f -
- -
-
r I
I
,
RIJKSWATERSTAAT
i
: COMMUNICATIONS !
No. 21
PUSH TOWS IN CANALS
DY
IR. J. KOSTER
1975 (2 B 2032,
21
RIJKSW A TERSTAA T COMMUNICA TrONS
PUSH TOWS IN CANALS
by IR. J. KOSTER Delft Hydrau1ics Laboratory (up to 1-1-1975)
Government Publishing Office -
The Hague 1975
All correspondence should be addressed to
RIJKSWATERSTAAT DIRECTIE WATERHUISHOUDING EN WATERBEWEGING THE HAGUE -
NETHERLANDS
The views in this article are the author's own.
ISBN 90 12 00864 8
Contents
page Introduction
5
8
2
Prototype measurements
8 8
2.1
11 11
2.3 2.4
Purpose of the study Navigation habits Traffic measurements Measurements with a push tow
12 12
3 3.1
12 14
15
3.2 3.3 3.4
16
4
16 17 18
4.1
4.2 4.3
19 19
5 5.1
20
5.2
22 28
5.4
2.2
5.3
32 32 32
6.2
34 35 36
6.4 6.5
38
6.6
39
6 6.1 6.3
Study of scale effects Introduction Definition of the problem Measurement results ConcIusions Influence of the canal cross-section on the directional stability of the push tow Introduction Measurement results ConcIusions Overtaking manoeuvres Introduction Simulation of prototype collisions Phenomena during overtaking Recommended canal section Special studies Effects on the canal section Side-wind Scheldt-Rhine CanaI/Eendracht bend Amsterdam-Rhine Canal/Demka bend and Goyer bridge Beuningen outlet structure Maarssen intake structure Figures
3
1 Introduction
This publication summarizes the research carried out in the Netherlands in the 1960s into the dimensions required for the cross-section of ship canals if push tows are to navigate safely with other types of inland shipping. The research was conducted by a working party set up by the Director-General of the Department of Water Control and Public Works (Rijkswaterstaat); in addition to the appropriate Rijkswaterstaat services, the Delft Hydraulics Laboratory, the Netherlands Ship Model Basin in Wageningen and the Department of Naval Architecture of Delft University of Technology were represented on this working party. The necessary cross-section dimensions were determined by the space required for the different traffk situations which must be possible without danger. The traffk situation requiring the greatest amount of space - taken as the key traffk situation - involves three large vessels: one is overtaking another, while a third is sailing in the opposite direction. At first sight it would seem that trafik problems in fairways can be approached by methods similar to those used in the case of roads, i.e. by allocating a lane of a given width to each of the vessels involved. This method has been used in some previous studies. Closer consideration shows, however, that it is unsatisfactory because in a fairway not only the vessel but also the supporting environment is in motion. As a result, the transverse movements of a vessel are more difficult to control than those of a vehicle on a highway whereas in addition, the different vessels infiuence one another. As long as a single ship is sailing in the axis of a straight canal with a prismatic cross-section, it is possible to derive approximate theoretica1 values for at least the principal characteristic parameters of the water movement (drop of the water level and reverse flow). In this case sufficient data is also available from practical measurements and laboratory tests to determine with reasonable accuracy the deviations from the theoretical results as a consequence of the approximations used. However, when the ship is not navigating in the canal axis and in particular when several ships are present alongside each other in the canal simultaneously, the water movement becomes too complicated for a theoretical approximation. It is therefore still impossibIe to obtain rules for the design of a canal cross-section by theoretical means. Satisfactory data for this purpose is also not available in literature.
5
U ntil rcccnLly this was not a se rIO liS prohlem occnuse- widc k..nmvlcdgc had been acquired through long experience of traditional inland navigaLion (towed barges ano self-propelled ships) in which conditions (lypes of ship. dimensions and speeds of tra vel) changed only gradually (photo I). With the introduction of push tows. this knowlcdge gaincd from cxperiencc ccased to be sufficÎent. Ol only are the push tows considcrably larger than the other types or \'essel. bUL bccausc or their different shape. especially of Ihe bow. lhe waler movemenl crealed by them has markedly different characleristics (photo 2). It \\as thererorc ncccssary to gain a beller insight Înto this problem through model tests. Direct simulation (\\ith rree-moving model ships manocU\Ting undcr realistic conditions) of the passing manoeuvres liable to be encountered in practice on the canal. formed all important part of the study. Serore this sinllllation could be earried out, it wac;, however. necessary to obtain more detailed physical information on thc phcnamcna. at least in qualitativc tcrms. in spccially designed series of tests.
This was useful ror a meaningflll interpretation of the passing tests and also necessary to determine the possible influence of seale effects. For both these reasons it was also desirabic la do thc most accurate passible prototype measlirements. Tile contacts
Piloto I.
6
Tradilional navigation changed vcry gradually could be based on long experience.
~o
lhat until recentl)' canal design
r'hoto 2.
The push tow is not only considcrably largcr lhan 01 her vessels bul also different in shape. cspecially at Ihe bow.
established in this connexÎon wilh the professionLIl circlcs directly cOllcerned providcd valuable guidance. A few separate series ol" tests conccntrated on special circumSlanccs sueh as sidc-winds, eallal bends and constrictions. A funhcr general study was made of the enccts on canal banks of the water movement callscd by shipping. Some specific studies were a1so made of the Aow distribution charactcrisLies of intake and out let structures siluated along thc fairways for \Valer management purpose. Thc aim \vas to limit as rar as po~sible lht.: hindrancc \\ hieh might be c.llIsed w shipping. and in panieular push tow navigrttion. by slleh local1y-gcncrated cross-curreIllS. Thc sludy was conducled in lhe De Voorst LaboralOry of lhc Delft Hydraulics LaboraLOry. Thc rcsults have alre<Jdy been applicd 10 the design of the widencd Amsterdam-Rhine Canal. thc Schcldl-Rhine Canal and the Hartel Canal (sec hgurc I). Thc rcsulto;; or thc slUdy are set out in detail in reports comaÎned in four annexes to the final repon or lhe working party. These annexes - in DU1ch arc obtainable from the correspondence addrcss.
7
2
2.1
Prototype measurements
Purpose of the study
The main purpose of the prototype measurements and tests was to obtain adequate knowledge of the complex relationship between the innumerable factors which are important in determining the conduct of barge-skippers in face of traffic situations. This information was necessary to define the structure of the model tests and to interpret the model measurement results. The boundary conditions for the model study were also determined on the basis of prototype measurements; these conditions included dimensions, draughts, capacities, navigation speeds of the ships, traffic situations encountered and the corresponding manoeuvres: evasive action, adjusting navigation speeds, distances from other vessels and from the banks. The prototype measurements also provided data for calibration of the model, in particular calibration of the behaviour of the ship and the helmsman under statie and dynamic interference between the ship and canal. Here, the course angle in relation to the axis of the canal and the rudder angle - in particular the mean value and standard deviation as a function of time - are important parameters. Finally, the prototype measurements together with model tests on different scales, provided important information on scale effects in nautical model tests.
2.2
Navigation habits
To gain familiarity with the navigation habits of skippers on inland canals, a number of voyages were made on board various inland waterway vessels. The experience gained in this way was of great importance for accurate manoeuvres with the model. For interpretation of the model results, it was also necessary to know what skippers considered an acceptable pattern of passing manoeuvres under practical conditions (photos 3 and 4). Photographs 5 and 6 clearly show that dangerous situations may arise. The fact that these passing manoeuvres did not result in a collision was due to the good manoeuvrability which motor vessels generally have, unlike tow barges.
8
rholo 3.
Photo 4.
PU'ih tow consisling of onc barge rneets a motor
1olor ')hip o"crtakes a singlc·bargc push
10\\
~hip
at a 'normar distance.
"ith normal clearance.
9
Photo 5.
Single·bargc push tow overtaken by an unIaden fast ship. with two oncoming 0\ ertaking vessels.
Photo 6.
The space on eilher side of thc raS1 \esse! cannol be a norm for canal design.
10
2.3
Traffic measurements
The traffic survey conducted in 1964 on the Amsterdam-Rhine Canal gave a clear picture of the overall traffk pattern. An analysis of the inland waterway ffeet in terms of load capacity and distribution of navigation speeds shows that ships of 2,000 tons are sometimes encountered and that speeds range from less than 7 kph to more than IS kph (see figures 2 and 3). A more detailed analysis ofthe results enabled the navigation speeds to be determined at which the probability of being involved in an overtaking manoeuvre (overtaking or being overtaken) was smallest. This speed, which is between 10 and 13 kph, could be recommended for push tows (see figure 4).
2.4
Measurements with a push tow
The characteristics of a push tow consisting of 4 'Europe-I' barges (E I-barges), with a draught of 2.86 m, were measured in a section of the Amsterdam-Rhine Canal with a depth of 4.20 mand a width at the water level and bottom of 72 and 50 m respective1y. These prototype measurements concentrated on navigation at constant speed and constant distance from the banks, as these conditions could be reproduced relative1y easily in the model. The measurement results showed that the drift angle and especially the rudder angle fluctuated around a state of equilibrium (see figure 5). In genera1 the state of equilibrium was not equal to zero.
11
3
3.1
Study of scale effects
Introduction
lt was necessary to determine the optimum scale for the projected model study. On the one hand the model must be as large as possible in view of scale effects in the hydrodynamic phenomena. (The hydrodynamic phenomena of resistance, propulsion and rudder action may be affected by scale effects as a consequence of an excessively low Reynolds number. There mayalso be question of scale effects in the behaviour of a helmsman in the model, for example in perceiving the ship's movements in case the time scale is too small). On the other hand, building and operating costs make it cheaper to use a small model. Here too there is, however, a lower limit because smaller models place higher requirements on technical equipment if a given level of accuracy is to be maintained.
The scale effect study concentrated on the equilibrium rudder angle and drift angle of a push tow sailing along a canal bank and on the rudder action and resistancej propulsion of a push tow. This study was carried out jointly by the Netherlands Ship Model Basin in Wageningen, the Naval Architecture Laboratory of Delft University of Technology and the Delft Hydraulics Laboratory. No study was made of the scale effect in the behaviour of the model helmsman. Experience with previous model studies suggested that this scale effect will be slight, provided that the model helmsman is able to steer from the ship itself and has a line of sight corresponding to that of the helmsman of the prototype. Investigation of this problem would not have fallen within the terms of reference of the working party. The study was conducted with a push tow of 2 x 2 E I-barges and a pusher tug with a power of 2 x 750 hp (see figure 6). Models on three scales were used, i.e. 1: 40, I: 25 and I: 10.5. Together with the prototype tests, a wide range of possible scales was therefore covered.
3.2 Definition of the problem In a model the physical parameters are reproduced in such a way that certain characteristics are the same for the prototype and model; in this study they were :
12
2
the Froude number
11
=
~ for accurate reproduction of inertia effects; gl
vi the Reynolds number = - for accurate reproduction of the influence of .
.
V
VISCOSlty.
In these expressions v I g
v
speed length acceleration of gravity kinematic viscosity
Since g and vare identical for the model and prototype, the following scale laws apply respectively:
There is of course a wide discrepancy between laws i and ii. If n v is introduced on the basis of an identical Froude number it follows from ii that the Reynolds number will be a factor n3~2 too low. This leads to differences between the model and real situation. These differences are defined as the scale effect. A push tow sailing parallel to a canal bank without drift angle and with its rudder set centrally will be exposed to lateral farces: - The water levels on either side of the push tow will not be the same. This leads to a difference in hydrostatic pressure. - The water under the keel will not flow solely in the longitudinal direction. The frictional resistance therefore has a component directed athwartships (see figure 7). The resultant of these lateral farces -- referred to below as the canal bank force - is perpendicular to the ship's axis or an extension of that axis. Two reaction forces are needed to establish equilibrium with the canal bank force. One reaction force (drift force) occurs because there is a drift angle between the push tow and its direction of travel. The other reaction force (rudder force) is caused by deflection of the rudder. The system is c1early defined sa that there is one value for the rudder angle and at the same time one value for the drift angle at which the farces on the push tow are in a state of equilibrium. These values are known as the equilibrium rudder angle and the equilibrium drift angle.
13
It is known from the study that in a state of equilibrium the rudder is always directed towards the bank, while the equilibrium drift angle, dependent on a number offactors such as the bow shape, water depth and distance from the bank, may be either positive or negative.
The force diagrams in figure 8 show that this is due to displacement of the point at which the canal bank force acts. The equilibrium rudder angle and the equilibrium drift angle are therefore largely dependent on the forces exerted on the push tow by the surrounding water. Since almast all the farces are caused by phenomena in which viscosity plays a part, both the rudder action and the effect of the drift angle on the interplay of farces may be influenced by scale effects. As aresuit there may be differences between the size of the equilibrium rudder angle and the equilibrium drift angle in the model and prototype. Some phenomena will counteract each other, so that it is impossible to predict whether the rudder angle and drift ang1e in the model will be larger or smaller than in the prototype.
3.3
Measurement results
Some measurement results obtained iu the study of the equilibrium rudder angle and drift angle of a push tow sailing along a cana1 bank are shown in figures 9 to 11. Figures 9 and 10 compare the mean rudder ang1e and drift ang1e during the different prototype measurements with the corresponding values for a free-moving model on a sca1e of 1: 25. Although the results coincide reasonab1y weil, it is significant that the prototype results show a wide scatter. Figure 11 shows the results for push tows held in a fixed position in the lateral direction, on different sca1es. With reference to the holding farces, the figure shows on a graph the rudder and drift ang1es at which the 1aten~.l farces are in equilibrium. As the measurement accuracy is 1 to 1.5 tons (prototype), the measured differences are not significant. Possible scale effects in the state of equilibrium when sailing along a canal bank are so small in relation to the measurement accuracy and scatter of the measurement results that no sca1e effects cou1d be shown in the equilibrium rudder and drift angles. The study of the rudder action involved measurement of the transverse farces as a function of the rudder angle of push tows held in a fixed position in the lateral direction on different scales (see figure 12). Taking into account the measurement accuracy referred to earlier, there does not appear to be any scale effect here either. The study of scale effects on resistancefpropu1sion - expressed in terms of propeller speed - also showed that the scale effect was so small that, for a variety of reasons, it could not be quantified.
14
3.4
Conclusions
On the basis of these measurement results and the considerations set out in the introduction, it was decided to continue the study on a scale of I :25. The argument that the push tow and the tow barges used in this case would then be large enough in the model to allow room for a helmsman was the determining factor.
15
4 Inftuence of the canal cross-section on the directional stabilit)' of the push tow
4.1
Introductioll
In the second phase of thc preparatory sludy a large numbcr of tests weTe carricd out to determinc thc rclatiol1ship betwecn dimcnsions of the canal seclion and their inf1uencc on the bchaviouT of a push tQW. A systemalÎc sludy ofthis kind had not been carricd out bcfore. although the results arc vcry important for (he adequate design of a cunni lIsed by push 10\\5. Thc depth. width and slope configuration of thc canal, and the propeller speed of tlle pu~her {lig. \\ere \ariable boundary conditions of the model. Thc range of variatioll of these parameters is such that the results are applicablc lo \\idely difTering cases. A push to\\ \\ith automatic steering was uscd in Ihis study (pholo 7). The slecring characlerislics of this automatic systcm cao bc vuried in such a \\ay that the performance of bath an unskillcd and idcal helmsman can for examplc bc simulatcd. Thc use
Photo 7.
16
Alilomalically·stccrcd push low during stud)' of dircctional stability in different canals, scalc I : 25.
of an automatic system of this kind is important when the steering characteristics must be identical in all the tests of a series. InitiaJly the comparison parameters used in this study were derived from the average rudder angle and the average drift angJe of a push tow encountered when the push tow sails close to the axis of the canal. The relevant literature suggests that these parameters are the most commonly used in studies of this kind. These parameters do, however, have the drawback of disregarding the non-steady phenomena which are particularly important during navigation. It is precisely the extent to which the ship and its rudder fluctuate periodicaJly around their mean position which gives an indication of steerability. In the remainder ofthe study, the parameters were therefore adapted more accurately to the dynamic behaviour of the ship.
4.2
Measurement results
Tbc mean rudder and drift angJes were determined from observations on a freemoving push tow on a scale of I :25. The number of voyages (at least 4) and the length of each voyage (approx. 4 km for the prototype) were large enough to determine the mean value accurately. These averages were determined for a number of different distances between the push tow and the canal axis. Figures 13 and 14 indicate as examples the results for rectangular canal sections with a width of 100 mand water depths varying from 3.80 to 7.40 m. These results show that direct comparison of the cross-sections was not possible. The absolute values of the rudder angle and drift angle were small in all cases and always permissible. In addition, the rudder angle characteristic appeared to be much the same in all canal sections, regardless of the variations in the section shape. Only the drift angle characteristic showed noticeable variations, depending on the canal section (see figure 14). The reasoning foJlowed in the interpretation is therefore based on the characteristic of the drift angle at an increasing distance [rom the canal axis. The drift angle is a consequence of the canal bank suction acting on the push tow. A steep gradient in the drift angle characteristic therefore signifies strong local variations in the interplay of forces, which may be experienced as an obstacle by the helmsmen. In this way it was possible to formulate a number of reql'irements with which a canal section must comply. As the study progressed, emphasis was also placed on the extent to which the rudder and drift angles fluctuate around their state of equilibrium during navigation. In figure 15, the behaviour of the automatic pilot in the model is compared with the behaviour of a skilled helmsman during one of the prototype measurements. lt is to
17
he expected that the differences ohserved between the model and prototype will have only a slight influence on the results of the study. The standard deviations ofthe rudder angle and drift angle appear to be comparatively low under practically all conditions They did therefore not appear to be a sufficiently sensitive parameter for the influence of the canal section on the directional stability of the push tow. As an example, figure 16 gives an impression of the measurement results.
4.3
Conclusions
Together with the previous study, the tests led to the following conclusions : The canal water depth must not he less than about 5 m, corresponding to 1.5 times the draught of the largest vessel. The shape of the underwater slopes has no noticeable influence on the directional stability of the push tow. If the water depth immediately in front of the canal bank is not less than 1.1 times the draught of the largest vessel, the navigable width and the directional stability are no smaller than in a completely rectangular canal section.
18
5
5.1
Overtaking manoeuvres
Introduction
The principal aim of the model study of push tow navigation in canals is to determine the cross-section of canals intended partly for push tow navigation. The cross-sections were studied under two conditions : -
A push tow navigates singly on the canal (see chapter 4). A push tow and other ships pass each other.
in the first study the cross-sections were compared with the aid of a parameter derived from the rudder angle or drift angle encountered when the push tow sails in succession through canals with different cross-sections.
A similar methad of study was used in designing the North Sea Canal (Delft Hydraulics Laboratory report M 726), the North Sea-Baltic Canal (Hansa No. 36/38, 2-9-'52), the Panama Canal (Lea, C.A. and Bowers, C.E.; Panama Canal, Ship Performance in Restricted Channels; Proc. ASCE 1948) and the Suez Canal. In busy canals it must be possible for two ships of the largest permissible dimensions to sail past each other in opposite directions ; if the traffk density makes it desirabie even more than two traffic lanes may be needed for sufficient space for oncoming vessels during an overtaking manoeuvre. The traffic situation which is considered decisive for a particular canal wiJl depend on the desired capacity of that canal. The study was based on a traffk density which makes it desirabie to have sufficient space for oncoming vessels during an overtaking manoeuvre (three navigation lanes). In addition, it must be possible for the ships to travel sufficiently fast to make economic use of their engine power. This means for example that a push tow should not have to reduce its speed to less than approx. 10 kph. The distribution of vessel types makes it unnecessary to allow for all conceivable combinations. When the daily traffic in bath directions is estimated at 5 to 10 push tows for example and 150 to 200 other vessels, allowing also for the high level of uniformity in the dimensions and speed of push tows, overtaking of two push tows can be ruled out. The probability that the three traffic lanes wiJl be used simultaneously by two push tows and a normal tow can also be considered very low.
19
The preliminary study showed that the traffic situation which creates the greatest difficulties is that in which a large ship with poor steering characteristics is overtaken by another large ship. For this reason, the decisive situation was chosen as that in which a normal tow is overtaken by a push tow with 2 x 2 wide barges, while a motor vessel is sailing in the opposite direction (see figure 6). Speeds of 7 kph for the normal tow, 10 kph for the push tow and 15 kph for the motor vessel were chosen. The aim of the study was to allow the manoeuvre to take place without difficulty under these conditions, naturallyon the assumption that the skippers complied with the requirements of good seamanship, in particular by reducing speed where necessary, and allowing each other enough room. At the speeds indicated, the overtaking manoeuvre takes 13 to 14 minutes and continues over a distance of about 2.1 km. If there is no room for oncoming traffic, the overtaking manoeuvre can only be begun if the closest oncoming vessel is more than 5.5 km away. This shows that three lane navigation is necessary when traffic is dense. The manoeuvring tests were based on the cIosest possible approximation to the real characteristics of shipping. For this purpose, the tests were designed and carried out in close contact with canal ship operators (photos 10 to 15). The model tests were carried out with free-moving ships. During an overtaking manoeuvre the successive positions of the ships were recorded photographically (photo 16). A parameter was then derived to assess the safety of the decisive traffic situation; this parameter is characteristic of the relevant canal section. lt is also necessary to determine what values the parameter must have for the canal to be sufficiently safe. The traffic situations in the model can also be assessed visually to determine their safety. An expert eye-witness will obtain a good impression during observation of the ship movements, to the extent that safety diminishes as the ships are closer together. A film was therefore made of passing manoeuvres in the principal canal sections (see photos 8 and 9). Safety in different canal sections can then be compared without relying excessively on the memory of observers. At the same time persons who were not able to follow the progress of the tests from day to day can gain an impression through this film of the course of the manoeuvres and the differences in the canal section dimensions.
5.2
Simulation of prototype collisions
A number of prototype collisions were simulated in the model in order to investigate whether a situation which in practice appeared to lead to collisions because of a high
20
Photo 8.
l.lhutQ 9.
Dccisi\C traflk ::.Îluation in thc model. Passing manOCUHes are filmed rrom the instrument troiIe) Ira\elling bchind the 10\\.
21
speed of travel or an insufficiently wide passing distance, also made an unsafe impression in the model. These tests were repeated several times in the model and the phenomena were found to be reproducable to a high degree; they also coincided with the prototype observations. An example of a collision later on simulated in the model is described in the minutes of the Netherlands Water Police (see figure 17).
5.3
Phenomena during overtaking
As already indicated the behaviour of the tow barge is the most critical in the decisive traflic situation. The push tow and oncoming vessels maintain their course weil without deviating significantly from it and remain practically straight in the canal. The tow barge cannot, however, hold its course when it is overtaken by the push tow. The forces which push the tow barge olf course are mainly due to the water movement prevailing around the push tow. In front of the push tow a slight increase in water level occurs and the reverse flow, generated by the push tow, has curved flow lines there. Because of this phenomenon a force acts on the tow barge sideways of the bow of the push tow; this force is exerted towards the starboard bank and alfects the rear of the tow barge first. The Jatter then slews over towards the bank while the forward part ofthe barge moves away from the bank. As the push tow continues its overtaking manoeuvre, the repelling force is displaced towards the bow of the tow barge. In this situation, the tow barge is angled in relation to the bank but still moves roughly parallel to it. MeanwhiJe the rear part of the tow barge drops into the Jower water area which begins just behind the bow of the push tow. As aresuit the barge train is slowed down considerably. When the whole tow barge is alongside the push tow the latter has little influence on it. The tow barge then has a short time to adjust its position before the most critical part of the overtaking manoeuvre begins. The water-level drop is quickJy made up again to the rear of the push tow barges, so that the tow barge is acceJerated. This phenomenon continues untiJ the push tow has overtaken completely. The towing motor vessel must then try to keep the tow line taut by increasing its speed. lf this is not possible, the tow barge wiJl close up on it and will be less easy to steer because the tow line will no longer draw the bow in the correct direction. At the same time the tow barge will be exposed to astrong suction force towards the push tow. This lateraJ force is also a consequence of the reverse flow directed towards the psuh tow at the rear of the push tow barges and to alesser extent at the rear of the pusher tug. This suction force also acts first on the rear of the tow barge which therefore slews over towards the bank. If this angle is large enough the tow barge will not be drawn far olf course but will move parallel to the bank.
22
Photo 10.
Photo 11.
Steering the model push IOW compared \\lIh model helmsman in the pusher tug.
protot~pe.
There is no room ror the
23
When the rear of the push tow has just passed the tow barge after overtaking, it is still possible that the bow ofthe tow barge will be drawn over so strongly that the tow barge veers off course and slews over to port in the cana!. A collision with the push tow is no longer possible at this stage but the tow barge may collide with an oncoming vessel. In practice, it is also possibie in this situation for the tow barge to collide with another ship overtaking it after the push tow did. This course of events in an overtaking manoeuvre, like the occurrence of a collision, must naturally be regarded as impermissible. The phenomena described above can be illustrated by an example. This concerns the behaviour of the rearmost tow barge in a train of two barges and a motor vessel which is overtaken by a wide push tow. The canni is treated in this case as a twolane fairway so that the push tow can move well over to port. This overtaking manoeuvre was measured 16 times in all. The test in which the tow barge requires the greatest amount of space is illustrated completely in figure 18. This figure also defines the concepts of 'navigation lane width' and 'space adjacent to the navigation lane'. The navigation lane width is the width between two lines in between which are enclosed all the different successive positions. The traffic lane width is the width of a canal lane. All the measurements in this series showed much the same characteristics. It is therefore reasonable to combine the observations into a mean value to enable the speeds and accelerations to be derived with greater accuracy by differentiation (see figure 19). Although the phenomena followed the same pattern in all the tests as a function of time, the values reached in the different tests may differ considerably. This is illustrated on the basis of the measurement results for a trapezoidal canal section with a water depth of 5 mand bottom and surface widths of 115 and 155 m respectively (see figures 20 to 29). Figures 20 to 23 show that the model helmsmen of the tow barge and push tow did not 'leam' during the series of 55 tests. Good and less good voyages occurred at both the beginning and end of the test series. Because of their experience of steering model ships the maximum performance of the model helmsmen had already been reached before the beginning of the measurements. The learning effect thus did not interfere with the measurement results. In the 3rd and 30th voyages the distance between the tow barge and push tow was negative (see figure 22). This means that after passing the rear of the push tow, the tow barge moved over partly behind the push tow. In voyage 3 this resulted in a collision with the push tow owing to the fact that on this voyage the tow barge had a very broad navigation lane width (see figure 20); the cause was not an excessive distance from the canal bank (see figure 21) or between the push tow and the canal axis (see figure 23).
24
Pholo 12 .
•
PllOlo 13.
Steering a model tO\~ barge comparcd \\Îth the prototype. ln:.u:ad of a tlig. a RI-IK ship is uscd In the model steered by lhc pcrson at thc froll!. Thc person at thc back 'iteer~
thc
IO\~ b~trgc.
25
The model helmsman of the push tow is generally able to navigate in the centre of the canal with a good measure of accuracy. His instructions were to keep the starboard side of the push tow in line with the canal axis. He had no visible means of guidance. The ends of the model were hidden for this purpose by black plastic foil. The only guidance was provided by the line of the canal banks. Whenever the push tow was too far over on the starboard side of the canal according to the personal impression of the tow barge skipper, the helmsman of the push tow was 'reprimanded'. This may explain why, after the 3rd and 30th voyages, a number of voyages were navigated too far over on the port side (see figure 23). The last three voyages of the push tow were made much (average about lOm) too far over to the starboard side of the canal. This may have been caused by a lack of concentration on the part of the helmsman of the push tow as a result of fatigue or reduced motivation. In these 3 voyages the distance between the tow barge and the push tow was no less than 12 m so that the tow barge skippers had little reason to correct the behaviour of the push tow helmsman. In order to investigate whether the distance between the push tow and the canal axis influences the navigation lane width of the tow barge these values are compared in figure 24. There seems to be no influence. lt is also important to know whether the navigation lane width of the tow barge is dependent on the distance between the latter and the bank (and push tow). For this purpose figure 25 shows for each voyage the largest and smallest distance observed between the tow barge and the bank (measured at the plane of the keel) expressed against the navigation lane width. For smal1 navigation lane widths « 36 m) the minimum distance is 10 to 20 m. With a large width (> 36 m) the tow barge always (7 cases) comes within less than 10 m of the bank. In 4 cases the distance was even less than 5 m. lt may therefore be concluded that the traffic lane required for the tow barge need not be any greater than the navigation lane width which is still conidsered permissible.
The above observations show that the scatter in the measurement results is considerabie; this cannot be ascribed to a dispersion ofthe material boundary conditions. The sole cause must lie in the uncertain behaviour of the model helmsmen. Since the model helmsmen had the intention of steering the best possible course in each passing test, they gained the impression that the progress ofthe passing manoeuvre was determined by chance. By analysing in greater detail the frequency distribution of the scatter in the results, it is possible to determine the probability of the tow barge and push tow moving out of their traffic lanes.
26
Photo 14.
"how 15.
\1odel
ra,~ing
~kipper~
manOCUHC. Thc push 10\\ and 10\\ barge \\ere sleered bye"perienced "ho (lClermined Ihe respCCII\C dlslanccs iOllliti\cl~.
27
The eumulative frequeney distribution of the traffie lane widths used by the push tow and tow barge is shown in figure 26. The measurement results eontained in figures 20 and 23 are used again here. The navigation lane width of the push tow was assumed to be 1.1 times the width of the push tow during the overtaking manoeuvre. During the relatively short measuring period this value was not exeeeded. The traffie lane width of the tow barge was assumed to be identieal to the navigation lane width (see figure 20). The data obtained from a number of similar passing tests in other eanals was also available for the tow barge. This data is shown in figure 26. It appeared that the relative eumulative frequeney distributions ean be represented
in an approximation by parallel straight lines with a logarithmic distribution and a normal frequeney distribution along the eo-ordinate axes respectively. This means that all the frequency distributions have much the same standard deviation. With the aid of figure 26 it is now easy to determine the relationship between the traffic lane width and the frequency with which this width is exceeded. In the canal considered above where the tow barge ean use the entire starboard half of the canal (traffie lane width 66.30 m), the frequency of exceedance is about 1%. This also indieates the probability of collisions. Allowance must, however, be made for a scale effect in the manner of steering the model, so that the probability of collisions in the prototype may differ from the probabiIity of collisions in the model. A detailed consideration of the scale effects will be found in chapter 3. For completeness, the relative cumulative frequency distributions are shown in figures 27 and 28 for the smallest distance between the tow barge and the push tow and bank. Finally, figure 29 shows the relative cumulative frequency distributions for the overtaking length and the time required by the push tow to overtake the entire barge train (tow barge drawn by motor vessel). This figure aIso shows the time which elapses untiI the push tow has just passed the tow barge and ean leave the port side of the eanal again in order to overtake the towing motor vessel on the starboard side of the canal.
5.4
Recommended canal section
If the boundary conditions are not ehanged, the navigation lane widths (b) of the different vessels may be interpreted as mutually independent stoehastie parameters (the seatter in the navigation lane width is obviously eaused by the helmsman). The probability of occurrance ofvalues equal to or greater than ~ b Oo5 and ~bOo2 is approximately equal to 0.5 and 0.2 respeetively, since the seatter in the navigation lane
28
Photo 16.
Jn~lrllmcnt trolley with pholOgraphic apparalus on a boom used 10 detcrminc the po~ilÎon
of {he ships.
widths of ünc of lhc vessels is generally high in relmioll 10 thai of thc
(WO
others.
These figurcs show thai in addition (O the ni.lvigatioll lanc widlhs there Illust al50 be sufflcielll room lef! 10 rcducc the probability of collisiol1s lo practical I)' Lcro. Account muSt be taken in this COllllcxion of: a b c
ct
the ~cattcr in navigation lane \\idlh~ due 10 tllc conduct of thc hcll1lsman: (he frequent)' at which a particular traflic silualion OCCUfS: Ihc COJ1seqllence~ of a possibJe collision (gcncrally consisting in onc of thc vessels scraping along anolher or along lhc bank): din"ercnces bel\\een practical conditions and thc model tests.
It may in fuwre be possiblc to sohe a deci:..ion problcl11 of this kind \\ith the aid of statistical and economie data. As this cannot be done al present. detailed discussions ofthc interpretation ofthe model results look place \\iLh the canal managemelll \\hich had cOl11l11issioned the study and practical experts. Thc scatter of the tolal navigation la ne widlhs (l: b) provided the basis for the criterion \\
29
between ~ bO. 2 and ~ b O. 5 ' The index here indicated the frequency with which ~ b is reached or exceeded. The canal must be wide enough for the space (R O. 2) remaining in addition to ~ b O• 2 to be sufficiently large for the probability of colIision to be kept to a minimum even when the navigation lane width is still greater. This may reasonably be expected to be the case when R O. 2 = 1.5 (~ b O' 2 - }; bo.ó ). With the aid of this criterion we can calculate for each passing manoeuvre for which adequate data is known, how wide the canal must be to obtain the required degree of safety. The results of this calculation are shown in table I (rounded olf to the nearest 5 m).
Passing manoeuvre
Canal width required in m
Water depth in m
2)
I) ----~------
------
- - - ~ ~ - -
m-d-s s-d-m s-m-d
125 110 95
5 5 5
m-d-s s-d-m s-m-d m-d-sm sm-d-m m-d-m m-m-d
100 85 95 90 95 80 90
6 6 6 6 6 6 6
----~--
1) m-d-s
s-d-m s-m-d m-d-sm sm-d-m m-d-m m-m-d 2)
Table 1.
a barge train is overtaken by a push tow with an oncoming motor vessel; respective speeds 7, 10and 15kph. a motor vessel is overtaken by a push tow with an oncoming barge train; respective speeds 8, 11 and 7 kph. a push tow is overtaken bij a motor vessel with an oncoming barge train; respective speeds 10, 17 and 7 kph. a tow barge, coupled alongside a motor vessel, is overtaken by a push tow with an oncoming motor vessel; respective speeds 8, 11 and 15 kph. a motor vessel is overtaken by a push tow with an oncoming tow barge coupled alongside a motor vessel; respective speeds 8, 11 and 8 kph. a motor vessel is overtaken by a push tow with an oncoming motor vessel; respective speeds 8,11 and 15 kph. a push tow is overtaken by a motor vessel with an oncoming motor vessel; respective speeds 10, 17 and 15 kph. The canal width should be measured at the keel plane of the ships.
Canal width required to enable the above passing manoeuvres to be completed with maximum safety.
The minimum initial navigation speeds at which the motor vessel can stil1just overtake the push tow were determined for three initial push tow navigation speeds (9, 10 and
30
11 kph), and in two different canal sections with widths and depths of 100 x 6 m 2 and 130 x 5 m2 respectively. At these minimum navigation speeds (see table 11) the overtaking manoeuvre takes a very long time. If the manoeuvre is to be completed smoothly the speed of the motor vessel must be about 1 kph higher. The results show that there is practicaUy no difference in regard to the minimum speed of travel necessary for overtaking in the two canal sections.
Push tow speed in kph
Minimum speed of motor vessel in kph Canal profile 100 x 6 m 2
9.0 10.0 11.0
13.8 15.5 17.5
130x 5 m 2 13.4 15.3 17.1
Table 11. Minimum speeds of a motor vessel, necessary to overtake a push tow as a function of the canal dimensions.
31
6
6.1
Special studies
Effects on the canal section
The banks of a canal in the vicinity of the water level are damaged by ship waves, caused primarily by fast (empty) motor vessels. Push tows do not create any extra difficulties in this respect. Damage to the canal bed and slopes below the water level are due to the speed of the reversc flow and propeller race, and also to the water-level drop which may cause ground water over-prcssure which forces olf the slope lining or soil particles. These phenomena are Jikely to occur more extensively and for longer periods when push tows use the canal than in the case of conventional inland waterway vessels. A brief study was made of these phenomena; the water-level drop and flow velocity around a push tow were measured, and information was gained with the aid of movable bank material on the mechanism of erosion. Tt was found that the eroding action on underwater slopes is greatest next to the push tow, level with the bilge. The propeller race of a moving push tow does not cause any special difficulties. Figure 30 gives an impression of the water-level drop.
6.2
Side-wind
An uniaden push tow in 2 X 2 formation is difficult to steer in the presence of sidewind. On the Waal, uniaden push tows therefore sail in swallow-tail formation (although with the introduction of more powerful pusher tugs, this formation has once again been largely abandoned). However, this is not a practical solution for canals, because the width of the tow is limited by the dimensions of the locks to two barge widths. lncidentally a solution may be found by providing a steering device at the front of the push tow (bow rudder, bow propeller etc.). These aids to manoeuvrability are being used on an increasing scale. Another simple solution is provided by ballasting. A number of model tests were therefore carried out in which the load state and wind speed were varied. The drift angle needed by the push tow in all these instanees to hold its course was used as a parameter to compare the difficulties likely to be encountered in any given situation. Good results were obtained when only one of the front barges was ballasted, as was
32
Photo 17.
O\enaking manoeuvre of a push {wO and 10W barge lowed bya motor Eendracht bend of Ihc Scheldt·Rhinc Cunal.
~hip
in Ihc
33
Plloto 18.
Instrlllllcnllrol1c)' llscd 10 pholograph thc posilÎons oflhc ships.
already kno\\ n from practical experience. h was <1lso found (hm good results are possible "hen lhe barges are fitlcd wilh a leeboard (see figure 31). The sludy did nol enable the maximum \\ind speeds lO be defined al which an empty push {Q\\ can still navigatc on thc canal: the grealcsl diHkulties oecur when the push 10\\ has to stop or suil a\\ay from lhe lee share. bul the study \\as confincd 10 push tO\\5 n:.t\igating at cruising speed only.
6.3
Schcldt-Rhine Canal Eendracht bond
Follo\\ing the manoeuHing study lhe queslion arises as to \\hether safety is as great
3~
in a canal bend as in a straight canal of the same dimcnsions. lllld also whether the watcr·current velocity has aoy infiuence here. These problcms arc relevant to the design orthe Scheldt·Rhine Canal with the belld at Eendracht in which tidal currellts lIill probably still be encollntered untilthc Eastcrn Scheldt lIorks \ViII bc completed. Thc study showcd lhat lhe current velocity has no nOliceable innuence on the behaviour of the ships in relation to thc water. Safety was found to be just as high. In the bend toa (with a radius of 3.(X)() m) the behaviour scarcely differed rrom that in a srraight canal. Thc push tow simply deviated ralher more from the required course lhan in a straight canal. In the light of this observation. it is rccommended that in callal bcnds \\ith a radius of about 3.000 111. the width of the cross-scction should be 5 m larger than in the adjacent straight canal scctions (sec photos 17 and I ).
6.4
Amsterdam-Rhine Canal Dcmka bend and Goyer bridge
Thc \\idlh of the Amsterdam-Rhinc Canal bet ween Utrecht and Maarssen is limited to about 95 111. In addition there is a bcnd at this point with a radius of only 1.000 rn. lJec3usc it wDuld be very expensive to widen the c<'lI1a\ here. the canal width was an
I)hol<) 19.
Dcmka bend - existing silualion. An cmpt~ motor \cssel and a push
lO\\
\\Îlh onc bargc meel a laden motor ship.
35
Photo 20.
Dcmb bend - widened sitlJation. Two push I{)\\~ \\ith four bargcs each meet.
invariable bOLJndary condilion for a study in which model tesIs arc LJsed lO delermine the passing manoeuvres whieh can be completed safcly. Bccausc of the short line or visibility (Iocally a~ low as 600 !TI) it is important for lwO push tO\\'S to be ablc to meet each other. This appeared possiblc. A molor vessel call still overtake a barge train wilh an oncol11illg push low. Rcstriclions fOT navigation need thcrcfoTC simply prohibit overtaking of or by a push 10\\ immediately berorc or in the bend (sec photos 19 and 20). A similar reslriction Illust also be imposed Icmporarily al other local narrow strclchc~ of the canal. e.g. near bridgcs "ith a relatively small span. For an existing bridge (Goyer bridge) and its sub-structure. it was determincd which traffic situations "ere not permissiblc al this point" ith a nlll11ber of alternative canal shapes. It was found necessary to widcn the canaillp to the bridge piers (passage "idth 68 111). There is then no problem if a push lQW meets a convcnlional vesse!. T\\o push lOws cannol. ho\\'cver. pass in OPpOSilC direction at this point (sec pholOs 21 and 22).
6.5
8cunin~cl1
out let slrucfure
In conjunclion "ith the widening of the Betuwe rcach of the Amsterdam-Rhinc Canal. lhc aid pumping-station that used la discharge water from the river Lingc illlO the
36
Photo 21.
Goycr bridge cxisling situation. A laden lUw meets an cmply tow.
Pholo 22.
Goycr bridge - exisling situation. A push tow meets a barge Ww.
37
canal must be demolished and replaced by a new pumping-station/discharge structure. The shape ofthe flow distribution structure on the oudet side must be such that ships sailing at a short distance from it are not adversely affected by the cross-current. Figure 32 shows the flow pattern encountered with a delivery from the structure of 30 m 3 /s, and the practically negligible influence on a push tow sailing alongside which in the model was ultimately achieved in the recommended layout.
6.6
Maarssen intake structure
To meet water supply requirements for the central and west Netherlands, it is assumed that in the vicinity of Maarssen water will be drawn olf the Amsterdam-Rhine Canal at a maximum rate of approx. 60 m3 /s. Ships sailing close to the intake structure must not be adversely affected; this places high requirements on the design of the structure. The study showed that especially relatively small motor cargo vessels (length up to 60 m) are influenced by the cross-current created here. By splitting the intake structure into three rather smaller units at distances of 60 m from each other, these vessels can sail past practically without hindrance. Figure 33 shows the ship movements as ohserved in the model.
38
Figures
Groninge-n
•
(
I /
I NORTH
I
5EA
,,-.)
? '--
._., ,-
<:."..., ...-./
~
ii~~~~~~~~~=('SCHELDT-RHINE "'") /) 0'" CANAL .
Scale
Figure 1.
40
._0
\'-0)'
\ EASTERN SCHELDT
•
Eindhoven
0 25 50 75 100 km ~I===5';;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;t'===5';;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;j1
Inland navigation canals in the Netherlands suitable for push tow navigation.
) ,)
.J
"o
25
ff-
a.
o w
""
20
f-
Z
W
u
0:
w a. V>
15
"
-
V>
a. :x:
V>
a.
o
10
0: W
'"
~
...,
::>
z
~ o o
500
------.
Figure 2.
~
~
1000
1500
LOAD
CAPACITY
2000
2500
IN TON5
Relative frequency distribution of laad capacity of laden ships. 0
.J
"o f-
f-
'"L
a.
o
5
w
"" fZ W
-
u 0: w a. V>
"
..... 0
~ o
" .J
.....
a.
o
0: W
'"::> ~
5
o
r
...,
-
Z
L
~
J 10
--+
Figure 3.
15 TRAVEL
IL--t-...
20
SPEED
IN
25
kph
Relative frequency distribution of travel speed of laden ships.
41
Z w «la: ><:
0
80
20
60
40
VJI-
60
iz VJ w Za: w«
W
~
VJ
0.. :I:
VJ
Z w « ...J 0
oZ OW
'"« :I: IUa: -w :I: > ~O
0..0
LL
0
w «IZ w U a: w
40
Cl
00
«z ...J« LL
20
0..
80
ow w« «a: I- W z> wO Ul50 o..z
'"
Cl I-
1
o
•
--<>--
Figure 4.
42
!
100
5
10
..
100 20
15 TRAVEL
SPEED
IN
kph
NUMBER OF LADEN SHIPS WHICH ARE OVERTAKEN , EXPRESSED AS PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF LADEN SHIPS WITH THE SAME TRAVEL SPEED NUMBER OF LADEN SHIPS WHICH DO NOT OVERTAKE AND ARE OVERTAKEN, EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL NUMBER OF LADEN SHIPS WITH THE SAME TRAVEL SPEED
Influence of travel speed on overtaking.
A
NOT
---
'/w
NI
q '" ~ '"'" '"
0 .; "'..,
...
"'W
l3"''V'~.l
033dS
0 "' "' I
q
0
'"I
<.
,
I.
,
:"
l.l
. ..'
, ,,
)
.' "
:;';
i,
L.-"
(
I i,
I I li
(
.~
.I
(
,
!
, \
!
(
~
I
i
L....
r.. . r-.
OOOVlOOO Mt"lC\lNT""OO
'S'd
'" ~ ..._----
'g's . - - - - - - -
wdJ NI 033dS
_
ll3T13dOlld
NI )(N\f9 Oèl'9'OatlV.LS 0.1 M09 .::IQ 3èllN3::) ViOèi.:.l 3')NV1510
....
..', , .'
10'
~~.
'.
.,'
1:" " ,
.'
l~
".
. .' ..
'" '"
'
"
,
"
.•..
.. Ic:I"-
'"
.l-
' 1-"
..".
~
-.. :
It::
.----,-----~ Ç/S:llllJ6~p
NI
~f'iln9NV
I
I
,, ,, I I
,
jfJ'
:.u .... Q)
, \
0
g
.:.: '" E Q) Q)
:r:
,
col
)
>
,,' I ij
.Cl 0 U
<0
7'
\
,.... ~
r'
0
~
\
"
., l"-
,."
'
,~
~
1-
0,
\ o2· I
~
I.....
..-
I '"
o
""
,I- ~
..'
,,
I
~:""
ÓÓÓOodó
531.11:>0'3/\
\
,, '. I"-~. ~\ ,,
.;
.-
C\l V .() 000
l"'Il
\
,;
:~ ~~l"~:
'
" 000
\
I
~
L!"., r-
o ~
i
I
'1" "r-
0)
'\
I:\
c
'E
I
,~
.
....
, I
i
~,
~
" '" ",
"
I-""
-..
I
.. .- .. ,r> "" ..
'. '.'.
Ir'
-.J
"""""
"
,
)
'"0
~~
"
~
,
• 1""'"
,
I'
"'
",
,,
II
I~ ir
, ..
",
.,".
l'
..,"'
,
I'
)
~
... ,- .'
. -.. -....
I
I I
"'
,,'
,
I..... r".
!
-,.-
0'
\
1/
'"
~
}
i
V
o
,
!
NI
è13aanèl
•.. --+---
'"'" '"0 "'" + + +
/~
,
NOJ.l:::>31.:.l30
l..:.ll~a
-~-.
"'
"I
~
s/'iZlZlJ6ap 31~NV
NI
..1"-:.-
-'
.,, ,
0
~
i:i ,... Q)
c: Q)
....
::l
'" E
•
ol Q)
\
Q)
0. >0
0
q
.---
'
0 0
0':;
H iOI'" dlHS
H1GlM 3N'V'1
NOt.l'9'91J\\fN
W
43
I
DIMENSiONS IN m
NARROW PUSH TOW
.....
F
z
1
-rSIDE
I
VIEW
PLAN VIEW PUSHER TUG "VULCAAN I" WITH
2x 2
EI BARGES
WIDE PUSH TOW
1o.00I
f:
:1:
I
~
~1- -'-3- ,B._0 - -l.otl . .~ !: .-=:_=-=-=:_=-=-=-1=9- ,2~1:" ":=0~'t;~ 6~.~5_0~=:,=:,=:,=:,=:,=:,=:,=:,=:,=:,~!:I....L..------'~ .J1
r
PLAN VIEW
PUSHER TUG"VULCAANI"WITH
I
2x2
ElIBARGES
BARGE TRAIN i
,
P
SIDE VIEW
~---~~--------c= 99.9 0
:1.
60.00
PLAN VIEW
.E
80.00
~
RHINE- HERNE CANAL SHIP "OLIVIER"WITH TOWING BARGE "DONALD"
I SELF-PROPELLED
SHIPS
====~~z k
-51K~--=~===1.J=L2.50 SIDE VIEW
r--
---I':C,
SIDE VIEW
~ 62.00 ~ ::rT
Figure 6.
44
f
~
rc
1+
PLAN VIEW COASTER" MARCON I"
I
80.00
~
PLAN VIEW RHINE-HERNE CANAL SHIP"ADRIAAN"
Principal dimensions of different types of ship.
I
Ir
:~ ~,"mm",m';'== 4 2.S0m
4.20m
100m
•
e u
1-------10
.0_.
0
0
a: 0
...J W
> w I
10
.. -- - --- - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - -
.
'
..
20
-....
30
loC(
3:
40
_ _...~
I I SURFACE'
[l]rmtJ. ! ______1_BOTTOM
.j:>.
VI
PUSHER TUG
-'; -.
...J
a: w
-
.. - - - - - - - - - - - -
,• ••••• 1
~ Cl.
.
PUSH TOW BARGES
Figure 7.
Flow pattern and water-level drop around a push tow in a canal.
'
.
,~
DIRECTION TRAVEL
DIRECTION TRAVEL
OF
,
I
I
DIRECTION TRAVEL
DIRECTION TRAVEL
OF
OF
w
v Resistance force
D = Drift force
v
Propulsion force
R
N
Canal bank force
W
=
Figure 8.
46
=
Rudder force
Influence on drift angle of point at which canal bank force acts.
15
· ·
~
~
tZ U)
~
~
a:
:>
10
"'" U)
:> a: U)
WEIGHTED MEAN
------
~
0U)
~ ~SCATTER
--'
IN '////SCALE
" Z
"a:
MOO~ 1:25///:;
U)
0 0
:>
a:
Z
"
U)
:>
1 o
o
10
----.
Figure9.
DURATION
OF
20 MEASUREMENTS
IN
min.
Mean rudder angle and duration of some prototype measurements with width of 100 m.
· ·
+ 0.5
~
~
~
t-
Z
U)
~
a:
:>
":>'" U)
a:
U)
0U)
--'
" " Z
I 0
~
0
20 IN
min.
WEIGHTED MEAN -------
t
SCALE
1: 25
" 0
z
":> U)
-0.5
-1.0
Figure 10.
L.-
---.L
--'
Mean drift angle and duration of some prototype measurements with width of 100 m.
47
10.---~---------,.-------~-------~-------~---'
..J c(
Z c(
u
5
1--+----------t--------+-------+--------,--+--1
lil
o
.. a:
2 :o
~
RUOOER
~
i!
TRANSVERSE FORCE BOW TRANSVERSE fORCE STERN
=
ol-+----.....I,1I--+-----,....~.....tIliF,....!::....---+_-----_+__1
l il
Z
>l
c(
a: ~
Z
c(
c1l ..J c(
Z
5
c(
u
::E
oa:
u..
10
L--L....,-
_0.5
DRIFT
_
_
_._
---L-::-
0
ANGLE
..
0
---I.-_---I.-L..:---L
+ 1.0
MOOEL
SCALE
1: 10.5
MODEL
SCALE
1: 25
THE ARE
TRANSVERSE FORCES EXERTEO ON THE ZERO IN THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS :
MODEL
SCALE
1: 40
MODEL
SCALE
1: 10.S
25
1 : 40
48
0
+ 1.5
STERN OF SHIP SLEWED AWAY FROM CANAL BANK
1 :
Figure 11.
--l..---.J
...l--::-
0
Transverse force bow equals transverse force stern.
PUSH
RUODER ANGLE + 10.0° DRIFT ANGLE + 0.61 0 RUDOER ANGLE + 10.0° DRIFT ANGLE + 0.46 0 RUOOER ANGLE + 9.4 ° DRIFT ANGLE + 0.32°
TOW
0
,
ir+
+ 20
KA+-
"Ol0~
[,.~
e
0-
.
~
c
2 ~ UI
U 0::
0
U-
UI
lil 0::
I
W ~
-'-= ~
? .~ -~
V V
-20
CORRECTED
50
K v -lINE FOR
CX= 25
~}v
I ~ =10' 1 = 0 X
0<.
•
C(
=
2S
40
-" 40
30
RUDDER ANGLE IN d~9r~~s
Figure 12.
~ :--, ~
~ V
ty V
~
~ =-,
-0V
KA
-40
A
0
-10
KA
# .#
0(
~'
~~ --...:~~
> lil z « f-
/'
CORRECTED KA-L1NE FOR
UI
0::
KV
,~
+10
2
I
20 TO
10 PORT
o ....f--+---l..
10
20
RUDDER ANGLE IN d~9r~~s
30
40
TO 5TARBOARD
Initial transverse' orees as a eonsequenee of rudder deflection.
49
50
20 VI
0
18
Ol
~
'"
_
16
Ol .."
Z
-
w
14
...J
L'.l Z
<
cr: w
12
0 0
~
cr:
SHIP: PUSHER TUG "VULCAAN" WITH 2 x 2 NARROW BARGES ~ DRAUGHT OF BARGES 3.20 m
water depth:
lA
••• _ . . .
_._._._ _ _ • __ ._ ___ __ .__ __________•
T 21 T 1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6
3.80 m 4.20 m 4.50m 5.00 m 5.20m 5.80 m 6.00 m
- _ ••• _ - _ •• _ _ ••••• _
T7 T22 T23
6.50m 7.00m 7.40m
V /'
/'. A~-:::::;
10
~
cr:
dl ...J
8
6
.;
."
."
~-
2
/ ..
,;
-
~."""7'
V
..- --
~'~~:'p~ ;.9 .
~
~ I,
/..'
V
/'
/
~
z
< dl
:~ ~",.-;,' "/
,~"
':~~~~~I' 5
---I". Figure 13.
.#~';~JI""""-?
....:'~::p
...... y4i"~...:..-....--o
/
~/'
/_.1-' " .. ,~~v/ ~::.
~.
4
o
'/
.-,. .. ~#J'~·r.~~.#V
~ .._--- -,'
~
1
:
~ ~~
I----t------\----+----+-------,v.,' -::"'1/.'- ~
0
w
/','it.:$.~....~ -.-
i ~/,/".~ ' .~./
I
~
./
10 DI5TANCE
...J
< z <
L.--'" 15 FROM
U
20 CENTRE
25 OF BOW
30 TO
35 CANAL
RUDDER ANGLE. fnfluence of depth (regtangular cross-section).
AXI5
40 IN m
45 PROTOTYPE
50
+ 1.2
/.,.-
'"
.;",
'"z
+ 1.0
<{
lil
...J
+ 0.8
<{
U
.." ..'" ~
+0.6
ij <{
"-
."
~
~
lil
+ 0.4
/
0
+0.2
ë(
lil
:::; :; 0
W
:.~
-0.2
X <{
-0.4
<{
Z
-0.6
-
-0.8
---.--
-
-_ ... - -_ .. - -_.... -
~
-----_ .. --_.
0
-1.0
_1.2
-
-._.-
-
<{
'"
-"'-'"
_._.-.-
Z
ij "-
,. ...
VI
o
5 -.
Figure 14.
.,."
1'-...... ......
"
---.....
-
watqr Mpth:
<{
U \!)
~
..,.....-.
'.
-.
"
Vl
...J
.....
'. ---' ,.' \ -....... .... =~ ...--' ~::: -' .- --1"'-.. •• ,0::: ~ "'. """"= 1"---" -.. r--, ..•. ....... " ......, ..... .... ", \ \ . ' .. '. ", . "" '. " "... \ \. \\ '. ' .. .. .
n :::;:
,.'
~,..
0
:::>
/ V
z
/
.Y
<{
Z
\!)
".., /
SHIP: PUSHER TUG "VULCAAN" WITH 2 x 2 NARROW BARGES ; DRAUGHT OF BARGES 3.20 m
T21 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T22 T23
3.80 m 4.20 m 4.50 m 5.00 m 5.20 m 5.80 m 6.00 m 6.50m 7.00m 7.40m
10 DISTANCE
15 FR OM
.'\.
"
'" :\
'\
........
'\ .. '\
.
",
\
..
. \ ...\
\
\
\
CENTRE
2S
~
"\\
\
\ 20
,
\ 30
3S
OF BOW TO CANAL
DRIFT ANGLE. Influence of depth (rectangular cross-section).
AXI5 IN
U
40 m
45 PROTOTYPE
50
l,L.~ V ,:,.-= ~
1--
UI
~
I
.
\ [J
~
i-X c;;
~ ,/
BB
i! Ir
~
b.- .
o
r· tl r-r-+tV r
tJ
'-
SB
~. J
•
r -R~ ...". '--; '1.- ..... ~ I1.\~
\J
"
1
'f
10
8
6
4
2
'ol
TIME IN
\.
,,--'-:" -, ~
12
minutqs
PROTOTYPE
RESULTS (Sqq fig. 5)
+ 2 0 , - - r - - r - - - , - - - , - - - - , - - - - , - - - - - r - - . - - - . - - - - , - - - . - -..........., BB
H
o
SB
UI
BB
i! Ir
o
_. -_.
_. -- '7' .- -"7"," - .- _.-_.~ ~ ~~
'-
1'-
SB
2
4 ---I.~
_ _ _ MEAN
Figure 15.
52
VALUE
'-~
6 TIME
8 IN
...
-::;0
~
10
12
minutn
MODEL
RESULTS
Behaviour of prototype push tow and model push tow with automatic steering.
'12
'1.2
'10
'1.0
x I J
8
)
0.8
Xl
lil
C» C»
lil lOl
Ol
C»
"
Ol
L-
L-
"0
z
6
"
"0
0.6
UJ ..J
C> Z
ex
\~'
\
UJ
«
,I
z
...J
4
UJ
C> Z
\ 0.4
«
t-
a a
u.. ex
-
::J
ex
a
2
t t 0
/
\
-'-,'
0.2
/
/
/
/;, ~, 'X
~-=.:.-==..-= ~
"
~·~X~·/
~
~
---.
0
/
/
\
0
- 2
.'
,
'10
~
\"
"
-
40 2b· 30 5o DISTANCE ~M_ CANAL AXIS IN m
"
-0,2
\
.t.
\
X - 4
- 0,4 Mean rudder angle
----Figure 16.
Draught 3.20 m
Standard deviation of rudder angle
Propeller speed 300 rpm
Mean drift angle
Rectangular canal section;
Standard deviation of drift angle
width 100 m; depth 6 m
Dynamic equilibrium of rudder angle and drift angle as a function of distance between push tow and canal axis.
53
Minutes of the Netherlands Water Police dated March 22, 1966 At approximately 13.30 on 21 January 1966 the following accident occurred close to km 5 on the Amsterdam-Rhine Canal, involving:
A motor ship 'Rudolf Tiedtke' load capacity 1168 tons, carrying 662 tons of wheat dimensions: 73 x 8.24 x 1.92 m engine: 600 hp B motor ship 'Dirk Jan Boon' load capacity 745 tons, carrying 630 tons iron scrap dimensions: 60 x 7.24 x 2.10 m engine: 630 hp C tow barge 'Boezemsingel' load capacity: 1399 tons, carrying 1360 tons of ore dimensions: 80 x 9.502 x2.53 m The initial speed of the ships was 8 to 10kph. After an unsuccessful attempt, the motor ship 'Rudolf Tiedtke' was again overtaking the 'Dirk Jan Boon/Boezemsingel' tow. The suction effect caused the tow barge 'Boezemsingel' to veer over instead of remaining straight. At a given moment the 'Boezemsingel' veered over so far to port that it collided with the 'Rudolf Tiedtke' although the latter was sailing well over to port. The 'Rudolf Tiedtke' was damaged in the collision. The skipper of the tow barge 'Boezemsingel' was sailing right over to starboard before or at the beginning of the overtaking manoeuvre; this considerably increased the suction effect of the bank. In addition all the ships were sailing too fast during the overtaking manoeuvre. Subsequently the overtaking operation was completed without difficulty at very low speed. lf the canal had been wider and/or deeper at this point the suction effect would have been lower.
Amsterdam
AmstC2rdam - RhinC2 canal A. Motor ship 'Rudolf Tiedtke' B. Motor ship 'Dirk Jan Boon' Figure 17.
54
Collision 4.
C. Tow barge 'Boezemsingel'
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105 120 1351150116511801195
•
210 225 240 255 270 285 300 315
TIME IN s
l
, , ,,
, , , , ,
RECTANGULAR WIYH:
t°j'
, , ' I , ' I , , --lO
:,6m
B-A
t
td~ ~
= NAVIGATION
LANE WIDTH. REAR TOW BARGE A+C = SPACE NEXT TO NAVIGATION LANE OF TOW BARGE
I
Vl Vl
Figure 18.
, , ,I , ,I
~
CANAL SECTION H DEr
Picture of ship positions (recorded photographically).
330
I
'"' z-..., ~ Ul N ...JI C)
0
zT'"
« )(
.~
lil
COl
U. ~
a::r
BB
8
./
I\..
iE
4
'""
J'
0 4
O't:l
SB 60
0
120
---i••
...,. ...,.
"' "" .... 180
240
TIME IN
300
5
~ lil COl COl
...
C7' COl
't:Il'l I
~O T"
.~
o
)(
60
N
120
---i..
180
240
TIME IN
300
5
~ lil COl COl
...
C7' COl
't:I
lil
Zl
-0 :~
T"
o
)(
60
UI
120
---:'I".
180
240
TIME IN
300
5
i~~~~ ---:i.. ~
0
60
120
180
TIME IN
z
0
~ 0::
4
~O «T'"
0
UI ...Jl'l UIl
...J )(
«
240
lil
0::' UI E ~
«z
...J_
5
BB
/
2 ,/
SB
o
"-
'-/
,/
2
"
60
---:I.. 120
........, \.
180 TIME
IN
L
L
~
240 5
RECTANGULAR CROSS SECTION; WIDTH 100 m ; DEPTH 6m
56
300
300
z
,
BB
8
I/)
J
o
UJ UJ
4
a..
I/)N
8
'" -
I I
4
.J E
~ '\.
I
.JO
0(T'" a: x UJ f- UI 0( ......
......,If
SB
o
60
120
180
--~~~
240
TIME IN
300
5
100
~
0
80
a:~
u.
"1\
r-'
J
o
I
.-
11" """""-
z
Eo(
60
al
~o
UJa:
40
uo(
zO
20
f-a: 1/)0( -fOl/)
0
o(al
60
0
180
120 ~
~ E
Z
o
UJ
UJ a..
:-1 1.5
I/)
o
60
120
180
0( E
240
300
IN s
TIME
+ 1.2 1\ I \
+0.8
0 ~N 0(1 + 0.4 a:0 UJT'" 0 .J X UJ N U UI U ......
TIME IN s
'fd f EB --~.,.
z z
300
240
I
, ...\
f~
,
j
T7
"\
o
60
120
180
---I~" TIME
~
"'
V
IJ
\ 11-
-0.4
Figure 19.
\ \
A
240
300
IN s
Results derived from positions of rearmost tow barge.
57
60
• 50
•
~
o
~
u-
o
• 40
• w
z <
...J
••
30
z
.
o ~
• •••
\.?
;; <
20
z
f
10
o
•••
•• •
•
20
10
-------.
Figure 20.
•
TEST
• • •
• • .•
40
30
NUMBER IN
•
• • •• • • • • • • .-
CHRONOLOGICAL
50 ORDER
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow. w
~i ~~
~
25
;0
o
0
•
~~
u-o
0 .. c:
20
w " Oei. Vi_ Ol
~~ ~ ti
• 15
•
dl-o a: ~
..
<
::>
~
lil
• •
"l O
,,~
~ E U-z
10
•
• •
•
•• •
• •
•
•
•
.
•
•
•
•
•• . •••
•
• • • • •
•
•
•
w'" Uz
z<
•••
~
~
0
O~
r
5
o
•
• o
--+ Figure 21.
58
20
10
TEST
NUMBER
30 IN
40
CHRONOLOGICAL
50 ORDER
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow.
50
0
•
~
w
40
l.:>
a: «
I.
l1l E
~
Oz
~-
•
• ••
•
LL~
•
•
00 w
•
•
.
30
•
•
~
eI VlVl ::>
~a.
• • ••
•
20
•
•
••
a: OLL
.•
•
•
•
••
• •
•
. •
•
0.0
•
:::!:w
oe a: Vl LL
•
10
0
wa: u«
zO
«11l
~a:
Vl« -~ OVl
Figure 22.
1
0
0
10
-----+
30
20 TEST
NUMBER
IN
40
50
CHRONOLOGICAL
ORDER
•
10
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow.
O~ ~
90
Ol
'"
~ :; O.D ~
I
Vl
::> a.
~
2 ë
80
•
Ol
c:
LL " Ol>.
•
w-..
e~
Vl
..:
cc
•
f---
Ol
~
g
~~
.
•
--
••
• f--.
~.
••
..
..: E
Vl
•
70
o " cc",
oal
. •
..•
••
•
---L
.......
. •. . •
canal axis
f'- - - 0 - - - -
••
-+--
• •
•
60
E
tl~ z
•
«'" ~z
~« 011l
r
40
30
o
10 ----.
Figure 23.
20 TEST
NUMBER
30 IN
40
CHRONOLOGICAL
50 ORDER
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow.
59
.
60
"§j
-,
~I
.1
•
e
I
I,
~
w
50
\:>
t
0:: <{
à:l
,
3:
o Iu-
o
!
•
I
I
b
40
!
~
w
•
.1
z
<{
...J
z
o ~
\:>
~
1
.. :jI
Z
• •
t
•. o.
••• • 20
• 50 ---.
Figure 24.
60
•
i. •
30
60
r..
.-.- :
•
•
• •
•
:
• •
•
I· 70
80
DISTANCE STARBOARD SI DE OF PUSH TOW TO BANK IN m (m2asur2d at tow barg2 k221 plan2)
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow.
80
UI ~
et:
<
10 ~,...
0111 I-f' a
A
70 f-
canal axis
ZA
..
UI ~ UI 0
~
1- .... UI 0 10 lil I/) c: UI~
u
Cl.
~
=
Z_
-
60
I-
50
•
1/)-"
I-"'CI' lil
•
40
•
UI ..
~ ~
et: a
<
...J
e
o e
30
-
<~
I-~
Z
UI<
I"
20
0
...J1O
ll'
""r'..o.
<0
0
klc
...J
~z
1/)<
f
A
.-.• ••
z
I/)
I ..
~ IA
IW' Itl •
lil
~
,,- .-
•
Ie"
••
oC; I/)
-
-
1.- .... 0
!jO
o
10
"
~
o
" CO
I'"
P
0
0
o
o
---I~.
Figure 25.
20
10
NAVIGATION
•
LARGE5T
o
SMALLEST
40
30 LANE
DISTANCE DI5TANCE
WIDTH
FROM FROM
50
60
OF TOW BARGE
IN
70
m
BANK BANK
Relationship between navigation lane width of tow barge and its distance from bank,
61
~O'O
50'0 Z'O
z
< 0
OE
UI UI
U )(
05
UI
•••
U.
OL
UI C)
UI
•
1ï.~-\
\.
lil
...,
UI
a..
J:
r-
a
J:
r-
Ul
z i :l;-< a ..J
·1_..,
...... ~
~
~
9'66
~O
~
:r
...... a.
. . . . . U') :::)
66
IJ
........ ........
56
z < 0
J;
z r- ~I-- 0 r1= 0 i;( IO
06
......... ........
··• III I·• I i I
0
l?
~
)(
UI
I
z
..... h....
\.:
il,
05 OE
UI
Ol-
I
~
5
•.. ~
I
Z'O
I
• I
50'0
! I
66'66
UI
a..
I
56'66
~
z
a:
.:
L,
-r '1
9'66
UI
U
"':
L I
1
T""
u. 0
..,
1 I
N
OL
z z
C)
• to,
.. ;
UI UI
U
-<
~
UI
U
0
~
66
CD
.0
N
Ó
Ó
Ó
H.LOIM dlHS H.LOIM 3N'tl NOI.L't~IA'tN
62
b
r-
,..,
1,,,-
56
Figure 26.
i
I" I.
"'t
06
J:
Ul
\
~
0
il
"\ ....
"\.
I--
IJ
r-
. , ',' \
.. ..
-< IO
'"r- 0 '" '"'"r- '"0 '"
a. -< a:
"ot
'11
• '" '"
r-
a-<
~..,
l?
a:
'"5!
öN
"\ \~, ~
~rL
Ul
...J
'1
U
a:
-< z -< u
IL,
~,L
\
...J
11
~
z
lil lil
L;
1.,
0
u
56'66
~~~~~
CD
z '" ,..rï= '"
0
!
:
U
lil
i
l-
UI
r-r-r-r-r-
I .,
I '"... ",I-- ,.., ",I--
tn..,..,,&nln
••
I
5
!
W').o,...CDCD
·I
I
~
Ol-
66'66
!
I1
...
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow,
.-;
o
~O'O
f
100
1
r
LIJ
U
-zeo « 0
t---
u )(
1,1
Z
t - - - 0 60 Z
u.
0
(
LIJ
l!l
t---
« I-
40
Z
~
LIJ
U
t---
a: LIJ 11.
t--j
20
)
/
~
I
0
-10
---+ Figure 27.
o
+10
+20
+30
DISTANCE BETWEEN NAVIGATION BARGE AND PUSH TOW IN m
LANES
+40 OF TOW
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow. 100
V
«
eo
0
w w
11
U
)(
W
1
I
Z
0
z
60
/
1)
JJ
w
l!l
«
I-
Z
w U a: w
40
11.
j
I----'
(
w
U Z
20
U
r
J
..... o
r- ~
o ~
Figure 28.
~
f
LIJ LIJ
LIJ I
t--
r
V
S
10
15
20
SMALLEST DISTANCE BETWEEN TOW BARGE AND BANK IN m (m ..asur..d at k.... 1 plan.. )
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow.
63
tJ
100
--~ ---
Z
« o
UI UI
U
x
I
-:"'-'
Ba
1"
i
__ I
UI
I Z
p.
o Z
60
UI
Cl
~ U
I
lI: UI Q.
20
I
I
f
• .J"
o
i
i
...
p-
I
•
.-
!.-J ......
li
~rE
r
/
I'
r
12
10
B
---i~~
2.0
.,............
2.2 OVERTAKING
16
14
OVERTAKING
2.4
TIME IN
2.6
DISTANCE
FOR
64
20
1B
minutu
2.B ENTIRE
3.0
3.2
TOW IN km
TIME NECESSARY Ta OVERTAKE TOW BARGE TIME NECESSARY Ta OVERTAKE ENTIRE TOW TOTAL OVERTAKING DISTANCE
Figure 29.
...
r0-
f
,..- ~
1.B
.....
_. _ . ..
J
~-j
1.6
,.....r
.....
r --
6
.
_.r-"
J-
~
40
Z
UI
• .....J
~I- • .J
I
U-
a
_r- I
Passing manoeuvre in which tow barge is overtaken by push tow.
1-- _ _
~I.Ul
_-10_ ..........., 1: )( 1 .,
-
...... "
"~t,
I
,,.,., '-
--------_ -
---20
~ ,-,. ~ .' .'
.....···..·······30.·...·...
--10.....
······30~ ' ......·-40·.. ···
,-
"-
.)/,.
............
I
(
I '
'-'-',
,
i
\
I
I
I -'-40''''
/
I
I
\
,, .
/
('
sa_
'
I \ ~ \
I
, i, i \"40_,,
·•····· ..... 30 ...
'. ....
I
\..,1rI
/
;
i
\
\. 0
I
\
Wide push tow; rectangular canal section; width: 100 m; depth: 4.20 m
,."\
:
,I
i
...
~-~·
,~-.
"
~
\
"
b
~
O
I
",(-' -
...... ..........
I
\j
~o
I
X
)t
,'-
"-
\
"'. I .,,0'-.,
-
.. ..' '
-'-'40_ ..···......'30.... 120.. \
'
Lines of equal water-level drop in cm prototype
.. -
-----20_...
............ '70,
Figure 30.
'-
v=
10.9 kph
Water-level drop around moving push tow.
65
z
15
1I-+-~r---+-__+---1------:li:---+--I---+---l
DRAUGHT OF ALL BARGES 0.75 m
UJ ...J C)
~
10
1I-+--t---1~-+---iII~--+--I--+------,j~-----l
~
u.
a: o 511-+-~--+-.......jj~--1----7I'-:.......,I,,~--+-4---.----l
f
o _"""'-_......_ ......_-:!:::,...I111111::;;;,j".__......__.....3.•3.,;0.;,;m;...e_----1 01
2
---\I".
=
20
3
4 WIND STRENGTH
g'
ON
8
9
BEAUFORT SCALE
It-+--;--+---+--t---+---+----+---~ LOCATION
~
7
__
OF BALLASTED
WINDWARD SIDE LEE SIDE AFT
BARGE: FORWARD
."
z
1 5 1I-+--t----1--+---+--+--I---I-t----+-----/
UJ ...J C)
Z 0( ~
u. cr
o
10
DRAUGHT OF ONLY ---+----lI!'---,jI[J..... BALLASTED BARGE 1.50 m I&.JL.---:--
I I
I
I
DRAUGHT OF OTHER BARGES 0.75 m
I
I /
/
/
511-+-~r__-+-__+---1'+_:~-~'---"""'*'~--+---l
f ---\I". Figure 31.
66
5
10
15
WIND SPEED AT HEIGHT
Influence of wind and draught on drift angle.
20 OF 10m IN mis
'Tl 0;;'
W
t:: ....
t'
'" ....,
!""
• 20
...J
<{ ..
~
+
0
0"
,
20
tl:l
eI: W o '" Ol
III
~ ~
ö' t:: ....
W
:r'" <
...,
0
'0
t::
'":r-
a ~ ::l
'...."
III
o:l
'"t:: :;
·
4
w~+
0
...J
<.:l Z
lil eI: '" Ol
8~ , J,
E
o~
'" 0
eI: Z WW
-
....
~
-
--
-
~ '"....
~
4
+
0
-
- - - ~--1 - - - _ . -
CORRESPONDING
<{<{
ïi ,
STARBOARD
4 400
200
I
I
I
0
VALUES
OFF SET
~--~--~--~--
200
I I I
400
--
600
L..-- _
i
I
I "\ '/
I
"-O'05~
I
STEM
-+- -
-----i -
1/4 BOTTOM WIDTH
,
--
f
P?fuION
-t-~- - =++~g, 45°
0
-E-?Ç 3-
.~
-
---
.C:; ~'\~
I
----t - - - - --1--- _ _O.1~---
_o.~~~=f8·2?==sw=
PUSH
TOW
LENGTH WIDTH DRAUGHT PROPELLER
: : : :
191 m 22.80 m 3.30m 200 rpm
SH I p's SpEED: 2.0
mis
-+----- - --+--- _ ---+-- _ ---+- _ ...J
.--1
-------~-==--1 _-------I .. == WATER-LEVEL
~
0\ -.l
I DISPLACEMENT
I I
ë ....
i
-
TRANSVERSE
- ~--!--- - - -
t::
0
I
I
PORT
()
II ....,
-- - - -
ANGLE
STAR BOARD
lIlW
ZU
'"
DRIFT
4
·
>~
t::
;0
ANGLE
;:>"
~
::l
i
PORT
<{ ..
S'
OQ
RUDDER
Z
PLAN scal~
VIEW
1: 5,000
NAP. +
g
2.7öll\
PLAN
VIEW
seo Ie 1: 5,000
PROPELLER SPEED 120 rpm ; SPEED 2.50 m/s
DI STANCE FROM FRONT OF MOTOR SHIP IN m
I
C~
~~ CCw lil E
~~
I
I
4
350 6
150
350
150
!
PORT
o - - - --
~
0
-
lIlW
--
~
~--
---
~ .............
.......
~
-
--
zU
« CC...J ~a.
STARBOARD
6
8
i'j WOl
lIl~
P6RT
0
---
_.
CC Ol
=>"" Oz U-
a
tI
STAR~OARD
PORT
20
!-
1---- -
---= -------
-
I I I
0
W'" C Ol
- - -- - - - -
I
---&..._- ~ . -
-
c""
=>z cc_
20 Figure 33.
68
y
I
W
CC~
I
i'-.... 100.. STARBOARD
~
- - - ~ . -- - -
r-'
Behaviour of motor ship near Maarssen intake structure (Q
=
~
65 m 3 /s).
..-......../
In the series of Rijkswaterstaat Communications the fo\lowing numbers have been published befare: No.
I. * Tidal Computations in Shallow Water Dr. J. J. Dronkerst and prof. dr. ir. J. C. Schänfeld Report on Hydrostatie Levelling aeross the Westerschelde Ir. A. Waalewijn
No. 2. * Computation of the Decca Pattern for the Netherlands Delta Works Ir. H. Ph. van der Schaaft and P. Vetterli, Ing. Dip!. E.T.H. No. 3. * The Aging of Asphaltic Bitumen Ir. A. J. P. van der Burgh, J. P. Bouwman and G. M. A. Steffelaar No. 4.
Mud Distribution and Land Reclamation in the Eastern Wadden Shallows Dr. L. F. Kamps t
No. 5.
Modern Construction of Wing-Gates Ir. J. C. Ie Nobel
No. 6.
A Structure Planfor the Southern IJsselmeerpolders Board of the Zuyder Zee Works
No. 7.
The Use of Explosives for Clearing lee Ir. J. van der Kley
No. S. * The Design and Construction ofthe Van Brienenoord Bridge across the River Nieuwe Maas Ir. W. J. van der Ebt No. 9.
Electronic Computation of Water Levels in Rivers during High Discharges Section River Studies. Directie Bovenrivieren of Rijkswaterstaat
No. 10. * The Canalization of the Lower Rhine Ir. A. C. de Gaay en ir. P. Blokland No. 11. * The Haringvliet Sluices Ir. H. A. Ferguson, ir. P. Blokland and ir. drs. H. Kuiper No. 12.
The Application ofPiecewise Polynomials to Problems of Curve and Surface Approximation Dr. Kurt Kubik
No. 13.
Systems for Automatic Computation and Plotting of Position Fixing Patterns Ir. H. Ph. van der Schaaft
No. 14.
The Realization and Function of the Northern Basin of the Delta Project Deltadienst of Rijkswaterstaat
No. 15.
Fysical-Engineering Model of Reinforeed Concrete Frames in Compression Ir. J. Blaauwendraad
No. 16.
Navigation Locks for Push Tows Ir. C. Kooman
No. 17.
Pneumatic Barriers to reduce Salt Intrusion through Loeks Dr. ir. G. Abraham, ir. P. van der Burgh and ir. P. de Vos
No. IS.
Experiences with Mathematical Models used for Water Quality and Water Quantity Problems Ir. J. Vaagt and dr. ir. C. B. Vreugdenhil
*) out of print
69
In the series of Rijkswaterstaat Communications the following numbers have been published befare (continuation):
No. 19.
Sand Stabilization and Dune Building Dr. M. J. Adriani and dr. J. H. J. Terwindt
No. 20.
The Raad-Picture as a Touchstone for the Threedimensional Design of Roads Ir. J. F. Springer and ir. K. E. Huizinga (also in German)
70
N
800 ~
00
~ w
w
*
