Journal of

Marine Science
and Engineering

Article
Marine Demonstration of Alternative Fuels on the Basis of
Propulsion Load Sharing for Sustainable Ship Design
Hyungwon Shim 1 , Yun Ho Kim 1 , Jang-Pyo Hong 1 , Donghee Hwang 2 and Hee Jin Kang 1, *

1 Alternative Fuels and Power System Research Center, KRISO, Daejeon 34103, Republic of Korea
2 Technology and Research Institute, KTE Co., Ltd., Busan 618270, Republic of Korea
* Correspondence: hjkang@kriso.re.kr; Tel.: +82-42-866-3417

Abstract: As the IMO aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships by more than 50% by 2050
compared to 2008, the paradigm of the shipbuilding and shipping industries is changing. The use
of carbon-free fuels, such as hydrogen and ammonia, is progressing, along with the incorporation
of batteries and fuel cells in ships. With the introduction of various propulsion power sources, the
application of electric propulsion systems to ships is also expected to accelerate. The verification of
reliability and safety is of paramount importance in the development of new technologies designed
in response to environmental regulations. However, maritime demonstration is time-consuming
and expensive. Therefore, an effective means of demonstrating the performance, reliability, and
safety of various marine carbon-neutral technologies with a small burden is required. This study
introduces a ship design for marine demonstration, integrating eco-friendly alternative fuels and
electric propulsion system components. We further demonstrate a preparation process for the
realization of marine carbon neutrality and future ship design through international joint research,
standardization, and ship development, which can be linked to manpower training.

Keywords: greenhouse gas regulation; alternative fuels; electrification; electric propulsion; DC

switch board

Citation: Shim, H.; Kim, Y.H.; Hong,

J.-P.; Hwang, D.; Kang, H.J. Marine
Demonstration of Alternative Fuels 1. Introduction
on the Basis of Propulsion Load Environmental issues remain a major global concern, and in 2018, the International
Sharing for Sustainable Ship Design. Maritime Organization (IMO) set a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567.
by 50% by 2050 [1,2]. Alternative marine fuels, such as LNG, methanol, biofuel, and e-fuels,
https://doi.org/10.3390/
are considered [3–5]. Therefore, many shipyards and shipping companies are developing
jmse11030567
technologies to comply with greenhouse gas (GHG) regulations. Representative examples
Academic Editors: Jean-Frederic of reducing greenhouse gas emissions include optimizing ship hull forms, using energy-
Charpentier and Alon Gany saving devices (ESDs), air lubrication systems, slow steaming, and route optimization [6,7].
Although liquefied natural gas (LNG) propulsion systems are known to reduce carbon
Received: 13 January 2023
emissions by about 20% compared to marine fuel oil (MFO)-based systems, they face
Revised: 27 February 2023
Accepted: 3 March 2023
limitations due to increasingly strict greenhouse gas regulations [8]. It is expected that
Published: 7 March 2023
propulsion power sources will eventually be replaced with carbon-neutral fuels, and
that electric/hybrid propulsion systems that can accommodate various propulsion power
sources will become more common.
So far, various types of demonstration vessels have been developed in response to
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. GHG regulations, as shown in Table 1. However, designing and building a demonstration
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. ship takes a long time and is expensive. According to research conducted by RICARDO
This article is an open access article (www.ricardo.com) at the request of the IMO, more than USD 10 billion is expected to be
distributed under the terms and spent on developing eco-friendly ship technology in response to the IMO’s greenhouse
conditions of the Creative Commons
gas regulations. Furthermore, more than 60% of this cost is projected to be spent on
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
test evaluation and demonstration, to verify the reliability and safety of the developed
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
technology [9].
4.0/).

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11030567 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 2 of 17

Table 1. Research for demonstration vessels in response to GHG regulations.

Research Topic Key Findings References

This study describes the development and testing of a
demonstration ship designed to meet IMO greenhouse
Development of a demonstrator ship gas emissions regulations. The ship is equipped with a
for IMO greenhouse gas hybrid propulsion system consisting of a diesel engine A. Haglind, et al., 2016 [10]
emissions regulations and a battery system, and the results of the testing show
that the ship can reduce its emissions by up to 70%
compared to a conventional ship.
This paper presents the design and testing of a full-scale
battery-powered ferry. The ferry was equipped with a
large battery bank, electric propulsion, and regenerative
Development and testing of a
braking system. The study found that the ferry was able J.T. Holen, et al., 2021 [11]
full-scale battery-powered ferry
to operate for a full day on a single charge, and it was
expected to reduce CO2 emissions by more than 95%
compared to conventional diesel ferries.
This paper describes the design and testing of a hybrid
LNG-electric propulsion system for a cruise ship. The
Development of a hybrid system consisted of two electric propulsion motors, two
LNG-electric propulsion system for a gas turbine generators, and two LNG engines. The P. Carbone, et al., 2021 [12]
cruise ship study found that the system was able to reduce CO2
emissions by up to 30% compared to conventional
diesel-electric systems.
This paper presents the design and analysis of an
ammonia-fueled tanker ship for zero-emission shipping.
Development of an ammonia-fueled The ship is designed to use ammonia as fuel, which
S. Seo, et al., 2021 [13]
tanker ship produces no greenhouse gas emissions when burned.
The results of the analysis show that the ship can
operate efficiently and with zero emissions.
This paper describes the design and testing of a
hydrogen fuel cell-powered ferry. The study found that
Development of a hydrogen fuel the ferry was able to operate for up to 12 h on a single
R. Skontorp, et al., 2021 [14]
cell-powered ferry tank of hydrogen, and it was expected to reduce CO2
emissions by more than 95% compared to conventional
diesel ferries.

The purpose of this study is to construct a marine demonstration vessel capable of

collectively and rapidly demonstrating various GHG regulatory response technologies,
with economic feasibility and commercialization potential through track record acquisition.
Establishing a testbed ship as a center for collecting empirical data on different alternative
fuels and propulsion system components can greatly contribute to the development of
green ship and shipping technologies, by reducing the time and cost required for marine
validation.
By applying the research presented in Table 2 on batteries, fuel cells, and electric/hybrid
propulsion systems for the proposed marine demonstration vessel, objective and compara-
ble data can be obtained, which can accelerate the practical application of green ship and
shipping technologies.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 3 of 17

Table 2. Research for alternative fuels and electric/hybrid propulsion systems.

Research Topic Key Findings References

This paper discusses the improvement and
optimization of inland ship power and
Improvement and optimization of inland propulsion systems. They combined diesel
Z. Du, et al., 2023 [15]
ship power and propulsion system engines, electrical propulsion, and energy
storage devices to achieve higher efficiency
and reduced emissions.
The paper presents a concept design of a
hybrid offshore patrol vessel (OPV) that
Concept design of a hybrid offshore
integrates various power sources, including A. Ljulj, et al., 2023 [16]
patrol vessel
diesel engines, electric motors, and
renewable energy sources.
The study investigates the technical,
economic, and regulatory challenges of
Deployment of electric ships for
electric ship deployment and provides W. Wang, et al., 2022 [17]
green shipping
recommendations for ship owners and
operators to overcome these challenges.
The paper proposes a multi-energy
Multi-energy integrated ship energy integrated ship energy management system
Y. Ren, et al., 2022 [18]
management system based on a hierarchical control collaborative
optimization strategy.
The study finds that the integration of SOFCs
Impact of SOFC power generation plant on can significantly reduce the CII of cruise
M. Gianni, et al., 2022 [19]
carbon intensity index for cruise ships ships, thus improving their
environmental performance.

To achieve maritime decarbonization and expedite the practical application of related

research results, it would be particularly advantageous to have a ship capable of accom-
modating MW-class alternative fuels and electric/hybrid propulsion system components
simultaneously for sea trials, especially for large ships subject to IMO GHG regulations.
To this end, the marine demonstration vessel in this study is named the Korea Green
Ship Testbed (K-GTB). The K-GTB will be used for international joint research, technology
standardization, and the training of technical personnel for the realization of marine car-
bon neutrality. The K-GTB is designed to have the ability to simultaneously mount and
demonstrate MW-class alternative fuels and electric/hybrid system components [20].

2. Characteristics of the K-GTB

The propulsion system consists of two permanent magnet (PM) motors, inverters,
converters, a DC switchboard, and two LNG DF main generators. The MW-class batter-
ies, fuel cells, and non-carbon fuel mixed combustion internal combustion engines were
evaluated for ship applicability, performance, reliability, and safety via assessing the main
generator and propulsion load. Figure 1 shows the K-GTB alternative fuel demonstration
concept. The shape and specifications of the K-GTB were decided in consideration of the
portability of various eco-friendly ship technologies, and their operability in the coastal
waters of Korea.
Figure 2 shows the general arrangement of the K-GTB. The marine battery, fuel cell,
and non-carbon fuel mixed combustion internal combustion engine are mounted in a
separate area around the mid-ship.
 J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 18
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 4 of 17

Figure 1. General arrangement and conceptual diagram of the K-GTB.

Figure 2 shows the general arrangement of the K-GTB. The marine battery, fuel cell,
and non-carbon fuel mixed combustion internal combustion engine are mounted in a sep-
arate1.area
Figure around
General the mid-ship.
arrangement and conceptual diagram of the K-GTB.
Figure 1. General arrangement and conceptual diagram of the K-GTB.

Figure 2 shows the general arrangement of the K-GTB. The marine battery, fu
and non-carbon fuel mixed combustion internal combustion engine are mounted in
arate area around the mid-ship.

Figure2.2.General
Figure Generalarrangement
arrangementofofthe
theK-GTB
K-GTB(alternative
(alternativefuels
fuelswill
willbe
be installed
installed in
in shaded
shaded areas).
areas).

The
TheK-GTB
K-GTBisisthe
thefirst
firstmarine
marinedemonstration
demonstration vessel
vessel acquired
acquired and
and operated by the
operated by the
KRISO
KRISO(Korea
(KoreaResearch
ResearchInstitute of Ships
Institute and and
of Ships Ocean Engineering).
Ocean It weighs
Engineering). approximately
It weighs approxi-
1722
mately 1722 tons in deadweight, and although it does not reach the scale ocean-going
tons in deadweight, and although it does not reach the scale of full-scale of full-scale
cargo ships, itscargo
ocean-going hull form and
ships, itspropulsion
hull form andstructures are similar
propulsion to those
structures areof large cargo
similar ships.
to those of
In the KRISO, it is possible to acquire all required data from CFD (computational fluid
dynamics) analysis, basin model tests, and real-ship operation tests, to be used in various
ways to estimate and verify the performance of eco-friendly ship technologies.

Figure 2. General arrangement of the K-GTB (alternative fuels will be installed in shaded ar
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 5 of 17

3. Ship Resistance Estimation and Propulsion Power Setting

We conducted a review to configure the K-GTB’s propulsion system for the demon-
stration of MW-class batteries, fuel cells, and carbon-free fuel mixed combustion engines.
First, the ship resistance characteristics of the K-GTB were evaluated considering both
experimental and numerical results. First, calm water resistance was achieved in model
tests conducted in KRISO’s towing tank, at speeds ranging from 10 kts to 16 kts.
The real ship performance in calm water was then estimated via the ITTC-1978 ex-
trapolation method. The added resistance, induced by waves at different ship speeds, was
calculated through a well-known commercial program, WASIM. The essential background
of this numerical scheme is explained as follows. As the fluid is inviscid and incompressible,
and the flow is irrotational, and the velocity field should satisfy the Laplace equation. The
governing equation, the continuity equation, is illustrated in Equation (1). As we adopted
the simple Rankine source, only three nonlinear boundary conditions were applied: the
body boundary condition (shown in Equation (2)), the kinematic boundary condition
(shown in Equation (3)), and the dynamic boundary condition (shown in Equation (4)).
Here, we show the velocity potential function, the position vector, the time, the total veloc-
ity of a point on the hull, which includes both the steady forward speed and the oscillatory
velocity components, the normal vector, the wetted surface of the hull, and the total free
surface elevation. → 
∇2 ϕ x , t = 0 (1)

∂ →  →→  →
ϕ x , t = V x , t · n on SB (2)
∂n
∂ →  →  →  ∂ → 
H x , t + ∇ ϕ x , t ·∇ H x , t = ϕ x,t on z = H (3)
∂t ∂z
∂ →  1 →  →  → 
ϕ x , t + ∇ ϕ x , t ·∇ ϕ x , t = −gH x , t on z = H (4)
∂t 2
In the Rankine theory, the velocity potential can be split into four independent poten-
tials: basic, local, memory flow, and incoming wave. Basis flow is assumed to be on the
order of one, and is the basis for the linearization. Other flows are assumed to be small
perturbations of the basis flow. The formulas, features, and computational algorithms for
each flow are illustrated in references [21,22].
The computed meshes of the K-GTB are shown in Figure 3. The section model was
converted from the CAD design file, and the sectional hull mesh was generated in three
domains: bow, mid-ship, and stern. The additional mesh, the control mesh, was artificially
generated under the free surface to calculate the diffracted wave effect.
We initially conducted a test under the conditions of the vessel moving forward in
calm water. The ship speed was varied from 0 knots (Knots) to 10 knots, as shown in
Table 3. The heave and pitch displacements of the center of gravity were also set to be
in the steady-state range. The Froude number was set at a maximum of 0.196, so high
Froude number conditions were excluded. As the ship speed increased, the trim of the
vessel also increased. Under the highest vessel speed condition, the heave displacement
was −0.2 m and the pitch displacement was 1.2 degrees, which resulted in relatively small
values. These static changes, according to the ship speed, were used as an initial input
value for subsequent calculations.
Next, the resistance induced by waves was calculated. The wave direction was fixed
at 180 degrees, and only 2, 6, and 10 knots were used in this study for ship speed. The
wavelength was increased from 0.2 to 2.3 compared to the length of the ship. The time
series of the added resistance is shown in Figure 4. When the results were stabilized in
the latter part of the analysis, the load displacement according to the regular wave was
confirmed with five waves.
Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 1
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 6 of 17

Figure 3. Computational mesh for the three-dimensional panel method (a) Sectional Model (b)
Figure 3. Computational mesh for the three-dimensional panel method (a) Sectional Model (b) Se
Section Hull mesh (c) Control mesh including free surface (d) Section hull mesh and control mesh.
tion Hull mesh (c) Control mesh including free surface (d) Section hull mesh and control mesh.
Table 3. Calculated equilibrium heel and trim values with forward speeds.
We initially conducted a test under the conditions of the vessel moving forward i
Vs (Knots)
calm water. Vs (m/s)
The ship speed was variedFroude
from No. Heave (m)
0 knots (Knots) Pitchas
to 10 knots, (Deg.)
shown in Tab
0 0 0 − 0.069 0.964
3. The heave and pitch displacements of the center of gravity were also set to be in th
steady-state1 range. The Froude
0.5144 number 0.020 −0.070
was set at a maximum of 0.196, so high Froud
0.966
number conditions were excluded. As the ship speed increased, the trim of the vessel als
2 1.0288 0.039 − 0.074 0.971
increased. Under
3 the highest
1.5432 vessel speed condition, the
0.059 heave displacement
−0.079 0.980 was −0.2 m
and the pitch
4 displacement2.0576was 1.2 degrees,
0.079 which resulted
−0.087 in relatively
0.992 small value
These static5 changes, according
2.572 to the ship
0.098speed, were−used
0.097 as an initial
1.011input value fo
subsequent6calculations. 3.0864 0.118 −0.110 1.034
7 3.6008 0.137 −0.126 1.062
Table 3. Calculated equilibrium heel and trim values with forward speeds.
8 4.1152 0.157 −0.142 1.099

Vs (Knots)9 Vs4.6296
(m/s) Froude No. −0.164
0.177 Heave (m) 1.142 Pitch (Deg.)
0 10 5.144
0 0.196 0 −0.190 −0.069 1.201 0.964
1 0.5144 0.020 −0.070 0.966
Figure 5 represents the non-dimensional added resistance R aw in the frequency domain,
2 was normalized by
which 1.0288 0.039
the water density, gravitational −0.074
acceleration, wave amplitude, the0.971
3 width, and length
K-GTB’s 1.5432 0.059(ρ × g × Amp2−0.079
between perpendiculars × B2 /L pp ). The results
0.980
from4 the empirical method,
2.0576 STAwave-2 [23], are also shown in this
0.079 figure for validation.
−0.087 0.992
Although relatively similar values were achieved at the slow speed, it was confirmed
that5the maximum value 2.572 0.098 was approximately
in the empirical equation −0.097twice as high 1.011
at
the 6
fastest vessel speed.3.0864 0.118 period in the−0.110
Additionally, the resonance empirical results was1.034
generally
7 shorter than that
3.6008of the 3D Rankine source
0.137 method. The analysis
−0.126 results suggest 1.062
that the empirical formula can achieve a higher added resistance than the 3D Rankine panel
8 The model test4.1152
method. results were evaluated0.157 −0.142
to verify the effect of 1.099
ship specifications on
9 resistance.
the ship 4.6296 0.177 −0.164 1.142
10 5.144 0.196 −0.190 1.201

Next, the resistance induced by waves was calculated. The wave direction was fixe
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 18

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 latter part of the analysis, the load displacement according to the regular wave was 7con-
of 17
firmed with five waves.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 18

latter part of the analysis, the load displacement according to the regular wave was con-
firmed with five waves.

Figure
Figure 4.
4. Time
Time series
series of
of added
added resistance
resistance at
at ω
ω==0.6
0.6rad/s
rad/sand
andVs
Vs= =6 6kts.
kts.

Our results
Figure are similar
5 represents to those of manyadded
the non-dimensional previous studies,
resistance 𝑅 whichin theshowed
frequency that do-
the
empirical formula achieves a relatively high value. In addition,
main, which was normalized by the water density, gravitational acceleration, wave am- we inferred from the
Rankinethe
plitude, source method
K-GTB’s width, thatandthe amount
length of trim
between changes according
perpendiculars (ρ g to𝐴𝑚𝑝 the ship 𝐵 /𝐿 speed ).
in the
The initial
results stage,
from theand thus the
empirical resonance
method, period increases
STAwave-2 with
[23], are also the length
shown in thisoffigure
the ship.
for
Experimental
validation. studies relatively
Although should be similar
carried values
out for were
a more precise ship
achieved at theload estimation
slow speed, itinwas the
Figure
future.4. Time series of added resistance at ω = 0.6 rad/s and Vs = 6 kts.
confirmed that the maximum value in the empirical equation was approximately twice as
Inthe
highFigure
at order to consider
fastest vessel thethe total
speed. resistance, itthe
Additionally, is necessary
resonance toperiod
add the calm
ininthe water resistance
empirical results
obtained 5 represents
through the non-dimensional
experiment. Only extremeadded resistance
conditions of 10 𝑅knots orthe frequency
more do-
wereresults
tested,
was
main, generally
which wasshorter than
normalized that
by of
the the 3D
water Rankine
density, source method.
gravitational The
acceleration,analysis
wave am-
due to the
suggest limited
that towing tank
the empirical slotscan
formula andachieve
the need to evaluate
a perpendiculars
higher addedtheresistance
ship’s performance
than the𝐵3D in Ran-
more
plitude,
dangerous the K-GTB’s
conditions. width, and length
Therefore, between
the low speed, reflected in the g 𝐴𝑚𝑝
(ρ numerical /𝐿 ).
calculations,
kine panel method. The model test results were evaluated to verify the effect of ship spec-
The
wasresults from the via
only achieved empirical method,according
extrapolation STAwave-2 to [23], are also shown
the exponential law.inAs thisa figure
result,for the
ifications on the ship resistance.
validation. Although relatively similar values were achieved at the
calm water resistance was 12.6 kN, 31.1 kN, and 75.0 kN for 2 knots, 6 knots, and 10 knots, slow speed, it was
confirmed
respectively.that the maximum value in the empirical equation was approximately twice as
high atAdded
the fastest vesselcomponents
resistance speed. Additionally, the resonance
in the frequency domain period
were in the empirical
converted into theresults
time
was generally
domain shorter than
via Newman’s that of the[24].
approximation 3D Rankine sourcewave
The considered method. The analysis
conditions results
were generated
suggest
using thethatJONSWAP
the empirical formulawhich
spectrum, can achieve
is showna higher added
in Figure resistance
6. These than the
included 3D Ran-
a significant
kine
wavepanel
heightmethod.
of 1.88The
m, model
a peak test
periodresults were
of 8.8 s, aevaluated to verify
wave direction the degrees,
of 180 effect of ship
and aspec-peak
ifications
parameter onofthe ship
2.5, resistance.
all of which are commonly seen in South Korea.

Figure 5. Cont.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 18
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 8 of 17

Figure 5.
Figure Non-dimensionaladded
5. Non-dimensional added resistance
resistance in ain180
a 180 degree
degree heading
heading condition:
condition: (a) Vs(a)
= 2Vs
kts,=(b)
2 kts,
Vs
(b) Vs = 6 kts, and (c) Vs =
= 6 kts, and (c) Vs = 10 kts. 10 kts.

The total
Our resistance
results of the
are similar to K-GTB at many
those of three different
previousship speeds
studies, is shown
which in Figure
showed 7,
that the
including means and standard deviations. The fluctuation range due to waves was
empirical formula achieves a relatively high value. In addition, we inferred from the Ran-rela-
tively large compared to its resistance in calm water. It was confirmed that the greatest
kine source method that the amount of trim changes according to the ship speed in the
resistance achieved was 270 kN. In the case of the average value, it was confirmed that as
initial stage, and thus the resonance period increases with the length of the ship. Experi-
the speed increased, a second-order polynomial level was reached. The above results were
mental studies should be carried out for a more precise ship load estimation in the future.
obtained via the three-dimensional Rankin source method, and are more realistic than the
In order to consider the total resistance, it is necessary to add the calm water re-
empirical-based estimates. In the future, the time series of these loads will be used as input
sistance obtained through the experiment. Only extreme conditions of 10 knots or more
values for eco-friendly marine fuel system evaluation in the ocean environment.
were tested, due to the limited towing tank slots and the need to evaluate the ship’s per-
formance in more dangerous conditions. Therefore, the low speed, reflected in the numer-
ical calculations, was only achieved via extrapolation according to the exponential law.
As a result, the calm water resistance was 12.6 kN, 31.1 kN, and 75.0 kN for 2 knots, 6
knots, and 10 knots, respectively.
Added resistance components in the frequency domain were converted into the time
domain via Newman’s approximation [24]. The considered wave conditions were gener-
ated using the JONSWAP spectrum, which is shown in Figure 6. These included a signif-
icant wave height of 1.88 m, a peak period of 8.8 s, a wave direction of 180 degrees, and a
peak parameter of 2.5, all of which are commonly seen in South Korea.
Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 18
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 9 of 17

(a)

(b)
Figure 6.Figure Wave input
Wave6.input data:data: (a) JONSWAPwave
(a) JONSWAP wave spectrum
spectrum and
and(b)(b)
wave timetime
wave series.series.

Considering the above, the total propulsion power of the K-GTB was set to around
The2 total
MW, to resistance
allow it to of the K-GTB
handle at three
the required different
propulsion ship speeds
load while operatingisatshown
a speedinof Figure
at 7,
including means
least and
10 knots standard
along the coastdeviations. The fluctuation
of Korea. Afterwards, consideringrange due to
the inner waves
ship was rela-
space for
tively large compared to its resistance in calm water. It was confirmed that the itgreatest
equipment and the maintainability of the propulsion system, including the PM motor,
wasachieved
resistance finally decided
was to270install
kN.two 1.1 MW
In the casePM ofmotors. The K-GTB
the average value,is expected to be able to that as
it was confirmed
achieve a speed of more than 10 knots at 2.2 MW propulsion, even in actual sea operation.
the speed increased, a second-order
When ammonia polynomial
or hydrogen fuel level
is used as fuel forwas reached. fuel
demonstration Thecells
above results were
or internal
obtainedcombustion
via the three-dimensional Rankin source method, and are more
engines, it may be necessary to increase the size of the storage tank due torealistic than the
empirical-based
these fuels’estimates.
low energy In the future,
storage density. the time series
In preparation forofthis,
these loads will
we installed be tank
a fuel usedforas input
demonstration purposes separately on the open-air deck of the
values for eco-friendly marine fuel system evaluation in the ocean environment. K-GTB, to secure sufficient
space for safety reasons [25].
Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 10 of 17

(a)

(b)
Figure 7. Total
Figure resistance
7. Total resistance(Rts)
(Rts) at different
at different ship
ship speeds;
speeds; (a) resistance
(a) total total resistance in domain,
in the time the timeand
domain, a
(b) statistical values of total resistance.
(b) statistical values of total resistance.

4. Marine Demonstration by Load Sharing of Propulsion Power

Considering the above, the total propulsion power of the K-GTB was set to aroun
A hybrid propulsion system that transfers the power generated by two LNG dual-fuel
MW,(DF)to allow it to handle
main generators to twothe
1.1 required propulsion
MW-class permanent load
motors while
(PMs) operating
through at a speed of
a direct current
least (DC)
10 knots along was
switchboard the installed
coast ofinKorea. Afterwards,
the K-GTB. considering
A DC switchboard was usedthe because
inner shipit is space
easy to connect
equipment and the to maintainability
various propulsion of power
the sources, such assystem,
propulsion MW-class batteries, fuel
including thecells,
PM motor
and carbon-free fuel hybrid engines, for demonstration. During K-GTB
was finally decided to install two 1.1 MW PM motors. The K-GTB is expected to be a operation, the LNG
DF main generator and the alternative fuels to be demonstrated share the propulsion load,
to achieve a speed of more than 10 knots at 2.2 MW propulsion, even in actual sea ope
enabling the evaluation of various operational profiles.
tion. For example, in the case of MW-class marine battery evaluation, the battery during K-
When ammonia
GTB operation or hydrogen
is evaluated fuel is
by increasing theused asload
output fuelshared
for demonstration fuel cells or int
by one LNG DF generator,
from 0 to 100%. The battery system is then assessed for its performance,
nal combustion engines, it may be necessary to increase the size of the storage reliability, andtank due
safety under the required charging and discharging conditions, and data related to the
these fuels’ low energy storage density. In preparation for this, we installed a fuel tank
shipboard demonstration are secured.
demonstration purposes
In the future, separately
a separate on thedevice
measurement open-air deck ofNO
for verifying the K-GTB, to secure suffici
x , SO2 /CO2 ratio, and
spaceCO for safety reasons
2 emissions [25]. however, for this study, the value calculated based on the fuel
will be added;
consumption of the DF main generator, with the use of eco-friendly alternative fuel, was
compared
4. Marine with the measured
Demonstration by value.
Load The greenhouse
Sharing gas reductionPower
of Propulsion effect can be calculated
or measured by considering the use of alternative fuels and the amount of fossil fuels
A hybrid propulsion system that transfers the power generated by two LNG du
fuel (DF) main generators to two 1.1 MW-class permanent motors (PMs) through a dir
current (DC) switchboard was installed in the K-GTB. A DC switchboard was used
cause it is easy to connect to various propulsion power sources, such as MW-class batter
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 11 of 17

used. After securing objectivity through third-party verification, the verification results are
reflected in the Energetic Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) and the Energy Efficiency Existing
Ship Index (EEXI) formulas.
The K-GTB was designed to enable simultaneous installation of three types of MW-
class batteries, fuel cells, and carbon-free fuel mixed engines, as well as the simultaneous
demonstration of two or more types of propulsion power sources. The alternative fuel
loading area was designed according to the relevant rules of the classification society, and
was equipped with an emergency response system (or damage control system), which is an
expanded alarm, monitoring, and fire protection system designed to respond to accidents
that may occur during the demonstration process [26].
The bus voltage of the main switchboard equipped on the K-GTB was designed to
operate at DC 1000 V. This is in consideration of the scalability constraints of the existing
DC 750 V system, the construction cost, and the difficulty in obtaining the appropriate
components when configuring a system with more than 1000 volts (V). LNG DF generators
are reflected as two alternating currents: (AC) 690 V and 1596 kW. These were configured
to drive two 1100 kW-class propulsion motors, without the involvement of a separate
alternative-fuel-based propulsion power source, for demonstration at a speed of 10 knots or
more in actual sea conditions. For port entry and departure support, one bow thruster with
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 18
a capacity of 550 kW was installed in the bow section. Figure 8 shows the configuration of
the K-GTB’s propulsion system for the DC-switchboard-based electric load sharing design.

Figure 8. K-GTB
Figure 8. K-GTB propulsion
propulsion system
system configuration
configuration for
for DC-switchboard-based
DC-switchboard-based electric
electric load
load sharing
sharing
(M: electric
(M: electric motor,
motor,G:
G:Generator,
Generator,FCU:
FCU:Fuel
FuelCell
CellUnit).
Unit).

In the K-GTB, marine batteries can achieve up to 2000 kW at 770~900 V DC. The fuel
cell can achieve up to 1000 kW at 790~900 V DC. The carbon-free hybrid engine can
achieve up to 2000 kW at 790~690 V DC. As shown in Table 4, the voltage of the generator
on board was finally set at 690 V, after considering the advantages and disadvantages of
450 V and 690 V.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 12 of 17

In the K-GTB, marine batteries can achieve up to 2000 kW at 770~900 V DC. The fuel
cell can achieve up to 1000 kW at 790~900 V DC. The carbon-free hybrid engine can achieve
up to 2000 kW at 790~690 V DC. As shown in Table 4, the voltage of the generator on board
was finally set at 690 V, after considering the advantages and disadvantages of 450 V and
690 V.

Table 4. K-GTB verifiable battery, fuel cell, and internal combustion engine specifications.

450 V 2000 kW 690 V 2000 kW

 Required current is approximately  Required current is approximately 2091 A

3200 ampere (A) at 450 V PF0.8; based on 690 V PF0.8;
 Requires four Fl13 modules;  Requires three Fl13 modules;
 Increase in size and cost of  Cable savings due to reduced
main switchboard; current capacity;
 A 1692 kW capacity is possible when four  A 1692 kW capacity is possible when
Fl13 modules are applied. three Fl13 modules are applied.

The K-GTB’s propulsion load sharing specifications were set as follows. The connected
DC guards, No. 1 bus bar, and No. 2 bus bar were charged, and operated the power grid.
Supplying power in the single or parallel mode with No. 1 generator (Gen. 1) and No. 2
generator (Gen. 2) was considered as the base mode. The interval for the best efficiency
for Gen. 1 and Gen. 2 was established as 70~90 % of the rated output. Achieving a
high efficiency of the alternative fuel power source, the eco-friendly power source (EFPS),
depends on the conditions of the test and the test subject. The operating section of the
EFPS, subject to verification, depends on the conditions of the test and the test subject. In
considering the main bus connection situation of multiple EFPSs, the provision of power to
the main bus with only the EFPS was prohibited.
The operation mode is divided into two types: the base mode in which only Gen. 1
and Gen. 2 are operated as propulsion power sources, and the test mode, in which the
EFPS is operated as well (preparation, status transition, and EFPS operation modes).
When converting from the base mode to the test mode, a preparation step (test prepa-
ration) is performed, to ensure safety and smooth switching between modes. Table 5 shows
the operating modes, and Figure 9 shows the process of switching between modes.

Table 5. Propulsion system operation mode of the K-GTB.

Operation Mode Description Operable PMS Mode

In the case of operating Gen. 1
Single running
[M1] base mode and/or Gen. 2 with main bus
Parallel running
power supply
A transition step during the EFPS
[M2] status test or after the test that changes the Single running
transition mode operation mode, checking the status Parallel running
and moving the load
Gen. 1/Gen. 2 is responsible for the
minimum load required for the bus
[M3] EFPS mode bar, and EFPS operates according to Parallel running
the load required for
the demonstration

Figure 10 shows the diagram of the propulsion system configuration which manages
power for the K-GTB. Gen. 1 and Gen. 2 operate alone or in parallel, and both supply
power to the K-GTB. Figure 10a shows Gen. 1 as a single operation mode with Gen. 2 in a
standby state. Figure 10b shows Gen. 2 as a single operation mode with Gen. 1 in a standby
 [M1] base mode
2 with main bus power supply Parallel running
A transition step during the EFPS test or
[M2] status transition after the test that changes the operation Single running
mode mode, checking the status and moving the Parallel running
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 load 13 of 17
Gen. 1/Gen. 2 is responsible for the mini-
mum load required for the bus bar, and
[M3] EFPS mode Parallel running
EFPS1 operates
state. Figure 10c shows Gen. and Gen. according to operation.
2 in parallel the load re-
Symmetric mode, asymmetric
quired for the
mode, and fixed mode were considered demonstration
for PMS modes available in parallel operation.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18

Figure 9.
Figure 9. Conceptual diagram
diagram of
ofthe
thepower
poweroperation
operationmode
modetransition
transitionofofthe
theK-GTB.
K-GTB.

Figure 10 shows the diagram of the propulsion system configuration which manages
power for the K-GTB. Gen. 1 and Gen. 2 operate alone or in parallel, and both supply
power to the K-GTB. Figure 10a shows Gen. 1 as a single operation mode with Gen. 2 in a
standby state. Figure 10b shows Gen. 2 as a single operation mode with Gen. 1 in a standby
state. Figure 10c shows Gen. 1 and Gen. 2 in parallel operation. Symmetric mode, asym-
metric mode, and fixed mode were considered for PMS modes available in parallel oper-
ation.

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 10. Examples of the K-GTB’s propulsion system operation modes; (a) Gen. 1 as a single op-
Figure 10. Examples of the K-GTB’s propulsion system operation modes; (a) Gen. 1 as a single
eration mode with Gen (b) Gen. 2 as a single operation mode with Gen. 1 in a standby state (c) Gen.
operation mode with Gen (b) Gen. 2 as a single operation mode with Gen. 1 in a standby state (c) Gen.
1 and Gen. 2 in parallel operation.
1 and Gen. 2 in parallel operation.
The power operation mode is divided into a single mode that uses only the main
generator, and a parallel mode that receives power from alternative fuel for demonstra-
tion. During operation for marine demonstration, each mode can be transitioned into the
other.
Setting the status transition mode to enter the EFPS mode from the base mode can be
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 14 of 17

The power operation mode is divided into a single mode that uses only the main
generator, and a parallel mode that receives power from alternative fuel for demonstration.
During operation for marine demonstration, each mode can be transitioned into the other.
Setting the status transition mode to enter the EFPS mode from the base mode can be
performed as follows.
• Preprocess
※ It is mandatory to input operation-related information for the EFPS and check the
connection of the target.
• Step 1: Gen. 1(2) minimum load condition set up
Gen. 1(2) switch to a single running state and proceed with load reducing:
{Gen. 1(2) load target level = Gen. 1(2) minimum load + EFPS minimum required load}
. . . (Equation (1)).
• Step 2: EFPS preparation
EFPS start-up and preparation: EFPS is ready to connect.
• Step 3: Status check (Always)
Check for alarms or warnings and take action when necessary:
(i) Switch to base mode in the case of alarm/emergency with flag.
(ii) Wait for user response when alert occurs with flag.
• Step 4: Waiting for operator confirmation
Wait for the operator to accept entry into EFPS mode, and continuously check for
alarms and warnings. Operator help pop-up.
• END of mode change from base to EFPS mode.
Next, set the status transition mode to return to base mode from EFPS mode via the
following steps.
• Step 1: EFPS load removal
Cut off the connected load so that the load added to the EFPS for the test reaches the
EFPS minimum required load (※ can be achieved according to Gen. 1(2) operation
method).
• Step 2: EFPS disconnect
Block the EFPS and let Gen. 1(2) take the remaining load:
Gen. 1(2) residual load capacity > EFPS remain load . . . (Equation (2)).
• Step 3: Status check (Always)
Check for alarms or warnings and take action when necessary:
(i) Switch to base mode in the case of alarm/emergency with flag.
(ii) Wait for user response when alert occurs with flag.
• Step 4: Waiting for operator confirmation
Wait for the operator to accept entry into EFPS mode and continuously check for
alarms and warnings.
• END of mode change from EFPS to base mode.
Figure 11 shows the load change process between base mode and EFPS mode.
 (i) Switch to base mode in the case of alarm/emergency with flag.
(ii) Wait for user response when alert occurs with flag.
• Step 4: Waiting for operator confirmation
Wait for the operator to accept entry into EFPS mode and continuously check for
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 alarms and warnings. 15 of 17
• END of mode change from EFPS to base mode.
Figure 11 shows the load change process between base mode and EFPS mode.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 18

Figure 11.11.
Figure Diagram illustrating
Diagram thethe
illustrating trends in in
trends propulsion load
propulsion change.
load change.

Figure
Figure 12
12shows
showsthe
theDC switchboard
DC system
switchboard andand
system the energy management
the energy system
management from
system
the above system design results.
from the above system design results.

(a)

(b)
Figure 12.
Figure 12. Examples
Examplesof
ofthe
thedeveloped
developedDC DCswitchboard and
switchboard energy
and management
energy system
management system(EMS); (a)
(EMS);
DC switch board and certification (b) Energy Management System (EMS) and certifications.
(a) DC switch board and certification (b) Energy Management System (EMS) and certifications.

5. Institutional Considerations
5. Considerations
To date,
To date, R.O.
R.O. Korea
Korea has
has no
no rules
rules for
for type
type approval,
approval, or or related
related laws
laws for
for propulsion
propulsion
systemsthat
systems thatcan
canchange
changethe
thepropulsion
propulsionpower
powersource
source during
during operation.
operation. Therefore,
Therefore, a tem-
a tempo-
porary
rary exemption
exemption fromfrom related
related lawslaws and regulations
and regulations is required
is required for thefor the marine
marine demon-
demonstration
stration
of of eco-friendly
eco-friendly alternativealternative fuel and
fuel and electric electric system
propulsion propulsion system components,
components, through the
through the configuration and utilization of the proposed propulsion system. It is neces-
sary to promote the marine demonstration of developed eco-friendly technologies, secure
track records, and promote commercialization. It is possible to secure a verified empirical
data technical background for enactment and revision of domestic and international laws.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 16 of 17

configuration and utilization of the proposed propulsion system. It is necessary to promote

the marine demonstration of developed eco-friendly technologies, secure track records,
and promote commercialization. It is possible to secure a verified empirical data technical
background for enactment and revision of domestic and international laws.

6. Concluding Remarks
For the development and commercialization of technology designed in response to
the IMO’s GHG regulations, it is critical to verify the performance, reliability, and safety
of new equipment through marine demonstration and to secure track records. On the
other hand, the time and cost required for the design, construction, and operation of
demonstration vessels is a heavy burden, not only for developing countries, but also for
organizations and companies in developed countries. The K-GTB proposed in this study
is a marine demonstration vessel that can be used for the development of eco-friendly
technologies, with minimum burden of time and cost. The K-GTB is also designed to
facilitate international joint research, the dissemination of marine carbon-neutral technology,
and information sharing from a model basin test period to real ship operation. In this
study, a model test was conducted based on the initial specifications of the K-GTB, and
the main propulsion output was set after examining the fluctuation range of the required
propulsion power for real sea operation. The main generator and the alternative fuel
propulsion power source were designed to share the load required for K-GTB propulsion,
using a 1000 V D/C switchboard. The basic design of the K-GTB has been completed, and
construction has been in progress since September 2022. The K-GTB is expected to be ready
for commercialization in 2025 after a launch in 2024, and is expected to serve as a tool for
the realization of marine carbon neutrality. Various technologies designed to meet GHG
regulations can be tested, evaluated, and demonstrated with the K-GTB, before application
for next-generation eco-friendly ship design.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.J.K.; methodology, Y.H.K., H.S., D.H. and H.J.K.; soft-
ware, Y.H.K.; validation, J.-P.H. and D.H.; writing—original draft preparation, H.S. and H.J.K.;
writing—review and editing, H.J.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the
manuscript.
Funding: This study was supported by a grant from the National R&D Project “Development of
1 MW class Marine Test-bed for Adoptability Demonstration of Alternative Fuels” funded by the
Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries of Korea [1525012293/PMS5560].
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: As authors, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to the support from
the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, Republic of Korea. Authors would also like to thank KTE
Corporation for their contribution to the research and development work, as well as their support for
the writing of this paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. IMO(MEPC72). “Resolution MEPC.304(72).” Initial IMO Strategy on Reductin of GHG Emissions from Ships. Available
online: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/Index-of-MEPC-Resolutions-and-Guidelines-related-to-
MARPOL-Annex-VI.aspx (accessed on 4 January 2023).
2. IMO(MARPOL). Annex VI, Regulation 22A IMO (MEPC72). “Resolution MEPC.304(72).” Initial IMO Strategy on Reductin
of GHG Emissions from Ships. 2018. Available online: https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/KnowledgeCentre/
IndexofIMOResolutions/MEPCDocuments/MEPC.304(72).pdf (accessed on 4 January 2023).
3. Nikolić, D.; Marstijepović, N.; Cvrk, S.; Gagić, R.; Filipović, I. Evaluation of pollutant emissions from two-stroke marine diesel
engine fueled with biodiesel produced from various waste oils and diesel blends. Brodogradnja 2016, 67, 81–90. [CrossRef]
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 567 17 of 17

4. Banawan, A.A.; El Gohary, M.M.; Sadek, I.S. Environmental and economical benefits of changing from marine diesel oil to
natural-gas fuel for short-voyage high-power passenger ships. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part M J. Eng. Marit. Environ. 2010, 224,
103–113. [CrossRef]
5. Ammar, N.R. An environmental and economic analysis of methanol fuel for a cellular container ship. Transp. Res. Part D Transp.
Environ. 2019, 69, 66–76. [CrossRef]
6. Balcombe, P.; Brierley, J.; Lewis, C.; Skatvedt, L.; Speirs, J.; Hawkes, A.; Staffell, I. How to decarbonise international shipping:
Options for fuels, technologies and policies. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 182, 72–88. [CrossRef]
7. Bouman, E.A.; Lindstad, E.; Rialland, A.I.; Strømman, A.H. State-of-the-art Technologies, Measures, and Potential for Reducing
GHG Emissions from Shipping—A Review. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2017, 52, 408–421. [CrossRef]
8. DNV-GL. Maritime Forecast to 2050 (Engergy Transition Outlook 2019). 2019. Available online: https://www.dnv.com/maritime/
publications/maritime-forecast-2022/download-the-report.html (accessed on 4 January 2023).
9. IMO(MEPC75). MEPC 75/INF.5 Proposal to Establish an International Maritime Research and Development Board (IMRB).
2019. Available online: https://www.ics-shipping.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/proposal-to-establish-an-international-
maritime-research-and-development-board-imrb.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2023).
10. Haglind, A.; Sjöström, M.; Brynolf, S.; Wäckelgård, E.; Andersson, M. Development and testing of a demonstrator ship for IMO
greenhouse gas emissions regulations. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part M J. Eng. Marit. Environ. 2016, 230, 356–366. [CrossRef]
11. Holen, J.T.; Eidsmo Rein, G.; Rekdal, S.L.; Moan, T. Design and testing of a full-scale battery-powered ferry. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021,
9, 592. [CrossRef]
12. Carbone, P.; De La Fuente, A.; Arnaldo, R.; Fossen, T.I. Design and testing of a hybrid LNG-electric propulsion system for a cruise
ship. Appl. Energy 2021, 283, 116231. [CrossRef]
13. Seo, S.; Son, H.; Kim, Y.; Choi, J.; Kim, D. Design and analysis of an ammonia-fueled tanker ship for zero-emission shipping. J.
Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 1296. [CrossRef]
14. Skontorp, R.; Skarphagen, H.; Molnes, A.R. Design and testing of a hydrogen fuel cell-powered ferry. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 697.
[CrossRef]
15. Du, Z.; Chen, Q.; Guan, C.; Chen, H. Improvement and Optimization Configuration of Inland Ship Power and Propulsion System.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 135. [CrossRef]
16. Ljulj, A.; Slapničar, V.; Grubišić, I.; Mihanović, L. Concept Design of a Hybrid Offshore Patrol Vessel. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 12.
[CrossRef]
17. Wang, W.; Liu, Y.; Zhen, L.; Wang, H. How to Deploy Electric Ships for Green Shipping. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2022, 10, 1611. [CrossRef]
18. Ren, Y.; Zhang, L.; Shi, P.; Zhang, Z. Research on Multi-Energy Integrated Ship Energy Management System Based on Hierarchical
Control Collaborative Optimization Strategy. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2022, 10, 1556. [CrossRef]
19. Gianni, M.; Pietra, A.; Coraddu, A.; Taccani, R. Impact of SOFC Power Generation Plant on Carbon Intensity Index (CII)
Calculation for Cruise Ships. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2022, 10, 1478. [CrossRef]
20. IMO(MEPC 78). MEPC 78-INF.24-Marine Testbed Ship for Alternative Fuels and Electric Propulsion Systems. 2022. Available
online: https://www.imokorea.org/upfiles/board/45.%20MEPC%2078%20%B0%E1%B0%FA%BA%B8%B0%ED%BC%AD%
28%BF%B5%BE%EE%29.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2023).
21. Fonseca, N.; Guedes Soares, C. Time domain analysis of large amplitude vertical motions and wave loads. J. Ship Res. 1998, 42,
100–113. [CrossRef]
22. DNV. Software Suite for Hydrodynamic and Structural Analysis of Renewable, Offshore and Maritime Structures. DNV.
12th Aug. 2022. Available online: https://www.dnv.com/Images/Sesam-Feature-Description_tcm8-58834.pdf (accessed on
4 January 2023).
23. ITTC. ITTC-Recommended Procedure and Guidelines: Analysis of Speed/Power Trial Data. International Towing Tank Confer-
ence. 7.5-04-01-01.2, 1-33. 2014. Available online: https://ittc.info/media/4210/75-04-01-012.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2023).
24. Newman, J.N. Marine Hydrodynamics; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; p. 448.
25. De Vries, N. Safe and Effective Application of Ammonia as a Marine Fuel. Master’s Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft,
The Netherlands, 2019.
26. Lee, D.; Kim, S.; Lee, K.; Shin, S.C.; Choi, J.; Park, B.J.; Kang, H.J. Performance-based on-board damage control system for ships.
Ocean. Eng. 2021, 223, 108636. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.