DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Under Keel Clearance of Gadeok Channel for the Safety Passage of Mega Container Ship

초대형 컨테이너선의 가덕수로 안전운항을 위한 선저여유수심 연구

  • Ryu, Won (Korea institute of Maritime and Fisheries Technology) ;
  • Kong, Suk-Young (Korea institute of Maritime and Fisheries Technology) ;
  • Lee, Yun-Sok (Department of Ship Operation, National Korea Maritime & Ocean University)
  • Received : 2021.08.13
  • Accepted : 2021.10.28
  • Published : 2021.10.31

Abstract

The worldwide sizes of container ships are rapidly increasing. The container ship size in 2005, which was about 9,200 TEU has increased to 24,000 TEU in recent times. In addition to the increase in the sizes of the container ships, the arrivals/departures of large container vessels to/from Korea have also increased. Hence, the necessity for reviewing safe passage of such vessels is emphasized. In the present study, a 24,000 TEU container vessel was used as a model ship to calculate the under-keel clearance (UKC) at Gadeok Channel through which vessels must pass to arrive at Busan New Port, in accordance with the Korean Port and Fishing Port Design Standards and Commentary. In addition, the maximum allowable speed that meets UKC standards was calculated using various squat formulas, whose results were then compared with the current speed limit standards. The analysis results show that Busan New Port requires 10% marginal water depth, and the squat that meets this requirement is 0.95 m. Gadeok Channel requires 15% marginal water depth, and the squat that meets this requirement is 1.78 m; in this case, the maximum allowable speed is calculated as 15 kts. Busan New Port has set the speed limit as 12 kts, which is higher than the calculated 11 kts. Thus, speed limit reconsideration is required in terms of safety. However, the set speed limit for Gadeok Channel is 12 kts, which is lower than the calculated 15 kts. Thus, additional considerations may be provided to increase the speed limits for smooth navigational passage of vessels. The present study, however, is constrained by the fact that it reflects only a limited number of elements in the UKC and allowable speed calculations; therefore, more accurate UKC and safe speed values can be suggested based on extended studies to this research.

전세계적으로 컨테이너선은 대형화되고 있으며, 2005년 9,200 TEU에 불과하였던 컨테이너선의 크기가 최근에는 24,000 TEU급으로 확대되었다. 컨테이너선의 대형화와 함께 우리나라에서도 대형 컨테이너선들의 입·출항이 잦아지고 있어 안전 통항에 대한 검토의 필요성이 강조되고 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 24,000 TEU 컨테이너선을 대상 선박으로 우리나라의 항만 및 어항 설계 기준에 따라 부산신항 및 부산신항 입항을 위해 통과해야 하는 가덕수로에서의 UKC를 산출하였다. 또한 UKC 기준을 충족하면서 항해 가능한 최대속력을 다양한 squat 식을 활용하여 구하였고, 이 결과를 현재의 속력제한 기준과 비교하였다. 연구결과 부산신항에는 흘수대비 10 % 여유수심을 요구하며 이를 만족하는 squat값은 0.95 m였으며, 가능한 최대속력은 11 kts였다. 가덕수로에서는 흘수대비 15 % 여유 수심을 요구하며 이를 만족하는 squat값은 1.78 m였으며, 가능한 최대속력은 15 kts였다. 부산신항에서는 계산결과인 11 kts보다 제한속력이 12 kts로 높게 설정되어 있어 안전측면에서 재고려가 필요하며, 가덕수로에서는 계산결과인 15 kts보다 제한속력이 12 kts로 낮게 설정되어 있으므로 원활한 통항을 위하여 필요시 속력제한 규정을 높이는 것을 고려해 볼 수 있다. 본 연구는 제한된 요소만을 고려하여 UKC 및 항해 가능한 속력을 산출한 한계를 가지고 있으나 이 연구를 토대로 추가연구가 진행된다면 정확한 UKC 및 안전속력을 제한할 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Acomi, N.(2020), Impact of Chart Data Accuracy of Safety of Navigation, The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 411-415. https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.14.02.19
  2. Hmm(2020), Container Ship Dimensions from http://www.hmm21.com/cms/company/korn/container/, on July.
  3. ICORELS(1980), International Commission for the Reception of Large Ships, Report of Working Group IV, PIANC Bulletin No. 35, Supplement, pp. 17-19.
  4. IMO MSC.232(82)(2006), Revised Performance Standards for Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems (ECDIS). International Maritime Organization, London, 5 December, pp. 1-26.
  5. KHOA(2019), Annual Report of Korea Oceangraphic Observation Network from http://www.khoa.go.kr/webzine/, on July.
  6. Kim, C. H., Y. S. Park, and D. W. Kim(2020), A Study on the Safety Measure for Mega Container Ships Calling at Busan New Port from the Perspective of Pilotage, Journal of Korean Navigation and Port Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 174-180.
  7. Kim, H. C.(2010), Korean Vessels, Jisungsa, p. 110.
  8. Korea Design Standard(2017), KDS 64 40 10 Water Facility, Ministry of Ocean and Fisheries, pp. 1-27.
  9. Lee, S. M.(2021), Reduction of UKC for Very Large Tanker and Container Ship in Shallow Water, Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 409-420. https://doi.org/10.7837/kosomes.2021.27.3.409
  10. Lee, W. H., W. C. Yoo, G. H. Choi, S. H. Ham, and T. W. Kim(2019), Determination of Optimal Ship Route in Coastal Sea Considering Sea Satate and Under Keel Clearance, Journal of the Society of Naval Architects of Korea, Vol. 56, No. 4, pp. 480-487. https://doi.org/10.3744/SNAK.2019.56.6.480
  11. Li, D., K. S. Kwak, K. C. Nam, and Y. M An(2015), A Comparative Analysis of Terminal Efficiency in Northeast Asia Container Ports, The Journal of Navigation and Port Research, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 55-60. https://doi.org/10.5394/KINPR.2015.39.1.55
  12. Oocl(2021), Container Ship Dimensions from https://www.oocl.com/eng/ourservices/vessels/, on July.
  13. Park, N. K. and S. C. Suh(2019), Tendency toward Mega Container ships and the Constraints of Container Terminals, Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Vol. 7, No. 5, pp. 131. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse7050131
  14. Rules for navigation in Busan Port(2020) from https://www.portbusan.go.kr/board/boardView, on July.
  15. Ryu, W.(2017), A Study on Under Keel Clearance of Domestic Port' Fairway for Ship's Safe Passage, Korea Maritime & Ocean University, Master Dissertation, pp. 43-53.
  16. The World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure (2014), Harbour approach channels design guidelines, PIANC Report n° 121-2014, pp. 20-35, 181-218.
  17. TSCPHF in Japan(2009), Technical Standards and Commentaries for Port and Harbour Facility in Japan, The Overseas Coastal area Development Institute of Japan, pp. 552-582.
  18. Won, S. H., S. W. Cho, and J. H. Lee(2015), Counter-strategies of Busan Port against Expansion of Container Vessel Size, The Journal of Shipping & Logistics, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 249-274. https://doi.org/10.37059/tjosal.2015.31.2.249