stability of livestock carrier - Ships Nostalgia
06:05

Welcome
Welcome!Welcome to Ships Nostalgia, the world's greatest online community for people worldwide with an interest in ships and shipping. Whether you are crew, ex-crew, ship enthusiasts or cruisers, this is the forum for you. And what's more, it's completely FREE.

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.
Log in
User Name Password

stability of livestock carrier

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 10th March 2010, 08:25
gululu gululu is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6
stability of livestock carrier

Appreciate indeed if anybody can tell me about the unit weight of cattle or sheep to be applied in the stability calculation.
I go through the AMSA marine note 43 and class rules to figer out this issue, but without any result.
Many thanks in advance.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10th March 2010, 10:09
Billieboy Billieboy is offline  
member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1962 - 1970
 
Join Date: May 2009
My location
Posts: 4,302
Cattle = one per ton
Sheep = five or six per ton
Pigs difficult, weight is based on age in weeks, if fattened in North Europe.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11th March 2010, 00:17
gululu gululu is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6
Billieboy, many thanks, is that what applied in stability calculation?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11th March 2010, 07:45
Billieboy Billieboy is offline  
member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1962 - 1970
 
Join Date: May 2009
My location
Posts: 4,302
Not that I know gululu, they are the approximate weights of European livestock at local farms. It depends where you are loading, as a North African cow will be lighter, an Australian sheep will be lighter etc. There is a company in Breskens, Holland(NL), that owns a large number of specialist livestock carriers, I've forgotten their name at the moment. Try Googling, "specialist livestock carriers", there maybe more information there.

Good Luck.

p.s. The Breskens company is "Vroom and Co". (I just remembered it!)

Last edited by Billieboy; 11th March 2010 at 08:28.. Reason: add p.s.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11th March 2010, 08:05
John Cassels John Cassels is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 2,931
Would one need to take into account the "free range effect " as opposed to the
"free surface effect " when calculating stability ?.
__________________
JC ; same initials-but the other guy did the miracles.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11th March 2010, 08:29
Billieboy Billieboy is offline  
member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1962 - 1970
 
Join Date: May 2009
My location
Posts: 4,302
Don"t make it too difficult John!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12th March 2010, 02:49
gululu gululu is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6
Billieboy, thanks again, i just do a conversion design project, from a container vessel to livestock carrier, it's really a challenge for me cause i know nothing about livestock carrier before, i know such vessel's stability is quite different with normal vessel, to do a loading case calculation, i should know the exactly weight of loads. but i don't know if any regulation specify a certain unit weight of the lives.

p.s. John, as per AMSA's regulation, the shift moment of lives should be taken into account.

Last edited by gululu; 12th March 2010 at 02:53..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12th March 2010, 06:34
Billieboy Billieboy is offline  
member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1962 - 1970
 
Join Date: May 2009
My location
Posts: 4,302
Biggest problem with livestock carriers is corrosion. most decks are Corten steel and or acid resistant stainless steel, (316 and 316l).
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12th March 2010, 09:30
gululu gululu is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6
Verry interesting, I know the decks are always quite thin such as 6.5mm even 4.5mm. Now a day, owner wanna use alumimum material to instead of normal steel. But the price is quite higher. Alternatively, they may ask for a perfect coating job.

Last edited by gululu; 12th March 2010 at 09:51..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 13th March 2010, 06:36
Interalia Interalia is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by gululu View Post
Appreciate indeed if anybody can tell me about the unit weight of cattle or sheep to be applied in the stability calculation.
I go through the AMSA marine note 43 and class rules to figer out this issue, but without any result.
Many thanks in advance.
Gululu,

I have had a lot of experience in conversion of small vessels to livestock carriers in Australia. To answer your question Australian cattle, shipped from the north ( Brahman cross) weigh in at anything from 250 kg per head to 400 kg. depending on the season, from the south of Australia they tend to be heavier. They must breed big cattle in Europe!
Sheep and goats around 40 kg plus, camels at about 300 kg depending on age. Donkeys at around 75 kg (there's not much meat on them!)
Look at:
www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/930108/std4-vessel-preparation.pdf

to find tables allowing deck space per head.

If designing for AMSA take advice from one who learnt the hard way. Follow Part 43 to the letter!!!

Corrosion, in the short term I found not to be a problem, we had steel decks with custom made aluminim pen rails fitted with galvanised bolts and no adverse effects ( though there may have been a bit of voltage between the deck and the rails. But all bolts were sealed with silicon. Point to be aware though is the type of deck coating. After losing several cattle to splayed legs - slipping while rolling - eventually we devised a deck coating of a mixture of two pack epoxy mixed with three different grades of blasting grit.

Re stability, from a practical ( seaman's) point of view it is interesting to note that in heavy weather the cattle will lie down thus reducing their CG marginally on each deck.

I was involved with livestock here from 1994 to 2003, so the rules may have changed a bit but will be happy to give you and further help that I can,if I can.
Cheers
Interalia
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 13th March 2010, 08:05
Billieboy Billieboy is offline  
member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1962 - 1970
 
Join Date: May 2009
My location
Posts: 4,302
Gululu and Interalia, Very Sorry, I've made a big mistake I was thinking 1000Kilos but it was obviously 1000lbs! The sheep were also in lbs, so it's two cattle or ten sheep to the ton!

So sorry, it must be thirty years since I weighed a cow at the market in Carmarthen.

Last edited by Billieboy; 13th March 2010 at 08:08..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 13th March 2010, 11:49
gululu gululu is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6
Interalia and Billieboy, you all are vey kind. Both of those advices give me a lot help.
The project I'm just handling is a 4500TEU container carrier convert to a livestock carrier, as a junior naval architect with no any experience, it's really a challenge for me. The classification society treat livestock carrier as a cargo ship. The stability booklet which is one of the most important documents should be Class stamped and kept on board. We all know for a normal cargo ship, they have a typical deadweight, for example, a 50,000dwt bulk carrier can carrier about 50,000 tons of cargo. When I prepare the stability booklet, I just put 50,000 tons weight and it's VCG, LCG take into account the lightship's parameters, then calculate the intact and damage stability under the different loading cases (full-load departure / arrival, ballast departure / arrival, docking condition and etc) and compare with the IMO rules to show the vessel have enough stablity in any voyage case. But as you said above, the unit weight of lives is not a constant. It makes me confused, The owner only told me they propose to carrier 20,000 cattles or 100,000 sheeps, or a combination of both. I don't know what's the right typical weight should I apply in the stability booklet. That's the real question for me.

Last edited by gululu; 13th March 2010 at 11:52..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 13th March 2010, 15:27
JoK JoK is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,057
As a bystander who will conceivably never deal with lifestock carriers, interesting thread!
__________________
Walk softly and carry a big wrench
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 13th March 2010, 22:05
Interalia Interalia is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27
Gululu,
As with most stability problems, there is often a lot of aproximation with the weights and/or centres of gravity. For instance, where is the centre of gravity of a 300 kg animal? ( I went up to a farming area with a tape measure and measured a few steers and made a good guess!)

I should tell you first that I was not the naval architect who calculated all the stabilty but was heavily involved in the design work and conversion of 1500 tonne vessels -1200 head of cattle-(two converted one proposed only) and also sailed as Master of them , so stability was of great concern to me.
My method of attack was to determine the total deck area available for livestock (excluding the hospital pens), and using an average weight per animal - say, 300 kg,and using the table on the webstie I gave earlier in reply determine the total number of cattle per pen or deck. This will give you a weight to apply to the whole deck and apply an approximation of the CG for each deck. Choosing a middle of the range unit weight per animal will give a bit leeway either side of the probable true weight

Location of fodder is important, bearing in mind that the quantity of fodder reduces during the voyage ( we used pelletised fodder in bags stowed on upper deck, manually distributed by the crew) while fresh water is consumed at a high rate. After a very fast learning curve we installed three Reversed Osmosis units to make a total of 40 tonnes FW daily, sufficient to keep all FW double bottoms almost pressed up. Remember I am talking about much smaller vessels than you are dealing with.

Then to add to the interest, on a ten or twelve day voyage a good stockman would manage to make a weight gain in the cattle amounting to up to 10 kg per animal, depending on the weather. So there is an overall weight increase in the livestock decks during the voyage. As you realise, stability at the middle or end of the voyage is just as critical as initial stability.

Another concern is the presence of free water on the livestock decks during daily wash down This can be a considerable amount of SW and so provision needs to be made to get it off the decks as soon as possible eg with submersible sludge pumps installed in sumps.

As an aside, the first voyage of the first conversion resulted in the vessel having a severe list due to slack or empty tanks and, refering to an earlier thread about first ballasting the LOW side to lower the KG, believe me that is the only way to go!

As with any high sided vessel, with the wind near the beam there will, of course, be a considerable amount of wind heel, and consequently the cattle, of sheep will migrate to the low side. That is why the width of the pens are limited by AMSA.

AMSA in Canberra are very approachable and I'm sure they can give you advice - they want you to get it right - and as I am now retired, I'm happy to offer you what help I can - it's a waste to keep experience locked up in only one brain!

Cheers,
Interalia
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 14th March 2010, 09:50
John Cassels John Cassels is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 2,931
Why try to calculate the CG of every animal ?. Surely the weight is transferred through
the feet so no matter how big , fat , high the beast is , the CG will always be at deck
level.
If the animal is lying down, having a kip or just travel weary there will then be a slight
rise in it's CoG.
__________________
JC ; same initials-but the other guy did the miracles.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 14th March 2010, 16:09
Lancastrian Lancastrian is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Cassels View Post
Surely the weight is transferred through
the feet so no matter how big , fat , high the beast is , the CG will always be at deck
level.
Surely not?

LOADING WEIGHTS
GG1 = (w x d)
(Final displacement)
where d is the distance between the CG of the mass added and the CG of the ship.
Which is why it is unwise to stand up in a small boat!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg images.jpg (10.6 KB, 12 views)

Last edited by Lancastrian; 14th March 2010 at 16:33..
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 14th March 2010, 17:32
John Cassels John Cassels is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 2,931
Same principle as carcasses stowed on hooks. Weight acts from the hook and not from
the CG of the carcass.
The well known formula for shift of G as in yr last is only valid where the animal has not
yet developed sea legs and where the CG is not in a vertical line with a point that
intersects the diagonals between all 4 legs.
__________________
JC ; same initials-but the other guy did the miracles.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 14th March 2010, 19:41
Lancastrian Lancastrian is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Cassels View Post
Same principle as carcasses stowed on hooks. Weight acts from the hook and not from
the CG of the carcass.
The well known formula for shift of G as in yr last is only valid where the animal has not
yet developed sea legs and where the CG is not in a vertical line with a point that
intersects the diagonals between all 4 legs.
Obfuscation! Suspended weights are a different case -
"Effect of suspended weights
For a suspended weight, whether the vessel is upright or inclined, the point through which the force a gravity may be considered to act vertically downwards is g1, the POINT OF SUSPENSION."

I do hope you are not going to argue with Messrs Kemp & Young.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 14th March 2010, 20:34
John Cassels John Cassels is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 2,931
Would never dream of going against the teachings of K & Y. However , I must reiterate
that the principle is the same.
Kemp and Young only prove my point re suspended weights and here we have a
situation where the weight of the animal is acting on the deck via the hoofs. It then
follows that the vertical C o G of all animals on a particular deck will in fact be acting on
that deck itself. There is therefore no need to calculate individual V C o G.

As Interalia has already stated - in heavy weather animals will lie down . This will have a
slight detrimental effect on the vessels GM as the VCoG will slightly increase.

If animals have been seasick in heavy weather then the initial transfer of stomach contents to the deck will have a very slight beneficial effect on the GM ( how much would depend on whether the animals were standing up or had already collapsed on the
deck when the incident took place) but may be offset by any free surface effect caused.

In short , there are very many factors which can affect the stability of
livestock carriers . A cow could easily be trained to stand up in a small boat
in such a way that it would keep it's CoG in a vertical line projected up from
the initial CoG of the boat.
__________________
JC ; same initials-but the other guy did the miracles.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 14th March 2010, 21:30
Lancastrian Lancastrian is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 390
Reductio ad absurdum. When calculating the effects of loading, you take into account the CG of the cargo, even if in this case it is a variable.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 14th March 2010, 21:39
Cisco's Avatar
Cisco Cisco is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1963 - 2006
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
My location
Posts: 6,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancastrian View Post
Reductio ad absurdum. When calculating the effects of loading, you take into account the CG of the cargo, even if in this case it is a variable.
except when it is hanging on a hook.....

CG of a cow ( or most other beefs excluding bulls) is not at half height but more likely at about 11/16th height.... not much weight below the knees.
__________________
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 14th March 2010, 21:44
Cisco's Avatar
Cisco Cisco is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1963 - 2006
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
My location
Posts: 6,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Cassels View Post
A cow could easily be trained to stand up in a small boat in such a way that it would keep it's CoG in a vertical line projected up from the initial CoG of the boat.
I don' think you could train a cow to do anything.... thats why you don't see them in circuses.

In argentina it appears to be the norm to stand up in dinghies in sheltered waters.. bit of a macho thing I think... doesn't seem to bother the stability.
__________________
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 14th March 2010, 22:20
John Cassels John Cassels is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 2,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cisco View Post
except when it is hanging on a hook.....

CG of a cow ( or most other beefs excluding bulls) is not at half height but more likely at about 11/16th height.... not much weight below the knees.
All very correct and concise. The question is -from which point does
this weight act ?. On the hoof , perhaps ?.
__________________
JC ; same initials-but the other guy did the miracles.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 14th March 2010, 22:40
John Cassels John Cassels is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 2,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cisco View Post
I don' think you could train a cow to do anything.... thats why you don't see them in circuses.

In argentina it appears to be the norm to stand up in dinghies in sheltered waters.. bit of a macho thing I think... doesn't seem to bother the stability.
Well , I once saw a cow that was trained to walk and say "Moo " and this all
without any promting or extra encouragement or even in a circus.

It was so impressive , one can easily imagine that small boat stability would
present little problem to them.
__________________
JC ; same initials-but the other guy did the miracles.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 14th March 2010, 23:32
Cisco's Avatar
Cisco Cisco is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1963 - 2006
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
My location
Posts: 6,272
I have just been conducting an experiment in my shed. a piece of plywood.. about 2 foot by 2 foot.. balanced on a bit of 2" x 1".
I asked Daisy to take part in this experiment but she just said 'mooo' .. not in her job description.
So I placed 100kg of me on the ply.... bent from waist several times as if touching toes.... I wish... platform remained steady .. did not tip forward at all but did , due to flexing of my calves , tip back once or twice... away from my mass.
I go with the hoof being the CofE.
__________________
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cormo Express - livestock carrier Jan Hendrik Special Purpose Vessels 3 5th September 2019 09:41
J & J Denholm Gulpers J & J Denholm 865 11th May 2019 05:44
Ore carrier hits trawler rushie News and Views from the Shipping World 1 4th August 2006 13:16
Guardian Carrier flyer682 Coasters 1 18th June 2005 15:15



Support SN


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.