1

Damage stability of a vessel?

After the naval architects studied the reason for ship damage, the tried to quantify the damage and tried to design
the ship keeping in mind the survivability of the ship in case of damage. The tried to incorporate the damage stability
analysis of a ship in its design phase such that no or fewer failures are experienced at the time of operation. This
made the job of the naval architects pretty difficult and damage stability analysis came into the picture. The damage
stability analysis included
• Quantification of the behaviour of the ship when damaged in case of a failure or accident.
• Design aspects to prevent or restrict the havoc caused by the failure.

The two approaches to Damage Stability Analysis

To assess the behaviour of a ship after some damage two methods are considered:
• Deterministic damage stability
• Probabilistic damage stability

Deterministic Damage Stability

This is a traditional method of assessment of the stability of a ship when it is flooded. In this process, the ship is
divided into several subdivisions along its length with the help of transverse watertight bulkheads. Now the stability
of the ship is calculated when one or more compartments get flooded due to a breach of hull.
The changes in draft and stability when a compartment becomes flooded due to damage can be investigated by
either of two methods:
• Lost Buoyancy method
• Added weight method

1. Lost Buoyancy method:

The damaged compartment(s) is considered open to the sea and therefore, does n ot contribute to the buoyancy of
the ship. So, the lost buoyancy must be compensated by sinkage of the vessel and the moment due to change in LCB
of the vessel is manifested through the heel or trim of the vessel. The assumptions considered in this method are
that the flooded compartment does not provide buoyancy anymore and hence, there is no change in displacement
or KG of the vessel and no free surface effect is observed.

2. Added Weight method:

This method considers that water ingresses in the damaged compartments up to the new water level and the weight
of the ingressed water augments the displacement of the vessel that is compensated by the sinkage of the vessel.
Consequently, the KG of the vessel changes due to the weight of ingressed water and Free S urface Effects has to be
taken into account, if the compartment is partially filled with water. The weight added shifts the CG of the vessel
that might lead to list or trim of the vessel.
Thus the two methods act as a twofold assessment of the damaged condition of a vessel. It is actually a good
practice to verify the result of the assessment of the damaged condition of the vessel by the complementary
method.
Both methods will give identical answers for final draughts, trim and righting moments, despite dif ferent values for
GM. However, IMO/SOLAS recommends the use of Lost buoyancy method for all calculations.

2
Deterministic damage stability

As we discussed, in deterministic approach the hull is internally subdivided to increase the factor of safety of the
vessel in case of hull damage. Now, this subdivision is not arbitrary. It takes a lot of study and analysis balancing both
economic and safety needs of the vessel before the designer fixes the subdivision of the vessel. In this approach, the
length of this compartment is to be calculated such that if this compartment is flooded, the ship will sink to a point
where margin line is just submerged. This is the floodable length at a point along the length of the ship. The
subdivisions accordingly resist flooding in damaged conditions to the safest limits. Floodable Length is an important
parameter that is taken into account here. It is defined as the maximum length of the compartment that can be
flooded such that the draft of the ship remains below the margin line. Thus, the maximum division of bulkheads is
the best solution. But, other factors such as minimum required size of hold, improper cargo stowage, and the
number of required outfitting or increased steel weight hinders the possibility to some extent. Thus, optimizing the
safe limits of floodable length to the minimum required length of the watertight compartment is done in most cases.
Floodable length Curve:
A ship should not sink if anyone compartment is breached and flooded is the idea behind developi ng the floodable
length curve of the vessel. The floodable length closer to the midship area is larger compared to the ends of the
vessel since the flooding of the midship compartments are accompanied with parallel sinkage whereas the flooding
of the end compartments are accompanied with sinkage and trim that augments the chances of the waterline
touching the margin line of the vessel. Therefore, the floodable length varies along the length of the ship and its
variation is obtained by vertically plotting the floodable length along the ship’s length. Also, the floodable length
along the length of the ship is a function of the permeabilities of each compartment. More is the permeability of the
compartments, more will be the water ingress in case of a hull breach and as a result, lower will be the floodable
length at that point along the length of the ship.

In 2010, Paris MOU and Black Sea MOU carried out a concentrated inspection campaign on tanker damage stability.
At the end of this campaign, Pat Dolby, co-ordinator of this CIC commented,
The most significant finding from the campaign was that 16.2% of tankers that were inspected, the master could not
demonstrate that the ship was complying with damage stability.
16.2%. That is a huge number that definitely shows that there is a void in understanding this topic.
All the rules about damage stability are trying to keep the ships safe even after one or more compartments are
breached.
Consider this.
You have two ships both identical in every respect but the first one has only one tank (or cargo hold) and the second
one has two tanks (or cargo holds).
Which one do you think is safer? Easy answer, right?
The one with the two cargo tanks.
This is because if one compartment is flooded, the first ship will have 100% of the cargo space flooded. The second
ship would still have 50% of the cargo space intact.
But the ship owners cannot divide the cargo spaces in 20 or 50 compartments. This would mean the use of more
steel, more money to build the ship and lesser cargo space to use.
Shipowner cannot build a ship with just one compartment either. That is too unsafe.
So how many minimum subdivisions a ship must have?
All in all, there are three approaches to building a ship that can withstand damage to its compartments.
All the three approaches for damage stability are just aiming to find that answer. So let us discuss each of these
approaches of damage stability.

1. Floodable length and factor of subdivision

This is an old approach but it is still important to discuss this because this approach lays the foundation to
understand damage stability.
In this approach, the number of subdivisions required is calculated by knowing the floodable length along the ship.
Floodable length is the length of the compartment which if flooded will cause the ship to sink up to the margin line.
Let us understand this by building a ship.
We have a ship and we need to put subdivisions (bulkheads) to it to divide the ship into compartments.
We create one compartment in the midship by placing two bulkheads (let us mark this bulkhead as A & B).

The length of this compartment (Length AB) need to such that if this compartment is flooded, the ship will sink to a
point where margin line is just submerged.
This is the floodable length at this point.
Now we want to place another bulkhead aft of midship. Again this bulkhead needs to be at a location (C) such that if
compartment AC is flooded, the ship will sink to a point where margin line is just submerged.

And with this same approach, we can decide the location of other bulkheads along the ship’s length.

When calculating the floodable length, One thing that we need to keep in mind is that we need to flood the
compartment to the full width of the ship even when we have or plan to have a centerline bulkhead.
Floodable length Curve
Our ship is ready now with all the compartments it needs. This ship would not sink if any one compartment is
breached and flooded.But if you would have noticed I have drawn larger compartment in the midship area. This
means that I have shown large floodable length closer to the midship area.This is because if the midship
compartment is flooded, the ship will sink bodily (with least trim).But as we move away from the midship, the
flooded compartment will trim the vessel. This would make a smaller compartment to sink the ship up to the margin
line.
So the bottom line is that the floodable length changes along the length of the ship.
Floodable length curve represents the maximum floodable length of the ship along the ship’s length. This curve is
obtained by vertically plotting the floodable length along the ship’s length.

Checking the damage stability compliance: Floodable curve method

So far I have given the basic idea of what floodable length is and how floodable length curve is obtained.
Ships, that are required to comply with this method of damage stability would be provided with the floodable length
curve. The damage stability rules for the ships would be something like…
The ship should be able to survive the breach (flooding) of any one (two or three) compartment.
To check if the ship would comply with this damage stability requirement, the floodable length curve is
superimposed on the ship’s plan. Then one compartment by one, the damage stability compliance is checked. The
length of the assumed damaged compartment is plotted vertically at the center of the compartment.
If this length is below the floodable length curve, this compartment complies with the damage stability requirements
of one compartment standard.
Same is done with other compartments.

As we can see, all the length triangles are within the floodable length curve of the ship. This means that this ship
complies with one compartment standards of the damage stability.
Now let us check the damage stability compliance for two compartment standard. In this case, we will assume the
flooding of two compartments and compare the length triangle with the floodable length curve of the ship.
Again same is done assuming flooding of any two adjacent compartments.

Clearly, this ship does not comply with damage stability requirements of two compartment standards.
If we need to comply with two compartment standards, this ship needs to have more compartments, the length of
which need to be such that even when two compartments are flooded it will be below the floodable length curve.
Maybe the below subdivision of the ship will be able to satisfy the damage stability requirement for two
compartment standard.
Let us check the damage stability compliance to two compartment standard.

As you can see, this ship is a two compartment standard ship now.
We can go on in a similar way if we want to build a three compartment or four compartment ship.
Remember, Titanic was a four compartment ship and so was called the unsinkable ship.
Finally, if you are still unsure of this concept, watch this video.

3
Damage stability: Probabilistic damage assessment
Damage stability calculations by probabilistic damage assessment is required by SOLAS Chapter II-1, part B. This is
required for cargo ships 80 m in length and upwards and to all passenger ships regardless of length.
This approach uses the concept of probability to ensure that ships can survive damage to its compartment(s).
There are two probability factors that are used in this approach.
Probability that a particular compartment(s) will damage in an incident (factor “p”)
the probability that ship will survive if that compartment(s) is flooded (Factor “s”)
Used as the requirement for the cargo ships and passenger ships.
Multiplying these two factors (p x s) will give the probability of surviving that damage case.
Let us again take our 8 compartment ship and calculate the probability of surviving damage to one compartment.
Now we need to calculate the probability of surviving two compartment damage.
While it may seem repetitive but let us also calculate the probability of surviving three compartment damage

The value of S in all these will either be 0 or 1. This is because when we have considered a damage, the ship will
either survive (probability 1) or not survive (probability 0).
So if this ship is three compartment ship, there is no need to consider the probability of survival for four and more
compartments because it will be zero.

But there is still one thing to consider. At what drafts we need to consider all these damages?

SOLAS requires that these should be considered at three drafts.

Deepest subdivision draught (ds): Which corresponds to the Summer Load Line draught of the ship.
Light service draught (dl): Service draught corresponding to the lightest anticipated loading and associated tankage,
including, however, such ballast as may be necessary for stability and/or immersion.
Partial subdivision draught (dp): light service draught plus 60% of the difference between the light service draught
and the deepest subdivision draught.
So, for example, all these three tables I made above need to be made for these three initial (before damage) drafts
of the ship.
So for deepest subdivision draft we will have
For Light service draught (dl),

And finally, for partial subdivision draft, we will have

c

3. Damage stability compliance: Probabilistic method

Finally the bottom line. How would a ship comply with the damage stability requirements?
As per SOLAS Chapter II-1, part B-1, Regulation 6, the ship complies with damage stability when
Attained Subdivision Index > Required subdivision index
Attained Subdivision Index
As per SOLAS, attained subdivision index is calculated by the formula

Required Subdivision Index

SOLAS chapter II-1, Reg 7 gives the formula to calculate the required subdivision index for a ship.
These formulas are different for different type and size of the ship.
This would be the minimum required value of subdivision index.
If the actual value of subdivision index (Attained value) is less than the required, the subdivisions need to be re -
arranged or increased to have attained subdivision index to be more than required subdivision index.

Damage stability by Deterministic damage assessment

Damage stability calculations by this method is required for all types of tankers.
Unlike probabilistic method that uses the concept of probability, the deterministic method defines the variables in
quantifiable terms.
In this method, the damaged area is defined (damage assumption); and
The minimum required value of the stability factors is defined (Survival requirements)
In all the cases of damage assumptions, the vessel should have the stability factors value more than the survival
requirements.
Let us take the example of IBC code that sets the rules for the chemical tankers.
Damage assumptions as per IBC code are
1. Extent of damage
This defines the extent the hull of the chemical tanker needs to be assumed damaged.
2. Flooding assumption
This defines the flooding assumptions that need to be considered after the assumed damage to the hull of the
chemical tanker.
3. Standard of damage
The dimensions of assumed damage are considered in the “extent of damage” section. Standard of damage defines
the assumed location of the damage along the ship’s length.

Survival Requirements as per IBC code

We have considered all the damage assumptions required as per IBC code. In all the possible cases as per the
damage assumptions, the ship should survive. But in the deterministic approach, survival does not just mean that
ship should not sink. The deterministic approach gives the minimum tability criteria values that the ship must have
with assumed damage as defined. As per IBC code, these survival requirements are for two phases of flooding. In any
stage of flooding
At final equilibrium after flooding
In any stage of flooding
At final equilibrium after flooding
Damage stability compliance: Deterministic Approach
With probabilistic approach and floodable length curve, the damage stability compliance is dealt with at the stage of
construction of the ship.
But ensuring compliance with the deterministic approach is different.
In the real world, there can be endless combinations of loading conditions of a ship. In each of these loading
conditions, we need to apply the damage assumptions.
We then need to check if the survival requirements as defined by the IMO in various conventions are satisfied.
Off course, all these cases cannot be documented and checked during construction stages.
Instead, the damage stability criteria is checked for most probable loading conditions.
But during normal ship operations and before loading, the chief officer need to check and confirm that damage
stability criterions are met.

How to check if the proposed stowage plan satisfies the damage stability requirements?
Well, there are few methods to check this but I will have look ahead approach here. As per the new requirements,
the loadicators fitted on tankers need to have damage stability calculation capabiliti es.
So before a stowage plan is finalized, we need to check from the loadicator if this stowage satisfies the damage
stability requirements.
If not, the chief officer needs to make required amendments to the stowage until the damage stability requirements
are met.

Conclusion
If we are not checking the damage stability of the ship, not only we are risking the environment but we are risking
our lives too. It is so important that ships are able to survive any damage sustained during the adventures it carries
on the high seas. The first step toward complying with the damage stability is to understand what it is and what is
required of us.

Damage Stability Information

SOLAS Chapter II-1/Reg 19.5 requires that

Damage stability information shall provide the master with a simple and easily understandable way of assessing the
ship’s survivability in all damage cases involving a compartment or group of compartments.

What does this mean?

Damage stability calculations showed that ship will comply with damage stability requirements when damage cases
are applied to the pre-defined intact loading conditions.
But in reality, our actual loading conditions during the voyages may be totally different fro m that in intact stability
condition.
Our actual loading may not match with any of the loading conditions in the stability booklet.

This SOLAS regulation requires clear and easy instructions to be given to check if our actual condition complies with
the damage stability requirements.

These instructions are usually in form of a graph (or table) of Draft versus minimum GM (or maximum KG). There
may be a different graph for the different trim of the vessel.
Minimum-GM-curve-damage-stability

This information will form the part of either “Damage stability calculations” or “damage control booklet”.
If the vessel has a single “Damage stability booklet”, you will find this information in there.

5) Emergency Response service

MARPOL Annex 1/Reg 37.4 requires that

All oil tankers of 5000 T deadweight or more shall have prompt access to computerized shore -based damage stability
and residual structural strength calculation programs.
In the real world, this program is usually named as “emergency response service” and is provided by classification
societies.

Emergency-response-service
Though this is mandatory for oil tankers, ship owners prefer this service for other types of vessels too, especially on
container ships.

This service provides an emergency helpline number and email.

In case of a damage and breach of hull plating, the master can call this number and update regarding the incident.
Master then need to send the initial reports, loading condition before the damage and extent of damage by email.
The service provider will advise
  if the vessel will be able to sustain this damage
 what specific action vessel can take to reduce the effect of damage.

There is something else that ERS can be used for.

It can be used for showing the compliance with the damage stability requirements. Some vessels still do not have
the facility in the loadicator to calculate damage stability.

If the vessel’s actual loading condition is not matching with any of the pre -defined loadicator conditions in the intact
stability booklet, this loading condition can be sent to the ERS.
They will check the loading condition and advise if it complies with the damage stability requirements.
This is considered to be one of the methods for checking the damage stability compliance.

In fact, if the condition is approved for compliance with the damage stability, same can be added to the list of
approved damage stability conditions.

Loadicator with damage stability

MARPOL Annex I regulation 28.6 requires the oil tankers to be fitted with loadicator capable of calculating damage
stability compliance.
MARPOL-Annex-I,-Regulation-28.6
The loadicator if fitted with damage stability can check compliance with all the damage cases identified as per
MARPOL or other regulations for other types of ships.

To check the damage stability compliance on the Loadicator, go to calculations -> Stability -> Damage stability
Loadicator_damage_stability
It will show all the damage cases identified in the damage stability booklet.
loadicator cases damage
Click on the “Pre-determined” to check if the ship complies with the damage stability requirements.
Conclusion
A seafarer may or may not go through any incident requiring the use of damage stability on board.
But we need to be prepared for the worst. Knowledge of damage stability can help to take quick decisions at times
when each minute matters. Knowing about damage stability does not mean knowing the complex calculations. It is
to know the exact actions in case of damage and knowing about the resources on board that would help in these
actions. Damage stability calculations, damage control plan/booklet, emergency response service and loadicator are
the resources that we must know about.
6
Master’s Resources in ascertaining Damage stability
Damage stability booklet
The information provided in damage stability booklet can be divided into three parts

Damage control booklet (required for all type of ships)

Damage stability calculation (required for tankers)
Damage control plan (required for all type of ships)
Sometime you may find all this as one booklet called “damage stability booklet”. And on some ships, you may find
three different booklets titled as above

Following information is available from different booklets

1) Damage control Plan
Damage control plan is required as per SOLAS chapter II-1/Regulation 19.
As per this regulation
A plan showing clearly:
 for each deck and hold the boundaries of the watertight compartments,
 the opening therein with means of closing and position of any control thereof,
 and arrangement for the correction of any list due to flooding. Ie Cross flooding arrangements

In simple words, the plan needs to show the

 layout of all the compartments such as cargo tanks, ballast tanks, fuel tanks etc.
 means of closer such as valves,
 watertight bulkheads,
 hatches or cargo tank domes and its position
 arrangement for correction of the list during flooding. Such arrangement could be the use of ballast pumps,
Fire & GS pumps. In this case, location & capacities of these pumps need to be shown on the plan.
The more detailed guidelines about the information required in the damage control plan are provided in MSC
circular MSC.1/Circ 1245.

Damage control plan is required to shows the location and other details about resources required for d amage
control.
For example during flooding into a compartment, we would like to check the air pipes if air is coming out from these.
Damage control plan gives the location and details of the air pipes of all compartments.
Sometimes different plans for each area are available. Eg

Air-Vent-damage-control-plan
It gives the location and details of all watertight (and weather tights) doors on the ship.
Doors-damage-control-plan
Similarly, damage control plan gives the details of Tanks, Hatches or other compartments on ships.

Hatch damage control plan

It gives the type and location of important valves that can help in damage control or help in restricting the flooding.

Valves damage control plan

And finally, it also provides the information (like capacity) and location of pumps (such as Fire and GS pump, ballast
pump etc) that can be used for pumping out the water during flooding.

Pump damage control plan

Apart from all this information, the location of these will be displayed on the ship’s plan.

2)
Damage control booklet
The name says it all. This booklet gives the information to the master about how to control the effect of damage.
Damage control booklet is also required as per SOLAS chapter II-1/Regulation 19.
The information required in the damage control booklet is contained in the MSC circular MSC.1/Circ.1245.
As per SOLAS chapter II-1/19, damage control booklet need to have all the information as per damage control plan.
To comply with this, usually, a copy of damage control plan will be included in the damage control booklet.
Apart from this, damage control booklet is supposed to provide information and guidance to the master about
actions to take in case of damage to the ship.
These specific actions may include
Sounding of alarms to alert the crew the closing of all watertight doors and compartments
Sounding of tanks to check where the water is flooding and with what rate
ways to reduce the effect of flooding such as by use of pumps to pump out water.
Along with this information, some ship’s damage control booklet may also provide a flow chart to deal with damage
situations.
Rest of the damage control booklet will consist of the information and guidance to support required actions as per
this flowchart.
For example, one of the actions requires the vessel to monitor tank sounding. Damage control booklet will have one
section with the ready format for recording tank soundings.
Another action requires the vessel to report the damage situation to the necessary organization such as ‘Emergen cy
response service”. For this damage control plan will also provide a ready format for such reporting.

3) Damage stability calculations

Damage stability calculations demonstrate the compliance with the applicable damage stability regulation.
These are the calculations made during the design stage of the ship and verified after the construction.
For example, oil tankers need to comply with damage stability requirements as per MARPOL Annex I, regulation 28.
Damage stability requirements for oil tank damage assumptions.
For example below are the damage cases for a ship.
These damages are then assumed for all the loaded conditions mentioned in ship’s trim & stability book (intact
stability conditions).
The damage cases are not applied to the ballast conditions because the damage stability requirements apply to the
tankers in loaded condition only.
For this ship below are the loaded conditions in the intact stability booklet.

Intact-loading-conditions
Let us take damage case 101. This damage case requires assuming damage to 6 compartments.
In each of the intact loading condition, these damages need to be assumed.
After these assumed damages, the ship needs to comply with damage stability requirements mentioned in MARPOL
Annex I, Reg 28.

And for damage case 101, we will have a total of 9 damage stability conditions, each for one loading conditions. Let
us name these conditions as
Condition 13/ Damage 101
Condition 14/ Damage 101
Condition 15/ Damage 101
Condition 16/ Damage 101
Condition 17/ Damage 101
Condition 18/ Damage 101
Condition 19/ Damage 101
Condition 20/ Damage 101
Condition 21/ Damage 101

Each damage case will have 9 damage stability conditions. For this ship, there are a total of 21 damage cases and
total 9 intact loaded conditions.

The damage stability calculations need to be done for total 189 conditions.
And the end results of these calculations are supposed to comply with the damage stability criteria as per MARPOl
Annex I, reg 28.
These calculations form the part of booklet “Damage stability calculations”.

4) Damage Stability Information

SOLAS Chapter II-1/Reg 19.5 requires that damage stability information shall provide the master with a simple and
easily understandable way of assessing the ship’s survivability in all damage cases involving a compartment or group
of compartments.
Damage stability calculations showed that ship will comply with damage stability requirements when damage cases
are applied to the pre-defined intact loading conditions.

But in reality, our actual loading conditions during the voyages may be totally different from that in intact stability
condition. Our actual loading may not match with any of the loading conditions in the stability booklet.
This SOLAS regulation requires clear and easy instructions to be given to check if our actual condition complies with
the damage stability requirements.
These instructions are usually in form of a graph (or table) of Draft versus minimum GM (or maximum KG). There
may be a different graph for the different trim of the vessel.
Minimum-GM-curve-damage-stability
This information will form the part of either “Damage stability calculations” or “damage control booklet”.
If the vessel has a single “Damage stability booklet”, you will find this information in there.

5) Emergency Response service

MARPOL Annex 1/Reg 37.4 requires that
All oil tankers of 5000 T deadweight or more shall have prompt access to computerized shore -based damage stability
and residual structural strength calculation programs.
In the real world, this program is usually named as “emergency response service” and is provided by classification
societies.
Emergency-response-service ERS also known as ETAS
Though this is mandatory for oil tankers, ship owners prefer this service for other types of vessels too, especially on
container ships.
This service provides an emergency helpline number and email.
In case of a damage and breach of hull plating, the master can call this number and update regarding the incident.
Master then need to send the initial reports, loading condition before the damage and extent of damage by email.
The service provider will advise
if the vessel will be able to sustain this damage
what specific action vessel can take to reduce the effect of damage.
There is something else that ERS can be used for.
It can be used for showing the compliance with the damage stability requirements. Some vessels still do not have
the facility in the loadicator to calculate damage stability.
If the vessel’s actual loading condition is not matching with any of the pre -defined loadicator conditions in the intact
stability booklet, this loading condition can be sent to the ERS.
They will check the loading condition and advise if it complies with the damage stability requirements.
This is considered to be one of the methods for checking the damage stability compliance.
In fact, if the condition is approved for compliance with the damage stability, same can be added to the list of
approved damage stability conditions.

6) Loadicator with damage stability

MARPOL Annex I regulation 28.6 requires the oil tankers to be fitted with loadicator capable of calculating damage
stability compliance.
MARPOL-Annex-I,-Regulation-28.6
The loadicator if fitted with damage stability can check compliance with all the damage cases identified as per
MARPOL or other regulations for other types of ships.
To check the damage stability compliance on the Meca Loadicator, go to calculations -> Stability -> Damage stability
Loadicator_damage_stability
It will show all the damage cases identified in the damage stability booklet.
loadicator cases damage
Click on the “Pre-determined” to check if the ship complies with the damage stability requirements.
damage_stability_on_loadicator
Conclusion
A seafarer may or may not go through any incident requiring the use of damage stability on board.
But we need to be prepared for the worst.
Knowledge of damage stability can help to take quick decisions at times when each minute matters.
Knowing about damage stability does not mean knowing the complex calculations. It is to know the exact actions in
case of damage and knowing about the resources on board that would help in these actions.
Damage stability calculations, damage control plan/booklet, emergency response service and loadicator are the
resources that we must know about.

CALCULATING DAMAGE STABILITY

The study of damaged stability of a ship comes of use when the ship’s watertight hull is affected in a way that allows
water to flood any compartment within the ship’s hull. Since this changes the stability parameters of the ship, the
extent of which depends on the extent of damage and flooding, it is studied separately from intact stability.
the effects of flooding on a ship:
 Change of Draft: Flooding results in entry of water into the ship’s damaged compartment. This will cause a
change in draft to the point where the displacement of the undamaged (intact) part of the ship will be equal
to the displacement before damage less the weight of the water that entered the ship after flooding. To
express it:
  Change of Trim: Ingress of water in a compartment can be considered as an addition of weight to any point
along the length of the ship. This causes a change in the trim of the ship.
 Heeling: The ship will heel if the damaged compartment is unsymmetrically positioned about the centreline of
the ship. If the metacentric height of the ship in the flooded condition is negative, the damaged ship is
rendered unstable. In such a case, the ship would capsize if the flooded compartment is unsymmetrical about
the centreline, and is prone to capsize by action of any external heeling moment if the compartment is
symmetrical about the centreline.
 Change in Stability: The metacentric height of the ship changes due to flooding. This can be explained by the
general expression of metacentric height:

The explanation of reduction in stability can be done in two ways. When a ship is flooded, it results in a change
of KB and BM values. The KB rises due to flooding, and it may rise further due to change in the ship’s trim. However,
there is a significant reduction in BM, which is a function of the area moment of the ship’s water plane. Why? We
will look into that when we study the Lost Buoyancy Analysis.

 Change in Freeboard: The increase in draft of the flooded ship results in reduction of freeboard, which poses
a great threat to the residual buoyancy of the ship. Even though the metacentric height may be positive after
flooding, reduction in freeboard to a point where the deck is immersed, decreases the ship’s range of stability.
This means that the ship could now capsize due to external forces of wind or waves.
 Loss of the ship: One of the most common terms that is used in damaged condition of a ship, was the Margin
Line (Condition of Equilibrium). The Margin Line of a ship is an imaginary waterline considered 75 mm below
the uppermost continuous watertight deck. If a ship is damaged, it is considered to be safe only if the margin
line is not immersed. Once the waterline reaches the margin line at any point along the length of the ship, the
ship is considered to be unsafe, and evacuation becomes mandatory.
 Figure 1: Reduced GM due to damage to a ship.

The reduction in metacentric height due to damage can be extrapolated to the stability curve as a reduction in
height of the GZ curve and range of stability, as shown in the figure above.

So if the loss in metacentric height is such that the remaining maximum righting lever (GZ) is less than the heeling
moment, the ship will capsize. It is therefore, the designers work to:
1. Design the subdivision in such a way that the remaining righting arm is sufficient upto a certain level of
damage.
2. To identify the extent of damage that can be considered safe for the ship.

Concept of Subdivision of a Ship:

Traditionally, a ship is divided longitudinally into a number of watertight compartments to restrict the flooding to
one or more compartments in case of damage. This prevents progressive flooding (i.e. flooding across the entire
ship’s length in case of a damage at any location). The compartmentalization is done by means of transverse
watertight bulkheads. But the interesting question that arises here is, how many watertight bulkheads would a
particular ship require? How many compartments do we divide a ship into? These are answers that need to be
answered at a very initial phase of the design, most usually, in the concept design phase.
To understand the ‘how’s of this concept, we first need to understand the concept of “floodable” length. Refer to
the figure underneath to follow the concept further.
 Figure 2: Floodable Length Curve.

For any point ‘P’ along the length of the ship, the floodable length (l) is the max imum portion of the ship’s length
with the point ‘P’ at the center that can be completely flooded symmetrically without immersing the margin line. For
our convenience, we represent the floodable length of every point on the vertical axis. So, for the point ‘P’ we can
plot the floodable length at point ‘F’ on the vertical axis. Similarly, when the floodable lengths of all the points on the
ship are plotted, we obtain the Floodable Length Curve.
So, what is the use of Floodable Length Curves? The advantage that these curves come with is that they can be
plotted very inexpensively, and at a very initial stage of the design. This makes it possible for the designers to decide
on the number of watertight compartments, marginal compartments, and transverse bulkhead s required by the
ship.
We will first see, how the position of bulkheads are fixed, based on the floodable length curves. Follow the above
figure again. Suppose we place two watertight bulkheads at a distance of ‘l’ and as ‘P’ as their midpoint. We know,
that since the floodable length at ‘P’ is ‘l’, by the definition of floodable length, if the compartment of length ‘l’ and
with ‘P’ as its mid-point is flooded, the margin line will remain above the waterline. Hence, the compartment
between the bulkheads shown in the above figure is a safe design.
Note that in the above figure, the height of the triangle drawn from the two bulkhead is equal to the floodable
length of the point ‘P’. In other words, to ensure if a compartment is safe or not, we simply need to draw a triangle
from the two bulkheads. The height of the triangle should be equal to the length of the compartment. If the ver tex
of the triangle meets the floodable length curve, or is below the curve, the compartment is safe (as shown for
compartment AA’ in the figure below). However, if we now increase the length of the compartment from AA’ to BB’
(as shown in blue), the vertex of the triangle exceeds the floodable length curve. In other words, the bulkheads, if
placed at BB’, would result in submergence of the margin line if the compartment between the bulkheads was to be
completely flooded.
 Figure 3: Effect of change in compartment length.

So, to check whether a particular compartment plan (a longitudinal distribution of watertight bulkheads along the
ship’s length) is safe, designers follow the steps as explained below:
Step 1: The floodable length curve is plotted.
Step 2: Watertight bulkheads are placed at random, but known positions along the length of the ship, thus dividing it
into a number of watertight compartments.

Figure 4: Step 2- Compartment Layout.

Step 3: Triangles are drawn for each compartment such that the height of each triangle is equal to the length of the
compartment.
 Figure 5: Step 3 – Triangles for each compartment.

Step 4: At this stage, it is important for the designer to know what compartment standard the ship has to be
designed to. So what is a Compartment Standard? A ship is said to have a Single Compartment Standard if it is
designed to be sea-worthy (should be able to remain afloat, and margin line should not be immersed) even after any
one of its watertight compartments have been damaged completely. Similarly, a ship with Two Compartment
Standard can remain afloat even after complete damage to any of its two adjacent watertight compartments.
So, once the compartment standard is fixed, the designer must now check the same using the obtaine d floodable
length curve. For the compartment layout set in the above example, we have all the triangles with vertices below the
floodable length curve (refer to the figure below). This means that the chosen compartment plan can be used to
certify the ship with Single Compartment Standard.

Figure 6: One Compartment Standard.

But if the design of the ship demands a two compartment standard, the above check is not sufficient. In order to
perform a two compartment standard check, the triangles need to be drawn in a way considering that two adjacent
watertight compartments are damaged. For example, in the diagram below, the triangle AKC has been drawn for the
case when compartments AB and BC are completely flooded. In simpler terms, we will now consider two adjacent
compartments as one. The results obtained for the above case, is as shown below.

Figure 7: Two Compartment Standard.

The results clearly tell us that the margin line would submerge if the following compartments were flooded together:
 Both AB and BC.
 Both BC and CD.
 Both EF and FG.
 Both FG and GH.
But the margin line would remain above the waterline for simultaneous flooding of either of the two cases:
 Both CD and DE.
 Both DE and EF.
In such a case, the ship is given a two compartment standard, but only for simultaneous flooding of compartments
CD and EF or DE and EF. Hence, if in case of a damage to the engine room (which would usually be located in
compartment BC), progressive flooding to the steering gear compartment (AB) or the compartment j ust forward of
the engine room (CD) cannot be afforded to keep the margin line from submerging.
Concept of Permeability:
Practically, all the compartments in ships would contain items within them that would reduce the total volume that
can be occupied by the flooded water. The items include stiffeners, web frames, longitudinals, brackets, beam knees,
equipment, piping, and outfits. Hence, the ratio of the floodable volume to the total volume of the compartment
gives the permeability of the compartment. It is denoted by µ, and is usually expressed in percentage.
The general values of permeability used for different types of compartments are listed below, followed by a logical
understanding of the variation in the values:
Watertight Compartment – 95 to 97%
Accommodation spaces – 95%
Machinery compartments – 85%
Cargo holds – 60%
Stores – 60 %
What is to be observed here is that the permeability of machinery spaces (engine room, auxiliary machinery room,
pump room, etc.) is lower than watertight compartments (like tanks, cofferdams, etc.) and accommodation spaces.
The least permeability is obtained in cargo holds and stores which are usually stacked full or partially full, leaving
lesser volume for flooded water.
The floodable length of each point along the ship’s length is multiplied by the permeability to obtain the Permissible
Length. It is based on this permissible length curve, and not on the floodable length that we judge the final
compartment standards of the ship. This is exactly what has been illustrated below, where the permissible length
curves are first plotted for each permeability value.

Figure 8: One compartment standard with permeability factors considered.

The permissible length curves for 85 percent and 60 percent permeability are now incorporated into the floodable
subdivision diagram. Here, for machinery compartments (e.g. engine room compartment BC) the vertices for the
triangle needs to be checked against the 85% curve, instead of the floodable length (100%) curve, which we did
when permeability was not introduced. In this case, all compartments satisfy for single compartment standard.
The application of permeability would come to be noticed in a case illustrated below:

Figure 9: Evaluation of compartment standard and marginal compartme nt with permeability.

Here, the machinery compartment (AB) seems to be within the permissible length. But how do we assess whether
compartment BC is safe or not? This is the subdivision diagram for a typical merchant ship. The compartment BC is
generally used for cargo holds, where the permeability is as low as 60 percent. Hence, the triangle for this
compartment is to be checked against the 60 percent permissible length curve, which determines that one
compartment standard is achievable.
Another important concept that comes to play here, is that of Marginal Compartment. If you notice compartment
CD, its length is exactly equal to the floodable length, which is why the vertex of its triangle coincides the floodable
length curve. Such a compartment is called a Marginal Compartment. However, in this case, the marginal
compartment does not behave as one because of the permeability factor. The compartment CD in merchant ships is
usually used for cargo hold or forward stores, giving it a permeability of 60 perce nt.
It is therefore evident that though the triangles may overshoot the floodable length curve, the final analysis is to be
made only after calculating the permeability of every compartment.

Evaluation of Damaged Stability Equilibrium Conditions:

The most important step in analysis of a damaged condition, is to calculate the equilibrium conditions, which include
the final trim, heel and drafts after the location and extent of damage is known. There are two methods that are
used for this purpose. We will only graze through the concepts of each,
 Lost Buoyancy Method: This method assumes that the damaged compartment does not contribute to the
total buoyancy of the ship. Hence, the ship loses a part of its total waterplane, and its buoyancy, therefore
reducing stability. This method is easier to use, because it is not iterative. On the other hand, the results
obtained from this method are slightly less accurate than the other method.
 Added Weight Method: The added weight method considers the flooded water to be a weight added to a
certain point in the ship. The problem is them solved like a traditional weight addition case, and the trim and
drafts are calculated over a set of iterations. Though this process is time consuming, it provides more accurate
results, and is hence used by most stability analysis software.
We have restricted our study to the conceptual understanding of subdivision and the two methods of evaluation
have been discussed on a very primary level because they are very numerical in nature, and is hence out of the
scope of our article. Detailed examples of both the methods can be found in published textbooks. What’s important
to understand, is the conceptual application of damaged stability. These concepts are now applied in advanced levels
to develop newer ways of understanding damaged stability of ships, something that has taken a probabilistic
approach in the recent days.