On Regulatory Framework of Direct Stability Assessment

  • William S. Peters
  • Vadim L. Belenky
  • Arthur M. Reed
Part of the Fluid Mechanics and Its Applications book series (FMIA, volume 119)


Direct assessment of stability, including model tests and numerical simulations, is the ultimate way to evaluate the risk of stability failure for an unconventional vessel. That is why direct assessment is considered to be the highest tier of the second generation of intact-stability criteria, that are being developed by IMO. Direct assessment procedures for stability failure are intended to employ the most advanced state-of-the art technology available, yet be sufficiently practical so as to be uniformly applied, verified, validated, and approved using currently available infrastructure. This paper addresses several principal issues related to the application of numerical simulation in the IMO regulatory framework, including possible requirements for a method that adequately replicates ship motions in waves, validation of such a method, actual assessment procedures and their validation.


Direct assessment Intact stability Numerical simulations 



This work was partially funded by ONR under Dr. L. P. Purtell. The authors are grateful to the following colleagues for their fruitful discussions and helpful comments: W. Belknap, B. Campbell, and T. Smith (David Taylor Model Basin, NSWCCD); K. Weems (SAIC); K. Spyrou (National Technical University of Athens); and N. Umeda (Osaka University).

The authors are grateful to Ms. Suzanne Reed for her detailed editing that has greatly improved clarity and readability of the text.


  1. ABS (2004a) “Guide for the Assessment of Parametric Roll Resonance in the Design of Container Carriers.” American Bureau of Shipping, Houston, TX, 70 p.Google Scholar
  2. ABS (2004b) “Guidance Notes on Safehull Finite Element Analysis of Hull Structures.” American Bureau of Shipping, Houston, TX, 52 p.Google Scholar
  3. ASME, (2009) “Standard for Verification and Validation in Computational Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer.” V V 20 2009, Amer. Soc. Mech. Engin., New York.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, R. F. & A. M. Reed, (2001). Modern computational methods for ships in seaway. Trans. SNAME, 109:1–48.Google Scholar
  5. Belenky, V. L. (2011) “On Self-Repeating Effect in Reconstruction of Irregular Waves” in Contemporary Ideas on Ship Stability, Neves, M. A. S., et al. (eds), Springer, pp. 589–598.Google Scholar
  6. Belenky V., J. O. de Kat & N. Umeda (2008) “Towards Performance-Based Criteria for Intact Stability.” Marine Tech., 45(2):101–123.Google Scholar
  7. Belenky, V. L., D. Liut, K. M. Weems & Y. S. Shin (2003) Nonlinear roll with water-on-deck: numerical approach, Proc. 8th Int’l Conf. Stability of Ships & Ocean Vehicles (STAB’03), Madrid, Spain.Google Scholar
  8. Belenky, V. L & N. B. Sevastianov (2007) Stability and Safety of Ships: Risk of Capsizing. (2nd ed) SNAME, Jersey City.Google Scholar
  9. Belenky, V. & K. M. Weems (2011), “Probabilistic Properties of Parametric Roll.” Chapter 6 of Parametric Resonance in Dynamical Systems, Fossen, T. I. & H. Nijmeijer (Eds.) Springer, NY.Google Scholar
  10. Belenky, V., K. M. Weems, C. C. Bassler, M. J. Dipper, B. Campbell & K. Spyrou (2012) “Approaches to Rare Events in Stochastic Dynamics of Ships.” Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 28:30–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Belenky, V., K. M. Weems, W. M. Lin & J. R. Paulling (2011a) Probabilistic Analysis of Roll Parametric Resonance in Head Seas Contemporary Ideas on Ship Stability, Neves, M. A. S., et al. (eds), Springer, pp. 555–572.Google Scholar
  12. Belenky, V., H. Yu & K. M. Weems (2011b) “Numerical Procedures and Practical Experience of Assessment of Parametric Roll of Container Carriers.” in Contemporary Ideas on Ship Stability, Neves, M. A. S., et al. (eds), Springer, pp. 295–305.Google Scholar
  13. Brunswig, J. & R. Pereira (2006) Validation of Parametric Roll Motion Predictions for a Modern Containership Design. Proc. 9th Int’l Conf. Stability Ships & Ocean Vehicles (STAB ‘06), Vol. 1, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, pp. 157–168.Google Scholar
  14. Belknap, W. F. & A. M. Reed (2010) TEMPEST — A New Computationally Efficient Dynamic Stability Prediction Tool. Proc. 11th Int’l Ship Stability Workshop, Wageningen, The Netherlands, pp. 185–197.Google Scholar
  15. Belknap, W. F., T. C Smith & B. Campbell (2011) Addressing Challenges in the Validation of Dynamic Stability Simulation Tools, Proc. 12th Int’l Ship Stability Workshop, Washington, DC. USA, pp. 81–90.Google Scholar
  16. Degtyarev A. B. & I. Gankevich (2012) Evaluation of Hydrodynamic Pressures for Autoregression Model of Irregular Waves, Proc. 11th Int’l Conf. Stability of Ships & Ocean Vehicles (STAB ‘12), Athens, Greece.Google Scholar
  17. Degtyarev, A. B. & A. M. Reed (2011) Modeling of Incident Waves near the Ship’s Hull (Application of Autoregressive Approach in Problems of Simulation of Rough Seas) Proc. 12th Int’l Ship Stability Workshop, Washington, DC, USA, pp 175–188.Google Scholar
  18. France, W. M, M, Levadou, T. W. Treakle, J. R. Paulling, K. Michel & C. Moore (2003). An Investigation of Head-Sea Parametric Rolling and its Influence on Container Lashing Systems, Marine Tech.¸ 40(1):1–19.Google Scholar
  19. Francescutto, A., G. Contento & R. Penna (1994) Experimental Evidence of Strong Nonlinear Effects in the Rolling Motion of the Destroyer in Beam Seas, Proc. 5th Int’l Conf. Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles (STAB ’94), Vol. 1, Melbourne, Florida, USA.Google Scholar
  20. Grochowalski, S., C. C. Hsiung, Z. J. Huang & L. Z. Cong (1998). Theoretical Modelling of Ship Motions and Capsizing in Large and Steep Waves Trans. SNAME, 106:241–267.Google Scholar
  21. IMO MSC.1/Circ.1227 (2007) Explanatory Notes to the Interim Guidelines for Alternative Assessment of the Weather Criterion, London, UK, 23 p.Google Scholar
  22. IMO SLF 53/3/8 (2010) “Comments on Proposed Criteria for Surf-riding and Broach-ing.” submitted by Japan and the United States, London, 2010.Google Scholar
  23. IMO SLF 54/INF.12 (2011) Information Collected by the Correspondence Group on Intact Stability, Submitted by Japan, London, UK, 147 p.Google Scholar
  24. Meeker, W. O. & L. A. Escobar (1998) Statistical Methods for Reliability Data. Wiley, New York, 680 p.Google Scholar
  25. Ogawa, Y, N. Umeda, D. Paroka, H. Taguchi,, S. Ishida, A. Matsuda, H. Hashimoto & G. Bulian (2008) “Prediction Methods for Capsizing under Dead Ship Condition and Obtained Safety Level — Final Report of SCAPE Committee (Part 4)”, Proc. Osaka Colloquium on Seakeeping and Stability of Ships, Osaka, Japan, pp. 253–265.Google Scholar
  26. Peters, W., V. Belenky, C. Bassler, K. Spyrou, N. Umeda, G. Bulian & B. Altmayer (2011) “The Second Generation of Intact Stability Criteria An Overview of Development.” Trans SNAME. Vol. 119.Google Scholar
  27. Rahola, J. (1939) “The Judging of the Stability of Ships and the Determination of the Minimum Amount of Stability Especially Considering the Vessel Navigating Finnish Waters.” PhD Thesis, Technical University of Finland, Helsinki, viii + 232 p.Google Scholar
  28. Reed, A. M. (2008) Discussion of: Belenky, V., J. O. de Kat & N. Umeda (2008) “To-wards Performance-Based Criteria for In-tact Stability.” Marine Tech., 45(2):122–123.Google Scholar
  29. Reed, A. M. (2009) A Naval Perspective on Ship stability, Proc. 10th Int’l Conf. Stability of Ships & Ocean Vehicles (STAB ‘09), St. Petersburg, Russia, pp. 21–43.Google Scholar
  30. Reed, A. M. (2011) 26th ITTC Parametric Roll Benchmark Study, Proc. 12th Int’l Ship Stability Workshop, Washington DC, USA, pp. 195–204.Google Scholar
  31. Sadat-Hosseini, H., P. Carrica, F. Stern, N. Umeda, H. Hashimoto, S. Yamamura & A. Mastuda (2011) CFD, system-based and EFD study of ship dynamic instability events: Surf-riding, periodic motion, and broaching. Ocean Engineering, 38:88–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shigunov, V. (2009) Operational Guidance for Prevention of Container Loss. Proc. 10th Int’l Conf. Stability of Ships & Ocean Vehicles (STAB ‘09), St. Petersburg, Russia, pp. 473–482.Google Scholar
  33. Shin, Y. S., V. L. Belenky, W. M. Lin, K. M. Weems & A. H. Engle (2003) “Nonlinear time domain simulation technology for sea-keeping and wave-load analysis for modern ship design.” Trans SNAME. 111:557–578.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, T. C. (2011) Statistical Data Set Comparison for Continuous, Dependent Data, Proc. 12th Int’l Ship Stability Workshop, Washington, DC. USA pp. 75–80.Google Scholar
  35. Smith, T. C. (2012) Approaches to Ship Motion Simulation Acceptance Criteria, Proc. 11th Int’l Conf. Stability of Ships & Ocean Vehicles (STAB ‘12), Athens, Greece.Google Scholar
  36. Sevastianov, N. B. (1963). “On probabilistic approach to stability standards.” Trans. Kaliningrad Institute of Technology, 18:3–12. (in Russian).Google Scholar
  37. Sevastianov, N. B. (1994). “An algorithm of probabilistic stability assessment and standards” Proc. 5th Int’l Conf. Stability of Ships & Ocean Vehicles (STAB ‘94), Vol. 5, Melbourne, Florida, USA.Google Scholar
  38. Spyrou, K. (1995). Surf-riding and oscillations of a ship in quartering waves, Journal of Marine Science and Technology, Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 24–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Spyrou, K. (1996). “Dynamic instability in quartering seas: the behaviour of a ship during broaching.” J. Ship Research, 40(1):46–59.Google Scholar
  40. Spyrou, K., K. Weems & V. Belenky (2009) Patterns of Surf-riding and Broaching-to Captured by Advanced Hydrodynamic Modeling Proc. 10th Int’l Conf. Stability of Ships & Ocean Vehicles, St. Petersburg, Russia.Google Scholar
  41. Themelis, N. & K. J. Spyrou (2007) Probabilistic Assessment of Ship Stability. Trans. SNAME, 117:181–206.Google Scholar
  42. Umeda, N., S. Koga, J. Ueda, E. Maeda, I. Tsu-kamoto & D. Paroka (2007) Methodology for Calculating Capsizing Probability for a Ship under Dead Ship Condition, Proc. 9th Int’l Ship Stability Workshop, Hamburg, pp. 1.2.1–1.2.19.Google Scholar
  43. Umeda, N. & Y. Yamakoshi (1993). Probability of Ship Capsizing Due to Pure Loss of Stability in Irregular Quartering Seas, Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Vol. 30.Google Scholar
  44. Yen T. G., S. Zhang, K. Weems & W-M. Lin (2010) Development and Validation of Numerical Simulations for Ship Maneuvering in Calm Water and in Waves, Proc. 28th Symp. Naval Hydro., Pasadena, California.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • William S. Peters
    • 1
  • Vadim L. Belenky
    • 2
  • Arthur M. Reed
    • 2
  1. 1.US Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering StandardsWashington DCUSA
  2. 2.David Taylor Model Basin (NSWCCD)West Bethesda MDUSA

Personalised recommendations