|
Demanding
work |
3.0° |
Personnel
effectiveness |
Hosada 1985 |
|
|
Passengers on
a ferry |
3.0° |
Short routes. Safe
footing |
Karppinen
1986 |
|
|
Passenger on
a cruise liner |
2.0° |
Older people. Safe
footing |
Karppinen
1986 |
|
|
PITCH: |
|
|
|
|
|
Navy Crew |
3.0° |
Limits to
avoid damage to personnel |
Comstock 1980 |
|
|
Light manual
work |
2.0° |
Personnel
effectiveness |
Hosada 1985 |
|
|
Demanding
work |
1.5° |
Personnel
effectiveness |
Hosada 1985 |
|
|
HORIZONTAL
ACC.: |
|
|
|
|
|
Passenger on
a ferry |
0.025 g |
1-2 Hz frequency.
General public |
ISO 263/1 |
|
|
Navy crew |
0.050 g |
Non-passenger
and navy ship |
|
|
|
Standing
passenger |
0.070 g |
99% will keep
balance without need of holding |
Hoberock 1976 |
|
|
Standing
passenger |
0.080 g |
Elderly
person will keep balance when holding |
Hoberock 1976 |
|
|
Standing
passenger |
0.150 g |
Average
person will keep balance when holding |
Hoberock 1976 |
|
|
Standing
passenger |
0.250 g |
Average
person max. load keeping balance when holding |
Hoberock 1976 |
|
|
Seated person |
0.150 g |
Nervous
person will start holding |
|
|
|
Seated person |
0.450 g |
Persons will
fall out of seats |
|
|