(2012, Velsink) - Ports - and - Terminals

Ports and Terminals
H. Ligteringen
H. Ligteringen
Lecture notes CTwa 4330-5306
VS
SD
21-08-2007, 10:30
H. Velsink
Ports and Terminals
Ports and Terminals
H. Ligteringen and H. Velsink
Faculty of
Civil Engineering and Geosciences
Delft University of Technology
VSSD
©VSSD
First edition 2012
Published by VSSD
Leeghwaterstraat 42, 2628 CA Delft, The Netherlands
tel. +31 15 27 82124, telefax +31 15 27 87585, e-mail: hlf@vssd.nl
internet: http://www.vssd.nl/hlf
URL about this book: http://www.vssd.nl/hlf/f031.htm
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval sys-
tem, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher.
Great care has been taken to locate and acknowledge all owners of copyrighted material in
this book. If any such owner has inadvertently been omitted, acknowledgement will gladly
be made in future printings.
Printed version(OHFWURQLFYHUVLRQ
ISBN 978-90-6562-288-4,6%1
NUR 957
Key words: ports and terminals

Preface
Former students from Delft University of Technology, who followed the lectures Ports and
Waterways in the Master Hydraulic Engineering will recognize this text book as one of the
readers they had to digest. It was, and will be, used in that course, but as there has been
also much interest from other universities and practitioners in the Netherlands and in many
other countries, it has ultimately led to this ”upgrade”.
The contents of this book is the combined result of the work experience of both authors
in port planning and design and their consecutive part-time position in the chair of Ports
and Waterways in the Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences at Delft University
of Technology. Throughout the 33 years of our tenure the new developments in practical
engineering and results of academic research were merged in subsequent editions of the
reader. In that respect we also like to acknowledge the many contributions from colleagues
and researchers to the document and the valuable information from many PIANC Working
Group reports.
During the years the cover page evolved, from a stern white sheet with only the title, author
and course-code, into a colourful page with the aerial photograph of the Port of Rotterdam
as background, which is still shown on the present cover. The reason for this is not difficult
to guess: at one glance one sees the channels and basins and all different types of terminals,
which are treated in the book. But more importantly the Port of Rotterdam has become a
highly valued partner for the University and the Civil Engineering Faculty in particular,
providing training places and guest lecturers on specialized subjects, and collaborating in a
joint Research Program.
However, this does not mean that the text is focused on the planning and design of very large
ports and sophisticated terminals only. On the contrary, much of our experience related to
smaller ports and ports in developing countries has been included in the book, thereby also
referring to valuable - be it a little outdated - sources such as the UNCTAD Handbook on
Port Development. In other words, the book is aimed at guiding planners and designers of
any type of port facility, all over the world.
Delft, Winter 2012 H. Ligteringen and H. Velsink
v
Contents
Preface v
List of Symbols xiii
1 Introduction 1
2 Maritime Transport 3
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 Specific Data of Merchant Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.1 Transport Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.2 Vertical Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.3 Horizontal Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2.4 Other Relevant Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3 Commodities and types of vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3.2 Break-bulk or Conventional General Cargo . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3.3 Container Vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.3.4 Ro/Ro Vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3.5 Car Carriers and Other Special Vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3.6 Bulk Cargo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.3.7 Short Sea Trader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.4 Tramp and Liner Trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.4.1 Liner Trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.4.2 Tramp Trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.5 Graphs and Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3 Port Functions and Organisation 45

3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.2 Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.3 Transport Chain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.4 Organisation of Seaports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
vii
viii Ports and Terminals
4 Port Planning Methodology 53

4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.2 Types of Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.3 Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.4 Planning Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.4.1 Cargo Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.4.2 Functional Requirements and Planning Elements . . . . . . . . . . 59
4.4.3 Site Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.4.4 Layout Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
4.4.5 Evaluation Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.4.6 Project Optimisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.5 General Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
4.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
5 Planning and Design of the Water Areas 73

5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
5.2 Ship Manoeuvring and Hydrodynamic Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
5.2.1 Basic Manoeuvrability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
5.2.2 Ship Hydrodynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
5.3 Approach Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
5.3.1 Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.3.2 Channel Width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
5.3.3 Channel Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.4 Manoeuvring Areas within the Port . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
5.5 Port Basins and Berth Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5.5.1 Nautical Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5.5.2 Wave Agitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
5.5.3 Harbour Basin Resonance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
5.6 Morphological Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.6.1 Littoral Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.6.2 Siltation of Approach Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.6.3 Sedimentation inside the Port . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
5.7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
6 Planning and Design of Port Terminals 111

6.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.2 Services Provided . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.3 Terminal Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
6.4 Types of Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
6.5 Terminal Capacity: Maximum or Optimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
6.6 Terminal Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
6.6.1 Quays and Jetties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
6.6.2 Terminal Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Contents ix
7 Container Terminals 127

7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
7.2 Container Transport and Terminal Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
7.2.1 Container Types and Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
7.2.2 The Terminal Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
7.3 Lay-out Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
7.3.1 Quay Length and Number of Portainer Cranes . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
7.3.2 Apron Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
7.3.3 Storage Yard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
7.3.4 Container Transfer Area and Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
7.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
8 General Cargo and Multipurpose Terminals 151

8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
8.2 Non-containerised General Cargo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
8.2.1 Types of General Cargo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
8.2.2 Terminal Logistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
8.3 Number of Berths and Quay Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
8.4 Storage Area and Overall Terminal Lay-out . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
8.5 Multipurpose Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
8.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
9 Ro/Ro and Ferry Terminals 161

9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
9.2 Lay-out Ro/Ro and Ferry Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
9.2.1 Ferry Terminal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
9.2.2 Ro/Ro Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
9.3 Special Design Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
9.3.1 Ramp and Bridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
9.3.2 Bottom Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
9.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
10 Liquid Bulk Terminals 171

10.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
10.2 Oil Tankers and Gas Carriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
10.2.1 Oil Tankers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
10.2.2 Liquid Gas Carriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
10.3 The Nature of the Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
10.4 Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
10.4.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
10.4.2 Types of Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
10.4.3 Location of the Terminal - Safety Considerations . . . . . . . . . . 177
10.5 The Berth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
10.6 Jetties and Dolphins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
x Ports and Terminals
10.6.1 L and T Jetties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180

10.6.2 Finger Piers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
10.6.3 Approach Bridges and Jetty Heads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
10.6.4 Breasting Dolphins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
10.6.5 Mooring Dolphins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
10.6.6 Special Aspects of LPG/LNG Jetties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
10.7 Storage Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
10.8 Offshore Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
10.8.1 Multiple Buoy Mooring (MBM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
10.8.2 Single Buoy Mooring (SBM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
10.8.3 Fixed Offshore Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
10.9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
11 Dry Bulk Terminals 199

11.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
11.2 Dry Bulk Commodities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
11.3 Dry Bulk Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
11.4 Unloading Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
11.4.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
11.4.2 Grabs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
11.4.3 Pneumatic Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
11.4.4 Vertical Conveyors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
11.4.5 Bucket Elevators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
11.4.6 Slurry Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
11.4.7 Self-unloading Vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
11.5 Loading Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
11.6 On-terminal Handling and Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
11.6.1 Transport Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
11.6.2 Stacking, Storage and Reclaiming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
11.6.3 Blending, Processing, Weighing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
11.7 Design Aspects of Dry Bulk Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
11.8 Climatic and Environmental Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
11.9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
12 Fishery Ports 221

12.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
12.2 Types of Fishery Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
12.2.1 Simple Landing Places . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
12.2.2 Coastal Fishery Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
12.2.3 Near-distance Fishery Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
12.2.4 Ocean Fishery Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
12.3 Site Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
12.4 Fishing Vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
12.5 Port Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
Contents xi
12.5.1 Access Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

12.5.2 Basins and Berths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
12.6 Unloading Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
12.7 Fishery Port Organisation and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
12.8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
13 Marinas 243
13.1 Yachting and Yachts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
13.2 General Lay-out of the Port . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
13.3 Basins and Berths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
13.4 Port Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
13.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
14 Ports and Terminals for Inland Water Transport 251

14.1 Location and Lay-out of IWT Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
14.2 The Vessels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
14.2.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
14.2.2 The European Waterways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
14.3 Types of Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
14.3.1 Open River Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
14.3.2 Closed River Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
14.3.3 Canal and River Ports: Lay-out and Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . 260
14.4 Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
14.4.1 IWT Cargo Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
14.4.2 Cargo Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
14.4.3 Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
14.4.4 IWT Jetties on Rivers with a Large Seasonal Water Level Variation 265
14.4.5 Design Aspects for a Simple IWT Canal Berth . . . . . . . . . . . 267
14.4.6 Inland Passenger Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
14.4.7 Seaport Terminals for IWT Vessels and Lighters . . . . . . . . . . 271
14.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
Index 272
List of Symbols
Parameter Unit Description

a m vertical motion due to wave response
A m2 surface area
Ac f s m2 surface area of the CFS
Ach m2 chamber floor area (horizontal); channel wet
cross-sectional area
Agr m2 gross storage area
AL m2 longitudinal above water area
As m 2 vessel cross-sectional area in the plane of the water
surface; used in squat calculation
AT m2 transverse above water area
AT EU m 2 required area per TEU inclusive op equipment
travelling lanes
Bs m beam; width of a ship at the midships-section
c m/s celerity of an individual wave in unrestricted water
C t/yr; TEU/yr design annual throughput
ca m 1s 1 factor of bottom jet depending on the quay wall slope
ca m/s apparent wave celerity
cb t/yr; TEU/yr berth productivity; berth productivity per year
CB - block coefficient
cc TEU parcel size; the number of TEU (un)loaded per call
Cc - configuration coefficient; current force coefficient
Cc currency present day value
Ce - eccentricity coefficient
Cm - added mass coefficient
Cmx ; Cmy - virtual mass coefficients
Cr m/yr resiltation factor
Cs - stiffness coefficient
Cs - stiffness coefficient
cs h t/hr unloading rate per ship per hour
Ct currency annual costs in year t
Cw - waterplane area coefficient
D m draught; depth of non-moving ship; ship draught (for
condition considered)
xiii
xiv Ports and Terminals
d50 m average grain size diameter; characteristic diameter

bottom protection
D pl m3 water displacement
DWT t deadweight tonnage
E J impact energy
f Hz actual wave frequency
F N force
farea - ratio gross area over net area
fbulk - bulking factor
fr - irregularity factor for vessel arival
fT EU - TEU-factor
GRT 1 gross register tonnage (volume in units of 2.83 m3 )
h m water depth; water level above undisturbed level;
head-water thickness
hberth m water depth at the berth location
hf m freeboard
hgd m guaranteed depth (with respect to a specified
reference level)
hnet m remaining safety margin or net under keel clearance
hover m overdepth
hs m average height of the cargo in the storage or CFS
Hs m significant wave height
hT m tidal elevation above reference level, below which
no entrance is allowed
i - rate of discount (usually true interest, that is the actual
interest minus the inflation component)
k m radius of gyration of the ships mass around the c.g.
k - blockage coefficient (=As Ach )
kp kN/m pile stiffness
L m wave length
Lb m required berthing quay length for resting of vessels
LB m length of basin or slip
LBP m length between perpendiculars
LOA m length over all
Lq m quay length
Ls m ship length; main vessel length
Lst m stopping distance
M t mass of the ship in tonnes
M kNm moment
mb ms - occupancy rate of berth, respectively storage
mc - acceptable average occupancy rate
n - number of berths
m3 water displacement
List of Symbols xv
N20 - number of TEU’s

N40 - number of FEU’s
Nc - number of container movements per year per type
of stack in TEU’s
Ncb - number of cranes per berth
ndc day number of days comprising a fishing cycle
ndr day number of resting days in a fishing cycle
ndu day number of unloading days in a fishing cycle
Ngs - number of gangs per ship
nhd - number of unloading hours in a day
nhy - number of operational hours per year
NRT 1) net register tonnage (expressed in units of 2.83 m3 )
Ns - number of ships
Nsa - number of vessels abreast
Nsr - number of vessels at rest
Nsy - number of ship calls per year
P W power
P t/hr (un)loading productivity per handling entity
(crane, gang, pumps)
r m distance between c.g. of the ship and the point
of first contact during berthing
rst - ratio of average stacking height and nominal
stacking height (0.6 to 0.9)
s m squat
s m space between vessels
St - quantity of containers still on terminal; total
number unloaded containers
smax m maximum sinkage (fore or aft) due to squat and trim
Ta s apparent wave period
TB t total bollard pull
td day dwell time
td max day maximum dwell time (e.g. time within which 98%
of containers have left the terminal)
Tn s natural periods of oscillation (nth harmonic)
Tp s peak waver period
U, u, V m/s water velocity; current velocity
ub m/s velocity near the bed
v m/s approach velocity of ship’s centre of gravity at
time of impact
V m3 contents of 1 TEU container
Vc m/s average current velocity over the underwater
part of the hull
Vd m3 /yr average annual volume of resiltation
xvi Ports and Terminals
Ve f f m/s ship speed with respect to channel bottom

(design entrance speed)
Vmin m/s minimum ship speed for rudder control
Vs m/s sailing speed
Vwv m/s wind velocity
Vwd m/s transverse speed of ship as a result of wind drift
w kg/m3 specific weight of seawater
W m average width of canal; width
Wa m additional width
Wb m bank clearance
Wbm m basic widthv
We f f m channel width in unrestricted shallow water
Wp m separation distance
Wshelter m sheltering width in the wave direction
yp m pile deflection
yf m fender compression
z m vertical distance compared to undisturbed water
level (up is positive)
F angle between wave direction and ship axis
Faxis angle between current and channel axis
G drift angle
L angle
) - relative density (=(Ws Ww ) Ww )
) t ship displacement in tons
V angle interference peaks
Vc , Vw angle between current and ship axis,
respectively between wind and ship axis
Wair kg/m3 density of air
Wcargo kg/m3 density of the cargo as stowed in the ship or
stacked in the storage
Ww kg/m3 density of water
1 actually a ton-force (a non-SI unit), but in practice referred to as ”ton”.

Chapter 1
Introduction
By nature port planning is a multidisciplinary activity. It involves expertise in the field

of transport economics, shipping, nautical matters, safety and logistics. But also knowl-
edge of waves and currents, sediment transport and coastal morphology, dredging and land
reclamation, and design of breakwaters and quays. Hence port planning is teamwork. But
within this team the port planner plays a central role in developing the concepts and ob-
taining the required expertise at the right time. Most port planners are civil engineers with
hydraulic engineering training and experience. But they need to have two important quali-
ties in addition to that:
(i) a basic understanding of the other disciplines involved

(ii) creativity
The first quality is needed to direct the work done by these experts and to integrate the
results into a balanced design of the port lay-out. The integration process itself is the cre-
ative part of the work: after having determined the basic dimensions of approach channel
and turning basins, of quays and terminals and of the corridors for hinterland connections,
there are often many ways to physically arrange them into a port lay-out. Here the second
quality mentioned above plays a crucial role in developing the right one.
The first part of this book (Chapter 1 through 6) is aimed at providing the basic elements
to perform this planning process. In Chapter 7 the detailed planning of container terminals
is treated, including the logistic process. Further attention is paid to design aspects, typical
for such terminals. The objective is to provide the basis for an all-round port engineer,
somebody who can participate in the design of any given type of port or terminal.
Chapters 8-14 present the planning aspects of other types of terminals.
1
Chapter 2
Maritime Transport
2.1 Introduction
Maritime transport is (in terms of tonne kilometres) the most important of the 6 transport
modes, the other five being inland water transport, road, rail and air transport and trans-
port by pipeline. It is relevant to make the distinction between intercontinental maritime
transport and that within a continent, because of the different competitive position. For
the intercontinental shipping air transport is the only alternative, but not really a competi-
tor because of the great difference in freight rates (see Table 2.1). Broadly speaking only
passengers and high-value goods are carried by plane and this share of the market for trans-
portation is well defined.
Maritime transport within a continent has many competitors, road transport being the most
important one. Again the air transport mode is quite distinct from the others in terms
of freight rate. But maritime transport, road, rail and inland water transport are in the
same cost range and therefore in fierce competition. Maritime transport used to be at a
disadvantage compared with roads for two reasons:
(i) it often needs additional transport between seaport and final destination. This creates
two extra links in the chain, which increases costs, time and unreliability (see Figure
2.1)
(ii) ports presented an uncertain element, due to the conventional custom procedures and
the frequent labour strikes, which could cripple transport for weeks.
Both the intercontinental and the continental maritime transport volumes are increasing.
The former due to the steady growth of world trade, the latter also because sea transport is
becoming more attractive. Customs procedures become shorter by modern technology such
Table 2.1 Freight rates across the Atlantic Ocean
Transport mode Door-to-door time (days) Freight rate (US$/kg)

Priority air 2-3 3.30
Standard air 4-7 1.00-1.90
Direct ocean 14-28 0.13-0.26
3
4 Ports and Terminals
as Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) and Smart Card. The reliability of the connections
between sea and land transport become better by fixed routes and schedules and in many
parts of the world the ports become more ’business oriented’ and provide faster and more
reliable services.
And last but not least there is an added environmental advantage as the CO2 emissions are
relatively small as compared to other transport modes. Approximate values for CO2 emis-
sion per tonne.km are:
Air transport 550 g

Road transport 50 g
Rail transport 20 g
Maritime transport 3g
Containerisation in particular represents a major factor in the growth of cargo volume and
therefore in the increase of port capacity required. The average growth rate of container
terminal throughput between 2000 and 2010 was around 10% per year. This figure com-
prises the absolute growth of (general) cargo volume, but also the shift of conventional
general cargo to containerised cargo. It means new terminal capacity, cranes and other
equipment. This is illustrative for the present trend in port development world-wide: quite
a number of ports are reaching saturation and are being expanded. Examples nearby are
Rotterdam (Maasvlakte 2), Antwerp and Le Havre. The upturn is caused by the impressive
economic growth in Asia, in particular in China, where the port of Shanghai at the end of
2004 took over the position of largest port in the world from Rotterdam. The most recent
economic crisis has caused a temporary reduction of throughput, but this is being recovered
and expectations are that the above mentioned growth will be resumed.
Port development depends on the development of maritime transport, both in terms of vol-
umes per commodity and in relation to types and sizes of vessels. For port planning a good
understanding of these developments is mandatory. The following sections present data on
ship design and cargo handling (as far as relevant for port planning) and some trends.
2.2 Specific Data of Merchant Ships

2.2.1 Transport Capacity
The tonnage of a ship is an indication of the carrying capacity in terms of the amount of
cargo she can transport. Unfortunately, depending on the type of vessel, the country of
origin, or the purpose for which the tonnage is used (for instance for harbour dues), there
exist several ways to express tonnages. The most important ones are:
GRT Gross Register Tonnage

NRT Net Register Tonnage
DWT Deadweight Tonnage
The relations between these three parameters are not fixed unconditionally: they depend
mainly on the type of vessel concerned. However, within certain limits, the following rela-
Chapter 2. Maritime Transport 5
delivery
Figure 2.1 Cost elements in a transport chain
tions can serve as a first approximation:
General cargo ships: DWT 1 5 GRT 2 5 NRT,

Very large crude oil carriers: DWT 2 0 GRT 2 6 NRT
The definitions of the tonnages are as follows:
GRT is the total volume of all permanently enclosed space above and below decks, with
certain exceptions, such as the wheelhouse, chart room, radio room and other specific
space above deck, expressed in tons, in which one ton is equal to 100 ft3 = 2.83 m3 .
GRT is normally used as the basis for calculating port dues.
NRT is the total of all space destined for cargo, expressed in units of 2.83 m3 . The NRT is
equal to the GRT minus the crew’s accommodation, workshops, engine room etc.
DWT is the difference between loaded and light displacement, in which:
• Loaded displacement is the ship’s mass when fully loaded, so including hull, engines,
cargo, crew etc. Fully loaded means that the ship sinks into the water down to her
summer draught line (see Plimsoll Mark).
• Light displacement is the mass of the ship’s hull, engines, spares, and all other items
necessary for normal working performance.
In other words, the DWT gives the mass of the cargo, fuel, crew, passengers, fresh water,
victuals, etc. expressed in metric tonnes.
The following units are used:
45
40
35
DWT (1000 t)
30
25
20
15
10
tankers and bulk carriers
5 general cargo ships
container ships
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
GRT (1000 t)
500
450
400
DWT (1000 t)
350
300
250
200
150
100
50 bulk carriers
tankers
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
GRT (1000 t)
Figure 2.2 GRT versus DWT
Tonne or metric ton (t = 1000 kg)

English or long ton (1016 kg)
Short ton (907 kg)
Port- or shipping tons are used to determine sea transport charges. A port or
shipping ton is equal to 1 m3 and equal to 1 t when the specific weight of cargo
is bigger than 1 t/m3 .
For some specialised ships the carrying capacity is not only expressed in GRT, NRT or
DWT, but also in other units, typical for the type of vessel concerned. Examples of this are:
TEU This unit is normally used to express the capacity for container storage on board of
a ship. TEU stands for Twenty Foot Equivalent Unit, which is the space taken by a
standard container of the following dimensions:
Length = 20 feet = 6.03 m,

Height = 8 feet = 2.44 m, and
Width = 8 feet = 2.44 m, thus
Volume = 6.03 2.44 2.44 = 35.9 m3 .
2.2.2 Vertical Dimensions

Draught
The draught D of a vessel is the maximum distance in meters between the waterline and
the keel of the ship (Figure 2.3). Displacement tonnages are calculated in respect of the
draught D and the stationary freeboard h f , which is indicated on the ship’s side.
The maximum draught line is indicated by the so-called Plimsoll Mark. This mark is
composed of a circle and a horizontal bar with two letters on either side of the circle.
The letters stand for the classification society of the Plimsoll Mark, that issues binding
conditions for sizes and quality of materials to be used, tests to be carried out, etc. Without
”classification” a ship is virtually non-insurable.
Figure 2.3 Ships dimensions
Most common letters are:
LR: Lloyds Register (England)

BV: Bureau Veritas (France), and
AB: American Bureau of Shipping (USA).
The draught of a vessel is related to the density of the water in which she is sailing (uplifting
force). Since the density does not have a constant value over the year, and also differs with
longitude and latitude (a ship sinks deeper into the water in summer around the equator
than in winter on the North Atlantic), another indicator is to be found at the right side of the
Plimsoll Mark. This indicates the maximum permissible draught under various conditions,
such as:
TF = Tropical Fresh Water

F = Fresh Water
T = Tropical Salt Water
S = Summer Salt Water
W = Winter Salt Water, and
WNA = Winter Salt Water on the North Atlantic
A certain safety margin is also incorporated in the markings of maximum permissible

draught. The draught of a vessel is indicated by numbers that are painted on both sides
of the ships hull, usually at the bow, amidships, and at the stern. Often, these figures indi-
cate the draught in feet (1 foot = 0.308 meter).
2.2.3 Horizontal Dimensions

Length
The length of a vessel can be expressed in two different ways:
LBP : Length Between Perpendiculars, and

LOA : Length Over All
Both lengths are indicated in Figure 2.3.

The definitions are as follows:
LBP : is the horizontal distance in meters between the points of intersection of

the ship’s bow and the summer salt water line when fully loaded and the
vertical line through the axis of the rudder of the ship.
LOA : is the horizontal distance between two vertical lines; one tangent to the
ship’s bow and one to the ship’s stern.
For dimensioning harbour basins and berths normally LOA is normative. Unless specifically
mentioned LOA is used in this book.
Beam
The beam or breadth Bs , is the maximum distance in meters between the two sides of the
ship.
Figure 2.4 Kamewa bow thruster
2.2.4 Other Relevant Data

Without going into the details of ship design some information is relevant for the manoeu-
vrability and hence for the design of approach channels and water areas inside a port.
Engine power and number/type of thrusters are decisive in this respect. Extremes are on
one hand large bulk carriers and (high speed) ferries on the other. Notwithstanding their
size some of the large ore carriers and crude oil tankers are equipped with only one screw or
propeller and have a relatively low engine power. They are designed for long distance, low
speed transportation and will require assistance by 3 or 4 tugs during arrival and departure
in the ports.
Ferries are generally overpowered and are provided with 2 or more propellers and often 1
bow thruster (Figure 2.4). High-speed ferries have water jets instead of propellers.
Many ships built today are equipped with one or more thrusters, either at the bow or at the
stern or both. For safety reasons the presence of a bow thruster is indicated on the bow
above the waterline.
Vessel speed is expressed in knots. One knot is equal to one nautical mile (or 1852 me-
ter) per hour, equivalent to 0.514 m/s. The maximum speed of bulk carriers and VLCC’s
amounts to 18 knots. Ferries are designed for maximum speeds of about 24 knots and
empty high-speed ferries have maximum speeds of about 40 knots, while the service speed
(full load) amounts to 35 knots.
2.3 Commodities and types of vessels

2.3.1 Introduction
Cargo flows can be classified according to type of cargo and according to the form in which
it is transported (dry bulk, containers, etc.).
The first classification follows the internationally agreed division into 10 main groups of
cargo referred to as NSTR (Nomenclature uniforme des marchandises pour les Statistiques
de Transport, Reviseé).
These main groups are:
0. Agricultural products and livestock

1. Other food products and fodder
2. Solid mineral fuels (e.g. coals, cokes etc)
3. Oil and oil products, incl. fuel gas
4. Iron ore and metal scrap
5. Iron, steel and non-ferro metals
6. Raw minerals; construction materials
7. Fertilisers
8. Chemical products
9. Vehicles, machinery and other goods
Standardisation of these categories allows to use the statistics of different countries and in-
dividual ports to quantify international flows of cargo and to forecast future developments.
As explained in Chapter 4 any port planning study starts with such forecasts dealing with
above main groups of cargo, but often going into subcategories (e.g. fruits as a subcategory
of Agricultural products).
For the subsequent physical planning of terminals within a port master plan, the cargo
characteristics are important in so far as they affect the location and possible combination
of different cargo flows within the port area. These considerations will be treated in the
chapters on terminal design, but a simple example may illustrate such effects: Categories 3
and 8 include hazardous goods and are therefore subject to safety requirements regarding
the location of such terminals with respect to other terminals and surrounding areas.
The second classification of cargo is important for the actual design of terminals. With
respect to the form in which cargo is transported the following division is made:
A. Dry bulk
B. Liquid bulk
C. Containers
D. Roll-on/Roll-off
E. Other
The last category ”Other” is almost identical to conventional general cargo, which includes
the break-bulk cargo (many pieces of various dimensions and weights), mass-break-bulk or
neo-bulk (many pieces of mostly uniform size and sometimes uniform weight) and bagged
goods.
In the next section these categories of cargo types will be discussed as well as the different
types of vessels in which they are carried. Furthermore, special types of vessels will be
treated, such as ferries and cruise vessels for passenger transport. For further reading on
shipping business reference is made to the Unesco-IHE lecture notes on Merchant Shipping
(Kruk and De Heer, 2005). Many of the examples of different types of ships shown in the
subsequent pages have been taken from ’Shipping’ (Wijnolst e.a. 1996). And the graphs
(in Figures 2.32 - 2.26) with typical dimensions of General Cargo-, container-, dry bulk-
and oil tankers respectively have been updated on the basis of the study ’Ship dimensions
in 2020’ (Lloyd’s Register M.S., 1998).
2.3.2 Break-bulk or Conventional General Cargo

Break-bulk is defined as all kinds of boxes, crates, bags, sacks, drums, machine parts, re-
frigerated cargo as fruit, meat etc. Generally the break-bulk cargo will be transported by
one of the three types of break-bulk ships, i.e. conventional general cargo ships, multipur-
pose ships and refrigerated ships.
General cargo ship

A general cargo ship may carry all kinds of break-bulk cargo. The weight of each piece
of cargo (a lift) is limited by the maximum lifting capacity of the shore based crane or
the ship’s derrick. Each piece of cargo is handled separately or sometimes as an assembly
of some smaller items. The cassette system is relatively new, and designed for efficient
handling of rolls of paper.
Table 2.2 Freight rates across the Atlantic Ocean
Categories of break-bulk Shape or packing Cargo handling method

1. Bagged goods Undefined shape Ropes, on pallets
2. Normal break-bulk Crates, boxes, drums Ropes, hooks, pallets
3. Neo-bulk Steel plates, bars and wire, Ropes and hooks, cassettes
lumber and timber, paper
The general cargo ship is the archetype of cargo ship. All new, specialised vessels originate
from the general cargo ship.
Length Over All: 113.22 m

Length Between Perpendiculars: 105.40 m
Breadth: 19.60 m
Draught: 7.29 m
Deadweight: 8,739 t
Maximum speed: 13.30 knots
Figure 2.5 General cargo ship ’Sakti’
The capacity of the conventional general cargo ship ranges from 5000 to 25000 t. It has
four to five holds (space for cargo storage below deck) and usually one or two tween decks,
which run all along the ship. This makes it possible to stow cargo in such a way, that it can
be distributed evenly over the ship’s length and/or to unload a certain quantity of cargo in
a certain port without moving other cargo as well.
The older general cargo ships can easily be identified by the many derricks (ship’s cranes)
placed on deck. These are arranged in such a way, that each hold can be served by at least
two derricks. The older designs of general cargo ships show the wheelhouse amidships, but
more recent designs show a tendency to place it three-quarters aft or aft.
The draught of the vessel is usually small, ranging from 7.5 to approximately 10 meters,
which enables the ship to call at most ports of the world, even the smaller ones. An example
of a general cargo ship is shown in Figure 2.5.
Over the recent years, when more and more emphasis was put on the reduction of the ship’s
turnaround time, some new developments took place in design, as well as in cargo handling
methods, of the general cargo ship:
a. The openings of the holds (hatches) became wider and were placed in one vertical
line to ease the vertical movement of cargo. It even became possible to lower small
equipment for cargo handling, such as forklift trucks, into the holds. The aim to
achieve unobstructed movements of cargo was also one of the reasons why nowadays
most wheelhouses of general cargo ships are placed aft instead of amidships.
b. Horizontal cargo handling through side loading ports (see Figure 2.6)
c. The development of the Unit Load Concept (ULC), from pallets to other forms of
unitization such as cassettes for paper.
Figure 2.6 Horizontal cargo handling through side loading doors
Multipurpose ship
The multipurpose ship, in fact a general cargo ship, capable of transporting almost any
piece of cargo, ranging from a small box to a container or even a truck. The designs made
in recent years also show a limited capacity to carry bulk cargo, either liquid (oil, chemical
products), or dry bulk (grain, ore, etc.) and refrigerated cargo. Especially directed toward
less developed ports, the ship has heavy lifting equipment on deck. The ship can easily be
defined by:
a. The robust shape and heavy lift deck equipment.

b. The hatch covers that have been constructed in such a way that they can withstand
the load of heavy pieces of cargo or containers placed on it.
c. Bow thrusters and bulbous bow.
d. Side loading doors for horizontal cargo handling.
An example of a multipurpose ship is shown in Figure 2.7.

Breadth: 27.50 m
Draught: 9.32 m
Deadweight: 22,271 t
Figure 2.7 Multipurpose ship ’Taixing’
Refrigerated general cargo ship (reefer)

This general cargo ship is solely used for the transportation of fruit, meat, or other perish-
able commodities, which are kept on board at temperatures between 30 C and 12 C.
The reefer distinguishes herself from the conventional general cargo ship by the following
features:
• the ship is usually painted white

• her speed is higher; usually from 18-25 knots
• she looks quite elegant and fast; the appearance is streamlined
In recent years, container ships are provided with slots for refrigerated containers. These
do not supplant the specialised ships such as a reefer, of which an example is given in
Figure 2.8.

Breadth: 16.80 m
Draught: 7.00 m
Deadweight: 5,563 t
Figure 2.8 Refrigerated cargo ship ’Yakushima’
2.3.3 Container Vessels

Notwithstanding the introduction of ULC in the handling of break-bulk cargo the turnaround
times of general cargo vessels remained high. After World War II world trade increased
rapidly and with it the sea transportation, leading to serious congestion in the ports and
long waiting times.
The container had been introduced in the fifties as standard size box for the transport of
cargo by truck and rail across the USA. Its use in sea transport seemed a logic step in view
of the abovementioned problems, but received initially severe resistance, in particular by
the powerful unions of dockworkers. It did reduce the turnaround times and waiting times
in ports substantially. Initially limited to coastal shipping along the US West and East
Coast, the first SeaLand containers arrived in Rotterdam in 1966. Over the past 45 years
container shipping has spread across the globe, taking over a major share of the general
cargo trade.
The first containers had dimensions of 8 ft. 8 ft. 20 ft. (2.44 2.44 6.10 m). Because
of this dimension the capacity of a ship or a container storage yard is still expressed in
Twenty Feet Equivalent Units (TEU). Nowadays forty feet long containers are used besides
the twenty feet, and other sizes have been introduced for length, width and height.
The increased productivity is partly due to the fact that many pieces of cargo are packed
into one container, that can be handled in one lift, and partly due to the use of the twist
lock during handling and transportation (Figure 2.9). The twist locks, that are mounted on
the spreader, are inserted into the four upper corner castings of the container and fastened
automatically in a matter of seconds. On a truck or rail wagon the lower four corner castings
are also fastened by twist locks.
Figure 2.9 Twist lock and corner casting
The ”first generation” container ships were general cargo vessels, converted to carry con-
tainers. Since then several classes of container ships have been built with increasing di-
mensions and capacities (see Table 2.3).
Table 2.3 Container vessel characteristics

Class TEU capacity DWT (average) L (m) D (m) B (m)
1st generation 750-1100 14,000 180-200 9 27
2nd generation 1500-1800 30,000 225-240 11.5 30
3rd generation 2400-3000 45,000 275-300 12.5 32
4th generation 4000-4500 57,000 290-310 12.5 32.3
Post Panamax 4300-5000 54,000 270-300 12 38-40
Super Post Panamax
or Jumbo 6000-9000 90,000 310-350 14 43
Ultra Large Container
Ship (ULCS) 14,000 157,000 400 15.5 56.
The following points should be noted:
(i) the 2nd and subsequent generation ships were designed to carry only containers, the
so-called full or cellular container ships. The boxes were placed below deck in the
bays, divided into cells with vertical guiding rails along which the containers are
lowered into and hoisted out of the bay. On deck the containers are arranged in rows
parallel to the ship’s axis and secured by lashing systems.
(ii) up to the 4th generation the vessels have a beam limited to 32.3 m, allowing them
to pass the locks in the Panama Canal. Traffic between the East- and West coast
of the USA was still of high economic (and military strategic) importance. In the
eighties the Asia-Westbound and Pacific Trades became more dominant, and ship-
ping lines made the step to Post Panamax, accepting that these vessels could not pass
the Panama Canal.
(iii) in 1996 the vessel size made a considerable jump to Super Post Panamax or Jumbo
(see Figure 2.9). It is pointed out that this growth does not only require greater depth,
but also leads to higher cranes, with longer booms.
(iv) In 2006 another jump was made by the addition of the Emma Maersk to the fleet of
this shipping company. This ship was officially listed having a capacity of 12,500
TEU, but from its dimensions (of which the draught is estimated) it can be deduced
to be at or above 14,000 TEU.
(v) Early 2011 Maersk Lines has ordered 50 new ships with a capacity of 18,000 TEU,
Ls = 400 m, Bs = 58 m and D = 15.0 m.

Breadth: 42.80 m
Draught: 13.50 m
Figure 2.10 Jumbo container ship ’P&O Nedlloyd Southampton’
Another trend in container ship design was the introduction, by former Nedlloyd (now
Maersk), of hatch coverless vessels with full height cell guides (including 4 tiers high
above the board of the ship).
The time involved in lifting off the hatch covers, removing the lashings and placing both
back (roughly two hours for the larger ships) would be eliminated. A number of ships of
this design has been built (Figure 2.11), but in practice the reduction of service time in port
appears to be less than anticipated. Some negative effects of the design, e.g. overcoming
seawater in the holds, made that the concept did not get follow-up.
Figure 2.11 Container ship without hatch covers
In the early period of containerization some ships carried their own equipment to handle
the boxes. This is the shiptainer, a gantry crane on board of the vessel, able to run from
forward to aft on rails on the deck. In ship new-building this is no longer practice, mainly
because most ports have shore based cranes (portainers, see Figure 2.12).
Figure 2.12 A portainer
2.3.4 Ro/Ro Vessels

Another type of unitised cargo, which was developed in road transport, is the trailer. They
are also known as continental containers, but have two important differences with the sea
containers: they are not fit to carry the weight of other containers and they can not be lifted
(no corner castings). While sea containers are sometimes referred to as Lo/Lo cargo (lift on
/ lift off), the transport of trailers and trucks is known as Ro/Ro (roll on / roll off). In most
cases the chassis are carried overseas without the trucks. Movement onto and from the ship
is done by special yard equipment. At some terminals the entire truck-trailer combination
is taken aboard.
The Ro/Ro ships are therefore comparable with ferries, they must have a facility to drive
the cargo on and off the ship. Contrary to the ferry, which normally sails on short routes
only, this type of ship serves on the longer routes.
The first types of Ro/Ro ships usually had the ramp at the stern of the ship. When at sea
it was pulled up into a vertical position and in port it was lowered onto the quay. The
disadvantage of this type of ramp is, that a special place in the port or even a special berth
construction is necessary (see Figure 2.13). The manoeuvring with long trailers may be
difficult, since much space is required which is not always available. The problems with
high tide differences were solved by use of a pontoon between ship and quay.
Figure 2.13 Special berth structure
To attain more flexibility in the allocation of a berth in a port, Ro/Ro ships were later on
provided with a quarter ramp, which makes an angle with the axis of the ship and enables
the ship to berth at any part of a straight quay (see Figure 2.14).
The carrying capacity of Ro/Ro ships is usually expressed in lane length, being the total
length of the lanes in which the Ro/Ro cargo is placed on the different decks of the ship
(standard width of 2.50 m). The latest types of Ro/Ro ships have a total lane length of
about 6000 m. An example of a Ro/Ro ship will both quarter and stern ramp is given in
Figure 2.15.
Figure 2.14 Quarter ramp
Various ship designs exist, combining Ro/Ro facilities with place for sea containers, the
latter usually on the deck. An example of such a Ro/Ro-container ship is given in Figure
2.16.

Breadth: 21.40 m
Draught: 6.975 m
Deadweight: 5,445 t
Figure 2.15 Ro/Ro ship ’No. 2 Hokuren Maru’


Breadth: 32.26 m
Draught: 11.75 m
Figure 2.16 Ro/Ro container ship ’Taronga’
2.3.5 Car Carriers and Other Special Vessels

Car carrier
These ships have been designed for the transportation of newly built motorcars from the
producer to the consumer markets. Like Ro/Ro vessels they have ramps to the shore. In
addition to the quarter ramp, these vessels often have one or more side ramps to speed up
the loading and unloading process. Because the net load of motorcars is relatively low,
these vessels have a small draught and a large freeboard, as shown in Figure 2.17. This
implies that they are sensitive to wind and require substantial tug assistance while in port.

Breadth: 32.26 m
Draught: 10.00 m
Figure 2.17 Car carrier ’Aquarius Leader’
Lash ship
The lash (Lighter Aboard Ship) is an example of integration of sea and barge transport.
The principle of the system is as follows:
1. The cargo is stowed into a floatable barge at the producer’s premises.

2. The barges are pushed or towed to the place where the Lash ship is to arrive, where
they are put in a barge parking area.
3. After the Lash ship has arrived, the barges for the port concerned are unloaded and
the already parked barges are put on board of the Lash ship.
Figure 2.18 Lash ship ’Arcadia Forest’
4. The unloaded barges are put together in a formation and pushed or towed to the cus-
tomer.
This set-up is the application of an advanced door-to-door transport system, provided con-
sumer and producer can both be reached by water. Within the system the barges become
the means of transportation itself.
The Lash ship was still in use till recently, for instance in the Waalhaven, Port of Rotterdam,
an area was reserved for the mooring of these vessels and the parking of barges. Yet there
is no new building of Lash ships reported in recent years and the service to Rotterdam has
been abandoned.
Heavy lift carrier

The Heavy Lift Carrier (HLC) is another specialised ship, designed to transport huge, heavy
units of cargo, that cannot, or can hardly be transported by any other type of vessel. Cargo,
carried by HLC’s, may for instance be dredgers, assembly parts of factories or refineries,
drilling platforms, container cranes, etc. The ship is characterised by the vast deck-space,
on which the superstructure with the wheelhouse has been placed at one of the extremes
(either at the bow or at the stern), to create as much deck place as possible. Another char-
acteristic is the presence of the one or more heavy-duty cranes or derricks with capacities
of up to 500 t or more. The cargo can be placed on deck either by the ship’s own gear
or by auxiliary equipment, such as a floating or shore based crane or can be put on board
in the roll-on/roll-off fashion, provided the HLC is equipped with a ramp. The method of
operation of some HLC’s is such, that the cargo can also be put on board by floatation,
because the ship is submersible (in the same manner as a floating dry-dock). See Figure
2.19 for an example of a heavy lift carrier.

Breadth: 22.80 m
Draught: 9.50 m
Figure 2.19 Heavy lift carrier ’Happy river’
Cruise ships
Modern cruise ships are getting bigger, to such extent that existing terminals become inad-
equate, in terms of water depth or passenger facilities or both. Hence a lot of new cruise
terminals are built, especially in the popular regions such as the Caribbean, the Mediter-
ranean, etc. See Figure 2.20. The largest cruise ships under construction or in operation
are of the Genesis class, measuring L 362 m, B 47 m and D 9-10 m have a length
overall of 330 m.

Breadth: 25.00 m
Draught: 6.50 m
Deadweight: 4,202 t
Figure 2.20 Cruise ship ’Pacific Venus’
Ferry
The ferry vessel is also showing much development, both in terms of size and speed. As
mentioned before, the ferry is employed on fixed routes over limited distances. They carry
passengers, motor cars and trucks in different percentages, depending on the demands for
each. In the past ferries used to transport entire train lengths, e.g. in connecting the rail
lines on the Danish islands with the German and Swedish systems. Although these rail
ferries still exist, they are not common in other parts of the world. The development of size
is shown in Figure 2.21 showing one of the most recent designs.

Breadth: 15.8 m
Draught: 3.22 m
Deadweight: 600 t
Figure 2.21 Ferry ’Clansman’
Figure 2.22 HSS 1500
The need to reduce transit time (in order to remain competitive with other modes of trans-
port) led to the development of high speed ferries. Although smaller types have been in
use for decades, several very large ships came into service, such as the HSS1500 by Stena
Line, in the Baltic and Irish Sea. With its cruising speed of 40 knots, it reduces the total
transit time by 50% (see Figure 2.22). Negative aspects of these vessels are the high fuel
consumption (and large emissions) and the large wash waves generated, which forces them
to reduce speed when approaching the coast.
Fast Ship
In Section 2.1 it was mentioned that there is little competition between international ship-
ping and air transport because of the clear market and freight rate differentiation. In recent
years one exception has developed, i.e. the fast ocean going vessels, which are designed to
transport certain high-value cargo which used to be carried by plane. In Japan the so-called
Techno Super Liner is actually built and in operation, having a capacity of 150 TEU, and a
maximum speed of 54 knots (see Figure 2.23).
For service between the US-East coast and Europe the Fast Ship concept has been devel-
oped in conjunction with a very special type of terminal, the Alicon system. This ship is
designed to carry 1450 TEU at a cruising speed of about 40 knots, thus reducing the sailing
time across the Atlantic Ocean from 8 to 3.5 days. The concept is not yet realised, but plans
were well advanced to start a regular service between Philadelphia and Cherbourg. Here
also the high fuel consumption and negative environmental impact may play a role.
In terms of freight rate this type of vessel fits in between air transport and conventional
shipping. Regarding environmental impact it also falls in between these two modes.
Figure 2.23 Artist impression Techno-Super liner (1993)

2.3.6 Bulk Cargo

Introduction
Bulk carriers usually carry large quantities of homogeneous, unpacked cargo, for instance
liquids (oil, liquefied gas), chemical products (phosphate, fertilizer), cement, iron ore, coal,
agro products (grain, rice etc.). Because of the homogeneous nature, this cargo can be
handled in a more or less continuous way. The handling of bulk cargoes can be executed in
various ways, such as pumping (liquids), sucking (cereals), slurrying (mixture of dry bulk
cargo and liquid, which can be transported by pipeline), or by a combination of grabs and
a conveyor belt system (coal and ores).
Bulk carriers can also be subdivided in several types, which will be treated in the following
sections. In principle two types exist, viz.
1. Liquid bulk carriers

2. Dry bulk carriers
Table 2.4 gives an overview of the different bulk carrier types:
Table 2.4 Bulk carrier types
Type Cargo DWT (1000 t)

1. Liquid bulk
Crude carrier Crude oil 20-40
Product tanker Refined products 0.5-100
Parcel tanker Refined products, chemicals 0.5-40
LNG tanker Liquefied natural gas 60-90
LPG tanker Liquefied pressurized gas 0.5-70
2. Dry bulk Ore, coal 100-365
Chemical 5-70
Agro products 0.5-10
In addition, bulk carriers are classified according to size as shown in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5 Size classes of bulk carriers

Class DWT (1000 t)
Handysize 20-30
Handymax 45
Panamax 79
Aframax 79-120
Suezmax 120-180
VLCC 200-300
ULCC 300
Liquid bulk carriers

Crude oil tanker (See Figure 2.24) Before the World War II, the consumption of oil
was limited, because coal was the major source of energy in those days, and crude oil was
therefore transported by small tankers. When after World War II the consumption started
to rise (and soon to boom), the modern crude oil tankers appeared and soon grew larger
and larger in size, trying to keep pace with the demands and trying also to reduce the
transportation costs as much as possible (cost per tonne cargo diminishes with increasing
vessel size).

Breadth: 60.00 m
Draught: 21.10 m
Figure 2.24 Ultra Large Crude Carrier ’New Vanguard’
The most important producers (and exporters) of crude oil are the Middle East countries
around the Arabian Gulf, such as Saudi-Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq
and Iran, and countries as Nigeria, Venezuela and Indonesia. The most important con-
sumers (and importers) of oil are the countries in Western Europe, Japan and the United
States of America. These countries largely depend on the oil from oil-producing countries,
especially those of the Middle East. Figure 2.25 illustrates the development of the size of
tankers:
Figure 2.25 Growth of tanker size
Nowadays the intermediate size tanker (50,000-200,000 dwt) is becoming more important
again due to:
1. Levelling off or even some reduction in the world crude oil trade.
2. Increased use of the (improved) Suez Canal instead of around the Cape services.
3. The fact that, although VLCC’s (Very Large Crude Carriers) and ULCC’s (Ultra
Large Crude Carriers) can transport very large quantities of crude oil on one voy-
age, they can only call at few ports in the world, because of their large draught. In
1992 less than 10 ULCC’s were still in operation world wide.
The crude oil tanker can easily be identified by her flat deck without derricks and hatch
covers. Only some deck arrangements like stop locks, pumps, pipelines and small hose
derricks with the manifold amidships can be observed. A remarkable feature is the cat-
walk, a horizontal gangway, that runs along the deck from bow to stern, to enable the crew
to move along the ship. Older types of tankers have, like the older general cargo vessels,
the main superstructure amidships, but with the newer and bigger types all is aft; super-
structure, wheelhouse, engine room, etc.
A remarkable feature of the very large types is the return of the crow’s nest at the bow, that
is necessary because of the limited view from the wheelhouse aft.
Product tanker (see Figure 2.26) The definition of product tankers given by Lloyd’s
Register (Ref. Lloyd’s Register Management Services, Ship Dimensions in 2020, Rotter-
dam, May 1998) is: a vessel with independent tanks for the transportation of petroleum
products in bulk. Many tankers have a dead-weight capacity smaller than 7500 t, but there
is a large class of vessels with a capacity between 30,000 and 40,000 t. The largest product
tankers are about 110,000 t.

Breadth: 15.80 m
Draught: 5.455 m
Deadweight: 3,898 t
Figure 2.26 Petroleum product tanker ’Kakuyu Maru’
Parcel tanker (see Figure 2.27) The parcel tanker is a specialised tanker for transporta-
tion of refined oil products, such as paraffin, diesel oil and/or chemical liquids. The parcel
tanker has received her name from the fact that the many relatively small compartments in
the hold can be used separately, by which various products can be transported at the same
time.
The parcel tanker can be distinguished from the crude oil tanker by various additional
characteristics, such as numerous small tank hatches, many fore-and-aft running pipes and,
amidships, the manifold with its complex arrangements of pipes and valves, connected to
the ship’s tanks system. The manifold is the focal point of the loading and discharging
operations by means of the ship’s own pumps. Close to the manifold are two light hose-
derricks.
To reduce the hazards of fire, the holds fore and aft are equipped with double watertight
bulkheads (cofferdams). One of the great problems of parcel tankers is the cleaning of
tanks. When a certain type of cargo has been brought to her destination, and another type
of cargo is to be loaded, the tanks have first to be cleaned. In well equipped ports facilities
are available to execute this in a professional way. If this is not the case, illegal dumpings
at sea may occur, which may seriously harm the marine environment. A general lay-out of
a parcel tanker is given in Figure 2.27.

Breadth: 31.00 m
Draught: 10.80 m
Figure 2.27 Parcel tanker ’Stolt innovation’
Liquid gas tanker (see Figure 2.28) The gas is transported at a high pressure or at a
low temperature or a combination of both.
The products involved are:
• LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas), a mixture of propane and butane,
• LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas), which consists mainly of methane, and
• Other types of chemical gas, like ammonia, ethylene, etc.
The gas is mostly transported at atmospheric pressure and low temperature (LPG: 46 C
and LNG: 162 C) in liquid form in separate tanks in the hold of the ship, i.e. the so-
called cryogenic transport. In liquid form natural gas retains only 1/634th of its original
volume. Figure 2.29 gives the development of the liquefied gas carriers. LNG carriers have
grown recently to a capacity of 262,000 m3 with a length of 345 m. For smaller quantities
e.g. coaster type and size ships LPG is also transported in pressurised form at normal
temperatures. LNG cannot be liquefied by pressurisation at temperatures above 80 C.
The capacity of gas tankers is normally expressed in m3 . In principle LNG-carriers are
capable to transport LPG as well; but LPG tankers cannot carry LNG.
Figure 2.28 Examples of LNG-tankers (left) and LPG-tankers
Figure 2.29 Development of liquid gas carriers
Dry bulk carriers

Dry bulk ships are designed to carry big quantities of uniform, unpacked commodities
such as grain, coal, ore etc. Loading is always carried out by shore equipment, unloading
sometimes by shore equipment, sometimes by ship-based equipment. A large number of
dry bulk vessels are ’ungeared bulk carriers’ that have no self-loading capability. Geared
bulk carriers are equipped with derricks at all holds or with gantry cranes and do not require
shore cranes. In contrast to the tanker, the dry bulk carrier has hatches. The hatches are
usually very wide, in order to give access to the handling equipment in every place in the
holds. Until recently the largest bulk carriers in use (VLOC’s = Very Large Ore Carrier)
measured about 350,000 t, see Figure 2.3.6. But in 2011 the first 6 out of 19 ULOC’s
(Ultra Large Ore Carrier) ordered by the Brazilian mining company Vale have come into
operation. They are also referred to as Valemax or Chinamax carriers - as they are intended
for the export of iron ore from Brazil to China - and have the following characteristics:
400,000 dwt, LOA 362 m, D 23 m.

Breadth: 58.00 m
Draught: 23.00 m
Figure 2.30 Very Large Ore Carrier ’Peene ore’
Some types of dry bulk ships, the CSU’s (Continuous Self Unloader), are self-discharging
via an ingenious conveyor system. Capacities up to 6,000 t/hour can be reached (see also
Figure 2.31). The advantage of these self unloaders is that only some dolphins are necessary
for a berth.
Figure 2.31 Self-unloading gear of the M/V Western / Eastern Bridge
2.3.7 Short Sea Trader

The short sea trader is a sea going ship with a capacity of between 300 and 3000 dwt.
In several countries short sea traders with capacities ranging from 300 to 1500 GRT are
referred to as coasters. Usually, the short sea trader runs the shorter routes, connecting the
ports around the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and similar areas in the
world. As discussed in the previous chapters, the size and therefore also the draught of
ocean going vessels have increased sharply over the past decade. This has increased the
importance of short sea traders, mainly due to the following two reasons:
• Large vessels tend to call at as few ports as possible, in order to reduce costs, and
• Large vessels are no longer able to call at every port due to restrictions caused by the
dimensions of the ships
To maintain the connection between the ports of call of the large vessels and the other ports
the short sea trader is a most useful tool. If a short sea trader is employed in this way, she
is also referred to as feeder. Due to her limited dimensions the ship can call at most ports.
Furthermore it can be observed, that she is economic in use, because of the simplicity of
the ship and the small crew, economic in use. The short sea trader can transport any kind
of cargo, such as general, palletised, containerised or bulk cargo.
Depending on the type, the short sea trader is often fully equipped with cargo handling
gear, which also enables her to load or unload cargo at small ports with limited facilities.
2.4 Tramp and Liner Trade

International shipping can be subdivided into two major categories:
• liner trade
• tramp trade
2.4.1 Liner Trade

Liner trade is a seaborne trade of one company (or a consortium of companies), which
maintains regular services between a certain number of ports. Within this trade one can
further distinguish main routes: east-west and vice versa, north-south and vice versa and
short-sea lines. The latter provide a regular service between a number of ports at the same
continent, e.g. Rotterdam-Bilbao-Southampton-Rotterdam. The essence of all these lines
is:
• Times of arrival and departure in any port of the route are scheduled (and published)
over a certain period in advance; high reliability
• Tariffs are fixed over a certain period
• Berth location in most ports is fixed
In container shipping a peculiar phenomenon developed, i.e. main lines, which call on
only few ports in their route, with feeder ships collecting and distributing the containers
within a region around such a main port. Another name for this system is hub-and-spoke.
The reasons for this development are clear: the main line vessels were becoming too large
and too expensive to call on smaller ports. The transfer from main line vessel to feeder
and vice-versa is called transshipment. The total container throughput of the main ports
comprises hinterland cargo and transshipment cargo, the latter being counted double (on
entering and on leaving the port). Singapore port has mainly transshipment cargo, whereas
in Rotterdam the container throughput is about 15 % transshipment.
Over the past few years competition between the main line shipping companies, the mega
carriers, has led to concentration and rationalization. Concentration implies merges and
takeovers, leaving only about 20 companies to provide the intercontinental services. An
example is Maersk that consolidated its no. 1 position by taking over P&O Nedlloyd, lead-
ing to a total number of 500 container vessels with a total capacity of 15 million TEU.
Rationalization has also been applied to maximize slot usage, in other words, to make sure
that the vessels are loaded up to TEU capacity. This is achieved by forming consortia or
alliances (see Table 2.6).
Another way to achieve optimum usage of the capacity of scheduled ships is slot sharing.
This implies the chartering of container space (slots) on a competitors vessel on an as-need
basis. Notwithstanding all these measures to improve shipping economy, presently the
relative overcapacity leads to low tariffs and poor performance of most shipping companies.
Table 2.6 Alliances bulk carrier types
Name Members number of ships Fleet capacity (TEU)

Grand Alliance Hapag-Lloyd 250 740,000
OOCL
NYK
The New World APL 220 670,000
Alliance Hyundai
MOL
CYKHS Cosco 330 993,000
K Line
Yangming
Hanjin
Senator
2.4.2 Tramp Trade

Tramp trade is the opposite form of seaborne line trade. It is being applied whenever
or wherever needed. Tramp trade is mostly found in the bulk shipping trade, where the
markets are more volatile than in merchant shipping. Sometimes tramp ships are contracted
by liner companies on short or long term contracts, in case their own fleet is not adequate or
available to provide the services required. Chartering occurs through open markets mainly
in London and New York. The chartering through open markets is reason for strong varying
tramp tariffs because of the limited flexibility of the transport capacity. Therefore raw
materials processing industries are concluding long term contracts. This security of long
term contracts offers the possibility to use larger and more specialised bulk carriers.
To illustrate the importance of tramp shipping, the distribution of the world crude oil trans-
port in 1992 as follows:
Approx. 15% was transported by vessels owned by the major oil companies
Approx. 84% by independent tramp companies, which have leased their ship on short
and long term contracts to oil companies and oil traders
Approx. 1% was carried out by ships owned by governments
2.5 Graphs and Observations

Some graphs with respect to the main dimensions of ships are presented in the following
Figures (based upon data from Lloyds Register of Ships and other sources).
With reference to Section 2.3.6 large ships are often referred to as being ‘’Panamax size”,
‘’Suezmax size”, etc., reflecting the fact that they have dimensions just allowing them to
pass the Panama Canal locks, the Suez Canal or similar important natural of man-made
barriers for navigation. Ships can be adapted to the restrictions imposed by these obstacles
but, sometimes and within limits, the obstacles can also be adapted to the demand for the
passage of bigger ships. It is a complex balancing act controlled by economic and strategic
considerations. If transport chains and the appurtenant infrastructure were managed by one
and the same party, this balancing act would be relatively simple, but in practice there are
a number of stake-holders and non-rational aspects that come into play.
Canals and natural channels can in principle be deepened and widened and ship-locks can
be replaced by bigger ones, but usually all at considerable cost. Ship-locks constitute a
limiting factor for the reception or passage of big ships at quite a number of locations, not
only in Europe.
Important ship-locks and their lock chamber dimensions (L B D) are:
• Panama Canal, new locks under construction, 427 55 18 3 m.

• Antwerp, Berendrechtsluis, 500 68 13 6 m, and under construction: Deurganck-
doksluis 500 68 17 8 m, the world biggest for the time being.
• Bremerhafen, Kaiserschleuse, 505 55 13 m, particularly for the passage of car
carriers.
• IJmuiden, Noordersluis, 400 50 15 m, new lock in planning stage: 500 60to 70
15 m.
• Terneuzen, access to the port of Gent, construction of new lock about to be started
427 55 16 m.
• Le Havre, cluse François I, 400 67 24 m.
The limitations imposed by ship locks on shipping is not only matter of sheer sizes of the
locks but also of delays caused in transiting the locks and the fear by shipping lines that op-
erate on a strict time schedule, e.g. main container lines, to have their ships ”imprisoned” in
port for an indefinite period of time in case of damage to the vulnerable lock doors. For that
reason and for quite some time already ports like Antwerp and Le Havre have been shifting
part of their container operations to the tidal waters outside the locks notwithstanding the
fact that quay wall construction is far more expensive there and that STS crane productivity
is lower. For example at tidal births in Le Havre quay walls and cranes have to cope with a
tidal range of some 8 m.
Figure 2.32 Principal dimensions of general cargo ships

Figure 2.33 Principal dimensions of container vessels

Figure 2.34 Principal dimensions of bulk carriers. The squares ( ) denote the expected dimensions
of bulk carriers in 2020 (Lloyd’s Register)
Figure 2.35 Principal dimensions of tankers

Figure 2.36 Principal dimensions of tankers 40,000 t
2.6 References
Kruk, C.B and Heer, R.J. de., Merchant Shipping, & Cargo Handling, UNESCO, IHE
Delft, 2005.
Lloyd’s Register Management Services, Ship dimensions in 2020, Rotterdam, May 1998.
Wijnolst, N. and Wergeland, T., Shipping, Delft University Press, 1996.
Chapter 3
Port Functions and Organisation
3.1 Introduction
Before entering into planning and design of ports it is necessary to determine the functions
of a port and to understand its organisation. Both factors are relevant for the economic and
financial decisions to be taken as part of the planning process. Recently privatisation of
(public) ports and private development of entirely new ports have become a trend, but the
success of these policies depends very much on the function and the legal and institutional
conditions of the port concerned.
3.2 Functions
The primary functions of a port are:
• Traffic function: the port is a nodal point in the traffic, connecting water and various
land modes.
• Transport function: ports are turntables for various cargo flows.
Besides these, ports can have several other functions, such as:
• Industrial activities, often in relation to the cargo flows, to shiprepair and shipbuild-
ing, or offshore-supply. But the vicinity of sea transport may in itself be the reason
to locate an industry.
• Commercial and financial services, including banks.
The traffic function requires three conditions to be fulfilled, i.e. a good ”front door”, a good
”backdoor” and sufficient capacity and services in the port itself:
• Entrance from sea, needs to be accessible and safe;

• Port basins and quays, adequate space for manoeuvring and berthing of the ships,
capacity for handling and storage;
• Hinterland connections, road, rail, inland waterways, pipeline, depending on the
transport function.
45
The safety of ships and crew is most important and receives much attention. This is un-
derstandable, when recognising that ships are designed for manoeuvring in open water and
at cruising speed. Entering a port means speed reduction, entailing poor manoeuvrability,
stopping in limited waters and often having other ships around. For this reason the nautical
services are essential: starting with nautical aids (buoyage, lights), getting pilot assistance
and tugs, and moving to high-tech aids to navigation: the Vessel Traffic Service (VTS),
which implies monitoring of all vessel movements in a port by central radar.
However, a port with very good nautical entrance, but insufficient space and/or bad hinter-
land connections becomes quickly clogged and does not function. Hence the above three
conditions must be in balance.
Regarding the transport functions the conditions are depending on the particular situation
of the port:
(i) If a port has its ’natural’ hinterland, which it serves for import and export without
much competition, it is in the interest of society that this service is provided effi-
ciently, uninterrupted and at minimum costs. The absence of competition led in the
past to the ’public ports’, which often failed to achieve these goals. They became
either ’money earners’, or had more ships at anchorage outside than berthed inside
the port, or both.
(ii) Where several ports are competing for cargo from and to the same hinterland, or for
the transshipment trade, the efficiency of cargo handling and costs for pilotage, har-
bour dues, etc. becomes important. Ports become business in itself and privatisation
of port functions is a logical step to achieve the necessary efficiency.
In Section 3.4 this issue of public versus private will be further elaborated. Here the ques-
tion is posed whether the transport function deserves to be expanded in a competitive situa-
tion. The investment costs are high, which benefits justify them? This question has become
more relevant, since the direct employment in the port has reduced drastically over the past
decades as a result of improved handling methods and automation. There is no simple
answer to the question, but some considerations are applicable:
• Competition between ports is good to stimulate efficiency, and to keep the costs
down. Too much competition leads to overcapacity and losses, which in most cases
is paid for by the public.
• Unfair competition (e.g. by subsidies) should be avoided, because it leads to price
distortion (European Commission, 1995 ) and overcapacity.
• In the cost/benefit analysis of port development projects, the long term, indirect,
social benefits have to be included (de Brucker, 1998).
• Ports should strive to include employment generating activities in their development
strategies, in order to maintain the positive profile and public support in the local
community.
• Environmental effects have to be taken into account on a rational basis, e.g. by quan-
titative evaluation methods and against a uniform and transparent set of regulations.
Chapter 3. Port Functions and Organisation 47
The above aspects are all related to the investment decision in the planning stage of port ex-
pansion. In the direct competition between ports to attract certain trades and cargo volumes
the following competitive factors are all important:
• Availability of land for terminals and the related cost per m2 .

• Port tariffs and dues.
• Quality of the port and/or existing stevedores (efficiency, reliability, flexibility, han-
dling costs).
• Quality of the hinterland connections.
• Environmental requirements.
• Customs regime.
• Nautical safety.
In order to be able to attract new business, the port must have some excess space. It is
important to realise that this may also be found inside the existing port boundaries, for
instance where old and declined areas have become obsolete and can be converted to suit
the requirements of new trades.
This process has been observed in many existing ports and is described in the so-called Port
Life Cycle theory (Charlier, 1992). The cycle, shown in Figure 3.1, implies that a port area
develops with the growth of cargo throughput, reaches maturity (or saturation), starts to age
(due to changes in cargo pattern or in ship design) and then reaches a state of obsolescence,
which will continue, unless a revitalisation process is initiated.
maturity
ageing
restructuring
growth
obsolescence
Figure 3.1 The Port Life Cycle (Charlier, 1992)
The change-over from conventional general cargo to containerised cargo is a good example.
In many ports this has made existing terminals obsolete, leaving deserted areas with empty
warehouses.
The message is to start the revitalisation process before this happens, as soon as the signs
of ageing become clear. This is a task for the port authority, but involves port planning in
the same way as expansion outside the existing port boundaries.
shipper shipper
forwarder
land transport land transport
shipping agent
seaport shipping line seaport
Figure 3.2 Elements in the transport chain
3.3 Transport Chain

In the previous section the transport function is stated to be carried out by the ’port’. Nowa-
days there are only few ports in the world where the port authority is also responsible for the
ship unloading/loading and the storage of the goods. Often these activities are supplied by
a stevedoring firm, that is specialised and therefore can provide better services at a compet-
itive price. The place of the stevedore in the overall transport chain is shown in Figure 3.2.
This scheme also explains the role of two other agencies: the forwarder, who is hired by
the shipper of the cargo (not to be confused with the shipping company) to arrange the land
transport, and a shipping agent, who in turn arranges the shipping line and the stevedoring
in the seaports on both ends. This process is identified by the term ’merchant haulage’.
For large cargo volumes at regular intervals over a period of several years, forwarders tend
to prefer one contract for the entire transport chain. In response to this, shipping companies
have started to offer ’door-to-door’ services, in particular for containerised cargo, so-called
carrier haulage. And as a logical step shipping lines diversified their business to include
land transportation and stevedoring. An example is APM Terminals as a subsidiary of the
shipping line Maersk.
At this point it is relevant to mention the growing market for intermodal transport. In
Chapter 2 the competition between road, rail and IWT for the hinterland transport was
sketched. Intermodal transport concerns the combination of rail with road and IWT with
road. The present policy in Europe is to stimulate this intermodal transport in order to
reduce the congestion of the road network and for environmental reasons. To illustrate the
latter point Figure 3.3 gives the number and the total length of all units placed one behind
the other for of units of the different transport modes needed to carry 1200 tonne cargo.
This is an indication of the corresponding energy consumption and air pollution.
number of units needes

for 12,000 t cargo
8
1 6.5 400 600
7
transport length for 12,000 ton cargo (km)
0
4-barge barge railwagon trailer
push tow
Figure 3.3 Length of all transport units in a row for different modes
Promotion of intermodal transport can be achieved by improvement of rail infrastructure for

cargo (e.g. the Betuwe Line in the Netherlands) and the infrastructures for IWT (widening
of the Meuse and of various canals). Additionally there exists a subsidy for the private
development of terminals along rivers and canals.
3.4 Organisation of Seaports

It has been mentioned that many ports started as a public organisation. Consequently they
were government-owned, be it the National Government, a municipality, or a separate status
of Port Trust or Port Authority. Exceptions were so-called captive ports, built and operated
by an industry for its own use, such as the tanker berths for a refinery or the bulk export
terminal for a mining company.
World-wide one can distinguish three different forms of organisation of the public ports:
• The Service Port: all services including cargo handling and storage are provided by
the port authority. This form was common in the old times and can still be found in
some developing countries. It was often characterised by bureaucracy and red tape
and can only survive in case there is a natural hinterland without competition of other
ports.
• The Landlord Port: the port authority owns the land and gives concessions to private
sector companies for provision of cargo handling and storage services. The port au-
thority is responsible for the infrastructure, the nautical safety and access, including
maintenance of approach channel and basins.
• The Tool Port: the port authority remains responsible for providing the main ship-
to-shore handling equipment (usually light to medium multipurpose cranes), while
cargo handling is carried out by private companies under licences given by the port
authority.
A 1997 world review of the top 100 container ports shows that 88 out of 100 ports conform
to the Landlord Port model. This is therefore becoming the standard, but for small ports,
assuming 250,000-300,000 t of general cargo per annum to be minimum for an indepen-
dent cargo handling company to be financially viable. Below this level the Tool Port model
appears to be appropriate.
Besides these public ports fully private ports are becoming more common. These are ports
built and operated by private companies, including the responsibility for maintenance.
Statutory functions like navigation safety, environmental protection and customs remain
government responsibility (Juhel, 1999)
The latter so-called Built-Operate-Transfer (BOT) projects are seen by many politicians all
around the world as an attractive way to create infrastructure and thus overcome conges-
tion in the existing ports without public finance. The reality is that the return on investment
of most projects is insufficient (based on a 30 year pay-back period). Consequently the
only way to realise them is by a combined approach, i.e. public finance of certain basic
infrastructures and private financing of the rest. This is either achieved by following the
”Landlord” approach, or in a commercial investment by public and private partners jointly,
the Public Private Partnership (PPP). This approach has been followed by Amsterdam
Port Authorities in the realisation of several new terminals.
The advantages of various degrees of private sector investment and participation are clear:
(i.) It offers a good test on the financial feasibility of the port project (private sector is
not interested in ’white elephants’)
(ii.) Once in operation the efficiency and profitability of the port is driven by the commer-
cial interests of the private partner, and less by social and political considerations. A
good example of this is the privatisation in 1989 of quite a number of ports in the
United Kingdom, under the name Associated British Ports. In six years time ABP
had turned them around and made profit. This was achieved by labour reductions of
85% of the original workforce. And notwithstanding this reduction the total through-
put showed a 13% increase.
3.5 References
Brucker, K. de, et al, Sociaal-economische evaluatie van overheidsinvesteringen in trans-
portinfrastructuur, Leuven, 1998
Charlier, J., The regeneration of old port areas for new port users, in European cities in
transition, ISBN 1-852-93170-1, 1992
European Commission, Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport: public options for
internalising the external costs of transport in the European Union, report COM (95) 691,
Brussels, 1995
Juhel, M.H., Global changes for Ports and Terminals in the new Era, Journal Ports and
Harbours, March 1999
Chapter 4
Port Planning Methodology
4.1 Introduction
In principle port planning is not different from other infrastructure planning: one deter-
mines the requirements at a future point in time, one develops a suitable lay-out with
matching connections and a programme of (phased) development towards this target. What
makes it special as compared to most other infrastructure planning is the complexity of the
process. In addition to the spatial planning and the technical, environmental and legal as-
pects common to land infrastructure planning, port planning has to deal with a complex of
hydraulic, nautical and operational aspects.
For the port owner or operator planning is needed to anticipate on future developments and
ascertain that the infrastructure, once built, functions well. It is also an essential element in
obtaining finance and all legal permits, necessary to implement the project.
The planning methodology as outlined in this chapter follows the general approach of the
design methodology, as applied in other areas of civil engineering. The ”elementary design
cycle”, applied at the ”system’s” level, can be recognised in the process, as outlined in
Section 4.3.
4.2 Types of Planning

Depending on the time horizon the following types of planning can be distinguished:
Type Time horizon (years) Example
long-term 20-30 masterplan
medium-term 5-10 first phase of a masterplan
short-term 1-2 minor lay-out changes
Furthermore the type of planning may vary depending on the scope and geographical ex-
tent:
• national or regional port planning
• planning of individual ports
The purpose of a masterplan is to have a blue print for future development, reserving space
where it may be needed in the future, taking account of regulatory and environmental re-
53
quirements, and creating an efficient and economic port operation. National and regional
master plans for port development were aimed at creating the optimum allocation of func-
tions within a country or a region. This should take into account existing port capacity,
hinterland connections, industrial development and cost of the infrastructure. Such plans
were made during the past decades for countries like Indonesia and Malaysia, often with
World Bank assistance. The accent lies here on economics: assessment of cargo flows for
all commodities and cost/benefit analysis for the individual port projects leading to an opti-
mum overall plan. The port planner plays a role in the evaluation of existing ports (can the
efficiency and throughput capacity be improved, often even without new infrastructure),
and in preparing lay-outs for new port facilities or extensions where appropriate. Prelim-
inary design of infrastructure is needed to determine costs, but this is not done in great
detail.
While it is evident that this type of planning is useful to make sure that the right investments
are made at the best location, it must be realised that it is very difficult and often has limited
applicability over longer periods of time. This has the following reasons:
(i) In so far as the plan affects the future of existing ports in a negative way (limitation
to certain type of cargo and hence in overall growth) the port authority and local
community will resist it. Political lobbying starts to adapt the plan and otherwise one
will ignore it.
(ii) Several years after the plan has been formulated, the actual cargo flows may devi-
ate considerably from the forecasts, conditions may have changed and the plan has
become ineffective.
Western countries do not apply this type of national port planning anymore. What does
happen is that in preparing the masterplan for an individual port (expansion), the possible
overcapacity of neighbouring ports in the region is considered. An example of this is the
earlier stage of the planning process for Maasvlakte 2 in the Netherlands, see Figure 4.2.
Coming back to the types of planning according to time horizon: in the ideal situation the
long-term, medium-term and short-term plans are interrelated. The masterplan provides
the framework for medium-term plans, while these in turn form the basis for short-term
projects. The masterplan needs an update at intervals of about 5-10 years, during which
the actual throughputs are compared with the forecasted, the latter are adjusted, and ac-
cordingly the original phasing is reviewed and updated. In this way one could extend the
horizon of the masterplan and achieve a continuous planning process, as visualised in Fig-
ure 4.1. In this example the time that the construction of the Phase 3 infrastructure has to be
finished is brought forward by 2.5 years because the (updated) throughput forecasts show
a larger growth.
Chapter 4. Port Planning Methodology 55
original masterplan and phase 1
0 5 10 15 20 25
years
phase 1 up to capacity phase 2 up to capacity phase 3 up to capacity
phase 2 completed phase 3 completed
update 5 10 15 20 25
masterplan
after 5 years
years
phase 2 up to capacity phase 3 up to capacity
phase 3 completed
Figure 4.1 Rolling master plan
Project Main port Rotterdam (PMR)
The port of Rotterdam is reaching saturation, as far as industrial areas with ac-
cess to the (deep) port basins are concerned. In 1993 Rotterdam Municipal-
ity includes seaward expansion, Maasvlakte 2 (MV2), in an overall plan for in-
frastructure improvement, the ROM Rijnmond. It is interesting to note that the
Plan 2000+, a masterplan for the ports expansion dated 1969, presented the now
existing Maasvlakte only as a first phase, and showed an MV2 and an MV3
and so on. Since that time the legal requirements for large infrastructure have
changed (PKB and MER procedures) and the planning had to start from scratch.
In 1998 the process had reached a
point where these procedures were
started, carried out under responsi-
bility of three ministries, forming the
PMR organisation. The task was
to look for solutions to the land-
shortage in a broad way, also taking
into consideration (i) possible solu-
tions in South-West Netherlands and
(ii) concentration within the Rotter-
dam port area. This was a typical ex-
ample of regional port planning, be
it that the solution had to satisfy the
Rotterdam requirements.
Note: the lay-out shown here was
the result of the planning process
mentioned here. The further plan-
ning and design carried out by Port
of Rotterdam resulted in a different
lay-out. Figure 4.2 Maasvlakte 2 planning process
In practice there are not many ports in the world, that apply this process systematically.
The updating of the masterplan (if one exists) is often more ad-hoc, when the need arises.
And short-term plans are more often than not unrelated to the masterplan.
This does not mean that the masterplan should not be made. It simply shows that a master-
plan should be flexible enough to follow fluctuations in economic development and changes
in the transport patterns.
Usually the Phase 1 implementation follows directly upon approval of the masterplan. The
layout for Phase 1 is refined by detailed studies of wave disturbance, morphological effects
and manoeuvring conditions. Structural designs of quays and breakwaters are completed
at a suitable level of detail for construction tenders.
4.3 Planning Process

Each of the above described types of planning has its own particular character, but the main
steps of the ”elementary design cycle” can be recognised:
Figure 4.3 The elementary design cycle steps
Sometimes this cycle is partially repeated, be it with increasing level of accuracy. This is
the case in master planning, when one starts with a rough generation of lay-out concepts
(often based on approximate site data) and selects 2 to 3 promising alternatives. These are
subsequently worked out in more detail, using improved data, after which evaluation and
selection follow again. This is shown in Figure 4.4, which described the consecutive steps
taken in the masterplan process. This scheme forms a very useful guideline for any port
planning project.
It is important to maintain a balance between the accuracy of the input data and the level
of detail of the design. As shown in Figure 4.4, the first generation of alternatives is done
on the basis of available data on waves, currents, bathymetry, soil, etc. Often these are not
directly collected at the specific site, but of more general nature. Surveys may be started,
but the results are not yet available. Hence the alternative lay-outs at this stage are not more
than conceptual drawings, sketches, based on simple design rules. No need to work out any
details, as long as the principal dimensions of approach channel, turning circle, quays and
terminals are properly reflected in the different alternatives. The cost assessment (because
cost is an important selection criterion in all stages) is still very rough, comparing the major
cost elements (breakwater, dredging, quays). After the first selection better input data come
available and the promising alternatives are elaborated. Preliminary design entails the use
of applicable design standards, either national or international. The cost estimates have
typically an accuracy of about 30%.
When the selected alternative has been optimised on the basis of detailed site investigations
and hydraulic, nautical and logistic analysis (model, simulation), the detailed cost estimates
can be made leading to an overall accuracy of 20%. At this level of accuracy the economic
analysis can be made. Note: when the project moves into actual design and construction
preparation the structural elements are designed and cost estimates will be brought to an
accuracy of 10%. It will be clear that the planning process involves many different dis-
ciplines, and that teamwork is essential. The port planner must have sufficient knowledge
of the various specialist areas to be able to direct the team, to integrate the results and to
maintain the balance mentioned before. Some of the disciplines and specialisms are:
Technical
• Oceanography (wave climate etc.)
• Coastal engineering (morphology, breakwaters)
• Hydraulics (tides and currents)
• Hydro-nautics (approach channel, nautical design)
• Marine structures (quays, jetties)
• Dredging (excavation and land reclamation)
• Geology, geotechnology and seismic engineering (foundations, stability of struc-
tures)
• Transport technology (equipment)
• Terminal operations (logistics)
• Traffic engineering (road and rail connections)
• Safety engineering (consequences of hazardous cargo for the spatial plan)
Economics
• Macro-economics and transport economics (cargo forecasts)
• Econometry (economic and financial analysis)
• Commerce (financing, marketing)
Social / Environmental
• Spatial planning
• Environmental impacts (air-, water-, noise-, soil pollution analysis)
• Legal advise (national and local planning requirements, permits)
An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) forms an integral part of every port master
plan. It is carried out in parallel with the technical/economic process shown in Figure 4.4.
In most countries of the world the law requires an EIA report, approved by the governmen-
tal authorities, before the project itself can be approved. Because the environmental aspects
have become so important, they are treated in separate lecture notes (Vellinga, 2004).
In the following section some of the steps in the planning process will be further elaborated,
in particular the non-technical, as these are not treated in the later chapters.
Figure 4.4 The masterplan process
4.4 Planning Tasks

4.4.1 Cargo Forecasts
The forecasting process starts with the definition of a port’s hinterland and a grouping
of cargo flows according to economic and transportation characterisation into commodity
groups. The more detailed this grouping, the more accurate the forecasts will be. Then the
following steps will be taken:
(i) Assessment of economic and industrial development of the hinterland, often for dif-
ferent scenarios: high, medium and low growth.
(ii) Translation of the results of (i) into trade flows, both incoming and outgoing cargoes.
This is done for homogeneous types of cargo such as liquid and dry bulk, and for
general cargo. The former category is derived from the difference of production and
consumption within the hinterland, the latter is extrapolated on the basis of economic
parameters, such as growth of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
(iii) Potential shifts in cargo flows are investigated, caused by external often geopolitical
influences. This may give an adjustment of the trade flows determined sub (ii).
(iv) Subsequently the volumes of cargo are estimated which will be transported over sea
and an assessment is made of the type of shipping and the ship sizes.
(v) The next step is to analyse the different routing options that exist for all commodities
and all combinations of origin and destination. Here the issue of several ports serving
the same hinterland, thus of competition, plays an important role.
It will be clear that these analyses require specialist expertise and computer models. For
expansion of an existing port an extrapolation of actual cargo flows is often made as a first
assessment. It should be realised that this is very crude, especially when periods of 20-25
years are considered. In the container transport for instance port development is very rapid
and shipping lines tend to shift large volumes from one port to another. In such a market
a comprehensive analysis is indispensable. The remaining unreliability still necessitates
flexibility in the masterplan, as mentioned in Section 4.2.
4.4.2 Functional Requirements and Planning Elements

A useful document, especially for ports in developing countries, is the ’Handbook for plan-
ners’ (UNCTAD, 1985). Based on the cargo flow forecasts and the origin/destination matri-
ces the number and size of ships can be determined, often taking into account the existing
fleets. In some cases future developments of vessel size must be assumed (such as the
present trend towards larger container vessels) and occasionally a port facility is built for a
specific vessel, e.g. the dedicated LNG transport service between Brunei and Japan.
Once the expected fleet composition is known the functional requirements for the port can
be formulated, in terms of vessel sizes per cargo type, design vessel, number per year,
transport volumes to and from the hinterland, port services, etc. The principal dimensions
of the ports wet and dry areas are determined by use of design formulae, which will be
treated in subsequent chapters. In this way the functional requirements are translated into
planning elements:
• Dimensions of approach channel, turning circle and other water areas in the port
• Dimensions of quays for different types of cargo
• Dimensions of terminal areas
• Hinterland connections
• Number of tugs, etc. and dimensions small craft harbour
• Service areas, buildings
• Land required for industries
• Safety and environmental requirements, including safety distances for the handling
of dangerous cargo
4.4.3 Site Data

Knowledge of the site conditions is an indispensable part of port planning. For the exten-
sion to an existing port this task has a different content than for a green-field port develop-
ment. In the latter case the port designer has to start without data being available. Because
this is the most challenging case it will be treated here. It should be recognised however
that there are few greenfield port developments. In most cases planning relates to expansion
of existing ports and ample site data is available.
The port planner requires data on:
• Bathymetry
• Wave conditions
• Currents and horizontal tide
• Water levels and vertical tide
• River flow rates (in case of river ports)
• Meteorological conditions (wind, rainfall, fog, temperatures)
• Salinity
• Sediment characteristics and transport
• Soil characteristics and geotechnical conditions
• Seismic conditions
Some of the data have a distinct stochastic nature and require extensive periods of measure-
ments in order to determine design parameters with sufficient accuracy. The most common
example is the design wave height for design of breakwaters and other structures. To ob-
tain a reliable estimate of for instance the 50 year return period wave condition from in-situ
measurements one needs at least several years of wave recordings. Within the time frame of
a planning study this can not be realised. The question is therefore how to collect data with
acceptable accuracy in a short period of time (while initiating surveys and data collection
campaigns to serve subsequent stages of port development). This will be discussed below
for the various types of data, including traditional sources of information and advanced
methods available.
Bathymetry The first and most accessible source of bathymetric data is the nautical
chart. Most seafaring countries provide charts of the coastal waters and adjacent sea areas,
that are regularly updated, indicating water depths, type of seabed (sand, mud, rock, etc)
and sometimes current speeds. Moreover the chart shows information on tidal elevations,
in terms of MSL and mean values of high water and low water during neap and spring tide.
The British Admiralty collects all this information and publishes the so-called Admiralty
Charts, which can be purchased on the internet. It should be recognised that the scale
and amount of detail of these charts increase around existing ports and high density traffic
routes. For a green-field port site in e.g. South America, the scale may be small, but there
is something to start with. In case of a full master plan study there is normally enough time
to execute a proper bathymetric survey. This is particularly important when the foreshore
seabed topography is irregular and influencing the wave propagation.
Climate The British Admiralty also publishes the ”Pilots”, providing information for
mariners on the coastal areas and port approaches all over the world (Pilot, various years).
These Pilots are useful for the port planner, giving general oceanographic and climatic data
on the sea or coastal area concerned. This includes:
• Wind data, including seasonal variations such as during the monsoon in South Asia
• Wave conditions, be it not in a statistical format; indication of typhoon / hurricane
occurrence and their typical paths
• Current patterns and velocities, related to large circulation systems and/or tides and
winds
• Temperature
• Rainfall
• Fog
The Pilot data are certainly not sufficient for port planning, but they provide a qualitative
picture of the site, complementary to the Chart.
Wave conditions Until 1980 the so-called ship observations were the only source
of statistical wave data available. Mariners observations of wave height, -period and -
direction, taken at regular time intervals on board of all ships at sea, formed the basis of
the matrices published in e.g. Ocean Wave Statistics (Hogben, N. et. al. 1967). Because
this method of data collection had started just after WWII, the amount of data and length of
recording period were sufficient to allow extrapolation to extreme values. Yet the accuracy
of the observations made was low, estimated to be not better than about 20%.
During the 1970s the development of numerical models describing the relation between
barometric pressure, wind velocity and -direction and wave growth and -propagation brought
great improvement. The availability of historical weather maps for the entire globe in me-
teorological centres such as the KNMI made it possible to hindcast the storms above a
certain threshold for a specific area of the oceans or seas. The peak-values of these storms
could be extrapolated using theoretical distributions such as Gumbel or Weibull to obtain
the extreme wave conditions needed for design.
Whereas these models were initially applied for specific areas and for storm events only,
nowadays they are used on a regular basis. It is possible to obtain the wind and wave
statistics from internet data bases (a.o. NOAA), for any ocean- or sea area in the world,
based on hindcast computations. These include both operational and storm conditions and
hence can be used in the port planning for down time assessment and definition of design
wave height. The accuracy of these computations is estimated to be about 10%, i.e. similar
to that of the in-situ measurements.
A further development is the use of satellite measurements of wave height. Since about
1985 several satellites have carried radar altimeters (e.g. ERS -1/2), each of which pro-
duced records of wave height along their track. Comparison of these measurements with
buoy recordings have indicated an estimated accuracy of 10-15% for moderate wave con-
ditions. The extreme wave heights (in excess of the yearly wave condition) measured by
the altimeter are systematically lower by about 15%. Both factors imply severe limitations
of this source for port planning: for operational conditions the information on wave period
and direction is missing and for design conditions the systematic error is too large. It is
expected however that the extent and quality of satellite measurements will improve.
The wave conditions described above are obtained for deep water, whereas the port location
is often near shore. Translation of the wave conditions from deep water to the port loca-
tion is done by means of numerical models, that represent the effects of bottom friction,
wave refraction shoaling and breaking. The model SWAN, developed by Delft University
of Technology, is used worldwide and produces reliable output. For preliminary estimates,
the shoaling diagrams of Goda (1985) provide an easy method to determine the wave con-
ditions in shallow water, but with a much lower accuracy.
Tide and current conditions For the vertical tide the information presented on the
Admiralty Charts is generally sufficient for the planning phase. And even when the spe-
cific conditions at the site are expected to affect the overall tidal situation (e.g. in an estuary
or lagoon) one month of water level recordings is sufficient to determine the tidal charac-
teristics. This can be realised within the scope of a planning study.
For water level set-up due to wind and waves this does not hold. The simple methods
presented in e.g. the Coastal Engineering Manual (USACE, 2002), are adequate for an
estimate. Regarding flow velocities the same approach is usually followed: in-situ mea-
surements during a relatively shore period of time, at least including a full spring tide and
a full neap tide cycle. Extreme velocities due to river discharge are often not measured in
such a campaign.
Sediment and soils characteristics The conditions of the seabed and the shallow
subsurface are important for the assessment of dredgeability and use for fill material, as well
as for the design of structures. The indications on an Admiralty Chart are insufficient and
need to be verified and supplemented by in-situ measurements. An effective approach is
to combine the bathymetric survey with seismic profiling, which gives a reliable indication
of the subsoil topography, provided that it is supplemented with a sufficient number of soil
borings to ”calibrate” the seismic results. Soil sampling in the borings and subsequent
laboratory test will provide the necessary information on the subsoil characteristics.
Seismic conditions A privileged part of the worlds coastal areas has no historic record
of seismic events and in consequence in these areas -rightly or wrongly so- earthquakes are
not considered as a potential threat to the integrity of ports and port installations. In other
areas earthquakes are a more or less frequently recurring phenomenon, which does have a
significant influence on port site selection and subsequent design. Many earthquake-prone
countries do have directives with regard to earthquake provisions in their building codes, in
their simplest and inadequate form as a maximum horizontal acceleration to be taken into
account in the countrys different regions. For a major infrastructural investment as a port, it
is strongly desirable to consult seismologists on the strength and probability of occurrence
of site specific earthquakes, as these may deviate considerably from the regional average,
depending on the local geological picture.
A special aspect of seismicity is the potential occurrence of tsunamis, even along coasts that
are well away from fault zones themselves. Tsunamis are very long sea waves generated
by sea bottom movements, and may travel over great distances without losing much of
their energy. The susceptibility of a coast to tsunamis not only depends on the potential
of occurrence of earthquakes in the oceans and seas within a very wide area, but also very
much so on the sea bottom topography in the subject area. Desk studies can very well
quantify the threat. If there is such threat, there are no port planning solutions that can
eliminate the problem, but design-wise much damage due to seismic events can be avoided
(PIANC, 2001).
4.4.4 Layout Development

This task had been mentioned before as the creative part of port planning. The planning
elements have been prepared and must now be pieced together into a lay-out. Several lay-
outs in fact, because many different solutions are possible. While the planning elements
have been determined on the basis of formal design rules or guidelines, that are treated in
the following chapters, making the lay-out does not follow formal rules. The specific local
conditions play a dominant role and therefore no port lay-out is similar to another one.
There are a few do’s and don’ts, which should be kept in mind however, such as:
(i) Construction cost is an important factor in the feasibility of the port and can most
strongly be influenced in this conceptual stage of lay-out development (once the lay-
out is fixed, the possibilities for cost optimisation are very limited). When the port
is located at the coast a balance of cut and fill is often the best solution, unless the
soil is very hard (high dredging costs) or very soft (dredged material unsuitable for
reclamation), see Figure 4.5. Also the length of breakwaters should be minimised as
these form an important cost factor.
(ii) In case of strong offshore wave conditions the orientation of the approach channel
should preferably be in line with the dominant wave direction (in order to have waves
coming in ”aft” of the vessel instead of ”quartering” or ”beam”). At the same time the
configuration of the entrance proper should limit wave penetration. In practice these
two requirements are combined and lead to a small angle between wave direction and
the axis of the approach channel (see Figure 4.6).
(iii) When the port basins and entrance channel are protected by breakwaters these should
not form a narrow ”sleeve”, but provide space immediately behind the heads (see
Figure 4.7), for three reasons: 1) ships manoeuvring in a channel do not like a hard
structure close to the channel boundaries, 2) when there is a cross-current along the
entrance, vessels need lateral space in passing from the current into still waters, and
3) open space behind the breakwater heads helps the diffraction effects and thus
reduces wave penetration. It is seen from Figure 4.7 that the net breakwater length in
b) is not increased compared with a), while the open lay-out also provides a lot more
space inside the port for future development.
(iv) Bends in the approach channel close to the port entrance or immediately behind it
should be avoided: the vessel needs a straight course without the complications of
Figure 4.5 Balance of cut and fill
steering through a bend.

(v) Then there are morphological effects to be taken into account. Without going into
detail in this section, three basic principles are mentioned:
a. Along the alluvial coastline the littoral transport occurs inside the breaker zone.
Breakwaters should therefore reach beyond to the corresponding water depth in
order to avoid this sediment transport to deposit inside the approach channel.
b. When littoral transport occurs in both directions along the coast, breakwaters
are also needed on both sides. Only when the wave climate is such that the
littoral transport is unidirectional one breakwater may suffice.
c. The length of the breakwater depends not only on the extent of the breakwater
zone but also on the magnitude of the littoral transport and the corresponding
Figure 4.6 Orientation approach channel with respect to wave direction
Figure 4.7 Breakwater alignment a) and b)
accretion rate at the breakwater.

(vi) Regarding the location of berths and terminals some general safety aspects can be
formulated:
a. There should be no berths or hard structures in the stopping line of the vessels,
also not beyond the turning circle. In case a stopping manoeuvre fails the vessel
should be able to run aground in a soft bank.
b. Liquid bulk terminals preferable have to be located downwind from other port
activities and certainly from urban centres. In case of an accident the negative
effects (smoke, toxic gases or a vapour cloud) will thus have less impact.
4.4.5 Evaluation Techniques

As mentioned before evaluation of lay-out alternatives takes place at different stages of the
planning process: first screening of rough sketch lay-outs, followed by evaluation of the
most promising alternatives, and finally an analysis of the economic and financial feasibil-
ity of the selected masterplan lay-out. The evaluation techniques become more elaborate
in subsequent stages. A basic problem is that the criteria for evaluation are very different
in nature and importance, varying from nautical safety to noise nuisance. There are quan-
titative and qualitative criteria which must be reduced to a common denominator for the
purpose of evaluation.
The first screening remains often qualitative, but the selection of the masterplan lay-out
requires a formal procedure which must be transparent and (as far as possible) objective.
Two techniques are mentioned here:
• Numerical evaluation
• Monetary evaluation
(i) Numerical evaluation

The most common type of numerical evaluation is the multi-criteria analysis (MCA).
The principle is that an object is evaluated with respect to a number of criteria, which
may differ in importance. Such differences are expressed by giving ”weight” to the
criteria, by which the evaluation scores are multiplied.
A framework can be made of primary, secondary and tertiary criteria, each of which
is given its own weight. The primary criteria can be set by a panel, representing all the
disciplines involved, using an iterative process. The secondary and tertiary criteria
which are sub-divisions of the primary ones, can be set by representatives of the
various disciplines in question. In the MCA all alternative solutions are given scores
for all criteria. Multiplication of the scores by the weight and addition eventually
produce an ultimate quantitative value. On the one hand the MCA method has the
disadvantage of a still rather great subjectivity in setting weights. On the other hand
the entire calculation can easily be repeated with different weights, and the sensitivity
of the outcome for this determined.
In de past ”costs” was one of the criteria, which was treated like all other. Nowadays
a different approach is followed, whereby all non-cost related criteria are treated as
”value” (see also Table 4.1) and capital and maintenance costs are summed up as
costs. The comparison and selection of alternatives is then made on the basis of the
highest value over costs ratio. The advantage if this method is clear: a slightly higher
costs may be justified, if the value of the alternative is better.
In the example above the weight of primary criterion is the sum of the weights of
the corresponding secondary criteria, which in turn are summed up from the tertiary
ones. This is not necessary however.
(ii) Monetary evaluation
In this type of evaluation all criteria of the various alternative projects are expressed
in terms of money. The advantage is that the scoring is less subjective than with
the numerical system. The disadvantage is that it is, generally, much more time-
consuming and far more difficult, partly because of the necessity to express qualita-
tive differences in money via risk analysis (for instance, the difference in safety of
approach channels).
A reformulation of the evaluation criteria is necessary, for instance:
Table 4.1 Example of an MCA score table

primary criteria weight secondary criteria weight tertiary criteria weight
port technology 22 nautical and hydr. 10 approach route 1
stopping length 3
manoeuvring space 1
nautical safety 2
wave penetration 3
flexibility 5 extension poss. 3
re-allocation berths 2
construction aspects 7 building time 3
phasing poss. 4
spatial planning 5 flexibility 5
etc.
env. aspects 8 aquatic env. 2
coastal morphology 2
noise 2
dust 2
Nautical safety : risk of collisions/running around/consequences for the ship

and, possibly, for the local environment/resulting costs (it is necessary, for in-
stance, to know or to estimate what percentage of collisions/strandings will
result in the puncturing of one or more cargo holds).
The safety of cargo handling & storage and industry with respect to the risk to
the installation itself and to the local environment.
Operational costs: a part of the costs will be about equal for all alternatives (for
instance, port management). Differences arise from e.g. limitation of accessi-
bility of the port as a result of tide, wind, waves and visibility as well as time
lost at the berths because of ship movements due to waves and wind.
Spatial planning: extra costs that must be made in the region as a direct result of
the development of the port in order to fit it into the physical planning, possible
costs of hypothetical substitutes for specific facilities that will be lost (’shadow
prices’).
Space and flexibility: the likelihood that it will not be possible to realise certain
required developments of the port within a certain period. The resulting costs
of having them realised elsewhere.
Building and maintenance costs of the port.
Etc.
The costs of alternative projects should be compared on an annual basis:
Annual capital and maintenance costs

Annual operational costs
The probability, on an annual basis, of certain calamities and their financial

consequences
Etc.
The costs should be discounted, i.e. the present-day value be determined:

t n
Ct
Cc ¨ 1 i t
(4.1)
t 1
in which:
i is the rate of discount (usually true interest, that is the actual interest minus the infla-
tion component)
Ct is the annual costs in the year t
Cc is the present-day value
4.4.6 Project Optimisation

Following evaluation of alternative locations and lay-outs and the selection of the most suit-
able one, the optimisation of the project can take place. This means, amongst others, the
determination of and the final decision on the principal forms and dimensions of the port:
access, entrance, primary manoeuvring space, number of service points (berths or quay
length), terminal areas, etc. The tools and exercises used include computations, hydraulic
model studies, navigation simulator studies, operation simulation models, with as an ulti-
mate target the minimisation of costs. The tools are briefly described here, but are treated
in detail in Chapter 5 and in the lecture notes on Service Systems (Groenveld, 2005),
(i) Hydraulic model study, physical or mathematicals

Breakwater alignment and wave penetration, current patterns, sediment transport,
siltation and erosion, breakwater stability and, possibly, ship motion analysis.
(ii) Navigation simulation studies
Adapting the lay-out of the port and its approaches to optimise the nautical safety.
Various systems exist, from complete fast-time computer models, including a pro-
grammed navigator (quick, cheap, but with limited possibilities) to full-scale real-
time bridge simulators (with human navigators, ship’s bridge, outside image, radar
display, etc.)
Generally speaking, navigation simulator studies are more suited for a study of the
nautical aspects than hydraulic model tests because they give a better reproduction
of the steering effects. These usually play a greater role than the effects of the local
physical surroundings, as sea bottom and channel changes (which in their turn can
be more faithfully reproduced in a physical model). In most cases, both arrival and
departure manoeuvres will have to be investigated. The departure manoeuvre mainly
to verify if there is sufficient rudder control on leaving the shelter of the port under
more severe current, wind and wave conditions.
In all cases, sufficient simulator runs will have to be made to obtain a statistically
reliable picture of deviations from the channel axis and of stopping distances actually
used.
The ultimate objective is the verification and optimisation of the form and dimensions
of the port with respect to the approach channel, entrance and manoeuvring areas
by means of risk analysis. Also to study e.g. the possibility of a reduction of the
channel width as a result of the introduction of advanced aids to navigation and/or
VTS systems.
(iii) Computations
E.g. with regard to the optimum depth of the ports approaches, taking into account
’tidal windows’ for the maximum size vessels, the wave climate and vessel response,
and a certain accepted probability of touching channel bottom.
(iv) Logistic simulation models
Study of the effect on ship waiting times of alterations to, inter alia:
The number of berths or length of quay in the port

A vertical tidal windows
A horizontal tidal windows
One/two-way traffic
Various services: tugboats, pilotage, etc.
Priority rules, safety procedures
The ultimate aim of this investigation is to produce the data needed to arrive at minimisation
of the overall port costs per tonne of cargo.
Economic and financial analysis

The economic and financial feasibility analysis of a (port) project is an essential element in
the decision making process, either within the scope of a masterplan, or for an individual
(medium-term) project. In the preparation of a project, for which external financing is
sought (from International Financing Institutes such as World Bank, Asian Development
Bank etc. and/or from commercial banks) these analyses are a prerequisite. But also for
projects funded by a government or a port authority it should be a necessary check in order
to avoid poor public investments.
The economic analysis is aimed at determining the Benefit/Cost ratio or the Economic
Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) of the project, both being indicators of the return on invest-
ment in economic terms. Financial analysis is made to investigate the income and cash flow
of the project throughout a predetermined period (often 25-30 years), taking into account
the planned phasing of development. Sometimes the economic analysis is made for several
alternatives in the evaluation phase, in addition or in lieu of MCA or monetary evaluation
methods. In most cases however the economic and financial analyses are made for the se-
lected alternative only and lead to optimisation thereof. It happens that the project, after
having gone through the different stages of technical and nautical improvements, is found
to have insufficient or even negative rate of return on investment, in which case drastic cost
(and scope) reductions have to be found. This is often difficult and it is much better to make
preliminary economic analyses in the early stages of the project to avoid such surprises.
The economic and financial analyses are specialist work to be done by econometrists. The
basic principles however are outlined below.
(i) Economic analysis

All economic benefits and costs of the project are determined, which means that
these are expressed in monetary value, converted to one reference year (often the
year in which the analysis is made). An assumption is made of the inflation rate in
the later years and benefit and costs made after the reference year are corrected for
this inflation.
Benefits of the port project may comprise ground rent, lease fees for terminals, in-
come from pilot-, tug-and dockage charges. A very important benefit is the spin-off
for the national economy, which is often difficult to ascertain however. The costs
comprise capital investment costs and operation/maintenance costs. Risks and safety
can be accounted for as explained in Section 4.4.5 (ii).
The economic return on investment is the difference of benefits and costs. When this
difference is discounted (see again Section 4.4.5 (ii) and summed up over the project
period the Net Present Value is obtained (NPV). The EIRR now is the discounting
rate, whereby the NPV becomes zero. As a guideline for projects in developing
countries the International Financing Institutions demand an EIRR which exceeds
the commercial interest rate. Commercial projects in the developed countries often
require an EIRR of 15-20%. On the other hand there are (too) many public port
projects for which the EIRR (if calculated at all) fails to satisfy the IFI criterion.
(ii) Financial analysis
Finally some words about the financial analysis. This is in fact a tabulation of ex-
penditures (capital costs, operation and maintenance costs) and revenues per year,
throughout the period over which the project is evaluated. The capital costs are shown
in the years they are scheduled to be made, operation and maintenance costs, and rev-
enues come into the picture as soon as terminals are ready to receive the cargo. The
results can be expressed in terms of income or cash flow. In the latter case the capital
costs are used (like in the economic analysis), in the former case these have been
converted into depreciation costs on an annual basis.
4.5 General Observations

a. The importance of flexibility and space in port planning is often underestimated.
Forecasts regarding the quantity and types of the goods traffic and the related prog-
noses regarding the development of shipping are often only partially reflected in
the real developments. This is caused by unforeseen events in the world economy,
changes in the areas of production or consumption, a shift in the type of goods -
for instance, from raw materials to semi-manufactured articles -, etc. Regular and,
sometimes, radical adaptations of the port masterplan must, therefore, be possible.
In consequence, the masterplan is not a static document, as mentioned before. Re-

cent research at TU-Delft has led to a new planning method, called Adaptive Port
Planning (APP), which takes these uncertainties into account (Taneja, 2009).
b. Strategic planning: many of the worlds ports have to operate more or less on a com-
mercial basis and are supposed to show a profit at the end of the year, but they also
have to maintain their position in a competitive environment, e.g. the ports in the
Hamburg-le Havre range.
For these ports traditional master planning and strategic planning go hand in hand
with only one outcome.
In anticipating on what the competition is doing, or may do, ports can decide on
investments which are not or not yet required for strict economic considerations,
but may be necessary to secure the position of the port in the future, which is the
defensive side of strategic planning.
Ambitious ports may also formulate perspectives for their future role in regional
transport that go well beyond regular and predictable growth patterns. For these
ambitions to materialize, first of all they have to be translated in the master planning
process.
c. Frequent obstacles in port planning are :
– Unsatisfactory basic data: outdated, insufficient or unreliable

– Too much rigidity in the extrapolation of historical developments
– Shortcomings in the systems approach and the planning methodology
– Lack of insight and experience of local port authorities; insufficient understand-
ing of the time and costs involved in in-depth studies
– No adjustment to regional or national port developments
– Too much attention to infrastructural provisions and an underestimation of the
importance of operational and organisational aspects
– Relatively too much accent on the port activities on the sea-side and too little
on the land-side (more parts are ’ailing’ on the land-side than on the sea-side,
either in the port itself or in its hinterland connections)
– Unfamiliarity with or underestimation of the demands that the reception of big,
difficult-to-manoeuvre ships make on the infrastructure of the port, i.e. under-
estimation of the nautical requirements
– Unfamiliarity with safety aspects associated with the handling of dangerous
cargoes
Throughout the world, big mistakes have been and are still being made for many of
the above reasons. In the past 10 to 15 years alone, hundreds of millions of dollars
have been invested in new ports that, after completion, turned out to be either partly
or completely non-functional.
d. Specific problems in many countries in the developing world are:
– Management
The port management is often inefficient, too much of the decision-making pro-
cess rests with the central government and too little with local administrators.
– Operations
- Cargo handling and goods storage are frequently left in the hands of the
port authority and this usually results in low productivity
- Long transit times of goods in the ports
- Inefficient organisation of storage facilities, leading to the necessity of over
dimensioning of storage yards
– Customs
Often an obstacle in the administrative goods handling. This contributes to the
long periods that the goods remain in the port.
– Port congestion
More often caused by organisational and operational shortcomings than by defi-
ciencies in the infrastructure. It should also be borne in mind that organisational
improvements are considerably cheaper than extensions of the infrastructure.
– Poor maintenance and lack of spares
Necessitates port structures and equipment that require a minimum of mainte-
nance and, occasionally, the purchase of an excess of cargo handling equipment.
– Specialisation in goods handling
Often trying to catch up with developments in the West and according to imag-
inary needs. Specialisation should not be a forced process as drastic changes
demand adaptations over a long period. Equipment should not be unnecessarily
sophisticated and comply with local operational and maintenance skills.
This implies that a lot of improvement can be achieved in existing ports, before starting
to build new facilities. This should be taken into account in the early stages of master
planning: how can the operations be improved, in terms of better management, simplified
procedures, introduction of regular maintenance programmes etc.
4.6 References
Goda, Y., Random Seas and Design of maritime Structures, Un. of Tokyo Press, 1985
Groenveld, R., Service systems in ports and inland waterways. University Delft of Tech-
nology, 2005
Hogben, N. et al, Ocean Wave Statistics, Hydrographic Dept., London, 1967
PIANC, Seismic Design Guidelines for Port Structures. Balkema, 2001.
Pilot (various geographical regions), Hydrographic Dept., London
Taneja, P. et al., Adaptive Port Planning using real options. Proc. IAME Annual Conf.,
Lisbon 2009.
UNCTAD, Port Development, Handbook for planners in developing countries, April 1985
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Engineering Manual, EM 1110-2-1100, Washing-
ton D.C., 2002
Vellinga, T., Environmental issues in port development and port operation, 2004
Chapter 5
Planning and Design of the Water

Areas
5.1 Introduction
As explained in the previous chapter the lay-out of a port is to a large extent determined
by its wet surface. This includes the orientation and alignment of the approach channel,
the manoeuvring areas within breakwaters (if these are needed), turning circle, and port
basins for the actual berths. These dimensions are of great importance, firstly because they
constitute a major part of the overall investment, secondly because they are difficult to
modify once the port has been built.
The design aspects are mostly centred on the ship: its manoeuvring behaviour under influ-
ence of wind, currents and waves, its vertical motions in waves, the horizontal and vertical
motions at berth. We therefore have to understand somewhat more about the manoeuvring
behaviour and hydrodynamic responses of the ship. Another aspect to be taken into ac-
count is sediment transport. What is the effect of the port lay-out on the natural process,
and hence on the coast. And how can siltation inside the port and approach channel be
minimised by the lay-out.
Figure 5.1 The harbour of Zeebrugge
73
Finally environmental and safety aspects may play a role in the lay-out. A major issue in
the expansion or deepening of existing ports and channels is the removal and depositing of
dredged material, the dredge spoil. Often this is polluted to some degree and (international)
rules prevent that this can be dumped at sea (PIANC, 1996). In many countries environ-
mental regulations require mitigation and compensation measures to be taken, when port
(or other) development affects existing ecological systems. In the design of new land for
terminals within the Port of Los Angeles an area had to be allocated for an underwater habi-
tat to replace an existing area. And in the planning for Maasvlakte 2 ample surface area
needs to be created for nature development and recreation. Safety considerations lead in
some cases to additional requirements, such as the LNG import jetty in Zeebrugge, which
has its own basin, well isolated from other port areas (see Figure 5.1). In this and following
chapters these aspects are only treated briefly. Environment and safety aspects are covered
in more detail in the lecture notes: Environmental Issues in Port Development and Port
Operation (Vellinga, 2004).
5.2 Ship Manoeuvring and Hydrodynamic Behaviour

5.2.1 Basic Manoeuvrability
Considering the factors that influence a ship’s manoeuvring behaviour, the basic properties
belonging to the vessel itself are called here vessel manoeuvring characteristics. They
are determined by the ship’s hull shape, its mass, the rudder system and dimensions, the
propulsion system and the power. The manoeuvring characteristics are:
(i) The way the ship reacts to the rudder and to changes in propeller revolutions
(ii) Turning ability
(iii) Stopping ability
(i) Rudder efficiency

Turning the rudder creates a moment on the ship, when sailing. The effect of the
propeller flow on the rudder increases this moment. Big tankers and bulk carriers
commonly have a relatively small Ls Bs (length / beam) ratio, in the range of 6 to 7,
and a large block coefficient, in the range of 0.75 to 0.85. Together with the Bs D
(beam/draft) ratio, the ) P ratio (mass/propulsive power) and the rudder area, these
factors mainly determine the manoeuvring characteristics. A small Bs D ratio and a
large block coefficient result in a relatively long time to react to an applied rudder
angle; but, once the ship is rotating, it has a good turning ability.
It is clear that these characteristics are important for the manoeuvring ability of the
vessel in a channel. However, equally essential is the way the human operator on the
bridge uses these manoeuvring characteristics in steering the vessel.
In confined water, the reaction time of the ship to an applied rudder angle can be
reduced by a simultaneous rudder and propeller action, the latter only during a short
time (a ’burst’) to avoid a noticeable increase in ship speed. The effect of this ma-
noeuvre increases at decreasing speed.
Chapter 5. Planning and Design of the Water Areas 75
In general, course stability indicates the extent to which the ship reacts on external
disturbances. A ship is called to be dynamically stable when the moment exerted by
the rudder, counteracts the movement of the ship caused by the initial disturbance.
After moment and forces become zero again, the ship follows its course. This does
not occur with a dynamically unstable ship. The moment then strengthens the initial
rotation. The ship continues turning, even after forces and moment reach a new state
of equilibrium. In shallow water, the course stability tends to be better than in deep
water.
A ship sailing under the influence of a cross-current or cross-wind will have a certain
drift angle between her heading and course and the ”swepth” path is wider than the
beam of the ship. But even without external disturbances the ship’s real course shows
a sinusoidal movement instead of the intended straight course. This is due to the
speed of response of the helmsman and that of the ship in reacting to the rudder. The
total width of the manoeuvring lane exceeds therefore the beam width of the vessel
(see Figure 5.2). The extent of this depends again on the ship’s manoeuvrability, the
ability of the helmsman, the visual information available and the overall visibility.
This point comes back in Section 5.3.2.
basic manoeuvring lane
real course
(Wbm ÂBs)
Figure 5.2 Lane width of ship
(ii) Turning manoeuvre

The turning diameter in deep water at service speed and a rudder angle of 35 , varies
considerably between types of ships and even between individual ships of the same
category. Nevertheless, there are clear tendencies. Many container ships have a poor
manoeuvring capability, particularly those container ships built, or originally built,
to operate at high service speeds of 26 or 27 kn. For these ships, turning diameters
are in the order of 6 to 8 Ls . Turning diameters for large oil and dry bulk carriers at
service speeds in the 15 to 17 kn range, are in the order of 3 to 4 Ls , some even less
than 3 Ls . LNG carriers are mostly in the 2 to 2 5 Ls range, which would also apply
to a great number of conventional general cargo and multi-purpose vessels.
Turning capability at low speeds is often improved by the use of twin propeller ar-
rangement or bow thrusters, or a combination of the two.
Bow thrusters are useful for berthing and unberthing operations, but at speeds of 4 to
5 kn or above, they loose much of their effect.
(iii) Stopping distance
The stopping distance is affected by:
The size of the vessel and the relation propulsive power - displacement (= mass)
The speed at which the vessel enters the port
The stopping procedure
As concerns size, the ratio propulsive power -mass of the vessel is inversely propor-
tional to ship size. In consequence, the power available for decelerating (or accelerat-
ing) decreases in a relative sense with increasing ship size (see Figure 5.3). Also the
astern power as a fraction of the installed power varies from one system to another,
and may be as low as 50% for a vessel with steam turbine and fixed-blade propeller
to close to 100% for a vessel with diesel engine and controllable pitch propeller.
Figure 5.3 Stopping distance of ships
This means that the distance Lst , required for stopping from a given speed, expressed
as a function of the ship’s own length Ls , varies considerably and increases with
increasing ship size. For example, a 10,000 t general cargo vessel is able to stop
from a cruising speed of 16 kn in a minimum distance of about 5 to 7 Ls , say 900 m
(crash stop), whilst a 200,000 t bulk carrier or tanker requires some 14 to 18 Ls , say
4800 m (starting from a low speed, say 5 kn, the stopping distances are obviously
smaller; for a big tanker 3 Ls , for a general cargo ship Ls ).
In the 1970s a so-called ’fuel economic’ bulk carriers and tankers have come into operation
with very low propulsive power P (for a 150,000 t bulk carrier, the ) P may be about 13
and cruising speed about 12 kn, against a normal ) P of about 8 and cruising speed of
15 kn for this size of vessel). Moreover, their engines cannot run at low rpm’s; dead slow
ahead may be in the order of 6 kn. In consequence, to sail at low speeds they have to
regularly stop or reverse their engine, which makes them quite difficult to manoeuvre in the
confined space of a port.
With regard to the port entry speed, it will be obvious that the higher the speed, the bigger
the stopping distance required. The minimum speed at which a vessel still has sufficient
rudder control to make course corrections, is about 4 kn. However, waves, wind and, par-
ticularly, crosscurrents in front of the port entrance may force a ship to maintain a much
higher speed until it has arrived within the shelter of the breakwaters. This will be further
discussed in Section 5.4.
A degree of course control can be maintained by giving periodically brief ahead propeller
thrusts with the rudder set to give the desired course corrections. This, however, unavoid-
ably leads to greater stopping distances.
Finally, as concerns the way of stopping, different procedures are possible. The two ex-
tremes are the crash stop on the one hand, and the fully controlled stop on the other. In the
crash stop, the engines are set at full astern. It gives a minimum stopping distance, but, due
to turbulent flow around the rudder, the vessel has no course control whatsoever. It turns
either to starboard or to portside as shown in Figure 5.4.
5.2.2 Ship Hydrodynamics

A basic understanding of the forces exerted by waves, currents and wind and the responses
of the ship is necessary in port planning and design for the following reasons. Firstly the
vertical motions of a ship in waves have to be taken into account in the design depth of
approach channel, turning circle and other manoeuvring areas, and at the berth. Secondly
the design of the mooring system at the berth of an open jetty aims at restraining the vessel
in its natural movements and therefore the ship motions and forces in mooring lines and
fenders have to be determined.
(i) Sailing ships
A free floating vessel has six modes of freedom of motion: three lateral and three
rotary. In consequence, a ship exposed to waves may respond in six different modes,
or in any combination thereof (Figure 5.5).
In the vertical modes, a ship has its own natural frequency of oscillation. If excitation
occurs in a particular mode in a frequency near the ship’s natural frequency in that
number A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 J1 J2 J3
rudder deg 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 30 30
Vpeed ht 9 4.9 14.8 4.2 15 2.4 13 5 16.2 11 14.4
Uevs 42 44.7 42.5 48.8 47.5 46.7 38.3 48.3 42.9 47.7 47.5
h/T 2.1 2.2 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.7
30 kn wind
A8
3000 m
A2
2000
J2
A6
A4 A3
A5 1000
A9
A7 J1
J3
Figure 5.4 Stopping manoeuvres tanker MAGDALA, 220,000 t [Source IAHP 1981]
x
yawing z
rolling
swaying
pitching
heaving
surging
Figure 5.5 Ship motions
mode, resonance will result. Whether this resonance is important, depends on the
degree of damping. Of the three modes -rolling, pitching and heaving-, the latter
two are rather damped motions, but not so the roll motion which is quite resonance-
sensitive. A ship sailing in a strong beam sea with a wave period near the ship’s
natural roll period, may develop very large roll angles in which it loses rudder control
and may even capsize.
In deep water, the natural roll period is usually between 10 s and 17 s for merchant-
type ships. In wind-generated waves with (common) wave periods between 6 s and
10 s, roll motions need not be of great concern. However, the apparent incident wave
period Ta will increase when the waves approach from astern (and decrease when
the ship is sailing against the waves) and the ship has forward speed, and hence may
become critical.
In order to determine the vertical oscillating motions of an arbitrary point at the ship’s
hull, the cumulative effects of heave, pitch and roll have to be considered. The system
can be described mathematically as a mass-spring system with 6 degrees of freedom.
On the free floating vessel the hydrostatic forces act as springs: if a ship dives with
its nose into the water the excess buoyancy drives it back. In case of a moored vessel
additional springs are found in the mooring lines and fenders.
The analysis of ship motions was for a long period of time done in model tests.
Only after 1990 numerical models became sufficiently reliable to take over from
physical models. The first computer models were linear. The response of the ship
was calculated for a number of distinctive wave periods (or frequencies). The ratio
of motion amplitude and wave amplitude for a particular frequency is the Response-
Amplitude factor. Over the entire range of wave frequencies (the wave spectrum) the
Response-Amplitude factors constitute a transfer function, the Response-Amplitude
Operator (RAO). When we have the RAO function for a specific ship for different
wave directions, we can calculate all motions individually for a given wave spectrum.
Figure 5.6 is an example of the RAO function for the effect of roll, heave and pitch
combined. By multiplying the values of the wave spectrum with (RAO)2 the motion
spectrum is obtained. Although the wave spectrum has a peak at about 0.14 Hz
or T 7 s, there is virtually no ship response because that frequency is far higher
than the natural frequency of the ship motions. The low frequency peak of the wave
spectrum, at 0.06 Hz or 16-17 s does give resonance, even though the RAO is not
at its highest value. It is clear that the amplitude of the resulting ship motion would
increase rapidly for wave periods above 17 s.
Finally, attention is drawn to the abscissa of Figure 5.6 giving the encounter fre-
quency. This is the apparent wave periode Ta for the ship sailing at speed Vs . The
relation with the actual wave periode T is obtained via the wave celerity as follows:
L c T ca Ta c Vs Ta
c
Ta T (5.1)
c Vs
For stern waves Vs is subtracted in Equation 5.6 (Ta T ) and for head waves Vs is
added. When waves come in under an angle with the ship’s course the component of
Vs has to be used in Equation (5.1).
From the above introduction it may be concluded that the wave forces on and the
response of a sailing ship in waves can not be easily determined by analytical formu-
lae. Only a first assessment of possible resonance can be obtained from the following
reasoning:
Transfer function (RAO)

Energy density spectrum waves (Sη)
Energy density spectrum vertical ship motions (Sz)
5.0 2 5.0
2.5 1 2.5
Energy density (m3/s)
RAO
(Sη)
(Sz)
0
0 0.1 0.2
Encounter frequency (Hz)
Figure 5.6 Characteristic ship motions in waves
Figure 5.7 Characteristic ship motions in waves: Pitching
a. Pitching
When the ship sails in or against the direction of the waves, the pitch moment
exerted by the waves is maximum for wavelength L 2 Ls . The corresponding
wave period gives the highest response factor. For a vessel length of 250 m, this
means L 500 m and (assuming relatively shallow water) a wave period T =
30 s. Such long waves are rare and if they occur have very small amplitude. For
wave directions F close to 90 (beam waves) the critical wave length becomes
L 2 Ls cos F , and hence much shorter wave periods lead to pitching resonance
(always in combination with roll, leading to a corkscrew motion of the ship).
b. Rolling
The Eigen period or natural period of a ship for roll depends on its size, meta-
centric height and mass distribution. Typical roll periods amount to 12-16 sec-
onds for a 250,000 t tanker to 7-8 seconds for a 10,000 t cargo ship. For beam
waves with periods close to the natural period resonance will occur. This is
why ships try to avoid a course at right angle with the wave direction and why
an approach channel perpendicular to the dominant wave direction should be

avoided.
c. Heaving
For L Ls the resultant vertical force of the ship is zero, as shown in Figure
5.8. For the corresponding wave period the heave response is zero. With in-
creasing wave period, and thus wave length, the incident force and the heave
response will increase. With decreasing wave period there may initially be a
slight increase of response, but then it reduces to zero.
Figure 5.8 Characteristic ship motions in waves: Heaving
(ii) Moored ships

The assumption of linearity mentioned above holds reasonably well for sailing ships
in first-order waves (i.e. the observed waves). In the case of a moored ship it becomes
less accurate because the reaction forces of mooring lines and fenders are generally
not linear. Moreover the moored ship, in particular a large one, becomes sensitive
to so-called second-order or sub harmonic wave forces, due to the high resonance
periods for surge and yaw of the system. These wave forces include the wave drift
force inherent to any random wave field, or additionally may be caused by very long,
low amplitude waves as occurring in swell propagating over large stretches of ocean
or as edge waves along the continental shelf. The distinction between the bound and
the free long waves is difficult to make. An indication is given by the analysis of
long period wave recordings for the port of Sines (Vis et al, 1985). In these cases the
ship motion analysis has to be made by means of the non-linear computer models,
including all 6 degrees of freedom and the effects of second-order wave forces.
For a first estimate of wave, current and wind forces on a moored ship use is made of
empirical formulae based on model tests and simplified computer computations.
a. Wave forces
The wave force in longitudinal (X) and lateral (Y ) direction is derived from
computer computations of the force on a vertical elliptical cylinder with dimen-
sions Ls , Bs and D, held fast (i.e. not allowed to move in its mooring lines). It
is stressed that this is a strong schematisation of reality, as even the most tight
mooring system does allow some movement, especially with the aim to reduce
the line forces. Consequently the forces are much higher than in reality.
The direction of the incident waves, with wave length L and height H, is F . The
Figure 5.9 Wave force in longitudinal (X) and lateral (Y) direction
expressions for the wave forces read:

hberth hberth D
sinh 2U L sinh 2U L U cos F 2
Fx max Cmx h
Wshelter wH (5.2)
cosh 2U berth 8
L
hberth hberth D
sinh 2U L sinh 2U L U sin F 2
Fy max Cmy h
Wshelter wH (5.3)
cosh 2U berth 8
L
with additionally:
Cmx ,Cmy = virtual mass coefficients [-]

hberth = water depth at the berth location [m]
Wshelter = sheltering width in the wave direction [m]
= Bs + (Ls Bs ) sin F
w = specific weight of seawater (= 10.25 kN/m3 )
The coefficients Cmx and Cmy have been determined for various wave conditions
and ship sizes and are presented in dimensionless graphs, such as Figure 5.10
(Goda, 1972)
b. Current forces
The current forces on a ship are proportional to the cross-sectional area under-
water and the average current velocity squared. Like the force on a plate with
area A in flowing water:
F C A v2
The value of C depends on the angle of current direction with the ship axis, on
the under keel clearance (the ratio of ship draught and water depth) and on the
shape of the ship’s bow: a conventional or a bulbous bow. Due to the asym-
metry of the longitudinal section the working line of the lateral force may have
a (small) offset from the point amidships, which is taken as the centre of the
2.6
B/L s
Cmy
=0.0
2.4
0
or
001
Cmx
0.2
2.2
0.4
0.8
0.6
2.0
1.0
1.8
0.8
1.6
1.4
0.6
1.2
1.0
0.4
0.8
0.6
0.4 0.2
0.2 0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
B/L
Figure 5.10 Virtual mass coefficients for F = 45
co-ordinate system (see Figure 5.11).
This can be shown as a moment Mxy in addition to the lateral force Fy . But
another way is to determine the two lateral forces at the fore perpendicular and
at the aft perpendicular. This is generally more convenient for hand calculation,
because the mooring lines fore and aft have their resultant at those points along
the ship length. In the latter case the formulae for Fx , FyF and FyA become:
1
Fxc Cxc Ww Vc2 D LBP (5.4)
2
1
FyFc C Ww Vc2 D LBP (5.5)
2 yFc
1
FyAc C Ww Vc2 D LBP (5.6)
2 yAc
(It is noted that in all three equations D LBP is used, while one would expect
D Bs in the first one. This is done for ease of calculation).
The forces are found in kN. The other parameters are:
'>ACB 0=3 +4A<8=0;B
)'41% )'- #.-5%-3).- !-$ #..1$)-!3% 2823%,
/ ;>=68CD38=0; 2DAA4=C 5>A24 2>45U284=C RS

0 CA0=BE4AB4 2DAA4=C 5>A24 2>45U284=C 5>A4 RS
0 WA0=BE4AB4 2DAA4=C 5>A24 2>45U284=C 05W RS
W. 34=B8CH >5 B40 F0C4A R:6 < S
0E4A064 2DAA4=C E4;>28CH >E4A C74 D=34A F0C4A ?0AC >5 C74 :44; R< BS
B78? 3A0D67C 5>A 2>=38C8>= 2>=B834A43 R<S
-0;D4B 5>A C74 ,))%+ &) &<!%+ 0A4 >1C08=43 5A>< 6A0?7B 10B43 >= 4G?4A
8<4=C0; <>34; 30C0 = 4G0<?;4 >5 BD27 6A0?7B 5>A 0 F0C4A 34?C7 C> 3A0D67C
A0C8> >5 8B 68E4= 8= 86DA4 0=3 86DA4 2><?;4C4 B4C >5 6A0?7B
5>A 38554A4=C ;>038=6 2>=38C8>=B 0=3 F0C4A 34?C7 C> 3A0D67C A0C8>B 8B 5>D=3 8= C74
& $ ?D1;820C8>= K$>>A8=6 @D8?<4=C D834;8=4BK & $
2 !% &)*
+74 F8=3 5>A24B 0A4 20;2D;0C43 8= 0 B8<8;0A F0H 0??;H8=6 C74 B0<4 B86= 2>=
E4=C8>= 0B 5>A 2DAA4=C 5>A24B DB8=6 C74 5>;;>F8=6 4@D0C8>=B
/. /. W!) .
0 . 0 . W!) .
0. 0. W!) .

8= F7827
/. ;>=68CD38=0; F8=3 5>A24 R:%S
0 . ;0C4A0; F8=3 5>A24 5>A4 R:%S
0. ;0C4A0; F8=3 5>A24 05C R:%S
/. ;>=68CD38=0; F8=3 5>A24 2>45U284=C RS
0 . ;0C4A0; F8=3 5>A24 2>45U284=C 5>A4 RS
0. ;0C4A0; F8=3 5>A24 2>45U284=C 05C RS
W!) 34=B8CH >5 08A R:6 < S
. CA0=BE4AB4 01>E4 F0C4A 0A40 R< BS
F8=3 E4;>28CH 0C < 4;4E0C8>= R< S
;>=68CD38=0; 01>E4 F0C4A 0A40 R< S
Figure 5.12 Lateral current force coefficient at the forward and aft perpendiculars loaded tanker
Figure 5.13 Longitudinal current force coefficient, loaded tanker

Figure 5.14 Longitudinal wind force coefficient
Figure 5.15 Lateral wind force coefficient at the forward and aft perpendiculars
5.3 Approach Channels

The approach channel is defined as the waterway linking the turning circle inside a port (or
an open berth at an offshore jetty) with deep water. The three design parameters are align-
ment, width and depth. Although they are to some extent interdependent, they are treated
separately below. The length of the portion between the port entrance and the turning circle
is covered in Section 5.4 because it often largely determines the inner areas.
The International Navigation Association for Waterborne Transport (PIANC) has published
a Guide for Design of Approach Channels, that provides a valuable reference (PIANC,
1997). Some of the material here is taken from this report, without further reference.
The gradually increasing detail of the studies employed in the design, as mentioned in Sec-
tion 4.3, is reflected in the methods proposed by this PIANC report. This distinguishes two
stages, Concept Design and Detailed Design. In the process going from master planning
and/or feasibility study to implementation, even more stages and iterations may occur. The
main message of Section 4.3 has to be kept in mind: keep the level of detail proportional
to the accuracy of input data and output.
5.3.1 Alignment
The following (sometimes conflicting) requirements apply to the alignment of an approach
channel:
(i) In the case of a dredged channel: the shortest possible length taking into account
wave, wind and current conditions
(ii) Minimum cross-currents and cross-wind
(iii) Small angle with dominant wave direction
(iv) Minimise number of bends and avoid bends close to port entrance. The length of
straight channel needed before the actual entrance depends on current, wind and
wave conditions. In the port of Rotterdam a length of 6000 m is adopted, but in other
ports this length is smaller.
In actual cases the local geometry and bottom conditions play an important role. Hard soil
and rock introduce high dredging costs and should rather be avoided.
As long as ships have no tug assistance (which is usually the case for the part of the ap-
proach channel outside the breakwaters) the radius of bends depends on the manoeuvrabil-
ity of the design ship. In water depths normally encountered in a dredged approach channel
(1.3 to 1.1 times the ship’s draught) the required radius ranges from a minimum of 4 LBP
at a maximum rudder angle of 30 to a maximum of 16 L pp at 10 rudder angle (see Figure
5.16). A rudder angle of about 20 is a good basis for initial design, leaving some margin
of safety.
In the bend the channel width, as determined for the adjacent straight legs, may have to be
increased because the swept path increases (see Section 5.3.2).
In very busy ports the approach channel develops into a system of dredged channels for the
largest ships (channel bound traffic) and fairways marked by buoys. Both are available for
inbound and outbound traffic, and in open sea all are separated by traffic separation zones.
Figure 5.17 shows the existing system for the Port of Rotterdam.
The capacity of channels and fairways needs to be determined by means of a logistic simu-
lation model. Such a model also allows to investigate the number of ship encounters within
the system during a certain period of time. For a busy port marine traffic simulation models
are applied to investigate the risk of collisions and measures to reduce this risk, either by
introducing more stringent traffic rules or by modifying the layout of the system.
Whilst above guidelines are applied for the initial design, a further check and refinement
by means of manoeuvring simulation techniques is required, for which a variety of tools
Figure 5.16 Turning radius as a function of rudder angle and water depth
Figure 5.17 Approach channel Port of Rotterdam
is available. Irrespective of what tool or tools are used, the aim is always to assess the
viability and risk of navigating with a particular type and size of vessel in a given existing
or planned marine infrastructure, in particular physical boundary conditions of wind, waves
and currents. Sometimes the risk assessment will have to be quantified in terms of direct
and consequential economic damage and/or casualties to comply with local legislation, to
achieve overall cost minimization or to confirm a safety level consistent with worldwide
port and shipping practice. In any case, manoeuvring simulation constitutes a valuable and
indispensable step in present day port planning.
Manoeuvring simulation in its elementary form is performed with a Fast Time Simulator
(FTS), consisting of a computer model of the sailing ship under the influence of currents,
winds and waves, a monitor to make the operation visible and a track plotter to obtain a
record. The ship is programmed to follow a predefined track and the corrective response to
any deviations from that track, caused by weather, currents or bends is automatic and im-
mediate, of course within the manoeuvring capabilities of the vessel. The result reflects the
behaviour of a ship controlled by an auto-pilot and this, at the same time, is the limitation
of this method.
On the one hand, the auto-pilot will sail a track that it is closer to the predefined track than a
human navigator can realize, on the other hand, an auto-pilot cannot anticipate, but a human
navigator can. For example, a human navigator, supposedly familiar with local conditions,
can anticipate on local strong current changes and can make early mitigative course or
speed corrections and thus avoid a dangerous situation, which an auto-pilot cannot. But
when used and interpreted by an experienced nautical expert the FTS is quite useful, as it
allows a fair comparison of a great number of alternatives in terms of layout and boundary
conditions in a short time and at low costs. Such an FTS is for example the basic SHIPMA
model, used extensively by a variety of port planners. Because of the limitations inherent
to the FTS, the final check on alignment and width of channels and manoeuvring spaces
has to be done in a Real Time Simulator (RTS).
Manoeuvring simulation in its ultimate form is performed with Full Mission Real Time
Simulators. A state-of-the-art full mission RTS, for example the one developed and oper-
ated by MARIN, comprises a full size bridge and controls mock up, mounted on hydraulic
cylinders to simulate sailing in waves, a human navigator and helmsman, a very realis-
tically generated 360 degrees outside view adapting itself to the progress of the vessel,
manned satellite-simulators to simulate tugboat assistance and even audio effects to make
the perception of the whole more realistic. These full mission RTSs have been developed,
in the first instance, for training navigators and pilots in how to handle and act in difficult
and extreme situations, but they are also very useful to port planners to verify draft final
layouts on essential safety aspects. However, it should be born in mind that in as much
the stochastic character of the human navigator is involved, a statistical processing of the
results is required in order to arrive at conclusions. This means that for each layout and
each set of boundary conditions anywhere between 6 and 10 runs have to be made, each
taking one to a couple of hours of very expensive equipment and man-power. Thus full
mission RTS is a costly affair.
Fortunately intermediate forms of manoeuvring simulators have come into being. For the
RTS range of simulators this may involve a human navigator managing the port entry or
departure manoeuvre with the aid of a down-sized bridge control panel and the sailed track
displayed on a standard monitor. It may also consist of a set up with a bird’s eye-view
display of the manoeuvring environment adapting itself to the movement of the ship - and
the possibility of introducing different secondary effects like the variable forces exerted
by tugboats. Being operated real time by a human navigator it also allows to assess in a
specific port layout the potential effects of navigation mishaps like loss of rudder control,
propulsion failure or total black out which mostly occur during port entry or departure
manoeuvres because of the continual changes in engine regime. A good example of an
intermediate RTS manoeuvring facility is SHIP-NAVIGATOR (developed by Alkyon in the

Netherlands), which is very flexible with regard to complexity of set-up and input/output.
With regard to FTS models, a considerable improvement appears to have been made by
substituting the simple deterministic auto-pilot by a probabilistic one, thus taking into ac-
count the somewhat erratic performance of the human navigator (Jilan, 2010). Further
improvements are imaginable if, with artificial intelligence techniques, a self-learning ca-
pability could be incorporated into the auto-pilot model allowing it to anticipate on specific
situations, more or less as a human navigator.
5.3.2 Channel Width

As explained in Section 5.2.2 a sailing ship makes a sinusoidal track and thus covers a
’basic width’, which is about 1.5 time the ship’s beam. The effects of wind, current and
waves require additional width, but so does the lack of visibility. Moreover, certain margins
are needed, that depend on the type of channel bank and the type of cargo. The PIANC
Report, mentioned before, presents a method for concept design, that accounts for all these
aspects. For straight sections the channel width is described by the following equation:
W Wbm 2Wb ¨ Wa (5.10)
For a two-way channel the separation distance between the two lanes (Wp ) is added and
this expression becomes:
W 2 Wbm WB ¨ Wa Wp (5.11)
The numerical values of each of the parameters are shown in Table 5.1, which is a conden-
sation of the information in the PIANC report, but only for moderate manoeuvrability and
slow vessel speed.
Only in case of a large tidal range (say in excess of 4 m) the above calculation method is
superseded by another consideration, leading to a width of Ls . The reason is that if a ship
runs aground on one channel bank, it may turn on the tide and in a narrow channel it may
run aground with its stern on the opposite bank. Since channel transit will normally take
place around HW , the ship might break at falling tide and block the channel for an extended
period.
Regarding the additional width in a bend, it has been mentioned that this depends on rudder
angle and water depth over draught ratio. Taking a rudder angle of 20 the swept path of
the ship in the bend amounts to 0 35 B for a water depth of 1 25 D. For smaller under
keel clearance this additional width further decreases to 0 2 B at h 1 1 D. It is common
practice to apply the additional width only in case the adjoining straight leg has a minimum
width Wbm . When width additions for wind current, etc. are included, these provide for the
required space in the bend.
Table 5.1 Channel width in straight sections
Width component Condition Width (m)

Basic width (Wbm ) 1.25 D h 15 D 1.6 Bs
h 1 25 D 1.7 Bs
Additional width (Wa )
prevailing cross-winds 15 - 33 kn 0.4 Bs
33 - 48 kn 0.8 Bs
prevailing cross-current 0.2 - 0.5 kn 0.2 Bs
0.5 - 1.5 kn 0.7 Bs
1.5 - 2.0 kn kn 1.0 Bs
prevailing long current 1.5 - 3 kn 0.1 Bs
3 kn 0.2 Bs
prevailing wave height 1-3m 1.0 Bs
3m 2.2 Bs
aids to navigation VTS 0
good 0.1 Bs
seabed characteristics soft 0.1 Bs
hard 0.2 Bs
cargo hazard medium 0.5 Bs
high 1.0 Bs
Separation distance (Wp ) 8 - 12 kn 1.6 Bs
5 - 8 kn 1.2 Bs
Bank clearance (Wb ) sloping edge kn 0.5 Bs
steep, hard embankment 1.0 Bs
5.3.3 Channel Depth

The depth of approach channels depends on a number of factors (see Figure 5.18):
Draught of the ”design” ship, i.e. the ship with the largest draught, which may enter
the port fully loaded (larger ships must be lightered before they can enter)
Other ship-related factors such as the squat (sinkage due to ship’s speed) and trim
(unevenness keel due to loading conditions) and the vertical response to waves (see
Section 5.2.2)
Water level, mostly related to tidal levels. But very long waves and tsunami waves
must be taken into account when they occur frequently.
Channel bottom factors, including the variation in the dredged level and the effects
of re-siltation after maintenance dredging.
gross
underkeel
clearance motions and nett clearance
Figure 5.18 Under keel clearance factors
In a preliminary assessment of channel depth (in the absence of reliable information on

waves and ship response) all these factors may be lumped together into one depth over
draught ratio taken as 1.1 in sheltered water, 1.3 in waves up to one meter height and 1.5
in higher waves. While such high values may be justified for large ships in long waves
(higher response), in North Sea conditions it will lead to considerable overdesign. A better
method is to determine the various factors separately and to improve the calculation as
more reliable data come available. In formula:
hgd D hT smax a hnet (5.12)
in which:
hgd = guaranteed depth (with respect to a specified reference level)

D = draught design ship
hT = tidal elevation above reference level, below which no entrance is allowed
smax = maximum sinkage (fore or aft) due to squat and trim
a = vertical motion due to wave response
hnet = remaining safety margin or net under keel clearance
In many countries the reference level for sea charts, including port areas, is Chart Datum
(CD), often defined as the Lowest Low Water Level (LLWS) during springtide. This is
easiest for mariners as in 99% of the time the actual water level is above CD, giving extra
safety for their ship. In The Netherlands water depths in coastal areas and the ports are
given with respect to NAP and therefore the tidal amplitude needs to be taken into account.
The channel depth below CD as shown on a nautical chart is guaranteed by the government
or port authority responsible for maintenance. This means that the actual seabed may be
decimetres below this guaranteed or nominal level, depending on the maintenance dredging
program.
The value hT is introduced when a port decides to apply a tidal window: ships may only
enter during a certain period around high water. Obviously such a measure reduces the
nominal channel depth, but the entry limitation reduces the accessibility of the port.
The values of smax , a and hnet together also form the gross under keel clearance or UKC.
They may be estimated on the basis of experience: smax = 0.5 m; a Hs 2 (or the ampli-
tude related to the significant wave height therefore assuming a RAO = 1) and hnet having
a value depending on the type of soil along the channel, 0.3 m for soft mud, 0.5 m for a
sandy bottom and 1.0 m for a hard soil or rock.
Alternatively smax and a are calculated more precisely. For the ship response the actual
RAO values are applied to the wave climate. For squat a number of different formulae
exist, some of which are applicable in specific conditions only. A general formula for
shallow water is given below (Barrass, 2004):
CB 0 81 2 08
s 3 98 k vs (5.13)
30
in which:
s = squat [m]
vs = vessel speed [m/s]
CB = block coefficient [-]
k = blockage coefficient (= As Ach ) [-]
Equation (5.13) holds for canals, restricted channels and laterally unconfined water, as
shown in Figure 5.19. In the latter case the effective width of the waterway is introduced
to calculate Ach :
We f f 2
77 45 1 Cw (5.14)
Bs
with:
Cw = Waterplane area coefficient As Bs Ls [-]

As = Vessel cross-sectional area in the plane of the water surface [m2 ]
Ls = Vessel length [m]
Obviously, there is no sharp distinction between laterally unconfined water and restricted
channels. A channel with an underwater bank height less than 40% of the water depth or a
width larger than We f f is considered laterally unconfined.
Equation (5.12) is basically a deterministic calculation with arbitrary values for the stochas-
tic parameter a and for the safety margin hnet . Hence the real risk of a ship touching the
channel bottom is unknown. In order to avoid possible over dimensioning the probabilistic
Figure 5.19 Waterway configuration
method is introduced, whereby depth is calculated for an acceptable probability of bot-

tom touch. In this approach the actual seabed profile can also be included as a stochastic
parameter. The design formula then reads as follows:
Z h hT D s a (5.15)
in which h (= channel depth to reference level including dredging tolerance and the effect of
resiltation), hT and D are deterministic. For the parameters s and a the probability density
function needs to be determined. Subsequently the probabilistic analysis is made on Level
II or Level III for the probability of bottom touch:
Pr Z 0 F
This approach has been successfully applied for the depth optimisation in the Euro- and
Maasgeul to the Port of Rotterdam. The design ship is the Berge Stahl (and a few bulk
carriers with similar draught), the number of calls per year is not very high. Based on ex-
tensive studies on risk of damage to the ship the value of ’F ’ has been defined at 1 100
transits of the channel.
To conclude, we mention three aspects that are related to the channel depth designs, namely
the (vertical) tidal window, the concept of nautical depth and specific effects.
(i) Tidal window

It is emphasised that for channels subjethenct to tidal motion not all ships need to
be able to enter or leave port at all stages of the tide. On the contrary, it will often
be more economic to restrict the navigability of the channel, at least for the biggest
ships, to a limited period of the tide, the so-called tidal windows. This mostly refers
to the vertical tide, but it may also apply to limiting tidal currents, i.e. to the hori-
zontal tide (in addition, many ports have a wave window: wave conditions beyond
which port entry is not permitted either for safety of the vessel itself, or due to the
impossibility of pilots to board vessels).
The type and number of ships involved and the applicable extent of restrictions - i.e.
the width of the tidal windows - has to be studied from case to case. It will normally
be determined on basis of a minimisation of the sum of channel construction and
maintenance costs and ship waiting costs. In actual practice there are often consider-
able hidden waiting costs, because ships tend to reduce speed well in advance of the
harbour entry, rather than to have to wait at an anchorage.
When designing an approach channel with tidal windows the length of the channel
and ship speed have to be taken into account as shown in Figure 5.20. In fact, the
window needs to be defined at the beginning of the channel in such way that ships
entering within the window can traverse the length of the channel safely at a normal
speed. In case of emergency (motor failure or a collision) there have to be anchorages
along the channel, the last one close to the port entrance.
Figure 5.20 Vertical tidal window
(ii) Nautical depth

If the bottom of the waterway is covered with a non-consolidated, liquid layer of
mud, a clear definition of the depth of the channel does not exist. Moreover the
meaning of under keel clearance changes, because there is no danger of damage to
the ship when it sails through the upper part of the mud layer. The solution lies in
defining the ”nautical bottom” at a level, where its physical characteristics reach a
limit beyond which contact with a ship’s keel causes either damage or unacceptable
effects on controllability and manoeuvrability. Accordingly nautical depth is defined
as the vertical distance between the nautical bottom and the free water surface.
The above concept was subject of extensive studies both in laboratory and at sea
in The Netherlands and Belgium, for the purpose of optimising the maintenance
dredging volumes in the Europoort and Zeebrugge channels (PIANC, 1983). Without
going into great detail the outcome was to define the nautical bottom at a certain
density of the fluid mud layer, see Figure 5.21. The density of 1200 kg/m3 was
determined for the Port of Rotterdam, but in other locations slightly different values
may be specified. Quite extensive background information on survey techniques and
the effects on manoeuvrability is given in PIANC 1997.
(iii) Specific effects
A ships draught will be temporarily increased in channel bends due to heel. Es-
pecially container ships are sensitive to this effect and heel angles of 3 have been
observed. For a Bs of 50 m this means already some 1.3 m increase of draught which
will be even more if the ship is partly or totally de-ballasted. Squat will also be tem-
porarily increased if ships pass each other, particularly in confined waterways. For
example, a typical squat value for large containerships in the Panama Canal is 4ft
which will double to 8 ft when two such ships pass each other en route. This has
immediate consequences for the design depth of relevant channels and canals.
Figure 5.21 Definition of nautical depth
5.4 Manoeuvring Areas within the Port

The manoeuvring of small size vessels generally poses no special problem in the sense
that specific measures have to be taken in the dimensioning of the port infrastructure. The
required stopping lengths are limited (see Section 5.2.1) and can usually be accommodated
in conventionally sized inner channels and manoeuvring spaces. Manoeuvring capability
of these vessels is generally good, and upon entering port they will often manoeuvre and
stop under their own power.
For large ships the situation is different. Because of their much longer stopping distance
and because of the lack of course control during the stopping manoeuvre, they will mostly
not be allowed to stop under their own power. This may already apply to vessels of ap-
proximately 50,000 t and over. This means that as long as no effective tugboat control is
available, such ships have to maintain a certain minimum speed relative to the water, at
which there is still sufficient rudder control available. This speed is about 4 kn, sometimes
slightly less.
The number and capacity of tugs depend on the size of the vessel. For ships of about
50,000 t 2 tugs will be sufficient, one operating forward and one aft. But for large container
ships, VLCC’s and large bulk carriers 3 to 4 tugs are required. The capacity is expressed in
maximum bollard pull provided by a tug. The total bollard pull TB is derived from the ship
size by means of the following expression:
)
TB 60 40 (5.16)
100 000
in which:
) = ship displacement (t)
E.g. a 200,000 t tanker, with a displacement of 240,000 t will require a total bollard pull of
about 180 t. This can be provided by 3 tugs with 60 ton capacity or 4 tugs with 50 ton.
The stopping length becomes an important aspect for the port lay-out, when the design ship
requires an entrance speed above the minimum value and/or the wave climate outside the
port is such that pilots cannot board or tugs cannot make fast for considerable periods of
time. The latter situation occurs for Hs 1 5 m (possibly increased to Hs 2 m by use of
larger pilot launchers/tug boats). The slowing down and stopping length is then required
within the protection of the breakwater, i.e. in relatively sheltered water with little or no
currents, and is determined by the factors:
a) Entrance speed of the ship

b) Time required to tie up the tugboats and to manoeuvre them in position
c) Final stopping length
sub (a) The entrance speed is basically determined by the requirements that the vessel should
have sufficient speed with respect to the surrounding water for proper rudder control,
say 4 kn, and/or that the drift angle should not exceed a tangent of about 1:4. The
first requirement implies that if there is a following current near the entrance of e.g.
2 kn, the minimum entrance speed will be 6 kn. The second condition implies that if
there is a cross current of 2 kn, the minimum entrance speed will be 8 kn. See also
Figure 5.22. The length needed to slow down is taken as
3
L1 vs 2 Ls
4
sub (b) The time required for tying up tugboats depends very much on the expertise of the
crews and the environmental conditions. In average circumstances this time will be
in the range of about 10 minutes. The corresponding length amounts to L2 10 60
2 = 1200 m, assuming that the ship maintains its minimum speed of 2 m/s during
making fast.
sub (c) The final stopping distance is relatively short. The large ships give astern power the
moment tugboats can control the course and, subsequently, stop in about 1 5 Ls from
a speed of 4 kn (L3 ).
The total length within the protection of a breakwater thus becomes:
Ltot L1 L2 L3 (5.17)
Drift of the ship under influence of current and wind
Figure 5.22 Drift of the ship under influence of current and wind
v = ship speed with respect to water

vmin = minimum ship speed for rudder control (4 kn)
veff = ship speed with respect to channel bottom (design entrance speed)
u = current velocity
vwd = transverse speed of ship as a result of wind drift
O = drift angle
Faxis = angle between current and channel axis
In Figure 5.22 the ship has to maintain an angle with the channel axis in order to
counteract the forces due to current and wind. This drift angle is limited to about 14
because for greater angles the rudder control reduces too much.
The ship sails along the channel axis with a speed with respect to the channel bottom ve f f ,
which is calculated by either of the two equations:
(i) minimum speed can be maintained, without too much drift angle,
ve f f vmin cos O u cos F
provided that tan F 14

or Vmin cos O u cos F 4 u sin F vwd
(ii) the maximum permissible drift angle dictates the ship speed
ve f f 4 u sin F vwd
The consequence of the above requirements is that the length of the inner channel easily
measures 2.5 km or more, if the port wants to be able to receive large ships under acceptable
standards of nautical safety. However, there are no international rules to which the dimen-
sions of port channels and manoeuvring spaces have to comply and the PIANC-guidelines
do not address this aspect of stopping length.
In case of a captive port facility for dry or liquid bulk the solution is often to apply a hori-
zontal tidal window, i.e. the ship may only enter when the tidal currents are below a certain
value. For busy commercial ports this solution is often unacceptable, because of the inher-
ent limitations of access and resulting waiting time.
Note: in the Euro-/Maasgeul (Port of Rotterdam) and IJ-geul (Port of Amsterdam) a hori-
zontal tidal window has been introduced for the largest vessels, not for reasons of reducing
the stopping length, but to achieve safety in more general.
The width of the inner channel is determined using the same guidelines given in Section
5.3.2. Obviously, width additions for current and waves do not apply, because these are
eliminated by breakwaters. Where ships enter under influence of cross-currents, additional
space is required immediately behind the breakwaters. Upon entering the drift angle has a
tendency to increase because the bow of the ship is moving out of the current and the mo-
ment on the ship increases. An experienced captain or pilot will anticipate this movement
by giving some rudder in opposite direction. In practice allowance is made for this aspect
by extending the outside channel width for 2-3 Ls inside the breakwater before narrowing
to the inside width (see Figure 5.23).
Figure 5.23 Port entrance manoeuvre
The inner channel should end in a turning basin or circle, from where vessels, whether
small or big, are towed by tugboats to their respective basins. The diameter of this turning
basin should be 2 Ls . In exceptional cases, for small ports where no tugboats are avail-
able, the diameter should be 3 Ls . In case of currents, for instance in river ports, the
turning basin should be lengthened to compensate for vessel drift during manoeuvring.
The length, width and lay-out of the inner channel can be optimised in a similar way as the
width of an approach channel, viz. by fast-time manoeuvring simulatons initially, and by
a full-mission real-time simulator ultimately (see Section 5.3.1). Also here, the stochastic
nature of human navigator performance plays an important role.
With the aid of statistical processing of the simulator results, the boundaries of the in-
ner channel should be determined in such a way, that the probability of exceeding these
boundaries does not exceed a given acceptable frequency. This acceptable frequency, in its
turn, should in principle be determined on considerations of minimisation of overall costs,
including the mean direct and indirect cost of damage if the boundaries are exceeded.
5.5 Port Basins and Berth Areas

5.5.1 Nautical Aspects
Port basins should be given a sufficient width for the safe towing in and towing out of the
vessels, whilst other berths are occupied. For conventional cargo and container ships, this
results in 4 to 5 Bs 100 (Figure 5.24). If Bs 25 m (conventional general cargo ship),
this means a basin width of some 200 to 225 m; if Bs 32 m (container ships), the basin
width should be about 230 to 260 m.
Bs
Â Bs
50 m
20 - 25 m
20 m
Bs
Figure 5.24 Basin width
In case of very long basins, say 1,000 m or more, it is desirable that ships can be turned in
the basin. The required width is about Ls Bs 50.
For big tankers or bulk carriers, the desirable basin width - also for two-sided use of the
basin- is 4 to 6 Bs 100 m. The lower value applies to favourable wind conditions, the
higher to frequent and strong cross-winds. For Bs 45 m, 5 Bs 100 m results in a basin
width of 325 m.
Not to be overlooked in planning the port basins is a separate area for the small craft, i.e.
tugs, flats and pilot launches. Because of their size these vessels are more sensitive to wave
disturbance and hence the location of the small craft harbour must on one hand be well
protected and on the other hand not too far from the port entrance, where they have to pick
up incoming ships and let go the departing vessels. Sometimes this is achieved by creating
a separate basin (with the appropriate depth) protected by its own breakwater. The berth
length and basin surface area required depends on the number of tugs (see also Section
5.4).
Regarding the berth orientation, wave, wind and (in case of offshore or river berths) current
conditions play a role. Ideally for safe berthing, the berth should be aligned within about
30 of the prevailing wind direction. Currents alongside the berth should be limited to 3 kn
and perpendicular to the berth no more than 0.75 kn (OCIMF, 1997).
5.5.2 Wave Agitation

Waves within the boundaries of a port may have been generated locally, or have entered
from outside. Due to the limited fetch locally generated waves will generally be smaller
and have short periods. But, some ports do have a fetch for specific wind directions which
cannot be neglected, e.g. Rotterdam, New York, the Mersey ports in the UK, Bombay and
the south-western part of the port of Singapore. If the fetch is, for example, in the 5 to 10
km range, wave heights (Hs ) will be somewhat in excess of 1 m for a Beaufort 7 wind, and
some 1.7 m for Beaufort 9, with periods Tp of 3 to 3.5 s. Since, moreover, these waves can
be very steep, they will hamper harbour tugs and similar craft, but large sea-going vessels
will not be affected at all.
Wave penetration into a harbour mostly takes place through the harbour entrance. However,
also the overtopping of low-crested breakwaters of wave transmission through permeable
breakwaters - the latter particularly for long period waves - may contribute to wave agita-
tion within the port. For example, in the outer harbour of the port of Visakhapatnam on the
Indian east coast, wave transmission through the quite permeable primary and secondary
armour layers of the southern breakwater is an important cause for the local wave problems.
It is crucial to access the magnitude of these phenomena at the design stage of the break-
water(s), as it is difficult to devise suitable means to reduce wave penetration once the
breakwaters have been built.
In general terms, the problems encountered to limit wave penetration in a harbour increase
with increasing wave period. In this respect, an old ocean swell with a period in the order
of 12 to 16 s is already more difficult to protect against than wind waves of 6 to 8 s period.
For still longer wave periods, as applies for seiches with a period of 2 to 3 min or more,
the only solution often is to minimise resonance in the design of the port’s water areas (see
Section 5.5.3).
The port lay-out has to satisfy two different requirements as far as wave penetration is
concerned: (i) operational conditions must allow efficient loading and unloading of the
ships at berth, and (ii) for limit state conditions the ship must be able to remain at berth
safely.
(i) Operational conditions

In the preliminary design stage (master plan or feasibility study) the wave penetra-
tion for operational conditions is often estimated on the basis of hand-calculations
(Cornu or the wave penetration diagrams in the Coastal Engineering Manual) or sim-
ple computer models. The criteria at the various berth locations are in that case given
as allowable wave heights for unloading/loading and for the relevant ship types (see
Table 5.2). It is clear that the wave height criteria are quite crude, because the wave
Table 5.2 Limiting wave height Hs
Limiting wave heights Hs in m

Type of vessel 0 (head or stern) 45 - 90 (beam)
General cargo 1.0 0.8
Container, Ro/Ro ship 0.5
Dry bulk (30,000-100,000 t); loading 1.5 1.0
Dry bulk (30,000-100,000 t); unloading 1.0 0.8-1.0
Tankers 30,000 t 1.5
Tankers 30,000 - 200,000 t 1.5-2.5 1.0-1.2
Tankers 200,000 t 2.5-3.0 1.0-1.5
periods and the effects of the mooring system on ship movements are not taken into
account. For detailed design of the port lay-out not only more accurate wave penetra-
tion models are applied, but wave heights are translated into ship motions. Therefore
the design has to fulfil operational criteria in terms of ship movements in the relevant
modes (OCIMF, 1997 and PIANC, 1995). Table 5.3 gives a summary for different
ship types.
Table 5.3 Allowable ship motions
Allowable motion amplitudes

Type of ship Surge (m) Sway (m) Yaw ( ) Heave (m)
Tankers 2-3 2-3 1 1.5
Bulkers 0.5-1.5 0.5-1.0 - 0.3-0.5
Container ship 0.5 0.3 1 0.3
Ro/Ro ship 0.3 0.2 0 0.1
Some clarifications apply to the values of Table 5.3:

The allowable surge and yaw motion of tankers is much higher because the
ships are (un)loaded at a central manifold amidships. In detailed design of the
berth the type of loading arm determines the allowable motion in last instance.
The motions of a containership are more critical because of the high precision
needed for (un)loading containers and the delays when the container gets stuck
in the cell guides.
Ro/Ro ships are particularly sensitive to ship motions due to the ramp connec-
tion with the quay.
The ship motion analysis is performed with advanced computer models, as outlined
in Section 5.2.2. A typical example of the results of such a computation is given in
Figure 5.25.
Figure 5.25 Fender and mooring line forces for a tanker in head waves (source: Deltares)
(ii) Limit state conditions

For wave heights above the operational limit the (un)loading of the ship is inter-
rupted, but the ship remains berthed till limit state conditions are reached. In ports,
where wave disturbance does not play a role (e.g. ports behind locks or upriver) this
condition does not occur and ships can stay inside even in extreme weather. Many of
the older ports are examples of this fugitive type. Most newly developed ports cannot
afford to be fugitive and a limit state condition is determined as a trade-off between
costs for breakwaters and shipping cost related to the loss of time due to the ship hav-
ing to leave berth. In case of an offshore berth the limit state may be chosen at a 1/yr
wave condition, while in case of an enclosed harbour basin a 1/10 yr sea state may
be more appropriate. In all cases the forces in the mooring lines and fenders have
to be within the allowable limits. An interesting aspect here is that the fenders can
be designed strong enough, but that the number and allowable strength of the moor-
ing lines are often the determining factor. To determine the line and fender forces
requires again computer calculations (see Section 5.2.2) or even physical models in
case of a complex geometry of the port and/or the seabed. More details on types of
mooring lines and fenders and their characteristics will be outlined in Chapter 10.
5.5.3 Harbour Basin Resonance

In case the period of the incident waves equals or approximates the natural period of oscil-
lation of a harbour basin, resonance phenomena will occur. This may lead to locally much
higher waves and, consequently, to more severe problems for ships at berth. If a harbour
basin has a more or less uniform depth and rectangular shape, the natural periods of oscil-
lation Tn are as follows (see Figure 5.26):
closed basin open-ended basin

LB LB
fundamental mode
(first harmonic)
n=1 n=1
second harmonic
n=2 n=2
third harmonic
n=3 n=3
Figure 5.26 Basin oscillation
closed basins
2 LB 1
Tn with n 12 (5.18)
n gD
open ended basins
1
Tn 4 LB 2n 1 with n 12 (5.19)
gD
The closed basin condition would apply to basins with a very narrow entrance and to trans-
verse oscillations.
In case of a more complex geometry of the basin boundaries and variable depths, mathe-
matical models have to be used to determine the Tn in different basins.
This phenomenon should be avoided or minimised in the planning stage, i.e. by checking
the selected lay-out and if necessary by modifying it. Changing the size of harbour basins
often is not effective, because resonance then occurs for a slightly higher or lower wave pe-
riod. The best approach is to avoid regular shapes (organ pipes) and to introduce damping
boundaries, where possible.
The problem of harbour resonance is particularly manifest along the borders of oceans, be-
cause of the long period swell (Tp = 10-16 s) and the occurrence of long waves with periods
ranging from 30-300 s. Although the latter waves have small amplitudes, when creating
resonance they can become a nuisance. An additional factor is that such long waves easily
pass through rubble mound breakwaters, if their core is slightly porous. The third measure
to avoid resonance is therefore to make the core of the breakwaters as impermeable as pos-
sible.
In case harbour resonance occurs once the port is constructed it is more difficult to reduce
the problem. Placing additional (impermeable) breakwaters close to the entrance to the
basin is one method. Care should be taken that navigation is not impeded by the new
structures. Another measure is to create additional damping at the closed end of the basin,
but this is often conflicting with terminal functions. Moreover the dampening effect of a
spending beach on long period waves is very limited. In such cases it is easier to provide
additional, stiff mooring lines from the quay-side to reduce the effects of the resonance on
the ship motions. A new development in ship mooring, the so-called vacuum pad which
minimises the horizontal ship motions, will be attractive in this respect.
5.6 Morphological Aspects

In three different ways morphological processes affect the port lay-out:
(i) The effect of a coastal port with breakwaters on the natural littoral transport, often
resulting in accretion and erosion of the adjacent coastlines.
(ii) Siltation in the approach channel and in the area close to the port entrance, leading
to maintenance dredging.
(iii) Sediment transport into the port area leading to deposition and maintenance dredging.
5.6.1 Littoral Transport

In Section 4.4.4 the function of the breakwater to intercept littoral transport was mentioned.
In determining the length of the breakwater(s) two criteria apply:
(i) The width of the breaker zone. This varies, however, with the deep water wave
height (in first approximation the breaker depth db 1 6 Hs ) and the question must
be answered for what frequency of storms is taken as criterion in this respect. A
compromise is sought between very low frequency of occurrence leading to long
breakwaters but minimum siltation, and a high frequency with short breakwaters and
much maintenance dredging. As a first approximation the annual wave condition is
often used, but in a design optimisation the minimum of capital construction cost +
maintenance/dredging cost has to be determined.
(ii) The storage capacity at the side of the breakwater from which littoral transport
comes. Again it is an economic question in which cost of breakwater and of main-
tenance dredging have to be minimised. But it is also a matter of guaranteed depth
of the approach channel. The process of accretion on one side may, in the case of
relatively short breakwaters, fill up the triangle between the original coastline and
the breakwater, after which littoral transport continues. This will cause accelerated
siltation in the approach channel as shown in many existing ports (see Figure 5.27).
If this shoal reaches above charted depth (see Figure 5.18), the access of the largest
ships would be blocked, which clearly is not acceptable.
Figure 5.27 Effects of the port on littoral transport
For the port planner this means the following:
If there is substantial transport in both directions the port needs two breakwaters,
reaching to sufficient depth to avoid that the instantaneous transport is deposited in
the approach channel and harbour basins.
If the littoral transport is predominant in one direction, one breakwater may be suffi-
cient (but the eddy at the leeside of this breakwater may still deposit sediment, which
is undesirable).
In both cases above the breakwater at the side whence the net annual transport comes
from, has to be long enough to minimize by-passing sand to cause rapid siltation
of the channel (instead of making the breakwater longer it is possible to design an
artificial sand by-pass). The head of the second breakwater has to be positioned in
such way that by-passing material is not drawn into the port, even if this is conflicting
with nautical requirements (see Figure 5.28).
The methods for calculating littoral transport, rates of erosion and accretion, and deposition
rates in and around the approach channel are not treated in this book.
Figure 5.28 lay-out of breakwater heads in relation to littoral transport
5.6.2 Siltation of Approach Channels

Siltation in the outer channel can also be caused by settlement of sediments due to the in-
creased depth or reduced current velocities. This mechanism becomes an important factor
for channels located in coastal areas with fine material at the seabed, in estuaries or when a
natural river has been deepened to allow larger ships to reach an upstream port. Examples
are the Nieuwe Waterweg in Rotterdam, which was deepened from a natural depth of about
NAP -6.0 m to -15.0 m at present, the channel to the port of Shanghai (from CD 7 0 m
to 12 5 m) and the shipping channel in the muddy La Plata delta in Argentina, from CD
5 5 m to CD 9 0 m.
Computer programs are available to analyse the complex process of settlement and con-
densation of cohesive sediments. Again reference is made to Van der Velden (1995). Here
an empirical method is mentioned, which is particularly useful for channels extending far
into silty or muddy areas or in cases, where the natural riverbed is deepened to allow ship-
ping. In such cases the annual siltation volumes may be estimated as a percentage of the
overdepth (the difference between the new design depth and the natural depth).
Vd Cr W hover (5.20)
in which
Vd = average annual volume of resiltation [m3 /year]

Cr = resiltation factor [m/yr]
W = channel width [m]
hover = over depth [m]
The resiltation factor may be derived from an existing approach channel along the same
coast or by comparing the morphological conditions with similar situations elsewhere in
the world. Analysis of maintenance dredging volumes in major approach channels has
shown that values of Cr between 0.5 and 0.7 m/yr are quite common and in the La Plata
delta even Cr = 1.0 m/yr is found.
The method is useful for preliminary assessment because it allows taking the consequences
of (high) maintenance dredging costs into account in the early stage of concept develop-
ment. The problem is that, contrary to the littoral transport effects, very little can be done
in terms of design to reduce this sedimentation effect. For new to build ports it may lead to
reconsideration of the site for port development. And for the deepening of existing chan-
nels, it may be more economic to locate the necessary expansion nearer to the coast or even
into the sea, where deeper water is available.
5.6.3 Sedimentation inside the Port

Like the previous effect, the sedimentation inside the port area is also often caused by fine
sediments entering through the entrance and/or from upriver and settling in the deepened
basins and manoeuvring areas. Three mechanisms play a role in the sediment intrusion
through the entrance:
(i) The tidal filling of the port.

(ii) Density currents at the entrance, where salt (and/or colder) water flows in at the
bottom, while more fresh (and/or warmer) water flows out at the surface.
(iii) The exchange of sediment filled water in an eddy behind the breakwater forming the
port entrance (see Figure 5.29).
The annual rates of sediment deposition due to these processes are reasonably easy to es-
timate, based on preliminary data on sediment load and schematisation of the hydraulics.
Very often various processes act at the same time, in concurrence with sediment flow from
upriver. In such cases numerical models are applied for more accurate determination of the
resulting maintenance dredging.
Figure 5.29 Sediment exchange between main current and eddy
5.7 References
Barrass, C.B., Ship design and performance, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford,
2004
Delefortrie, G., Manoeuvrability of deep draft vessels in muddy navigation areas, PIANC
Magazine, Oct. 2008
Goda, Y and Yoshimura, T., Wave forces on a vessel tied at offshore dolphins, Proc. 13th
Int. Conf. on Coastal Engineering, ASCE, 1972
Hensen, H., Tug use in ports, Port of Rotterdam Authority/ Nautical Institute, London,
1997
OCIMF, Mooring Equipment Guidelines, Livingstone, 2008
PIANC, Approach channels, A guide for design, Report Working Group PTC II-30, Brus-
sels, 1997
PIANC, Criteria for movement of moored ships in Harbours, Report Working Group PTC
II-24, Brussels, 1995
Vellinga, T., Environmental issues in port development and port operation, 2004
Velsink, H., Manoeuvring simulation: a Port Planner’s wish, MARIN Jubilee Meeting,
Wageningen, 1992
Vis, F.C. et al, Long Waves and Harbour Design, Proc. Int. Conf. on Numerical Modelling
of Ports and Harbours, Birmingham, 1985
Chapter 6
Planning and Design of Port

Terminals
6.1 General
Port terminals are those port facilities that constitute the factual interface between different
modes of transport of the cargo. For example, from sea going vessel into inland barges,
road or rail transport, pipeline or feeder vessel, and vice versa.
There are also IWT (inland water transport) terminals where the cargo is transferred from
inland barge or self-propelled vessel to truck or railway wagon, and the other way around.
In commercial ports, the terminals are the ’raison d’être’ of a port. All other facilities are
provided only to enable the terminals to function, and that in a safe and efficient manner.
For captive port facilities the terminal is only a necessary element to enable the key process,
for instance a refinery or a power plant.
6.2 Services Provided

The services provided by a port terminal normally comprise the unloading from ship to
shore, or the reciprocal process, the temporary storage, sometimes a limited processing of
the cargo, and the loading or unloading into or from the through-transport means.
Unloading is also quite frequently done by ship-borne gear. This applies to virtually all
liquid bulk cargoes for which ship-borne pumps are used. It also applies to some dry bulk
cargoes carried by geared bulk carriers or s, and to the use of ship’s cranes on general cargo
or multi-purpose vessels. The loading of bulk cargoes is almost always done by shore-
based equipment.
Intermediate storage is not necessarily part of the services, but, in practice, almost always
is. Many cargoes need customs checking and/or quality and quantity checks which pre-
cludes direct through-transport. However, a more important reason, particularly for bulk
111
cargoes, is the difference in parcel sizes and loading and unloading rates of maritime trans-
port on the one hand, and through-transport on the other. E.g. a very large bulk carrier may
unload ore at a rate of up to 5,000 t/hr or 100,000 tonne or more per day, but it is unneces-
sary, technically almost impossible and very uneconomic to arrange the through transport
at the same rates. In other words, an intermediate storage or buffer stock is necessary.
Apart from that, certain clients prefer to locate operational and strategic reserves in the
port rather than at the site of production or consumption, which leads to increased storage
demands.
The processing that a terminal can offer as a service, usually consist of packing or re-
packing, bagging (e.g. grain or fertiliser) or blending (e.g. different grades of ore or coal).
More complex forms of processing exist, but are not very common. The ’added-value’
activities, that are very important for the employment, are mostly done outside the terminals
in logistic centres.
6.3 Terminal Components

The components of a terminal are:
• The wet and the dry infrastructure

• The suprastructure
• The equipment
• The human resources
The wet infrastructure comprises part or all of a harbour basin in which one or more berths
are located to accommodate the ships. The type of berth is largely dictated by the nature
of the loading or unloading process (see Figure 6.1). Relatively the most expensive is the
marginal quay or wharf which is a quay connected over its entire length to the terminal
area behind it. It thus permits longitudinal as well as transverse cargo movements to and
from the storage areas over the full length of the ship. This is a prerequisite for the efficient
handling of all non-bulk cargoes. Marginal quays are also often used for large dry bulk
terminals when heavy gantry cranes have to be able to travel alongside a ship for unloading
purposes. (Particularly for dry bulk cargoes, berths for loading and unloading respectively
may be quite different because of the different equipment used).
The cheapest form of berth but not fully fitting in this overview is the SPM (single
point mooring) used for the loading or unloading of oil and/or oil products in open sea. A
submarine pipeline connects the SPM to the shore.
Liquid bulk carriers load or unload through pipelines. They, generally, have a central mid-
ship manifold where pipelines from the different tanks connect with hoses or (un)loading
arms on shore. Such a process does not require shore-based equipment to travel alongside
the ship. In consequence, a relatively simple and cheap platform suffices to carry the load-
ing arms with often separate berthing or breasting dolphins and mooring dolphins to absorb
Chapter 6. Planning and Design of Port Terminals 113
Figure 6.1 Different types of berths
the horizontal forces exerted by the ship.
But, also some dry bulk carriers are not very demanding with regard to berth and shore facil-
ities. This applies to the so-called self unloader which carries its own unloading equipment.
It consists of one or two longitudinal belt conveyors below the tapered holds, transferring
to a vertical conveyor system which, in its turn, transfers the cargo to a horizontal conveyor
carried by a swinging boom which can have a length of up to 70 m. The boom conveyor
discharges into a hopper and conveyor system on shore. Because of the length of the boom,
the only berthing facilities that are required are breasting and mooring dolphins. (But, of
course, the ship itself is more expensive per tonne capacity than a conventional bulk carrier.)
The dry infrastructure comprises such items as storage area pavements an expensive
item for container terminals , roads, foundations for crane tracks, drainage systems, etc.
The dry infrastructure usually does not constitute the most spectacular part of the terminal,
but it is, nevertheless, a very necessary one.
The suprastructure consists of the sheds and other covered storage spaces as silos, offices,
workshops, etc.
Terminal equipment, either fixed or mobile, is found in a tremendous variety. Fixed equip-
ment comprises mainly belt conveyors and stationary cranes. Mobile equipment moves
either on rails (all sorts of gantry cranes, stacker-reclaimers, travelling hoppers) or on,
mostly, pneumatic rubber tyres (RTG’s, FLT’s, straddle carriers, tractors/trailers, a.s.o.).
Equipment will be discussed more in detail in the chapters dedicated to a particular type of
terminal.
The fourth and final terminal component mentioned is the human resources. It is certainly
not the least important one. As in most industries, productivity, efficiency and quality
largely depend on the capability and motivation of management and labour force. An old
but well run and well maintained terminal will generally provide a better service level to
its clients than a modern well-equipped terminal that is poorly operated.
6.4 Types of Terminals

There are as many types of terminals as there are ship types outlined in Chapter 2. Al-
though the detailed aspects of planning and design are treated per type of terminal in the
following chapters, a short overview is given here.
The main types of terminals that can be distinguished are
• Conventional general cargo terminals

• Multi-purpose terminals
• Ro-Ro terminals
• Container terminals
• Liquid bulk terminals, such as for:
- Liquid gas
- Crude oil
- Oil products
- Edible oil
- Chemical products
• Dry bulk terminals, such as for,
- Grain
- Ore and coal
- Special products (cement, sulphur, etc.)
• Fruit terminals
• Fish handling facilities
• IWT terminals
• Ferry terminals
(i) General Cargo Terminal

The conventional general cargo terminal is one of the oldest and, traditionally, was
designed for the handling of break-bulk and later on also unitised general cargo.
Since break-bulk and unitisation have given way, to a large extent, to containerisation,
the (conventional) general cargo terminals have lost much of their importance in
modern ports. Nevertheless, they are still needed. In fact new ones are still being built
because the traditional layouts and dimensions no longer suffice. A modern general
cargo terminal has to be able to handle a much greater variety of cargo, including
containers carried on deck of multi-purpose vessels, at a much greater speed.
Of course, not all ports can permit themselves to build specialised terminals for all
sorts of commodities. The investments required are mostly considerable and can only
be justified if there is a certain minimum cargo flow through such a special terminal.
Also, the space is sometimes lacking for the development of a variety of special
terminals. Finally, specialised terminals can only live up to expectations greater
handling speed, lower price and less pilferage if they are managed and staffed by
personnel trained for and experienced in this particular sort of operation.
Therefore, the answer to the question whether or not to specialise is more than one
of simple economics and arithmetic.
In developing countries, the rate of specialisation is lagging behind that of the in-
dustrialised world, not only for shortage of funds, but also because the training of
management and labour is lagging behind. This is understandable and not at all dis-
astrous. On the contrary, it is unwise to enforce specialisation too rapidly.
In terms of cargo volumes handled, so apart from considerations of land availability
and operational capability, a special container terminal cannot be expected to be eco-
nomic at throughputs below approx. 50,000 TEU/year. A simple dry bulk terminal
may become justified at a cargo flow of 0.5 to 2 million t/yr, depending also on the
value of the cargo. For oil and liquid gas, specialisation is normally required from
the very beginning, not so much for economic reasons as well as for safety reasons.
(ii) Multi-purpose Terminal
The difference between a modern general cargo terminal and a multi-purpose termi-
nal is very small. Very often the latter is developed from the former by some changes
in the terminal lay-out and in the equipment used. Most multi-purpose terminals
combine conventional breakbulk with container and/or Ro/Ro cargo and the essence
is that the containers are not any more occasional, but part of the regular cargo flow
for which specialised equipment is available. Converting an old general cargo termi-
nal to a multi-purpose terminal is not so easy for a number of reasons:
a) More space is often required and it has to be open. Hence the existing sheds
and rails, which often run along the quays, have to be removed.
b) The wheel loads of modern container cranes are greater and therefore the ex-
isting pavement is insufficient. If rail mounted cranes are used, the rails need
foundations. Otherwise the stability of the quay front has to be checked and
often to be strengthened.
c) The ramps of Ro/Ro ships can not be placed on the quay, when bollards are
spaced too closely. Bollards should be lowered (see Figure 6.2)
A typical example of a multi-purpose terminal is given in Figure 6.3.

(iii) Ro/Ro Terminal
As mentioned in Section 2.3.4 the type of ramp on the Ro/Ro ship determines the
quay lay-out: in case of a single stern ramp special arrangements are needed, such as
Figure 6.2 A lowered bollard
Figure 6.3 A multi-purpose terminal
shown in Figure 2.15 and Figure 6.4. The pontoon on the right is often used in case
the tidal variation in the port is too large for the ship ramp.
For ships with quarter and/or side ramps a marginal quay is suitable, provided that
there are no obstacles like bollards and rails. Ro/Ro terminals show a great variety of
landside lay-outs, depending on how much parking space is needed for the trailers.
Often this is very limited: trucks arrive between 1 and 3 hrs before departure of the
ship and continue their journey immediately after disembarkation in the other port.
When there is no long term parking of trailers the surface area requirement is low and
the terminal can be located where-ever this space is available (possibly even at some
distance from the berth location). The lay-out shown in Figure 6.5 is the terminal of
a. conventional basin b. floating linkspan
Figure 6.4 Ro/Ro berths for stern ramp
parking area
HSS-terminal conventional berths
0 100 500
Figure 6.5 StenaLine terminal
StenaLine in Hook of Holland.

(iv) Container Terminals
Contrary to Ro/Ro terminals the storage of containers on the container terminal often
takes several days (NW-European ports) to several weeks (some ports in develop-
ing countries). This leads to substantial surface area requirements, notwithstanding
the fact that containers can be stacked 3 high or more. Furthermore the storage of
containers has to be as close as possible to the berths in order to achieve efficient
(un)loading. Container terminals can therefore be easily recognised as large areas
with the stacks either parallel with or normal to the waterfront (depending on the
transportation systems). Another characteristic point of modern container terminals
is the giant portainer cranes with their boom in upright position, when idle. See
Figure 2.13 and Figure 7.2.
(v) Liquid Bulk Terminals
Whether for oil, chemicals or liquid gas these terminals all have one thing in com-
mon: the ships are (un)loaded via a central manifold midships and there is no need
for heavy cranes moving alongside. This implies that the shore-side facilities can be
concentrated on a limited surface area, often a kind of platform on piles. And de-
pending on the local geometry and hydraulic conditions the platform may be located
nearshore or at some distance from the coastline, connected by a trestle or isolated
as a so-called island berth (see Figure 6.6).
A special case is the terminal with offshore (un)loading facilities located in deep
Island Berth
T-jetty trestle
submarine
pipelines
Figure 6.6 Different configurations of liquid bulk terminals
water. To make a clear distinction from the Island Berth one could limit this type
of facilities to floating buoys and/or jacket structures to which the ships are moored
by bow hawsers and connected by floating pipelines. In practice one finds the Island
Berth also being referred to as an offshore facility. In the latter case the liquids are
pumped to/from the berth by means of submarine pipelines. The actual landside
facilities comprise storage tanks, which may be located at quite some distance (e.g.
close to the refinery or chemical factory in view of safety procedures).
(vi) Dry Bulk Terminals
Like the previous category, the dry bulk terminals are often designed and built for one
specific type of cargo, be it iron ore, coal or grain. In view of the different transport
processes needed for loading and unloading, there is in most cases a clear difference
between the export terminal and the import terminal for the same commodity . The
loading of bulk carriers in the export terminal is done by conveyor belts extending
right above the ship, from which the material falls freely into the holds at constant
and high capacity. At the import terminal the same cargo is unloaded by means of
cranes, which must be able to move around in order to retrieve all the material within
the hold and to go from one hold to another. As a consequence the export terminal
may be more similar to the jetty / platform arrangement for tankers, while the import
terminal needs a quay for heavy cranes (apart from the self-unloader shown in Figure
2.33).
The storage part of the terminal is basically the same at both sides of water: the
material is stacked in long piles in the open air or in closed silos, depending on the
type of cargo. The piles are separated by the space for conveyor belts and the rails
for the stacking / retrieving equipment (see Figure 6.7).
(vii) Fruit Terminals
Modern fruit terminals are characterised by refrigerated warehouses, that are located
near the waterfront. In some ports the cargo is transferred directly from the ship into
the warehouse by means of conveyor belts. In most ports however there are luffing
cranes at the quay, that can handle the different forms of packaging in which fruit is
transported, palletised boxes or containerised. These cranes are much lighter that the
ones on a container terminal or for dry-bulk handling, see Figure 6.8.
Figure 6.7 Dry bulk terminal of EECV in Europort, Rotterdam
Figure 6.8 Fruit terminal
(viii) Fish Handling Facilities

As fishing ports may vary from a simple beach landing to a full fledged harbour, the
facilities also show a large variation. The minimum requirement for a harbour is a
refrigerated shed for storage of the catch. When the fleet and size of fishing vessels
grows the harbour is usually equipped with a whole range of facilities, comprising
quays, fish processing and marketing buildings, and areas for supply of the vessels,
berthing while in port and ship repair. A typical example of a modern fisheries port
is given in Figure 6.9.
Figure 6.9 Lay-out of the fishing port of Esbjerg, Denmark (Courtesy Royal Haskoning)
(ix) Inland barge Terminals

Like the seaports the lay-out of barge terminals depends on the type of cargo handled.
This may vary from multipurpose / containers to bulk cargo and the characteristics
are similar to those of the seaport terminals. As mentioned in Chapter 3 the transport
of containers by barge is rapidly increasing and with that the need for terminals.
Stevedore ECT participates in a barge terminal along the Rhine at Duisburg, with
special container cranes and stacking areas for different types of containers. Similar
terminals are found along the major rivers for the handling of relatively large numbers
of boxes. Small scale terminals are gradually being established along the smaller
rivers and canals, as demonstrated by the map of Figure 6.10.
Figure 6.10 Network of container terminals in The Netherlands
(x) (Passenger) Ferry and Cruise Terminals

While the Ro/Ro terminal is primarily built for cargo transport, the passenger ferry
and cruise terminal is focused on the quick and safe movement of passengers. It will
be clear that there is an overlap between the two, where both cargo and passengers are
transported by the same ship. Passenger ferries and cruise terminals require a termi-
nal building like a railway station, with ticket counters, waiting lounges, rest rooms,
shops and restaurants. Between this building and the berthed vessel the passengers
must be able to embark and disembark in a smooth and safe manner. For ferries this
is normally achieved by bridges with sufficient capacity to minimise the time spent at
the berth. In case of a cruise ship the time factor does not play an important role, but
care is taken that passengers are transferred safely between the ship and the terminal
building. An example is given in Figure 6.11, which is a typical homeport terminal,
as can be seen from the large parking areas. Intermediate ”ports of call” do not need
these parking areas.
submerged
rip-rap slope
submerged toe wall
original shore line
bulkhead wall
Figure 6.11 Cruise terminal lay-out, Florida, USA
6.5 Terminal Capacity: Maximum or Optimum

Terminal capacity can be defined in different ways, and without specifying which definition
is used and which part of the terminal it is about, a discussion makes no sense.
To start with, capacity can refer to (un)loading, it can refer to storage or to through-
transport. Here it will be assumed that through-transport poses no bottleneck and that
terminal storage capacity is tuned to the (un)loading capacity, but also constitutes no re-
straint. Needless to say that, in practice, this is not always the case.
In terms of (un)loading capacity we can distinguish, in a general sense, the following:
• Maximum instantaneous capacity

• Maximum annual capacity
• Optimum annual capacity
The maximum instantaneous capacity can only be maintained for a short spell, e.g. when
well rested crane drivers start unloading a still full dry bulk carrier. This sort of capacity
is of no interest to the port planner, but it is of great interest to the equipment and system
designer, because all equipment downstream must at least have the same peak capacity to
avoid overload and clogging up.
The maximum annual capacity is the mean hourly capacity (averaged over a long period)
24 (hours/day) 360 (days/year). It is the capacity that can theoretically be attained if
the berths have a 100% occupation, and provided that there are no constraints on the land-
side of the terminal. But, since ship arrivals and ship loading and unloading are time-wise
stochastical processes, a 100% occupation leads to tremendous congestion on the sea-side
of the terminal and to excessive ship waiting times, it is of no real interest to anybody.
However, it is the way that many port authorities opt to define the capacity of their port,
because it shows impressive figures.
The optimum annual capacity is the sort of capacity with which the port planner has to
deal. Unfortunately, ’optimum’, again, can be defined in different ways. If ’optimum’ is
meant to be ’economic optimum’, it generally is that capacity or rather cargo throughput
for which the overall port costs per tonne of cargo reach a minimum. The overall port
costs comprise all fixed and variable terminal costs and all vessel-related costs during the
service period as well as the waiting period, including all port dues. In practice it is often
impossible to determine the optimum capacity in this way, because port and terminal costs
on one hand, and ship related costs on the other hand are born by different parties, each of
which is only interested it its own economic optimum.
In case of integrated, centrally managed transport chains (which applies to some liquid and
dry bulk trades), the true economic optimum can be sought, which is attained when the to-
tal transport cost per tonne from source or supplier to consignee or consumer has reached a
minimum. Port costs may then be well above an absolute minimum, e.g. because a deeper
and more expensive channel and quay allow the use of bigger ships, which reduces mar-
itime transport costs. In other words, optimum terminal capacity in those circumstances,
refers to a given size of ship, which size results from an earlier and more general optimisa-
tion exercise.
However, ’optimum’ does not necessarily refer to an economic optimum, i.e. there are
other optimisation criteria imaginable and also used in practice. For instance, container ter-
minals that have to operate in a heavily competitive regional market may wish to guarantee
a certain minimum service level in order to attract shipping companies. Such a service
level could be described, for example, by a guarantee that no more than x% of the vessels
visiting the terminal, will have a waiting time in excess of y hours and/or that no more than
m% of the vessels will have a total port time in excess of n hours.
The tools used in quantifying these optima, whether referring to cost minima or to ser-
vice level, are, for relatively simple situations, the analytical queuing theory, or, for more
complex conditions, discrete simulation models. They yield for specific boundary condi-
tions the ship waiting times, which can be incorporated if so desired into the cost
minimisation study.
6.6 Terminal Dimensions

The two main components of any terminal are the number of berths, which determine the
length of quay of waterfront required, and the storage area. To calculate these from a design
annual throughput/storage capacity basically three methods are available, with increasing
level of detail and accuracy:
(i) An estimate using capacity ratios. Empirical values of tonne cargo per m quay length,
respective per m2 storage area.

(ii) A calculation of the berth productivity/storage capacity taking into account the spe-
cific type of handling equipment and their numbers, but estimated occupancy values.
(iii) A detailed calculation as per (ii), but also accounting for variations in arrival- and ser-
vice times of vessels and applying queuing theory or simulation models to determine
the proper quay length and storage area.
The latter method is used in the final stages of master planning and in the design phase
and is dealt with in Groenveld, 2005 ’(see ref. in Section 4.6). Methods (i) and (ii) are
used in the preliminary development of lay-outs and are presented below and in the fol-
lowing chapters. The m2 refers to the total terminal area, including internal roads, offices,
workshops and the like.
6.6.1 Quays and Jetties

Capacity ratios for quays and jetties are given as follows:
conventional general cargo 500 to 750 t/yr per m2

containers 300 to 1000 TEU/yr per m2
3,000 to 10,000 t/yr per m2
coal 25,000 to 75,000 t/yr per m2
iron ore 50,000 to 150,000 t/yr per m2
crude oil 70 million 1 t/yr per berth
The wide ranges reflect the large variation in cargo handling productivity, depending on
the type of equipment (e.g. cranes, vehicles), number of ships, etc. A first estimate based
on these capacity ratios has very limited accuracy and shall be improved soonest by the
approach according to method (ii).
The productivity of a berth or jetty is given in general terms (independent of type of cargo):
Cb P N nhy mb (6.1)
P = (un)loading productivity per handling entity (crane, gang, pumps) in t/hr.

N = number of handling entities on a ship of average size.
nhy = number of operational hours per year (depending on number of shifts).
mb = estimated berth occupancy factor.
The value of mb depends on the type of terminal and the number of berths and will be
treated in the subsequent chapters for different terminals. In general a random arrival and
a low acceptable waiting time of ships lead to a low value of mb , while a strict schedule of
arrivals (e.g. ferries) makes it possible to choose an mb close to unity.
1 This high capacity is related to terminals receiving only VLCC and ULCC tankers. But also for smaller
vessels the tanker berths have a relatively high capacity leading generally to very low occupancy rates.
By dividing the design annual throughput by the berth productivity the number of berths of
jetties is found. The quay length Lq is then calculated by multiplying this number with the
length of the average ship (or the design ship in case of a single berth), adding the necessary
space between ships for mooring and/or safety (in Eauation 6.2 taken at 15 m, but in case
of larger ships going up to as much as 30 m).
Ls max 2 15 for n 1
Lq (6.2)
1 1 n Ls 15 15 for n 1
In case of jetties the waterfront area depends on the configuration of the jetties as discussed
in Chapter 10.
6.6.2 Terminal Areas

For terminal area, including storage, internal roads, offices etc., the following capacity ra-
tios serve:
conventional general cargo 4-6 t/yr per m2

containers 0.6 - 1.0 TEU/yr per m2
6 - 10 t/yr per m2
coal 2 15 - 25 t/yr per m2
iron ore 2 30 - 40 t/yr per m2
crude oil 40 - 50 t/yr per m2
As an alternative the following (generalized) equation can be applied:
C t d farea
Agr (6.3)
W cargo hs 365 ms
Agr = gross storage area [m2 ]

C = design annual throughput [t/yr]
td = average dwell time of cargo [days]
farea = factor accounting for difference between gross and
net area and cargo specific requirements [-]
W cargo = average cargo density [t/m3 ]
hs = average stacking height [m]
ms = estimated storage occupancy [-]
Note that the gross storage area in this equation only includes the space needed for roads,
pipelines, crane rails or conveyor belts within the storage and not for other internal roads,
offices etc.
The dwell time depends on the type of cargo and the specific conditions of the terminal
(high through-flow of strategic reserves). The value of ms depends on the variations of
the oncoming and outgoing flows, but also on contingency options, like the availability
2 Figures shown refer to import terminals. Export terminals have even higher capacity ratios.
of additional storage space at some distance from the terminal (extra costs, but possibly
cheaper than having overcapacity during most of the time).
Chapter 7
Container Terminals
7.1 Introduction
In Chapter 2 the development of containerised transport has been treated. The most im-
portant recent developments are presented below, in as far as relevant for the planning and
design of new terminals.
(i) The world container traffic reached a volume of 360 million TEU in 2005, represent-
ing 3500 million tons of cargo (Penfold, 2005). The top 3 stevedoring companies
handled more than 75% of this cargo. The growth rate in the period 2005-2008 was
around 9%, in 2008 and 2009 a decline was registered, but recent forecasts predict
the growth to continue at the above level for the coming 5-10 years.
(ii) The size of container ships is still increasing as shown in Table 7.1. Maersk has
ordered in 2011 10 ships of 18,000 TEU capacity but with quite different draught
as shown in the table. Very surprisingly, the draught has been limited to a mere 15
m by changing the ship design to a rather high block coefficient (the more bulky
shape allows to increase the TEU-capacity). The ships are also designed for a much
lower cruising speed than conventional container ships, the so-called slow sailing.
The cranes ordered for new terminals for the Ultra Large Container Ships or Jumbo-
vessels have already a boom reaching 60 m outside the quay front. Earlier predictions
of the dimensions of a 18,000 TEU ship showed a draught of 21 m., the maximum
draught for passing the Straits of Malacca (hence called Malaccamax). Whether such
ships will ever be built remains to be seen.
(iii) The growth of vessel size and TEU capacity poses new challenges on ports and termi-
nal operators to keep the service time of these ships within 24 hours. Various direc-
tions are followed to solve this problem: increase of crane productivity, introduction
of automation and the handling of the ship on both sides. Probably a combination of
measures will be needed, but it will take years before the new technology will reach
a stage of general acceptance.
The logistical process of container terminals is often determined by the future user, the
stevedoring company or the shipping line, which operates its own terminals. They have
127
Table 7.1 Development of container vessels. (source: Cargo systems, opportunities for container
ports)
Container vessel Ls [m] Bs [m] D [m] Capacity [TEU]

Post Panamax:
APL C-class (1988) 275 39.4 12.5 4340
NYK Altair (1994) 300 37.1 13.0 4740
Maersk S-class (1996) 318 42.8 14.5 7000
OOCL Shenzhen (2003) 320 42.8 15.9 8000
Maersk E-class (2006) 400 53 16.0 14000
Maersk Triple E-class (2013?) 400 59 15.00 18000
their preferred terminal concept, based on past experience and in-house technical know-
how. The port planner must integrate the requirements following from this logistical pro-
cess with the spatial conditions of a specific location.
At the time of master planning the future terminal operator is often not yet known. In this
case the port planner will apply the general principles as outlined in this chapter and will
have to create sufficient flexibility in the lay-out to be able to accommodate future users.
This is also the case when planning terminals for medium sized and smaller ports, which
are mostly multi-user terminals.
7.2 Container Transport and Terminal Operations

Before going into actual design aspects the logistical process on the terminal is described,
starting with some further information on the central element, the container.
7.2.1 Container Types and Sizes

The International Standards Organisation (ISO) issued the official standard dimensions of
containers:
• The most common standard is the TEU (Twenty feet Equivalent Unit), which is a
container with L 20 ft (6.10 m), B 8 ft (2.44 m) and H 8 ft or 8 ft 6 inches
(2.60 m). Its own weight is about 24 kN. Its internal volume is approximately 32 m3
and the maximum payload amounts to 220 kN, up to 280 kN for High Cube. This
implies that the container can not be filled to the limit with high density cargo. In
practice the payload is much lower even, with an average value around 100 kN.
• The 40 feet container (2 TEU or 1 FEU) measures twice as long and has the same
width and height as the 20 ft container. Its own weight is about 45 kN and the internal
volume measures 65 m3 . The maximum payload is only marginally higher than the
TEU: 270 kN, but again the average payload in practice is only 175 kN.
Besides the ISO containers there are several other types in use, including:
Chapter 7. Container Terminals 129
• Oversize containers (longer than 40 ft, of which in particular the 45 ft is used more
often).
• High Cube containers (higher than 8 ft 6 inches).
• Overwidth containers (wider than 8 ft).
The latter category originally measured 8 ft 2.5 inches (2.50 m), because that width allowed
placing two pallets side-by-side inside the container. Moreover, it was the maximum width
permitted on the West European roads. Since this was relaxed to 2.60 m, the container
width of 8 ft 6 inches has become more common.
The existence of non-ISO containers has several negative consequences, as can be expected:
• On the ship the cell guides in the holds are designed to receive ISO containers. Hence
Oversize and Overwidth containers have to be placed on deck. This is limiting the
flexibility of the loading schedules.
• On the terminal the Oversize containers need their own stacks, which again limits the
flexibility.
• The spreader, the frame used under the crane trolley or by the yard equipment to pick
up a container by means of the four twist locks at the corners, must be adjustable to
accommodate the different sizes.
• For the onward transport of containers by road or rail different sizes require special
provisions on the trailer or rail wagon to fasten the containers at the corner castings.
Apart from the variation in size there is a range of special purpose containers (both ISO
and non-ISO), including the following:
• Refrigerated containers or reefers, requiring electrical supply points both on the ship
and on the terminal.
• Tank containers, open frames of (mostly) TEU size around a tank. Because of the
hazardous contents these containers need a separate location from the rest in the
storage yard, with all safety precautions of a liquid bulk terminal.
• Flats, in fact just a bottom structure with corner castings used for large pieces of
cargo, that can not be placed inside a box (but comply with the size and payload
requirements).
All these require separate locations on the terminal and therefore have to be included in the
planning.
7.2.2 The Terminal Processes

The flow of containers through the terminal is shown schematically in Figure 7.1. Fol-
lowing the route of an import container, the different processes on the terminal can be
described.
information and documentation flow
transport transport
cargo flow handling to road/ cargo flow
inbound to stack handling onto
ship/quay adjust- rail/air outbound
ments throughtransport
means
storage
cargo flow
transport to CFS outbound
unstuffing
(separate
small
consignments)
capacity handling throughput stack size throughput handling equipment
determined by: equipment system and system system and CFS size
Figure 7.1 Flow of inbound cargo through the terminal
At the quay
Prior to arrival of a ship the containers to be unloaded have been identified (and those to be
loaded have been arranged in the export stack in such a way that they can be transferred to
the ship in the right order).
Immediately after the ship has made fast at the berth the lashings are taken off the containers
above deck and the ship-to-shore gantry cranes (or portainers) start unloading. A modern
portainer crane is as high as a cathedral, especially with their booms up as shown in Figure
7.2.
Figure 7.2 Post Panamax Portainer cranes at the Delta terminal in Rotterdam
These cranes are generally rail mounted, although recently mobile cranes have been
introduced again. They are characterised by a boom arm, which can be lifted, as
shown in Figure 7.2, or pulled inward, depending on the make. The cranes are
provided with a trolley and a cabin, which moves with it, from which the crane driver
(or operator) guides the trolley and the spreader to the right container on the ship. The
container is picked up and transported to the space between the seaward and landward
leg of the crane, where it is lowered and placed on the transport vehicle in use between
quay and stack. Some typical properties of the crane are:
lifting capacity: lifting capacity: originally 400 kN, now increasing to

800 kN and above, to allow handling of 2 FEU
boom length: going up to 60 m. for the hub terminals
rail gauge: varying from 15 m. to 35 m.
width between legs: min. 16 m. to allow Oversized containers to pass
breadth outer bogeys: 2 40’, to allow cranes at every other bay
crane productivity: peak 40-50 moves/hr. average 20-30 moves/hr (while
working on a ship). Taking into account the TEU-factor
(see Equation (7.1) and the time that the crane is not active
(idling, repairs, etc) the annual crane productivity in the
Hamburg-Le Havre range averages some 135,000 TEU/year.
min. 30 m
40'
fut. 48'
min. 16 m
min. 12 m Panamax 32.2 m
future 39.6 m
backreach rail gauge min. outreach 35 m

min. 15 m 16 to 35 m 2.5 future 40 m
Figure 7.3 Ship-to-shore gantry cranes
Between quay and storage yard

For the transport between the quay and the storage areas several options exist, depending
on the size and the throughput of the terminal and on the preferences of its operator. In
increasing order of sophistication these are:
(i) Forklift truck (FLT, see Figure 7.4). Even the largest FLT’s presently available can
only handle 20 ft containers, with an average payload. For this reason the 20 ft con-
tainers have two rectangular channels in the bottom structure, for the forks of the FLT
to pass under the box. A 40 ft container does not have this. Modern FLTs are pro-
vided with spreaders to pick up a container from above. In addition to this limitation
the FLT needs sideway access to a stack, that can therefore be only two containers
wide and requires much space between the stacks. In view of these limitations the
FLT is used most often for the handling of empty containers only. On multipurpose
terminals with limited container throughput and much space this type of equipment
may offers an economic solution.
(ii) Reach stacker (see Figure 7.5). The difference with the FLT is that this machine
handles the container by means of a boom with a spreader. Hence it can reach the
second row of containers in a stack, that can therefore be four rows wide. However
the space efficiency is still low. Another disadvantage is the relatively high wheel-
pressure at he front wheels, which asks for a strong pavement.
(iii) Chassis (see Figure 7.6). Single trailers for use in the yard only, where they are
moved by tractor units. The containers are stored on the chassis. This approach, quite
customary in U.S. ports, has the disadvantage of low space utilisation, compared with
the stack approach applied in Europe and Asia.
(iv) Straddle Carrier (SC, see Figure 7.7). For this equipment the stack consists of (not
too lengthy) rows of containers, separated by lanes wide enough for the legs and
tyres of the SC. Depending on the nominal stack height, 2- or 3-high, the SC can lift
a container 1 over 2 or 1 over 3. Certainly in the latter case the SC becomes quite
tall and difficult to manoeuvre since the driver cabin is on top. For reasons of space
efficiency and flexibility in use the SC is quite popular among terminal operators,
however.
These four types of equipment deal with the transport from quay to storage yard and within
the yard. In high capacity terminals the two functions are often separated, with the fol-
lowing two types only used for quay-yard and vice versa, and dedicated cranes within the
stack.
(v) Multi Trailer System (MTS, see Figure 7.8). A series of up to 5 trailers interconnected
and pulled by one yard tractor, offers a substantial reduction of the number of drivers
needed. The system, developed and manufactured in The Netherlands, has a special
device to keep all trailers in line when making a turn.
(vi) Automated Guide Vehicle (AGV, see Figure 7.9). Developed and implemented by
ECT on the Delta-SeaLand terminal on the Maasvlakte, these vehicles follow stan-
dard tracks in the pavement between quay and storage yard. They are remote-
controlled from a central station and therefore mean a further drastic reduction of
manpower. One of the ”teething troubles” of this innovative design is that the pave-
ment was showing rapid deterioration, due to the high wheel loads and the ”rutting”
(all AGVs follow exactly the same track which causes channels in the pavement).
This has been overcome in the most recent extension of the ECT terminal.
(vii) Lift-AGVs. The new APM terminal in the Port of Rotterdams latest extension,
Maasvlakte 2, starting operations in 2014, will make use of Lift Automated Guided
Vehicles, that place the containers on a platform from where ASCs subsequently take
over, resulting in a higher terminal throughput.
Figure 7.4 A forklift truck Figure 7.5 A reach stacker
Figure 7.6 A chassis

Figure 7.7 A straddle carrier Figure 7.8 Multi Trailer System (MTS)
Figure 7.9 Automated Guided Vehicle (AGV)

Quay to storage transport systems

ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Fork lift truck / Reach stacker
slow investment equipment much storage space
simple / flexible in operation labour intensive
mostly used for empties only handles loaded 20 feet containers
Terminal chassis
low investment pavement much storage space
low maintenance costs large number of chassis needed
simple / flexible in operation low throughput capacity
labour intensive
Straddle carrier
high throughput capacity complicated equipment
one type of equipment for entire terminal high investment and maintenance costs
highly qualified personnel needed
labour intensive
Multi-trailer system (MTS)
less labour needed less flexible in operation
high throughput capacity
traffic peaks easily absorbed
Automatic Guided Vehicle (AGV)
minimum labour costs high investment and maintenance costs
high throughput capacity complicated and sensitive equipment
Within the storage yard

The MTS and AGV’s deliver the containers outside the stacks and for further handling
within the stack separate equipment is needed. Various types of gantry cranes are used as
described below.
(i) Rubber Tyred Gantry (RTG, see Figure 7.10). This gantry crane is commonly used
in stacks up to 4 containers wide and nominal 2 high. They are flexible (can be
moved from one stack to another), but require good subsoil conditions in view of the
relatively high wheel loads on the pavement.
(ii) Rail Mounted Gantry (RMG, see Figure 7.11). Where the subsoil conditions are less
favourable the RMG is preferable, because the rails spread the load better. Notwith-
standing the greater span of the crane (up to 10 containers wide) the crane bogeys
provide for lesser wheel loads. Also the rail can be more easily supported, if needed.
While most RMG’s have the rails at ground level, a new terminal in Singapore has
an overhead crane running on rails on beams, supported by concrete columns at 18
m above ground level, revered to as: Overhead Bridge Crane (OBC).
(iii) Automated Stacking Crane (ASC, Figure 7.12). The first cranes of this type were
introduced by ECT in conjunction with the AGV’s. They reach across 5 containers
and operate 1 over 4 high, in the most recent terminal extension.

Equipment within the stacks
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Rubber tyred gantry (RTG)
good space utilisation high maintenance
flexible, high occupancy rate needs good soil conditions
high productivity highly qualified personnel needed
Rail mounted gantry (RMG)
good space utilisation high investment
reliable, low maintenance inflexible
automation possible
Automated stacking crane (ASC)
minimum labour costs high investment and maintenance costs
high capacity
Figure 7.10 Rubber Tyred Gantry (RTG)
From storage yard to hinterland transport

The transport of containers between the stacks and the truck stations (and vice versa) is
done mostly by SC, because these can move over the truck. From the yard to a rail- or
inland barge terminal various types of equipment are used, depending on the distance. The
same considerations apply as for the equipment between quay and storage yard.
The gate
For road transport this is the central element on the terminal. Here the import containers
leave the terminal and the export containers arrive. All entrees and departures are recorded
Figure 7.11 Rail Mounted Gantry (RMG)
Figure 7.12 Automated Stacking Crane (ASC)
and customs formalities are dealt with. High capacity terminals require advanced informa-
tion technology to avoid frequent queues and long waiting times for the trucks.
7.3 Lay-out Development

The terminal lay-out depends to a certain extent on the chosen handling systems. An illus-
tration of this fact is the orientation of the containers in the stack: on terminals with SC the
length axis of the containers can be either perpendicular or parallel to the waterfront. In
case of MTS or AGV the orientation is more likely to be perpendicular to the quay, con-
tainers being delivered or collected along the seaward face of the stacks. This implies that
the planning of a new terminal is a multidisciplinary exercise in which the preference of
Figure 7.13 Container flows and modal split.
the operator for a specific handling system often forms the starting point. For the lay-out
the following planning elements have to be determined and quantified:
• Quay length and number of portainer cranes

• Apron area
• storage area
• Container transfer area (to truck and rail)
• Buildings (container freight station, office, gate and workshops)
The dimensions of all planning elements are a function of the yearly averaged flows of
containers, which are presented in the so-called modal split. The modal split gives the
(forecasted) numbers of containers entering and leaving the terminal via the sea (main
lines, feeder lines and short-sea lines), road, rail and IWT. As shown in Figure 7.13, the
incoming containers are split between import and those which leave the port again by sea,
the transshipment containers (see also Section 2.4.1). In the same way there may be a small
portion of containers that enters from the land and leaves by (another) landside modality.
An example of a simplified modal split is shown in 7.14, with arbitrary numbers. The
assumption that the flows are balanced per transport mode is clearly a simplification of
reality. In most cases there is a distinct imbalance. The throughput figures shown include
the empty containers, which normally are given explicitly, because they require separate
stacking space.
Figure 7.14 Example of a modal split.
Number of
containers
Total throughput 3,000,000
Sea import 1,500,000
Sea-sea 35% 525,000
Out via land 975,000

In via land 975,000
Total landside 1,950,000
Of which:
Road 55% 1,072,500
IWT 30% 585,000
Rail 15% 292,500
Containers across the terminal: Total landside + sea-sea = 2,475,000
The modal split gives the transport flows in number of containers. This is relevant for the
quay length design, because the container crane production is also in container(moves) per
hour. For the capacity of the storage yard the division between 20 ft and 40 ft containers
has to be known, because the surface area depends on this. The other capacity calculations
are therefore also carried out in TEU.
The above division is given by the TEU-factor, which is often characteristic for different
types of ports and can be derived from statistical data.
N20 2 N40
TEU-factor: fTEU (7.1)
N20 N40
in which:
N20 = number of TEU’s
N40 = number of FEU’s
When the ratio of 20 ft to 40 ft containers is 4 to 6, the TEU-factor amounts to 1.6. In devel-
oping countries rather low TEU-factors are encountered, indicating that a large percentage
of goods is transported in 20 ft containers. The main line traffic shows a shift towards 40 ft
containers over the years, which is expected to continue for some time.
The initial planning is often based on relatively simple design formulae, as presented in
the subsequent sections, or Queuing Theory. The final lay-out is always optimised by
means of simulations, which permits to analyse the complete terminal process, including
the stochastic variation of ship arrivals, crane and other transport equipment availability,
and container arrivals/departures via land.
7.3.1 Quay Length and Number of Portainer Cranes

A first approximation of the number of berths and hence of the quay length is made on the
basis of an estimated berth productivity. Such an estimate is made as follows:
cb P fTEU Ncb nhy mb (7.2)
in which:
cb = average annual productivity per berth [TEU/yr]
P = net production per crane [moves/hr]
fTEU = TEU factor [-]
Ncb = number of cranes per berth [-]
nhy = number of operational hours per year [hrs/yr]
mb = berth occupancy factor [-)
The net crane productivity P is subject of much confusion, due to the lack of a commonly
accepted definition. In Equation (7.2) P is the average number of containers moved from
ship to shore and vice versa during the period between berthing completed and deberthing
started. This period includes all sorts of unproductive intervals such as for crane reposi-
tioning from one bay to another, removal of hatches and replacing them, time loss between
shifts and simple repairs of the cranes. A gross crane production of 50-60 moves per hour
is easily reduced by above losses to a net productivity of 25 moves per hour.
For a modern terminal receiving 4000-5000 TEU ships on a regular basis and working 24
hours per day, 360 days per year, the average ship size is assumed to be about 2000 TEU,
with a length of 250 m. We would expect on average 3 cranes to be available per berth and
a rather low berth occupancy of 35%. A net crane productivity of 25 moves per hour and a
TEU-factor fTEU 1 5 give a berth productivity of 340,000 fTEU per year.
Subsequently the number of berths n is calculated as:

C
n (7.3)
Cb
where C is the total number of TEU entering and leaving the terminal by seagoing vessels
(including empties). For a throughput of 2 million TEU/year one would need about 6 berths
with the above productivity.
It is stressed that this estimation is very rough and does not even account for the time
needed for berthing and deberthing. It should be followed by a more precise calculation
as outlined below. However, this approach gives good insight in the importance of various
parameters. Some comments are relevant in this respect:
(i) A berth occupancy of 0.35 is rather low, but often encountered due to the stringent
conditions posed by the shipping lines with respect to minimum waiting time.
(ii) A berth productivity of 340,000 TEU/yr is higher than most terminals can achieve at
present. On many container terminals in developing countries the berth productivity
is more in range of 100,000-150,000 TEU/yr. Although the berth occupancy is nor-
mally very high (80-90%, which creates in turn long waiting time for the ships) this
can not compensate the rather low TEU-factor, the frequent breakdowns of equip-
ment and the low crane productivity. On modern hub terminals the berth productivity
can be as high as 500,000 TEU/yr, due to the high TEU-factor, larger average ship
size and more cranes per ship, each with a high productivity. Often berth produc-
tivity or terminal productivity is also expressed in TEU/m/yr. For the ports in the
Hamburg- Le Havre range the average values is in the order of 1,000 TEU/m/yr, but
some terminals achieve double this figure. The projected productivity for the new
Euromax terminal in Rotterdam is 1,500 TEU/m/yr.
(iii) The number of portainer cranes per berth depends on several factors:
- The range of vessel sizes and the (weighted) average size.

- The number of berths.
- The maximum number of cranes that can operate on one ship.
Along a conventional quay the cranes can work on every other bay. For practical rea-
sons (including the movements of other transport equipment between the portainers and
the storage yard) Post Panamax ships have not more than 5 cranes working simultaneously.
Smaller vessels have fewer cranes. When a new terminal would start with one berth only,
but should be able to handle a Post Panamax vessel efficiently, 5 cranes are needed for that
single berth. For the latest generation of ships this is not enough. On the other hand, when
a marginal quay consists of several berths, the low berth occupancy permits to reduce the
average number of cranes per berth. For the above example with 6 berths a total of 18
cranes is therefore justified, in a first approximation.
The second and more accurate method for determining quay length requires also a more
precise input in terms of expected annual number of calls Nsy and the average parcel size cc ,
i.e. the number of containers unloaded and loaded per call. The relation with C becomes:
C Nsy cc (7.4)
From the parcel size, the net crane productivity and the number of cranes per berth the
average service time is derived. By applying queuing theory the number of berths (service
points in the system) and the related average waiting time are obtained, assuming random
ship arrivals. It will be seen that relatively low berth occupancy rates are found, to keep the
waiting time low (Groenveld, 1999).
In practice most container ships sail on fixed routes and within tight schedules. Unless sig-
nificant delays occur due to bad weather or vessel repairs, the ships arrive within about 1
hour of their scheduled time of arrival. This means that the assumption of random arrivals
is conservative. Most likely the berth occupancy can be increased to 0.5-0.6 without result-
ing in significant waiting time for the majority of the ships. In the competitive stevedoring
market it is not easy to reduce the service level demanded by the shipping line. It will be
interesting to check the berth occupancy of a terminal operated by the shipping line itself.
Amsterdam Container Terminal
The approach chosen for this new terminal to achieve a berth productivity of 300 moves
per hour is to have a quay on both sides of the ship, each equipped with 5 portainer
cranes with a gross productivity of 30 moves per hour. The width of the basin is
designed at 55 m and all cranes have a boom length of 60 m, thus capable to receive
”Jumbo” ships with 53 m beam, and to operate this at every hold at the same time. The
lay-out of this berth within the overall terminal is shown below. It will be clear that this
innovative concept requires special procedures and facilities for safe, but fast berthing
and deberthing.
Figure 7.15 Amsterdam container terminal

Another aspect of this service level is the maximum time spent in port, which is stipulated
at 24 hours. The latest class of ULCS vessels with 14000 TEU and above can not be
handled within this time period, when the parcel size exceeds 4400 TEU. Assuming 1 hour
for berthing and 1 hour for departure:
P fTEU Ncb 22 25 1 6 5 22 4400 TEU
Solutions to this problem are sought in various directions, including improvement of the
crane productivity by using a double trolley system (one from end of boom to a platform
above the apron and the second from that platform to the position above a transfer lane),
by handling two 40 ft boxes (or four 20 ft boxes) simultaneously and by further automation
and reduction of the cycle time. A very interesting solution was chosen for the new con-
tainer terminal in Port of Amsterdam (see Figure 7.15).
Quay length
Finally the quay length is calculated, based on the number of berths (whether estimated or
determined by means of queuing theory).
For a single berth the quay length is determined by the length of the largest vessel fre-
quently calling at the port, increased with an extra length fore and aft for the mooring lines.
For multiple berths along a straight continuous quay front the quay length is based on the
average vessel length, as follows:
Ls max 2 15 for n 1
Lq (7.5)
1 1 n Ls 15 15 for n 1
This allows for a berthing gap of 15 m between the ships moored next to each other and an
additional 15 m at the two outer berths. The factor 1.1 follows from a study carried out by
UNCTAD. For a number of actually observed ship length distributions and for the relation
average berth length / average vessel length as a variable, the probability of additional
waiting time as a result of simultaneous berthing of several above-average vessels was
determined (UNCTAD, 1984). From this the following graph resulted.
The correction factor for total port time represents the additional waiting time. It is shown
that with an average berth length equal to 110% of the average berth length + berthing gap,
no additional waiting time occurs.
With increasing number of berths in a row, the correction factor will theoretically reduce
to 1.0. In practice this is not the case, because only rarely ships will be shifted during
operations in view of the additional delays this causes.
7.3.2 Apron Area

Once the quay length has been determined, the lay-out of the apron area can be completed.
Along a line perpendicular to the waterfront one encounters the following lanes:
1.2
1.15
1.1
Correction factor
1.05
total time
0.95
0.9
0.96 0.98 1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12 1.14 1.16
Average berth length
Average ship length + berthing gap
Figure 7.16 The correction factor total port time
(i) A service lane of 3-5 m between the coping and the front crane rail, to provide access
to the ships for the crew and for supplies and services. This space is also necessary
to prevent damage to the crane by the flared bow of the ship during berthing under
some angle.
(ii) The crane track spacing, which is primarily determined by considerations of crane
stability (see Figure 7.3). A second aspect is the space required for the transport
equipment. On most terminals the containers are dropped off or picked up by the
portainer within the space between the crane rails. When five portainers are working
on one ship, each has transport equipment lining up, which preferably have their own
lane for reasons of safety. And depending on the number of crossings of the landward
rail along the length of the quay, there may be need for additional lanes.
(iii) The space immediately behind the landward rail is used to place the hatch covers
and/or to lift special containers (such as flats with bulky or hazardous cargo).
(iv) Finally there is a traffic lane for the SC, the MTS or AGV which commute between
the storage yard and the quay. The width depends on the transport system adopted.
For SC 2 lanes are usually sufficient, while for AGVs a width equal to that between
the crane rails is required.
It is noted that no hinterland connections are allowed on the apron area, contrary to the
conventional general cargo terminals, where truck- and rail access onto the quay was cus-
tomary. For reasons of efficiency and safety this is not possible on a modern container
terminal.
7.3.3 Storage Yard

The storage yard is usually divided into separate stacks for export, import, reefers, haz-
ardous cargo and empties. In addition one finds a (CFS) for the cargo, which is imported
in one container, but has different destinations (stripping), or which comes from different
origins and is loaded into one container for export (stuffing). After an import container is
stripped and before an export container is stuffed, the cargo is stored in the CFS, which
is covered. In some cases the CFS and/or the empty yard is located outside the terminal
property. The surface area requirements for the different stacks (import, export, reefers,
empties, etc.) can be calculated as follows:
Nc td ATEU
A (7.6)
rst 365 mc
in which:
A = area required (m2 )

Nc = number of container movements per year per type of stack in TEU’s
td = average dwell time (days)
ATEU = required area per TEU inclusive op equipment travelling lanes (m2 )
rst = average stacking height / nominal stacking height (0.6 to 0.9)
mc = acceptable average occupancy rate (0.65 to 0.70)
The parameter td (average dwell time) has to be considered separately for import, export
and empty containers (for which dwell times are usually much longer). Also, fluctuations
in dwell times may have to be considered although the factor td is the average over a great
number of containers, so, generally, will not vary much.
td can be written as:

1 h
td S t dt (7.7)
St t 0 0
in which:
St = quantity of containers still on terminal divided by total number unloaded

containers)
ECT found that for their home-terminal the following dwell time function applies (see Fig-
ure 7.17):
1 for 0 t 1
td max t 2
St td max 1 for 1 t td max
0 for t td max
From the above it follows that:
td max = maximum dwell time (e.g. time within which 98%

of containers have left the terminal)
td = td max 2 3
td max values:
for Western Europe 10 days
for developing countries 20-30 days
3/4
1/2
S (t )
1/4
0
1 t (days) T
Figure 7.17 Typical dwell time function
The factor ATEU is empirical and depends on the handling systems and the nominal stacking
height. Typical values are given below in Table 7.2
Table 7.2 Storage area per TEU for different equipment
System Nominal stacking height ATEU (m2 /TEU)

Chassis 1 50-65
Straddle carrier 2 15-20
3 10-13
Gantry crane (RMG / RTG) 2 15-20
3 10-13
4 7.5-10
5 6-8
Forklift Truck (FLT) or 2 35-40
Reach Stacker 3 25-30
The factor rst in Equation (7.6) reflects the fact that the sequence in which the containers
will leave the stack is partly unknown (mostly so for the import stack) and that intermedi-
ate repositioning of containers is expensive. Statistically, the need for re-positioning will
increase with increasing stack height. Consequently, the value of r has to decrease. If the
acceptable degree of repositioning can be defined (e.g. 30% additional moves) as well as
the degree of uncertainty in departure of containers from the stack, the optimum value of
rst can be found through computation or simulation. This degree of uncertainty depends,
inter alia, on the mode of through transport. Rail and IWT can, generally, be programmed
quite well, but the sequence of arrival of road vehicles not.
The factor mc (optimum average occupancy rate) has to be introduced because the pattern
of arrivals and departures of containers to and from the terminal is stochastic by nature.
The optimum value of mc depends on the frequency distribution of these arrivals and de-
partures, and of the acceptable frequency of occurrence of a saturated stack. The number of
container departures per unit of time may be more or less constant, at least for large termi-
nals, but the number of arrivals is not. The container arrival distribution can have different
forms and depends, in its turn, on the ship arrival distribution and on the variation of the
number of containers per ship.
The surface area of the CFS does not follow equation (7.5), but is calculated as follows:
Nc V td farea fbulk
ACFS (7.8)
hs mc 365
in which:
Nc = number of TEU moved through CFS [TEU/yr]

(also called ”Less than Full Container Loads” or LFCL)
V = volume of the cargo in 1 TEU container
farea = ratio gross area over net area [-]
(accounting for internal travel lanes and containers)
fbulk = bulking factor
hs = average height of cargo in the CFS [m]
mc = acceptable occupancy rate [-]
The CFS resembles the transit sheds on the conventional General Cargo terminal. The
containers are positioned around the CFS during actual transfer of cargo, which is also
reflected in the value of farea ( 1.4).
The factor of fbulk is introduced to account for additional space needed for cargo, which
needs special treatment or repairs. One finds values of 1.1 - 1.2.
Finally the factor mi again reflects the random arrivals and departures of this cargo, and the
need to avoid a full mc CFS. Normal values are 0.6 - 0.7.
Calculation example
Assume a small terminal to be designed for a capacity of 70,000 TEU/year of which:
• 35,000 import (of which 15,000 via CFS)

• 25,000 export
• 10,000 empties
Normally, also a part of the export containers passes the CFS, but this is disregarded here.
Container handling by straddle carrier, stacking three-high (ATEU = 13 m2 ).
Expected td values for import, export and empty containers are 10, 7 and 20 days respec-
tively.
Import
Aimport = (35 000 10 13) / (0 6 365 0 7) = approx. 30,000 m2
Export
Aexport = (25 000 7 13) / (0 8 365 0 7) = approx. 11,000 m2
Empties
Aempties = (10 000 20 13) / (0 9 365 0 8) = approx. 10,000 m2
CFS
ACFS = (Nc V farea fbulk hs mc 365) =
(15 000 29 2 5 1 4 1 1) / (0 65 365 = approx. 7,000 m2
A possible layout for the above terminal is given in Figure 7.18. Regarding this lay-out the
250
12.5 100 100 12.5
25
Offices Parking
40 Workshop
(un)loading road vehicles
7
30
Empties
100
CFS
70
30
Reefers
(un)loading road vehicles
25
Transfer area Transfer area
25
Transfer area
493
Import Import
150
Export Export 55
30
25
Figure 7.18 Example layout container terminal
following comments can be made:

(i) The export stacks are often located close to the quay in order to expedite the loading
process. The containers are positioned in these stacks prior to arrival of the ship,
taking into account their order of loading.
(ii) In addition to the stack areas calculated above there are traffic lanes between the
stacks. The 25 m width shown here is rather high.
(iii) On most terminals empties are stacked outside the gate (also because of the long
dwell time) and higher than assumed in this example.
(iv) The gate and transfer areas are shown rather schematically. These elements and the
various buildings are dealt with below.
The total gross surface area of this terminal amounts to 11.4 ha. The throughput- area ratio
is about 6300 TEU/ha. Compared to this figure the major container terminals NW-Europe
and in Asia have 2-4 times higher ratios:
TEU/ha
Kaohsiung 15,400
Singapore 22,000
Hongkong 40,000 - 50,000 1
Rotterdam (Euromax) 25,000
This difference is to a large extent caused by the efficient use of the storage yard, in partic-
ular by lowering the dwell time. To achieve this the stevedoring company must introduce
incentives for shorter dwell time and penalties for longer dwell time than average, by ap-
plying a variable tariff.
7.3.4 Container Transfer Area and Buildings

The trucks that bring containers or come to collect them, enter the terminal through the
gate. Here 3 functions are executed:
(i) Administrative formalities related to the cargo, including customs inspection and
clearance.
(ii) Inspection of the boxes themselves (for possible damage).
(iii) Instruction of the drivers to the location in the container transfer area.
The gate used to create long queues due to the distinct peaks in the truck arrivals during the
day. The introduction of electronic data processing and automated inspection of the boxes
has shortened the delays at the gate considerably.
At the container transfer area the trucks take their assigned position. The area is usually
located immediately behind the import stacks and the trucks position is chosen to minimise
the distance to the import container to be picked up. The export containers are brought
straight to the export stacks. The most common equipment for transfer is the Straddle Car-
rier.
1 Figures include transfer of cargo midstream to barges. Therefore this is not comparable.
Transfer to and from rail is sometimes done on the terminal itself. The rail track runs then
parallel to the truck transfer area. More often a separate rail yard is made outside the ter-
minal area with container storage area and gantry cranes. This facilitates the formation of
so-called block trains, i.e. wagons which all have the same hinterland destination. They are
also called Rail Service Centres (RSC). The lay-out of these RSC’s falls outside the scope
of these lecture notes. Transfer from the container terminal to the RSC is done by trailer,
which passes via the gate. On modern terminals an internal road may connect to the RSC,
allowing use of terminal equipment such as MTS.
Transfer of containers to and from IWT barges is often done along the quays for sea-going
vessels. This has two distinct disadvantages however:
(i) The portainer cranes are far too large for handling the small barges, that move more
easily. Crane production is therefore low.
(ii) The barges often collect their cargo at several terminals, which is time consuming.
The first disadvantage is overcome by creating a separate barge terminal, linked to the main
terminal, but having proper equipment. An example of this is found at ECT’s Delta Ter-
minal on the Maasvlakte. To address both disadvantages it would be an improvement to
build a general barge terminal with connections to the different container terminals. This
introduces an additional link in the transport process with two times extra handling. The
associated extra cost makes this solution unattractive. It is expected that the rapid increase
of the number of TEU transported by barge will allow to create multi-user Barge Service
Centres (BSC) like the RSC, with internal connections to the surrounding container termi-
nals.
Other buildings encountered on the terminal include the office building and the workshop
for repair and maintenance of the equipment. The requirements vary per terminal.
7.4 References
Cargo systems, Opportunities for container ports, IIR Publications Ltd, London, 1998
Containerisation International, Yearbook 2005
Frankel, E.G., Port planning and development, Wiley Interscience, New York, 1987
Groenveld, Service Systems in Ports and Waterways, Delft University of Technology, 1999
Penfold, A., Changes in Shipping Industry, Proc. Seminar on Life Cycle Approach in Port
Infrastructure, PIANC, Brussels, 2005
Chapter 8
General Cargo and Multipurpose

Terminals
8.1 Introduction
In previous chapters reference is made to General Cargo terminals (further referred to as
GC terminals) as the traditional port area for transfer and storage of commercial goods.
In the classification of terminals according to the form in which the cargo is transported
(see Chapter 2), this terminal falls under ”Other”. In Section 6.4 the shift from general
cargo to containerised transport is explained. Although the latter trade has surpassed the
former in terms of tonnes of cargo and will continue to grow fast, the GC terminal will
maintain its function for specific commodities, such as neo-bulk (steel products, non-ferro
products, forest products, etc.) and in certain conditions (small ports, with yet insufficient
throughput for a dedicated container terminal). For all Dutch ports the handling of general
cargo amounted in 1998 5% of the total throughput. In Vlissingen/Terneuzen (Zeeland
Seaports) this percentage was 13% in the same year and growing faster than any of the
other forms of cargo.
An interesting development is the all-weather terminal, that provides a covered dock for
loading and unloading of products such as steel and paper. The improved quality and
increased operability of such terminals is attractive for shippers and forwarders, as demon-
strated by the success of the Waterland Terminal in Amsterdam (see Figure 8.1).
Multipurpose terminals are treated in the same chapter because they are often developed
from GC terminals, as described in Section 6.4.
In summary: firstly there is a need for modern GC terminals and secondly existing termi-
nals are often insufficient in terms of land area and quay design. Modernisation of existing
terminals is therefore an additional challenge to the port planner.
The type and size of ships are described in Chapter 2. We are dealing with general cargo
and multipurpose ships in the range of 5,000 to 25,000 dwt, with draughts ranging from
7.5 to 10 m and lengths ranging from 100 to 170 m (see Figure 2.34).
151
Figure 8.1 All-weather terminal in Amsterdam
8.2 Non-containerised General Cargo

8.2.1 Types of General Cargo
As mentioned above GC includes a wide range of different commodities, some of which
may in some ports be handled at separate terminals.
Within the NSTR main groups of commodities (see Chapter 2), we find the following types
of general cargo and their specific way of being packaged/handled:
Table 8.1 Types of General cargo
Main Group GC commodities Packaging / handling

0 Agro products (sawn) timber Pre-slung
paper Rolls in cassettes
1 Food products Fruit condensate Special containers
Sugar Bags 1
Wine, etc. Special containers
3 Oil, oil products Lubricating oil Drums
5 Iron, steel, etc. Steel profiles Pre-slung
Steel plates Rolls
6 Raw minerals etc. Cement Bags on pallets
7 Fertilisers Phosphate Bags on pallets
8 Chemical products Resins Bags
9 Vehicles etc. Machine (parts) Crates
The above list is by no means exhaustive, it aims to demonstrate the great variety of cargo
passing through GC terminals. Although some specialisation is noticeable (e.g. Forest Ter-
1 There is a trend to transport bagged sugar in containers, instead of on pallets
Chapter 8. General Cargo and Multipurpose Terminals 153
minals in Rotterdam handling only forest products), the majority of GC terminals handles
a wide range. This is possible because the type of equipment for loading and unloading
is common: mobile cranes with a capacity of 20-30 tonne, which can handle almost any
of the abovementioned types of cargo (see next section). However, in some cases specific
storage requirements have to be fulfilled, such as:
• Fruit condensate requires refrigerated warehouses

• Chemical products, if hazardous cargo, require safety precautions
These special cases are not elaborated in this Chapter; reference is made to Chapter 12 on
Fisheries Ports on refrigerated storage and the Chapter 10 on Liquid Bulk Terminals for
safety requirements.
8.2.2 Terminal Logistics

A general flow scheme is shown in Figure 8.2. The option of direct transfer of cargo from
and to the ship is still indicated, but rare since the (un)loading capacities exceed the rate at
which goods can be removed or delivered. Normally the cargo is transported by terminal
equipment (e.g. forklift trucks) to either the transit shed or the open storage, depending
on size and whether it needs protection or not. From there it is taken to its destination the
consignee by different modes of transport. Only when cargo is stored at the terminal for an
extended period of time it is stored in the warehouse. The same conditions apply to export
cargo.
Ship
Quay
Direct Delivery Transit Shed Open storage
Warehouse
Consignees
Shippers
Figure 8.2 Cargo Flow Scheme

Ship-Quay
In most cases the transport of cargo between the ship and the quay is achieved by the ships
derricks. Rail-mounted luffing cranes, such as were used in older ports, do not give a higher
productivity and require stronger quays. A small number of mobile cranes on pneumatic
tyres will be needed to lift the heavy items, including containers. Normally they will be
needed for only a fraction of the ship working time and therefore two per berth will be
sufficient.
Labour is needed in the holds and at the quay for hooking up and unhooking of the cargo.
It is customary to have one gang per hold, the size of which may vary for different types of
cargo. With 3 holds being worked at the same time, 3 gangs are working simultaneously.
For small coastal vessels 1-2 gangs may be sufficient.
Unloading and loading rates depend on the type of cargo, the number of gangs, etc. The
basic parameter is the average productivity of a gang:
t / hr
Conventional general cargo (breakbulk) 8.5 - 12.5
Timber and timber products 12.5 -25
Steel products 20 - 40
Containerised cargo 30 - 55
Quay-Transit shed / storage

The transit sheds are placed next to the quay and goods are normally transported by forklift
trucks (FLT). Per gang at the quay 3 FLT’s will be needed. When cargo goes directly to the
open storage area this can be done by the FLT’s as long as the travelling distance is within
100 m. For longer travelling distance a combination of FLT and tractor + trailer becomes
attractive. The FLT’s are then used to load and unload the trailers. Per hold 2 FLT’s, 2
tractors and about 8 trailers will be needed to match the quayside productivity.
In the storage itself 1 or 2 mobile cranes plus a number of FLT’s will be required for
handling.
Hinterland connections
As mentioned railway lines no longer are installed on the quay and also trucks are not given
direct access to the quay. If there is a railway connection, it is usually located at the rear
side of the terminal.
Trucks are allowed inside the storage area, with internal roads giving access to the transit
shed and warehouses, and to the open storage.
Where hinterland transport is carried out by barges, these are normally handled at the quays
for seagoing vessels.
8.3 Number of Berths and Quay Length

To determine the quay length first of all the number of berths has to be established. As
in the case of container terminals this can be done less or more accurate depending on the
stage of the planning process.
In an early stage of planning a rough estimate is made using the following approach. The
throughput of a GC berth is calculated from the average productivity of a gang, the number
of gangs and the number of effective working hours in a year.
cb P Ngs nhy mb (8.1)
in which
cb = throughput per berth [t/yr]
P = average gang productivity [t/hr]
Ngs = number of gangs per ship [-]
nhy = number of operational hours per year [-]
mb = berth occupancy rate r [-]
In the previous section typical values of P are given for conventional general cargo, neo-
bulk and containerised cargo, handled at a GC terminal. The mix of cargo types for a new
terminal, as defined in the transport forecasts, is translated into a weighed value of gang
productivity.
The number of gangs per ship depends on the size of the ship as explained in Section 8.2.
Again a weighed average of Ngs has to be used, taking into account the mix of small and
medium size vessels calling at the future terminal.
The number of operating hours depends on the number of shifts considered. For a two-
shift operation the full 16 hours are used in calculating the nhy , notwithstanding the fact
that there will be loss of time between shifts. The gang productivity P is a net productivity
measured as an average over the 8 hours shift period.
Let us consider a terminal for breakbulk cargo and timber products in a ratio of 3 to 1.
The gang productivity amounts to 12.5 t/hr. The ship sizes range from 100-150 m which
implies an average of 2.5 gang/ship. With 2 shifts per day, 6 days per week nhy becomes
4992 hours. An average berth productivity of 109,000 t/yr is found for a occupancy rate of
0.7. This rate is quite high, but not uncommon for GC terminals, where ship waiting time
is more easily accepted.
Then the number of berths is determined (while neglecting the time for berthing and de-
berthing):
C
n (8.2)
cb
where C is the required throughput across the terminal in t/yr.
Service time of GC ships
For a 15,000 dwt GC vessel we assume that 3,000 tonnes is unloaded in a specific port
and 1,500 tonnes is taken on board. 3 gangs handle the total of 4,500 tonnes of cargo
with a productivity of 15 tonnes per hour (most of the cargo is conventional breakbulk
and timber). Upon arrival 1 hour is spent on berthing and unfastening the lashings
before the actual unloading process starts.
The total time for unloading and loading amounts to 100 hours. For a two shift
operation this means 6.25 days. Even when the terminal would provide a 24 hour
service the service time is in excess of 4 days.
These figures are typical for the GC trade and demonstrate the difference with the
container trade: several days in port are quite common and a few hours delay for
whatever reason (waiting time, berthing, hatches, crane repair, etc.) is much less of a
problem.
The more accurate method for determining quay length is based on the expected number
of calls Nsy per year and the average volume of cargo unloaded and loaded per call, cc
in tonnes. From the values of cc , P and Nsy the average service time is determined. By
applying queuing theory the number of berths and corresponding average waiting time is
calculated, assuming a certain distribution of the inter-arrival times. For the selection of
the distribution function and the numerical tables used in the calculation reference is again
made to Groenveld, 2005 (see Section 4.6).
It is possible that 2 or more different commodities are handled at the GC terminal, each
having quite different characteristics in terms of ship size and gang productivity. In this case
we prefer to execute the calculations for the average values per commodity, thus arriving at
separate numbers of berths.
Quay length
Once the number of berths is found the quay length is again calculated by means of the
same equation used for container terminals.
Ls max 2 15 for n 1
Lq (8.3)
1 1 n Ls 15 15 for n 1
8.4 Storage Area and Overall Terminal Lay-out

The area required for the separate storage facilities (transit shed, open storage, warehouse)
has to be determined from the annual throughput and the average transit time (or dwell
time) of the goods as main parameters. For instance for a transit shed, the required floor
area Agr can be calculated as follows:
farea fbulk Nc td
Agr (8.4)
mc hs Wcargo 365
in which:
Nc = total annual throughput which passes the transit shed

td = average dwell time of the cargo in days
Wcargo = average relative density of the cargo as stowed in the ship (e.g. 0.6)
hs = average stacking height in the storage (e.g. 2 m)
farea = ratio gross over net surface, accounting for traffic lanes for FLTs etc. (e.g. 1.5)
fbulk = bulking factor due to stripping and separately stacking of
special consignments, damaged goods, etc.
mc = average rate of occupancy of the transit shed or storage
Example
For Nc = 120,000 t/yr

farea = 1.5
fbulk = 1.2
td = 10 days
mc = 0.7
hs = 2m
Wcargo = 0.6 t/m3
the required surface area Agr will be 7200 m2 , e.g. a shed of 60 125 m.
mc has to be determined in such a way, that most of the fluctuations in td and in the cargo
flows per unit of time can be absorbed.
The factor mc , consequently, clearly depends upon the number of berths. The optimum
value depends also strongly on the possibility of occasionally storing excess cargo outside
the terminal and the extra costs thereof.
If statistical material is available, an optimisation can be made by means of the probability
distributions of the relevant parameters. This is, however, rarely the case. For that reason,
mc is usually arbitrary chosen in the 0.65 to 0.75 range.
In case clear seasonal fluctuations in the cargo flows occur, the required storage area has to
be calculated on basis of the peak season figures instead of the annual throughput.
For determining area requirements for open storage and warehouses, an identical procedure
can be followed, the value of the parameters may differ though.
Terminal lay-out
A typical lay-out for a modern GC terminal is given in Figure 8.3 (UNCTAD, 1984). The
following observations can be made:
250 m
25 m 70 m 45 m 70 m 40 m
Offices Car Park
160 m berth staff

Transit shed
2
(9,100 m ) Open
storage
(5,000 m2)
Offices
berth
mberth
Transit shed Warehouse

(9,100 m2) or open
160m
storage
160
(12,500
m2 )
trucks
160 m berth
Open
storage
Car Park
Transit shed 2
(3,400 m )
2
(9,100 m )
Truck Park
Figure 8.3 Typical modern three-berth breakbulk zone
(i) The berth length of 160 m implies that the terminal is designed for an average ship
length of 130 m, corresponding with 10,000 t. But a 25,000 dwt vessel with Ls = 170
m can also be accommodated.
(ii) Three transit sheds of 9,100 m2 surface area each are placed close to the quay. The
quay-apron width of 25 m is a minimum and should preferable be 30 m
(iii) The width of the central delivery zone of 45 m is determined by the need of long
trucks to move into and out of loading bays along the transit sheds and the ware-
house (see also Figure 8.4). If a large number of 15 meter long trucks were used
for delivery the delivery zone would have to be up to 50 m width. A one-way road
circuit improves the safety and the capacity of the terminal.
(iv) The warehouse is only needed when the terminal operator wishes to provide long-
term storage of cargo, for example for cargo that must be aged or cargo which is to be
sorted, packaged and sold from the warehouse (i.e. a forerunner of the districenter).
(v) There should be sufficient space for offices (both for the terminal management and
for shipping agents) and for parking of trucks and private cars.
Transit Shed
Loading bays
15 m
30 m
4m
15 m
Warehouse
Figure 8.4 Necessary space for trucks
8.5 Multipurpose Terminals

The multipurpose terminal becomes necessary when GC ships calling at the port start to
carry a substantial volume of cargo in containers. Once the change-over has been made the
terminal will be able to service a mix of GC and smaller container ships.
The terminal layout shown in Figure 8.3 is not suitable for receiving containers on a regular
basis for two reasons:
(i) Containers need open storage, preferably close to the quay

(ii) The apron width is too narrow for handling of containers
Conversion of this terminal to a multipurpose terminal could lead to a lay-out as shown in

Figure 8.5. Two transit sheds and the warehouse have been broken down to provide space
for the container storage yard.
Features of this layout are:
(i) About 200 m of quay has been converted for container handling, sufficient for multi-
purpose ships of 25,000 tonnes and small container vessels. The maximum draught
at the quay is not increased, since this might endanger the stability of the existing
quay wall.
(ii) Along this stretch of quay a rail mounted gantry crane is installed, capable of han-
dling the heavier boxes and providing a higher productivity than the mobile cranes.
The mobile cranes can still operate along this part of the quay at other holds.
(iii) The apron area is widened, allowing straddle carriers or reach stackers to operate
between the quay and the stacks.
(iv) The detailed layout of the container storage area depends on the chosen type of equip-
ment. There are separate areas for import and export containers, while some of the
250 m
25 m 70 m
Offices Car Park
Transit shed IN
160 m berth
2
(9,100 m )
General cargo
Open storage
2
(70 x 70 m )
Mobile cranes
Offices
Open storage
120 m berth
Open storage
GC/ Containers
2 GC / Containers
(70x70 m )
Export Import
Container transfer
Gantry Crane (35 tonne)
Parking
200 m berth
APRON
OUT
5 m 10 m 35 m 70 m 15 m 70 m 45 m
Figure 8.5 Multipurpose Terminal
open storage for GC may be used for off-size containers. The transit shed can be
utilised as CFS for ”stripping and stuffing” of containers.
(v) In order to guarantee the traffic safety at the terminal, the one-way circulation has
been maintained by separating the entrance and exit gates. Other solutions are possi-
ble, but lead to more complex situations.
It is stressed that this layout is only one possible alternative, within the confined space
of the existing CG terminal. When planning an entirely new multipurpose terminal more
depth of land is desirable. Moreover one would likely design for larger container vessels,
i.e. 2nd or 3rd generation, with lengths up to 275 m and a draught of 11 m. This would
make the terminal better suited for growth of the container throughput.
8.6 References
UNCTAD, Port Development, United Nations, New York, 1985
Chapter 9
Ro/Ro and Ferry Terminals
9.1 Introduction
As explained earlier in Chapters 2 and 6 the term Roll-on/Roll-off applies to a specific
category of cargo transport, whereby the road-trailers are driven on and off the ship. The
following types of Ro/Ro transport can be distinguished, depending on vessel size and
sailing distance:
Ro/Ro ferries Developed from the traditional ferries, with travel times ranging from a
few hours up to a day. Combination with passenger transport, including passenger cars
and buses. Regular service, of which the frequency depends on the traffic volume. Typical
examples are the ferry lines between the UK and the European continent, and between
Italian ports and the islands in the Mediterranean Sea.
Ro/Ro ships Dedicated cargo ships (hence no passenger facilities), long sailing dis-
tances. In recent years this type of service is developed on short-sea routes, e.g. from
Scandinavia to West-Europe, and from there to the Iberian peninsula. But also interconti-
nental lines employ Ro/Ro ships, when they service ports with inadequate container han-
dling facilities.
Ro/Ro container ships Combination of Ro/Ro and Lo/Lo (see also Section 2.3.4).
The total volume of Ro/Ro transport is growing at about the same rate as container trans-
port. The size and capacity of the vessels is also growing, but at a more modest rate com-
pared with container ships (see also Chapters 2, 3 and 4). When comparing the two alter-
natives it becomes clear that each has its specific areas of economic advantage:
(i) Ro/Ro transport provides a fast and seamless connection for ”continental containers”,
as the road trailers are often called. No transfer of goods needed and no dwell time
in a storage yard, such as for containers.
(ii) The trailers are driven on and off the ship one by one and require more space per unit
than a container. The total cost per tonne cargo exceeds that for container cargo. This
cost difference outweighs the above mentioned advantage of Ro/Ro transport, when
161
the sailing distance and volumes of cargo grow. The precise turning point depends
on a number of economic factors.
A special type of Ro/Ro vessel is the car-carrier, transporting automobiles from a factory to
other countries. Although the trade is entirely different from the transport of general cargo
by Ro/Ro vessels, the common aspect is the use of ramps for (un)loading.
9.2 Lay-out Ro/Ro and Ferry Terminals

Common elements in the lay-out of terminals for ferries and Ro/Ro ships are the following:
• The (un)loading of trailers is concentrated in one location, usually at the stern or the
bow of the vessel. This determines the quay-configuration.
• The maximum number of trailers (and other vehicles in case of a ferry) that can be
taken on board, must be parked in an orderly manner, close to the loading point. But
the unloaded trailers also need parking space, when these are handled by terminal
tractors. The total surface area for parking may be as large as twice the area needed
for a full ship load.
There are also differences between ferry and Ro/Ro terminals:
• Minimisation of the service time is for a ferry even more important than for a Ro/Ro
ship, in view of the relatively short sailing time of the ferry and tight schedules. For
this reason a ferry berth is often designed in a special way to reduce berthing time,
whereas the berth of a Ro/Ro vessel is comparable with GC and container vessels.
• Ferry terminals need passenger facilities, including a terminal building and separate
access bridges to the ship.
Another important difference is caused by the fact that a ferry line owns and operates the
terminals at both sides, whereas Ro/Ro shipping lines call at a number of ports during one
journey, where the terminal is operated by the port or a separate company. This is reflected
in the planning of the terminal lay-out as follows:
• A ferry link must be developed integrally, including number of vessels, sailing time
and berthing time. Hence, the number of berths is determined as a part of the overall
system.
• A Ro/Ro terminal must provide adequate service to the ships, that usually belong
to various shipping lines. The situation is comparable to container terminals: the
number of berths depends on the requirement to limit or avoid waiting times. Like for
general cargo and container terminals, the (un)loading capacity must be determined
in order to estimate the average service time.
Because of the above mentioned differences the two types of terminals are treated now
separately.
Chapter 9. Ro/Ro and Ferry Terminals 163
9.2.1 Ferry Terminal

Berthing Facilities
The number of berths depends on the number of vessels to be handled simultaneously.
As mentioned before, per vessel the (un)loading is taking place across a ramp, connecting
the vessel with the landing area. The berth further provides for mooring dolphins and a
fendering system, that allow rapid berthing and unberthing and only little movement of
the vessel during (un)loading. When the terminal is located in relatively calm water a berth
lay-out such as shown in Figure 9.1 may suffice: the vessel is positioned against a fendering
system on one side, with the stern fenders on both sides of the landing area. Mooring lines
fore and aft hold the vessel in position.
Figure 9.1 Corner berth lay-out
When on the other hand the ferry location is exposed to waves and/or current, a more
enclosed berth is needed as shown in Figure 9.2. Such wedge type lay-outs are quite typical
for ferry berths. The heavy fendering on both sides allows a rather high approach velocity
and guides the ship to the correct position at the landing area, at the same time reducing its
speed by friction. To avoid damage of the ship hull these type of ferries are provided with
a belting all around, i.e. a strengthened girder at the level of one of the decks. The design
of the landing area depends on various factors and will be treated in Section 9.3.
Figure 9.2 Wedge type ferry berth
Roads and parking area

The terminal area has to facilitate a smooth flow of vehicles in both directions, including
sufficient parking area. While the actual lay-out will depend on the number of berths, the
capacity of the ferries and the geometrical conditions of the available land area, a typical
example of a ferry terminal is given in Figure 9.3, taken from PIANC (1995). The main
streams of cars and trucks, outbound and inbound, are indicated and are shown to be fully
separated.
Figure 9.3 Typical ferry terminal
Terminal building
A building with passenger facilities is needed at the terminal, e.g. for buying tickets, to
provide a waiting lounge, cafeteria and/or restaurant, and possibly some shops. Embarking
and disembarking of passengers should be separated from the (un)loading of vehicles and
preferably via a direct bridge connection between the terminal building and the vessel.
9.2.2 Ro/Ro Terminals

Berthing facilities
For vessels with quarter or side ramps any quay will serve, provided it is long enough and
there are no obstacles, such as bollards, at close spacing (see Section 6.4). Vessels with
stern ramps however, need a separate landing area, which can either be fixed or floating
(see Figure 9.4). The fixed landing area is often combined with other quay/terminal facili-
ties, such as a multipurpose terminal or a combined container and Ro/Ro terminal. A fixed
or floating platform (often referred to as link span) is a flexible solution in existing ports,
where a Ro/Ro terminal is added. This will be treated in more detail in Section 9.3.
The length of a single berth follows the rules given in Chapter 7; i.e. the largest ship
determines the required space. For a multiberth facility the total quay length would be de-
termined with Equation (7.5), provided that all vessels have quarter or side ramps.
Floating platform
Figure 9.4 Fixed and floating lading areas
The number of berths can also be estimated using an approach like for container terminals
given in Equations (7.2) and (7.3), in which the (un)loading capacity is given in trailer units
per hour.
Parking area
The parking area at a Ro/Ro terminal is a function of the number of vehicle movements per
year, the average transit time in days and the area requirement per vehicle. Additional space
for access roads and reserve capacity in view of peak loads needs to be taken into account.
In UNCTAD (1985) a planning chart is given. For an average transit time of 2 days (which
is high for modern Ro/Ro terminals) and an area requirement of 40 m2 per trailer unit,
the parking area amounts to 1 ha per 25,000 vehicle movements per year (inbound and
outbound).
9.3 Special Design Aspects

9.3.1 Ramp and Bridges
Ro/Ro ships and ferries are equipped with at least one ramp. At sea the elevated ramp closes
off the opening in the ship hull, at the berth the ramp is lowered and gives access to and
from the landing area. Depending on the vessel size, the tidal variation at the berth and the
difference in elevation of the fully loaded and the unloaded vessel, different arrangements
of the landing area are needed to allow uninterrupted (un)loading.
Maximum tidal variation 1.5 m Under this condition a fixed landing area is feasi-
ble. Its design should accommodate the ship ramp in all tidal conditions, given its maximum
allowable slope of 1:8. To account for ship size two classes have been adopted internation-
ally (see Figure 9.5):
- Class A: ships with a ramp, which reaches in loaded condition between 0.25 m and
1.75 m above water level.
- Class B: ships with a ramp, which reaches in loaded condition between 1.5 m and
3.0 m above water level.
interface limitline
up to normal area level 4 m ship ramp 1m
landing area facing line
ship ramp
1:10
1.5 m 0.75
high normal
1:8 1:6 water level
0.25
1.75m
max.
class A level low normal
range water level
up to normal area level

interface limitline
down to 5m 4 m ship ramp 1m
normal area landing area facing line
level
1:10
1:10 1:8 ship ramp

2m
1.5 m
1:6
high normal
3m
water level
class B max.
1.5 m
level low normal

range water level
Figure 9.5 Elevation of landing area and ship ramp
As shown in Figure 9.5 the landing area itself is often sloping down towards the waterfront,
with a slope 1:8 for the ship ramp landing area.
Tidal range 1.5 m In this case a bridge system is needed between the ship ramp and
the landside. Various concepts are in use, again depending on local conditions.
- Bridge, hinged at land side and floating at ship side (Figure 9.6). The bridge moves
up and down with the tide and therefore does not consume manpower or energy.
Depending on the response characteristics of the bridge, it may be sensitive to waves,
and in a different mode than the ship. When the two floating bodies move out of phase
the (un)loading is severely hampered. Another limitation of this concept is that it can
not accommodate great differences in draught of the vessel.
- Bridge hinged at land side and mechanically adjustable in height at the ship side
(Figure 9.7). In many of the ferry terminals on both sides of the Channel, e.g. in
Oostende and Dover, these type of bridges are the common solution. As shown in
Figure 9.7 in Dover two bridges and a passenger walkway are moved by winches up
and down with the tidal variation. The system is quite expensive, compared with the
following concept.
- A fixed or floating pontoon, located along the quay. This type, commonly referred to
as link span, offers great flexibility at relative low cost. The pontoon can be relocated
to other locations inside the port or in another port (see Figure 9.8).
Figure 9.6 Bridge hinged at land side and floating on ship side
runway
beam
external winches
walkway
winch house link bridge
passenger access portal adjusting
walkway cylinder
link
spans
upper bridge 11.000
dolphin level
transition lower bridge 2.000 link span
flaps level adjusting
52.000
cylinder
cross girder cross girder
Figure 9.7 Bridge hinged at land side and mechanically adjustable in height at the ship side
Figure 9.8 Floating linkspan in Melbourne, Australia

9.3.2 Bottom Protection

The effect of the propeller jet velocities on the bed material along a berth leads to erosion in
case of non-cohesive sediments without protection. At Ro/Ro and Ferry berths this effect
is even more pronounced, due to the high power of these ships and the way this motor
power is employed at departure. In the 1980s several Ro/Ro terminals in Western Europe
showed damage to the bottom protection, leading to erosion pits along the berths and risk of
instability of the quay structures (Verheij et al, 1987). To design a stable bottom protection
an empirical formula is used, as follows:
1 3 u2b
d50 (9.1)
g )
in which:
d50 = characteristic diameter bottom protection [m]
ub = velocity near the bed [m/s]
) = relative density of stone protection [-]
The coefficient 1.3 is considerably higher than that for the corresponding formula for natu-
ral flow, due to the effects of high turbulence and the vicinity of quay-walls (e.g. in case of
a corner berth).
The velocity in the propeller jet can be calculated for the case without too much side and
bottom effects by means of formulae developed by Fuehrer (1987). In practice these effects
are often present, leading to increased velocities which are difficult to predict and require
application of 3D numerical flow models.
With the growth of ship size also the installed power increases. This has created a situation
where a rip-rap protection is not a suitable solution anymore, because the d50 of the stones
becomes too large and a considerable thickness of stone filter is needed to prevent erosion
of the underlying sand. In these cases several new methods of bottom protection have been
introduced and applied at ferry berths:
• Concrete mattress, which is a fabric filled with underwater concrete.

• Concrete blocks, interconnected by wires to form a mattress, placed by a special
vessel on a geomembrane (Sawicki, 1998).
9.4 References
Bruun, P., Port Engineering, Gulf Publication Company, 1989
Fuehrer, M., H. Pohl and K. Romisch: Propeller jet erosion and stability criteria for bottom
protections of various constructions, PIANC Bulletin no 58, 1987
PIANC, Report on Standardisation of Ro/Ro Ships and Berths, Supplement to Bulletin
No.33, Brussels, 1979
PIANC, Port Facilities for Ferries, Report of WG PTCII-11, Brussels , 1995
UNCTAD, Port Development, United Nations, 1985
Verheij, H.J., T. Blokland, M.P. Bogaerts, D. Volger, and R.W.L. van der Weijde: Ex-
periences in the Netherlands with quay structures subjected to velocities created by bow
thrusters and main propellers of mooring and unmooring ships, PIANC Bulletin no 58,
1987
Chapter 10
Liquid Bulk Terminals
10.1 Introduction
Liquid bulk comprises the following commodities: crude oil, oil products, chemical prod-
ucts, liquefied gases and vegetable oils. Oil and gas terminals are separately classified in
ports, since:
• The goods are mostly classified as ’hazardous’, leading to special safety require-
ments.
• Loading and unloading occur through one central manifold on the ship, placed more
or less midships. As a result, (un)loading equipment does not have to be able to move
alongside the ship to service the different holds, and, thus, no full-length marginal
quay is required. For carrying the (un)loading arms and auxiliary equipment, a rela-
tively small platform is generally sufficient.
Consequently, there are striking differences with regard to dimensions and nature of the
port facilities required as compared to other trades.
10.2 Oil Tankers and Gas Carriers

10.2.1 Oil Tankers
The transport of crude oil generally happens in large tankers (VLCC’s) of 200,000 t or
more. Refined products are transported by product tankers of up to 100,000 t.
Typical tanker dimensions are given in Table 10.1.
10.2.2 Liquid Gas Carriers

Marine transport of LNG (mainly methane, relative density about 0.45) and LPG (a mixture
of mostly propane and butane, relative density about 0.6) takes place in refrigerated form,
LNG at a temperature of about 165 C and LPG at about 50 C. The only exceptions
are some small coastal tankers that carry pressurised LPG (at about 7 bar). LNG can be
liquefied by very high pressure (Compressed Natural Gas or CNG), which is transported
171
Table 10.1 Dimensions of oil tankers

DWT water length width fully loaded fully loaded
[t] displacement [t] Loa [m] [m] draught [m] freeboard [m]
20,000 26,000 175 21.4 9.2 2.9
50,000 65,000 230 31.1 11.6 3.7
70,000 87,000 245 35.4 12.8 4.0
100,000 125,000 272 39.7 14.6 4.6
150,000 185,000 297 44.2 17.1 5.5
200,000 240,000 315 48.8 18.9 6.4
250,000 295,000 338 51.8 20.1 7.3
325,000 375,000 346 53.4 24.7 7.3
442,000 500,000 379 68.0 24.5 9.5
Table 10.2 Dimensions of liquid gas carriers
cargo water length width [m] fully loaded fully loaded

[m3 ] displacement [t] Loa [m] [m] draught [m] freeboard [m]
10,000 15,000 138 19.2 7.0 4.3
35,000 43,000 187 27.0 10.5 7.8
75,000 69,000 220 34.8 11.5 9.2
125,000 110,000 278 42.0 13.6 14.5
210,000 149,000 315 50.0 12.5 14.5
266,000 179,000 345 53.8 12.2 14.8
in relatively small steel cylinders. Similarly the carriage of pressurised LPG in big ships
would require too great wall thicknesses for the cargo tanks.
The load capacity of liquefied gas carriers is always given in cubic metres instead of dwt.
Dimensions are given in Table 10.2.
The last two sizes have been recently built for the transport of Qatar gas and are therefore
referred to as Q-Flex and Q-Max respectively. The possibility of regasification on board of
the vessel has been added to some classes of vessels allowing to use the gas as fuel. There
is a considerable difference in draught between LNG/LPG carriers and oil tankers as shown
in Table 10.3.
Table 10.3 Difference between LNG and VLCC

LNG 133,000 VLCC 150,000
[m3 [t]
length [LBP ] 280 297
width [m] 42 44
draught [m] 11.5 17.1
load capacity [t] 60,000 150,000
loaded freeboard [m] 14.5 - 16.5 5.5
Chapter 10. Liquid Bulk Terminals 173
The draught of the LNG tanker in ballast is only slightly less than the loaded draught, as
the tanker has to take in a relatively large quantity of ballast water for stability reasons.
Table 10.3 also shows the high freeboard figure for the LNG vessel, which results in a
high resistance to wind. Especially, in case of spherical tanks (Ross-Mosenberg system)
where the tanks extend approximately 17 m above the deck, the influence of the wind is
considerable. The low density of the cargo and the high position of these ships lead to
significant differences with oil tankers as regards their behaviour in waves.
10.3 The Nature of the Products

The liquid form in which oil and gas are transported, enables rather high (un)loading ca-
pacities of up to approximately 25,000 t/hour (crude oil) and m3 per hour (LNG). Vessels
smaller than 200,000 to 250,000 t can load or unload with net hourly capacities equal to
10% of their deadweight tonnage. Consequently, these ships occupy the port facilities for
a short period only, about 1 to 1.5 days including time for cleaning, ballasting etc. Loading
is performed by shore-based pumps, unloading by ship-based pumps.
The liquid state permits off-shore loading and unloading by means of pipelines, hoses and
mooring buoys. In case of crude oil and oil products, this may be done through sub-marine
pipelines and floating single-point moorings (SPM’s). For refrigerated gases, the technol-
ogy for sub-marine cryogenic pipelines and SPM’s has not yet been developed, but floating
storage and regasification units (FSRU) are now available.
Another important characteristic of oil and gas is the in flammability. In consequence, there
are strict safety requirements for the transport, handling and storage of these products, espe-
cially for liquefied gases. The relative density of a typical Middle-East crude is about 0.85.
For LNG, this is between 0.43 and 0.50, and for LPG between 0.58 and 0.60. Propane, as
a component of LPG, liquefies at atmospheric pressure at a temperature of 50 C, LNG at
162 C to 165 C. The volume of the LNG is thereby reduced to 1/600th of the original
volume.
Figure 10.1 shows the relation between temperature and minimum pressure required to
liquefy different gases.
10.4 Terminals
10.4.1 General
The shape, dimensions, locations and arrangement of terminals are dictated by their func-
tion. This can be:
• Transhipment and storage (e.g. Maasvlakte Oil Terminal Rotterdam, Bullen Baai
Curacao)
Temperature - vapour pressure relationships

of some liquefied gases
Type 1 fully pressurised
Type 2 semi-pressurised
Type 3 semi-pressurised/fully refrigerated
Type 4 fully refrigerated
lbf/in2 Bars X = Critical Temperature

Gauge Gauge nia
mo
70 Am
1000 60 ane
50 e Eth
len
500 ne hy
ha
400 Et ne
et
Vapour Pressure (Logarithmic Scale)
pa e
M
300 20
Type 1
Pro tan
Bu
200
10
100
5
50
40
30
20
Type 3
Type 2
10
5 Type 4
4
3
2
–300 –250 –200 –100 –50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
–200 –150 –100 –50 0 50 100 150
Temperature
Figure 10.1 Relation between vapour pressure and temperature of different gases
• Supply to refinery and distribution from refinery

• Combination of both foregoing possibilities (e.g. Shell Europoort)
The diversity of products has to be taken into account. Terminals belonging to refineries
have a more or less fixed pattern of requirements regarding facilities, dictated by the vol-
ume and origin of the crude imported and the range of products produced.
Typically, a medium-sized refinery, with an annual throughput of 5 to 6 million tons, would

need facilities to receive, say, 25 to 30 VLCC’s of 200,000 t per year. The products may be
exported in some 100 to 240 product tankers in the 25,000 to 50,000 t range. Two to three
berths would be required to accommodate these ships.
If no sheltered deep-water port already exists, it may well be economically attractive to

unload at an off-shore SPM/SBM and, thus, avoid having to dredge the channel and basins
and to build a jetty for big tankers. In that case, two berths, able to receive 50,000 t product
tankers, would be sufficient.
For bigger throughputs, the SPM solution becomes less attractive because of lower unload-
ing rates (as compared to a fixed jetty), greater delays and greater threat of pollution. Also
the mooring and unmooring of the vessel at the buoy requires tug- and serviceboats to go
out, which limits the accessibility.
Simulation models will have to establish the actual requirements for berths, (un)loading
capacities and storage capacities.
10.4.2 Types of Terminals

The most important parameters for the choice of types are:
• Cost
• Safety
• Reliability
The cost calculations need to include:
• Inaccessibility due to current, waves, wind, visibility, etc.

• Maintenance (e.g. dredging)
• Influence of future extensions, if expected
The following types of oil terminals can be distinguished:
(i) Conventional sheltered port with storage areas.

The berth mainly consists of a jetty (Figure 10.2) and dolphins.
L jetty catwalk
mooring dolphins
breasting dolphins
platform
roadway
pipe track
Finger jetty
or fingerpier
Figure 10.2 Types of jetties Figure 10.3 Single buoy mooring (SBM)
(ii) Off-shore multiple buoy moorings

(MBM) and single buoy moorings (SBM, the most common form of single-point
moorings, SPM, used in case of large ships and insufficient water depth near the
shore (Figure 10.3)).
The traditional off-shore terminal consists of MBM or SBM with sub-marine pipelines
to the shore where storage takes place. The pipelines can be dug in, but this is not
always necessary. Trenching (digging in) may be required for:
– the stability of the pipeline (currents and waves)

– protection against damage (anchors, fishing gear)
– the avoidance of unacceptable stresses in the pipeline due to small bend-radii
or long free spans
The sand or gravel cover of the pipelines ranges from 0 to 5m, depending upon the
location and the circumstances.
(iii) Off-shore terminals with floating storage
This new application can be economic in cases of small or remote oilfields. The ter-
minal is an SBM with a permanently moored storage vessel (FSU). Tankers come
alongside this vessel for loading (Figure 10.4). For the loading and unloading of
Figure 10.4 Floating storage
liquid gas, mostly ports are used. Exceptions are a floating LPG import facility
in Beirut, Lebanon and an unsheltered, but fixed offshore LNG loading terminal in
Brunei, which will be discussed later. Only recently Floating LNG Storage and Re-
gasification Units (FSRU) have come into service (see Figure 10.5). Their operating
method is very similar to the FSU, but the FSRU needs more protected water in view
of the vulnerability of the ship-to-ship cryogenic pipeline.
Figure 10.5 FSRU with shuttle carrier, Bahia Blanca, Argentina
10.4.3 Location of the Terminal - Safety Considerations

The location selection is based on the following considerations:
Export or import For the export terminal, the location of the oilfield or gas field is the
main determining factor. For the import terminal, the suitability of the site and the presence
of sheltered natural or artificial deep-water harbours will often dictate the choice of a site
for the terminal and/or refinery.
Storage area Availability of an adequate area for tank farm and, possibly, refinery.
Geotechnical factors can be important.
Water depth The available water depth in relation to the draught of the envisaged ves-
sels and the required initial and maintenance dredging are also important factors.
Safety and reliability This concerns the technical as well as the operational safety and
reliability. The technical safety and reliability refer to matters as, e.g.:
- Sheltered berthing
- No seiches in the harbour basin
- No sudden siltation in the entrance channel
The operational safety and reliability concern:
- Storm frequency
- Persistent low water conditions
- Regular visibility problems
- Night-sailing restrictions
- Tidal restrictions
- Presence of good functioning port services
- Presence of tug assistance
- etc.
With regard to safety, it must be mentioned that the surroundings of the terminal and the
refinery need to be protected against the hazards associated with the terminal, and vice
versa. Due to the nature of LPG and LNG, the consequences of spills can be more severe
than with oil terminals, because the liquid gas evaporates faster (consequently, gas clouds
may form) and because fires produce, in general, a greater heat radiation.
Thus, for terminal planning purposes, different safety distances have to be taken into ac-
count:
• The distance to possible leakage or spill sources on the terminal within which vapour
clouds may develop with an inflammable or explosive density (density above LFL 1
or LEL 2 . Within these boundaries, no uncontrolled ignition sources may occur.
• The distance to possible fire sources in the terminal within which heat radiation may
cause physical harm to people.
• In case toxic products are used or processed, the distance to possible leakage or spill
sources within which vapour clouds may develop with a density that, again, may
cause physical harm to people.
For the calculation of these safety distances, reference is made to Sandia (2004) and Lig-
teringen e.a. (2007).
It will be clear that the possibility of spills must be reduced to the utmost minimum. In
consequence, all oil and gas terminals should be located in special port basins that are not
accessible to other traffic and can be easily closed off by floating booms in case of acci-
dents. Furthermore, the (un)loading rates can be restricted, so that in case of e.g. a rupture
in the loading arms, the size of the spill can be limited, depending also on the closing speed
of the emergency valves. Various other safety measures are taken by the terminal operators
to reduce the possibility of calamities.
However, relatively small events like the rupture of pipes or flexible hoses, the failure of
valves, flanges, seals or gaskets, will occur occasionally, even on the best run terminals. It
1 LFL: Lower flammable limit
2 LEL: Lower explosive limit
is particularly for these ’routine events’ that the strict abidance to safety distances is impor-
tant to minimise the effects.
At the other extremity, there are the major accidents like main tank failure which can result
in catastrophes that are almost impossible to defend against by safety distances. E.g., TNO
in the Netherlands calculated that if a 28,000 m3 load tank of an LPG carrier is ruptured
and ignites, a column of fire will develop with a diameter of 600 m and a height of 550
m for a duration of 6 min; first degree burns will be sustained up to a distance of 2200 m.
With delayed ignition, an explosion may occur (with LPG, but not with LNG) which, under
unfavourable weather conditions, leads to a loss of 10% of the living quarters at a distance
as far away as 7 to 11 km.
For these major accidents, the best and only defence is to take such precautions, both in
planning, design and in operational procedures, as to bring the probability of occurrence
at an extremely low level. For example, other ship traffic may be stopped in the neigh-
bourhood of an LNG tanker sailing within a port’s boundaries and low-visibility navigation
may be prohibited. Also, LNG storage tanks are provided with a double wall, so that in
case of an in itself very improbable failure of the inner cryogenic tank, the product will be
contained within the concrete outer wall (Figure 10.6).
concrete outer tank
nickel steel inner tank
Figure 10.6 Full containment tanks 150,000-200,000 m3
10.5 The Berth

The location of the oil terminal berth can be in open sea or bay, as well as inside a harbour.
Local conditions dictate the best choice. While in Europe harbours and river mouths offer
the required protection, it is a widespread practice in the Middle East to locate the terminals
offshore (Ras Tanura, Kuwait, Kharg Island).
For the feasibility of offshore fixed berths, waves and currents are the decisive parameters.
In case of swell (periods more than 12 s), a good orientation towards the wave direction is
a necessity. But, an orientation parallel to the local currents is equally necessary.
Table 10.4 very roughly shows the limiting wave heights that apply for the use of jetties
and SBM’s.
Table 10.4 Limiting wave heights for jetties and SBM’s
during berthing without during berthing with during loading or

swell [m] swell [m] discharging [m]
jetty 1.5 - 2.0 1.0 - 1.5 2.0 - 3.0
SBM 2.0 - 3.0 2.0 - 3.0 4.0 - 6.0
The figures for the jetties very much depend upon the arrangement of the mooring system,
orientation towards wave direction and shape of the wave spectrum. Of course, there is also
a strong influence of currents and wind. Berthing with wind speeds higher than 12.5 to 15
m/s is considered to be unsafe, and is, therefore, not allowed.
Considerations of excessive wear and tear of the fender system may reduce the limiting
wave height at a jetty during loading and unloading well below the above given figures.
The offshore solutions are further discussed in Section 10.7 hereof.
For a conventional berth inside a harbour basin, the following principles have to be ob-
served:
• For safety reasons, oil and gas berths should be separate from other port facilities.
No other shipping should be allowed inside the oil and gas basins.
• The berth shall preferably be fugitive, i.e. the ship can stay at berth under all weather
conditions. When this is not possible (for economic reasons) the storm warning
procedures shall allow timely and safe departing of the ship. This very much applies
to liquid gas tankers, as these can only sail with either full or empty cargo tanks.
(’Empty’ means with 1 or 2% residual cargo to keep the tanks refrigerated on the
return voyage. Contrary to oil tankers, gas tankers have no partitions in their cargo
tanks, which, when in open sea, would lead to sloshing of the liquid in the tanks if
only partially filled. This, in its turn, could cause rupture of the tank wall as well as
loss of stability of the ship.
As concerns the length of waterfront required per berth, for safety reasons the space be-
tween two ships, berthed in line, should be approximately equal to the width of the biggest
ship. It should also be taken into account that the manifold of many ships is not located
exactly in the middle of the ship, but sometimes up to 15 m fore or up to 10 m aft of the cen-
tre. It is, therefore, advisable to take as a minimum centre-to-centre distance of 2 adjacent
berths: the length of the longest ship + 1 the width of the largest ship + 2 15m.
10.6 Jetties and Dolphins

10.6.1 L and T Jetties
Oil and gas jetties (Figure 10.7) generally consist of the following components:
• An approach bridge with a roadway of 2.5 to 3.5 m width and a pipe track (preferably
in one layer for easy inspection), plus service ducts, lighting and guard rails. The pipe
track can be either next to the roadway and on the same level, or underneath the road.
The length of approach bridges varies, depending upon the local conditions, from
tens of meters to many kilometres.
• The jetty head consisting of a platform with:
- Loading arms
- Service area
- Service building
- Jetty crane
- Fire fighting tower
- Gangway
- etc.
A typical size of a jetty head is 20 35 m2 .
road
loop catwalk
mooring
dolphin
loading
arms
platform
breasting
dolphin
fender
line
breasting fender
lines spring lines stern lines
Figure 10.7 L jetty arrangement
• The berthing or breasting dolphins which serve to:
- Absorb the kinetic energy of the berthing ship

- Hold the vessel during on-shore wind
- Fasten the ’spring’ lines of the vessel (although, sometimes, also special moor-
ing dolphins are used)
• The mooring dolphins to fasten the transverse mooring lines (breast, fore and stern
lines).
The difference between L and T jetties is caused by the lay-out of the approach bridge and
jetty head. An L jetty has the bridge at one of the sides of the platform, while at a T jetty
the bridge is centrally positioned. A possible advantage of the L jetty is that it provides
space at the inner sides of the platform for small craft (tugboats), but otherwise the choice
is based on the configuration of pipelines on the platform, connecting to the bridge.
The overall lay-out of platform, breasting and mooring dolphins is following the guidelines
prepared by the Oil Companies Marine Forum (OCIMF, 2008). These are aimed at provid-
ing optimum effectivity of the mooring arrangement and at standardisation. The principles
are given in Figure 10.8, taken from these quidelines.
symmetrical
breasting
mooring dolphin loading platform dolphin
15° 35 to 50 m
15° 15°
15°
10°
0.25 - 0.4 LOA
(assume 0.3 LOA for standard layout)

mooring dolphin horizontal angles not to exceed values shown
25° 25° water line
1.5m min
(assume 1.5m
for standard
breast lines lauout) loading platform spring lines
vertical angles of lines (in true elevation) not to exceed

values shown with vessel in least favourable load state
Figure 10.8 Typical mooring pattern
The lay-out is symmetrical with respect to the centre line of the platform (tankers have their
manifold at or near the middle of the ship and must be able to head into one or the other
direction, while at berth). Mooring lines fore and aft should have a maximum angle of 15
in the horizontal plane with the normal to the ship, because these lines restrain the lateral
movements of the ship and have thus optimum effectivity. The spring lines should have
a maximum angle of 10 with the longitudinal axis in order to function most effectively
in restraining the surge motion. Likewise the maximum angle of all mooring lines in the
vertical plane is limited to 25 with the horizontal. This is possible (given the normal dif-
ference in elevation of the fairleads in the ship hull and the hooks at the dolphins) by having
sufficient length of the line. It is for this reason that the mooring dolphins are positioned
behind the breasting dolphins at a distance of 35 to 50 m.
It is clear that this lay-out can only be realised when there is just a small variation in the
size of tankers / carriers to be received. When this is assured, it is sufficient to have only
two breasting dolphins, each at about (1/3) LS from bow and stern. When the variation in
ship size is considerable it is necessary to add one and sometimes two breasting dolphins
to satisfy the requirement that the space between two dolphins does not exceed 0 4 LS . In
such cases also additional mooring dolphins may be placed.
10.6.2 Finger Piers

Finger piers have the advantage of having berths at either side of the pier, with the pos-
sibility of joint use of the approach bridge, platform (partly) and mooring dolphins. But,
care should be taken that the distance between ships does not become too short, causing
mooring lines to become too steep. With the above mentioned minimum distance from ship
to dolphin of 35 m this would lead to a platform width of more than 70 m, which is in most
cases unnecessary.
10.6.3 Approach Bridges and Jetty Heads

Approach bridges and jetty heads are, in essence, simple structures for which local building
regulations apply. In case of exposed jetties the elevation of underside deck requires cal-
culation of design water level and wave height under design conditions. In order to avoid
high slamming loads the deck elevation shall be chosen well above design water level. For
the roadway loading, the design load is the biggest vehicle that passes during normal use,
unless the building or maintenance of the jetty as such entails special requirements. Nor-
mally, a 15t truck constitutes a reasonable design criterion.
In many cases, the design of the approach bridge is determined by the number and dimen-
sions of the pipelines. Spans for the pipelines may not be too big (4 to 12 m) due to the
stiffness requirements. Special attention has to be paid to pipeline anchors and expansion
bends (loops). In case of LNG lines, often bellows are used, instead of loops.
When designing approach bridges, it s highly desirable to let the pipeline anchors coincide
with the fixed points of the approach bridge. Expansion bends should coincide with the
expansion joints of the bridge. The bridge has to be sufficiently rigid in all directions. The
vertical deflection should be no more than 1/1000 of the span to prevent that, when draining
the lines, a residue of the product remains in the pipeline.
The dimensions of the jetty head are mainly determined by the space requirements of the
manifold and the loading arms. The required minimum distance between successive load-
ing arms is 3 to 4.5 m, depending on their size.
10.6.4 Breasting Dolphins

In Section 10.5.1 the functions of breasting and mooring dolphins have been mentioned.
Since breasting dolphins (also called berthing dolphins), contrary to mooring dolphins,
have to be able to absorb the kinetic energy of the berthing ship, they have to be flexible.
This flexibility can be attained either by elastic deformation of the dolphin itself (e.g. by
using a number of relatively small-diameter, thick-walled steel piles) or by elastic defor-

mation of the fenders, or by a combination of the two. Mooring dolphins have to withstand
only quasi-static loads and, as such, are most economically designed as stiff structures (e.g.
a single large-diameter steel pile).
The berthing of ships in general, but of VLCC in particular because of their great mass,
has to be done extremely cautious. The procedure is that the ship is brought alongside the
berth with no forward speed and then pushed carefully toward the berth by tugs or use of
bow thrusters. Preferably the forward breasting dolphin is reached first by creating a small
angle between the ship axis and the berthing line. In Figure 10.9 this angle is exaggerated.
The impact energy to be absorbed by the dolphin / fender combination is calculated by the
following formula.
1
E M v2 Cm Ce Cs Cc (10.1)
2
in which:
E = kinetic energy of berthing ship [kJ]

M = mass of the ship (displacement) [t]
v = approach velocity of ship’s centre of gravity at time of impact [m/s]
Cm = added mass coefficient [-]
Ce = eccentricity coefficient [-]
Cs = stiffness coefficient [-]
Cc = configuration coefficient [-]
centre of gravity
V
ω
Vr
γ
ω⋅r
breasting
dolphin
V
Figure 10.9 Berthing ship
The factor Cm has to be introduced to incorporate the effect of a volume of water that moves
with the vessel, the so-called added mass.
Cm M is the virtual mass of the vessel, comprising the ship’s mass and the added mass.
The value of Cm depends, inter alia, on the keel clearance, the approach velocity and the
deceleration gradient after contact with the dolphin. Extensive research was carried out
at Delft University of Technology on this important factor (Fontijn, 1980) and (Vrijburg,
1983), resulting in the following approximative expression:
D
Cm 12 0 12 (10.2)
h D
in which:
h = water depth [m]

D = draught [m]
Note: several manuals and standards, like British Standard BS 6349 (1994) and EAU
(1990) give another expression for Cm ( 1 2 D Bs ), proposed by Vasco Costa (1964).
This does not represent the effect of small under keel clearance, as is the case in most berth
conditions.
The eccentricity coefficient Ce takes account of the rotation of the ship during berthing, in
addition to the translation. Ce is approximated with the following expression:
k2 r2 cos2 L
Ce (10.3)
k2 r2
in which:
r = distance between c.g. and the point of first contact [m]

k = radius of gyration of the ships mass around the c.g [m]
According to BS 6349 k is a function of the ship length and block coefficient CB :
k 0 19 CB 0 11 Ls (10.4)
With k for most ships ranging from 0.2 - 0.3 Ls and r amounting to about 0.25 Ls in the
above procedure, a value of Ce = 0 5 0 8 is found. For a theoretical treatment reference
is made to Vasco Costas contribution in Port Engineering (Bruun, 1989).
The factor Cs depends on the relative elasticities of the dolphin and the ship’s hull, as some
of the energy may be absorbed by elastic deformation of the latter. When the dolphin and
fender are stiff, the hull will yield giving a value of Cs = 0.9. In case of soft fendering Cs =
1.0 should be used. Cs is thus only of secondary importance.
Finally the configuration coefficient Cc accounts for the types of berthing structure. For
open jetties like described in this Chapter a value of Cc = 1.0 applies. But in case of a
closed quay wall, such as a sheet pile structure, Cc = 0.8 may be used. The reason for this is
that the water between the wall and the approaching vessel can not escape quickly enough
from around and under the vessel and will act as a cushion.
As a rule of thumb to estimate the kinetic energy at berthing Equation (10.1) may be sim-
plified to:
1
E M Cb v2 (10.5)
2
with Cb = 0.7 representing the combined effect of the four coefficients described above. It
should be recognised that this is a very rough estimate.
It will be clear that the magnitude of the impact energy is largely determined by the ap-
proach velocity of the ship. As a simple guideline may serve:
- Favourable conditions of current and wind v = 0.10 m/s

- Average conditions of current and wind v = 0.15 m/s
- Unfavourable conditions of current and wind,
or berthing with smaller vessels v = 0.25 m/s
More detailed recommendations are given in EAU, 1990, and PIANC, 2002, see Figure
10.10. The values given in these references are considered to be quite conservative and
recently a new PIANC Workgroup has started to collect full-scale data of berthing velocities
in order to update the existing Guideline.
Figure 10.10 Berthing velocities
The availability of statistics for different classes of vessels allows the setting of design val-
ues based on an accepted probability of exceedance. British Petroleum measured dolphin
and fender deflections, and thus impact energy, for an extended period (Balfour et al, 1980).
For an accepted probability of exceedance of 1/3000 (or once per 20 years), this resulted in
the design values tabled below. The design values given for Shell are partly based on ap-
proach velocity measurements, and partly on certain design philosophies, e.g. the fear that
a long habit of berthing big ships at specific locations may result in a decrease of caution.
Table 10.5 Design values berthing energy
DWT British Petroleum [kJ] Shell [kJ]

50,000 103 120
100,000 152 183
150,000 185 250
200,000 215 345
300,000 260 515
Now we have to apply the berthing energy into the design of the dolphin including the
selection of a suitable fender. At first impact the berthing energy will result in compression
of the fender mounted on the dolphin and deflection of the dolphin. For the piles of a
dolphin there will be essentially a linear relation between the force F and the deflection y p :
F kp yp (10.6)
with k p = pile stiffness (N/m)
Most elastomeric fenders show a non-linear force deflection curve with y f as design com-
pression (see Figure 10.11). Equating the (kinetic) berthing energy with the maximum
3.6
3.2
Ø 1850/1000, l = 2000 mm
2.8
2.4
Ø 1750/1000, l = 2000 mm
2.0
force MN
Ø 1400/800, l = 2000 mm
1.6
1.2
0.8
0.4
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
compression mm
A) force reaction deflection curves
energy absorption capacity A
1.0
Ø 1850/1000, l = 2000 mm
0.8
0.6
Ø 1400/800, l = 2000 mm
MN m
0.4
Ø 1750/1000,
l = 2000 mm
0.2
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
compression mm
B) energy absorption - deflection curves
Figure 10.11 Force deflection curves and energy absorption curves of large-diameter cylindrical
fenders
potential energy in the breasting dolphin:

1 yf
E F yp yp F y f dy (10.7)
2 0
will allow to calculate the berthing force. In first approximation a different approach is
followed in design:
Because the deflection of dolphin piles is very small compared with the compression of the
fender, the design procedure neglects the former component:
(i) Based on the berthing energy E a suitable fender is selected (from energy absorption-
deflection curve, such as Figure 10.11b);
(ii) In the corresponding force-deflection curve, such as Figure 10.11a, the design force
is determined;
(iii) Subsequently the breasting dolphin is dimensioned on the basis of this design force,
taking into account the lateral friction force. Because the ship may still have some
forward speed at the instant of impact the friction between ship hull and fender sur-
face creates an additional force of about 0 5 F parallel to the berthing line. The
fender is designed to resist this lateral force safely, but the dolphin design shall be
based on the resultant of the normal force and lateral friction force.
It is not only the breasting dolphin that has to be able to withstand the impact force F, but
also the ship’s hull may not sustain damage. The permissible hull pressure is 200 kN/m2
for LNG/LPG tankers (and for dry bulk carriers), 250 kN/m2 for oil tankers up to about
100,000 t, and 300 kN /m2 for oil tankers above that limit. However, in view of the IMO
regulation that new oil tankers have to be provided with a double hull (i.e. separate cargo
tank), which will lead to a lighter outer hull structure, it would appear safe to assume a
generally applicable limit of 200 kN/m2 . The fenders or fender skirts will have to be de-
signed and dimensioned accordingly, and fender skirts must be mounted on the dolphin in
a flexible way, so as to be able to adapt themselves to the position of the ship’s hull.
In the above, only the design requirements resulting from the energy absorption function
have been discussed. Design requirements resulting from quasi-static forces transmitted by
a ship exposed to waves, wind and/or current, are usually less than the berthing force and
therefore not determining for the design.
10.6.5 Mooring Dolphins

For each size-class of ship, a multiple mooring line plan has to be made. In most cases this
will lead to 4 - 6 breast and stern line dolphins, and to 2 - 4 spring line dolphins (sometimes
combined with breasting dolphins).
Each mooring dolphin is designed for a specified number of mooring lines of given size,
type and breaking strength. The breaking strength of new lines is guaranteed by the factory
as the minimum breaking load (MBL). The actual strength is often higher initially, but will
decrease after frequent use. At tanker berths the mooring arrangement (to assure safety of
the berthed vessel) is laid out assuming in each line a maximum load of 0.55 MBL.
To avoid that mooring dolphins are overloaded and damaged due to the use of more or
stronger lines than assumed in design the following safety is introduced:
(i) The winches on board of the vessel have a brake, which slips at a force of 0.6 MBL
(ii) The dolphins are designed for a load equal to the number of lines MBL (the design
includes a load safety factor according to the applied Design Standard)
Modern berths have their mooring dolphins equipped with Quick Release Hooks (QRH),
which can be operated mechanically and can be programmed to release the lines when the
force exceeds MBL, see Figure 10.12. Jointly, the mooring dolphins (and mooring lines)
Figure 10.12 Multiple quick release mooring hook with a capacity of 150 tonnes per hook
should be able to resist any wind and current force exerted on the ship, that would move
the ship away from the berth.
In case of exposed jetty terminals, the dolphins (both breasting and mooring dolphins) must
also be able to resist the forces directly or indirectly induced by the waves. Normally, all-
steel mooring lines, or hawsers, are used for tankers, but in case of appreciable exposure
to waves, softer moorings (e.g. steel with nylon ’header’ or ’tail’) may be required to limit
mooring line forces. This leads to greater ship motions which may make it necessary to
disconnect the loading arms if the motion amplitude starts to exceed certain critical values.
Normally, for long-period horizontal motions surge, sway and yaw , amplitudes of
2.5 to 3 m are allowed. LNG loading arms often have an auto-disconnect set at 2.5 m.
Some load/elongation curves for different types of mooring lines are given in Figure 10.13.
To verify and optimise mooring arrangements for berths in difficult situations, numerical
programs are used, that calculate the fender and mooring line forces, and the ship motions
in six degrees of freedom in the time domain. The reliability of these computations is
good for relatively simple berth configurations. When the berth is located in a complex
geometry (e.g. inside a harbour with incoming waves and reflections) a physical model is
still employed besides numerical models, such as the combination of a Boussinesq wave
propagation model with a model to compute the forces on and the motions of the moored
ship (Van der Molen, 2006).
110
0
0 32
Figure 10.13 Load extension curves for mooring lines
1. Steel core wire (6 36 ordinary lay)

2. Steel core wire (6 25 ordinary lay)
3. Advance main-made fibre
4. Nylon braid line
5. Nylon square line
6. Polypropylene line
10.6.6 Special Aspects of LPG/LNG Jetties

The following aspects require special attention:
• The stringent safety requirements have an influence on the design in the form of more
conservative values for safety coefficients, acceptable stresses, etc.
• In the case of leakages or spills anywhere in the pipeline system, the very low tem-
peratures of LNG can expose steel structures to so-called cold showers which cause
an irreversible brittleness. Therefore, exposed steel structures have to be protected,

e.g. by applying a cover of concrete or by incorporating the structure in a concrete
floor.
• For the design of various parts of the jetty, especially the loading platform, spatial
forms have to be avoided which facilitate the development of so-called gas pockets.
• By applying insulation material around the pipelines, the surface exposed to the wind
doubles or trebles with subsequent higher wind forces.
• Acceptable deformations and rotations of the structure are small and are also deter-
mined by the nature of the applied isolation materials.
• An elaborate system of fire-fighting equipment is required.
The isolated pipelines for transport of LNG from the berth to the storage tanks are very
expensive. This prohibits transport over long distance.
10.7 Storage Areas

The size of storage areas for oil and liquid gas depends on the number and dimensions of
the tanks and the distances between these tanks. Space has to be added for pipe tracks,
roads, pumping stations, buildings, etc. The dimensions of the tanks depend upon the size
of the vessels, the intervals between ship arrivals and the diversity of the products.
In case of oil tanks, the distance between the tanks is mainly determined by the criterion
that each tank has to be surrounded by a concrete or earth wall (bund) at such a distance
and of such height, that in the event of the collapse of a full tank, the oil can be contained
within the bund. For example, a tank of 100,000 m3 surrounded by a 5 m high bund (4 m
useful) requires a surface of 25,000 m2 or 160 m 160 m.
Operational storage capacity is, generally, in the order of 1 month consumption. In addi-
tion to this, there may be a strategic storage. The costs of LNG/LPG tanks is much higher
than that of other tanks, so operational storage capacity is kept to a minimum.
Liquid gas storage is more dangerous than oil storage, and requires special safety provi-
sions as discussed already earlier. E.g., any escaping liquid from pipeline or tank rupture
should be contained in as small as possible an area to minimize the evaporation surface.
As a guideline for space requirements, an LNG terminal with a throughput of 6 million

m3 per year requires, roughly, 15 to 20 ha for storage, in 4 tanks of 60,000 to 80,000 m3
each. This direct need for space is exclusive of the safety zone which must be kept free of
uncontrolled sources of ignition.
10.8 Offshore Facilities

10.8.1 Multiple Buoy Mooring (MBM)
The simplest offshore berth facility is the Multiple Buoy Mooring, also referred to as Con-
ventional Buoy Moorings (CBM). Flexible hoses and connected to pipelines laid on the
seabed, which run to or from the tank farms on the land. When no vessel is at berth, the
flexible hoses are set down on the seabed, with pick-up rigging connecting the end of the
hose to a surface marker buoy. Upon arrival the ship uses its own anchor lines and often
additional wires, connected to surface buoys (which themselves are anchored by chains to
pile anchors in the seabed). Having moored, the vessel uses its manifold derrick or crane
to attach the pick-up rigging and lift the flexible hose in order to connect it to the vessels
manifold, located at mid-ships.
MBMs in the port of Beirut, Lebanon
The existing port of Beirut has eight oil and gas handling facilities along the coast, for
products such as gasoline, jet fuel, LPG and chemical products. The products are imported
via MBMs, located in a sheltered bay. The annual volumes are quite low, e.g. 40.000 m3
LPG, carried by some 35 vessels.
The lay-out of the MBM shows the 5 mooring buoys, each tied to 2 anchor piles.
Figure 10.14 Multiple Buoy Moorings in the port of Beirut

The connection of the vessel to the buoy moorings is carried out using a small launch,
which also brings the hose to the manifold area and connects it to the derrick/crane. When
the sea is rough, this activity can’t take place. As limiting wave height 1m is reported. This
implies that MBMs only can be used in relatively sheltered areas.
Another limiting factor for application of MBMs is the long time required for berthing
and deberthing (5 hours) in comparison with jetty and SBM (see Table 10.6). Also the
discharge/loading rate is less than at a jetty. Finally the system is more susceptible to spills
and therefore less acceptable under present day environmental requirements.
10.8.2 Single Buoy Mooring (SBM)

The advantage of an SBM is that the ship always takes the most favourable position in
relation to the combination of wind, current and waves. Tankers of up to 50,000 t can be
handled within 24 hours. The SBM is attractive due to the simplicity of the system and
the low investment costs. Figure 10.15 shows an SBM with multiple-chain anchors. The
system with 6- or 8-chain anchors is the most common.
fairlead
nylon mooring manifold
turntable ropes
MSL buoy
floating hose strings
universal
connectors
chain pendant
adjustable twin (6 or 8 PCS)
manifold buoyancy submarine
submarine tanks hose strings anchors or
pipeline seabed anchor piles
chafing
alternative for chain
turntable mooring ropes pick up wire
30°
submarine twin submarine (future)

pipeline hose strings SBM buoy
bow stoppers
manifold triangle plate
30°
swivel steel wire or ships manifold

braidline snotter
60° winker light
floating hose string reducer tail hoses
Figure 10.15 SBM with multiple-chain anchoring
As a comparison of the investment cost, a VLCC jetty, fully equipped and including local
dredging, requires an investment of approximately 2.5 times the investment needed for an
SBM with a 36 inch submarine pipeline of 5 km length. In addition to the differences in
investment costs, there are the expenses for tug assistance which is required for vessels
berthing alongside a jetty, but not often required for those mooring at SBM’s. For the SBM
a simple mooring launch is sufficient.
But, on the other hand, operation and maintenance costs for SBM’s are considerably higher
than for jetties. In particular, the hoses (underwater between pipeline and buoy, and the
floating hoses between buoy and ship) require strict inspection and frequent replacement,
although the technology has very much improved over the years. Furthermore, at arrival
and departure of the tankers mooring launches and sometimes also tugs have to come out
for assistance. In general, for small to moderate yearly throughputs SBM’s are more eco-
nomical than jetties. Only with big ships and for large throughputs, jetties become more
economical.
hose string and mooring
helicopter deck probe line in reeled off position
hose string and mooring tanker manifold
engine cabine line in reeled up position probe tanker
mooring trunk position wire 42000 DWT
mooring trunk
fendering messenger mooring line
water level soft eye
hose retrieval wire counter
skirt weight
buoyancy compartments
mooring trim
chain tanks
water ballast tanks 75-100
counter weight
fixed ballast
divers platform
submarine hose string
submarine pipeline
subsea manifold
seabed
Figure 10.16 Deepwater SBM
The attractiveness of SBM’s is also based on the fact that they can be used in very deep
water (see Figure 10.16).
An SBM buoy mainly consists of the following components:
• Buoy body
• Turning table
• Swivel
The buoy body is divided into watertight compartments. There should be ample freeboard
to avoid submerging of the buoy during maximum load. The maximum gradient may not
exceed 10 to 15 degrees. The design load of the buoy should be equal to the break load of
the hawsers. As regards selection of a buoy’s location, it will be obvious that the sub-marine
pipelines, i.e. the distance to the shore, should be as short as possible, But, it is equally
obvious that there must be a zone of sufficient deep water around the buoy to ensure safe
arrival and departure manoeuvres of the ships for different directions of wind, waves and
currents. For that reason, the distance from the buoy to the critical water depth should be
at least 3 times the length of the biggest ship.
Finally, Table 10.6 presents a comparison of the main design parameters of a jetty, an MBM
and a SBM.
10.8.3 Fixed Offshore Terminals

In areas where sea conditions are generally calm, the construction of fixed offshore ter-
minals may be considered, in the form of loading/unloading platforms and dolphins. The
Table 10.6 Comparison of three mooring systems.
jetty multiple buoy moorings SBM’s

access from shore: direct by sea by sea
number of hoses: 1-8 1-4 1-3
time between arrival and start 2 hours 5 hours 2 hours
of pumping:
mooring possible with wind 1.0 - 2.0 m 1.0 m 2.0 - 2.5 m
up to 30 knots and head waves of:
oil unloading with wind up to 1.5 - 2.0 m 2.0 - 2.5 m 3.0 - 4.5 m
40 knots and head waves of:
ship has to leave berth with - 2.0 - 3.0 m 3.5 - 5.0 m
wind of 60 knots and waves
higher than:
preference regarding ease of 2 3 1
berthing and de-berthing: 2 3 1
possible tide effects: yes no no
damage sensitive parts: fenders buoy chains hoses
assistance during berthing and tugs and flats flats flats
mooring:
assistance for the departure: tugs and flats flats flats
platform may be connected to the shore by pipe trestles or by sub-marine pipelines. Fig-
ure 10.17 shows an example of the latter: the Kharg Sea Island loading terminal (Iran),
designed for 500,000 t tankers on one side and 300,000 t tankers on the other. Another
example and a quite innovative design is given in Figures 10.18 and 10.19. It is the Brunei
LNG loading terminal, lao designed and operated by Shell. It is located some 4.2 km off-
shore. The jetty head with special loading crane has been connected to the onshore storage
by means of a simple trestle which carries the LNG pipelines. The ships are moored, as-
sisted only by mooring launches, with the bow towards the sea and the stern close to, but
free from the jetty head. This concept was chosen to avoid the need for tug assistance and
channel dredging. The ships and the loading crane are specifically adapted to each other,
and, hence, only the 7 LNG carriers of 75,000 m3 each, especially designed an built for the
Brunei-Japan trade, can be handled here.
The mooring system allows the ship to change its position during loading over an angle of
2 40 to keep waves head-on all the time. The mooring system is a ’soft’ system with the
steel mooring lines provided with a 60 m nylon header. This allows a displacement in the
horizontal plane of up to 12 m. The loading system is provided with a quick-release device
(and no-return valves) which can be operated from the ship. The terminal was inaugurated
in 1972 and has given virtually trouble-free service since. A more detailed description
is given in Kemper (1981). A second terminal, very similar to the first one, came into
operation in 1994.
''
'-0 2 Ø 20''
310 submarine
500.000 DWT lines
5 Tons (bunker)
ship 1500' long Derrick
2 Ø 56''
submarine
lines (heavy
& light crude)
180
300.000 DWT
0' -
existing
ship 1000' long tank form
0''
''
'-0
275
helicopter
deck
bunker loading arms

&
crude loading arms
navigation helicopter deck

light loading platform crude riser navigation
light EL.+52'-0''
upper deck deck EL.+35'-0''
EL.+42'-0'' sea bed
lower deck EL.–105'-0''
EL.+30'-0'' approx.
Figure 10.17 The Kharg Sea Island loading terminal (Iran)

loading arm of crane
loading crane mooring dolphin

mooring line nylon line
sea level
sea bed
anchor pile
mooring buoy
mooring dolphins
mooring
lines
loading platform
mooring
40°
lines approach jetty

40°
catwalk
anchor piles
anchor anchor
piles
to LNG carrier
mooring buoy
mooring line
sea level
sea bed
anchor
anchor pile
Figure 10.18 lay-out of LNG berth

Figure 10.19 LNG berth loading crane
10.9 References
Balfour J.S., Feben J.C. and Martin D.L., ’Fendering requirements, design fender impact
criteria’, Proceedings of Ports ’80, ASCE, Norfolk, 1980.
British Standard, Code of Practice for Marine Structures, BS6349, Part 4, 1994
Bruun, P., Port Engineering, Gulf Publishing Co., 1989
Recommendations of the Committee in Waterfront Structures, Harbours and Waterways,
EAU 1990
Fontijn, H.L., The berthing of a ship to a jetty, Proc. ASCE Journ. Waterways, Ports, Coast
and Ocean Div. 106, 1980
Kemper, W., ’Olie en vloeibaar gas terminals’, PATO Cursus Havens II, Delft University
of Technology, 1981
Ligteringen, H., Tak, C. van der, Dirke, R. and Boer, F.A. de, LionGas LNG Terminal in
Rotterdam, Proc. Int . Maritime-Port Technology and Development Conference, Singa-
pore, Sept. 2007
Maari R., ’Offshore mooring terminals’, 1977
Ministry of Social Affairs, Methods for calculation of the physical effects of the escape of
dangerous cargo, Dutch Government Printers, The Hague, 1979
Molen, van der W, Behaviour of moored ships in harbours. PhD Thesis, Delft University
of Technology, Delft, 2006
Oil Companies International Marine Forum (OCIMF), Mooring equipment guidelines, With-
erby and Co Ltd, Livingstone 2008
Sandia, Guidance on Risk Analysis and safety implications of a large spill over water,
Report SAND 2004-6558, December 2004
Vrijburg A., Fender forces caused by ship impacts, Delft Hydraulics Publ. no. 309, Delft,
1983
Chapter 11
Dry Bulk Terminals
11.1 Introduction
Dry bulk cargo is mostly shipped in loose form, which determines to a major extent the
transport technology employed at the quay and in the terminal. This and the storage sys-
tems make dry bulk terminals totally different from all other types of terminals.
One has to differentiate from the start between export and import terminals. Contrary to
virtually all other terminals -liquid bulk, containers, general cargo-, the dry bulk terminals
are mostly designed for one-way traffic only and, as a result, the loading and unloading
terminals are basically different in character.
The best location of a dry bulk loading terminal (i.e. export) is not necessarily close to the
main centre of commercial and industrial activities in the area, but rather in the vicinity of
the origin of the commodity, e.g. near the mining centre. Important site solution criteria
are the natural conditions, the land communications and the available depth of water, since
large bulk carriers have a considerable draught. Due to the large quantities often handled
in these ports, extensive storage facilities are required and the necessary land area has to
be available. As a result, worldwide many of the big loading terminals are so called ’dedi-
cated’ terminals or ports, designed and developed to handle only one particular commodity,
but in very large quantities.
Unloading or import terminals are much more diverse, both in location, size and cargo
handling system. In consequence, a relatively large part of this paper will deal with import
terminals.
11.2 Dry Bulk Commodities

Dry bulk commodities can be divided into:
(i) major bulk, e.g. iron core, coal, grain, phosphate, bauxite/alumina.
199
(ii) minor bulk, e.g. sugar, rice, bentonite, gypsum, wood shavings & chips, salt, fish,
copra
The total world maritime transport of minor bulk constitutes about one third of that of major
bulk. A short description of the major bulk commodities is given below.
Iron ore
This is the most important dry bulk commodity, representing some 20% of the total dry
cargo shipment by weight. The ore shipped has a stowage factor which varies between
0.30 m3 and 0.52 m3 per tonne, with an average of 0.4 m3 .
Iron ore, generally, is dusty and so it is normally necessary to provide dust extraction
equipment. The density of iron ore limits the stacking height in terminals because of the
limits of the load-bearing capacity of the ground. The angle of repose is usually less than
40 . Sometimes, the iron ore undergoes a concentration process before being shipped. The
concentrate is than baked into small spheres or pellets.
Coal
Coal has a stowage factor which varies between 1.2 m3 and 1.4 m3 per tonne. All types of
coal, also anthracite, are subject to spontaneous combustion, caused by heating of the coal,
as it absorbs oxygen from the air. But the sensitivity to this phenomenon differs from one
type to another, which is important for the planning of the coal stockpile, as it may restrict
the permissible height. Generally, the dust nuisance can be controlled by the use of water
sprays at transfer points and discharge positions and on stockpiles. The angle of repose
varies from 30 to 45 .
Grain
Under this heading belong wheat, barley, oats, rye, tapioca, etc. These grains have differ-
ent densities and properties, so, consequently, they also have different storage and handling
requirements. Since grain is a perishable commodity, it is necessary to have proper venti-
lation and protection against weather conditions and pests during shipping and storage. In
the grain trade, variation in seasonal conditions results in large fluctuations in transporta-
tion requirements. Various types of vessels of different sizes are used, including combined
carriers.
Phosphate
Phosphate rock is the main raw material for the fertilizer industry. It is very dusty and ab-
sorbs moisture very rapidly, which can create problems for unloading. The average stowage
factor is 0.92 m3 to 1.0 m3 per tonne. Practically all shipments are in the form of a powdery
concentrate. The material is very fine, and special provisions have to be made to prevent
dust problems.
Chapter 11. Dry Bulk Terminals 201
Bauxite/alumina
Bauxite ore, when processed into alumina, is the basic raw material for the production of
primary aluminium. The two raw materials differ greatly in bulk density. Bauxite stows
at 0.80 m3 to 0.88 m3 per metric ton, and alumina at 0.6 m3 . Handling characteristics
are also different. The trend is towards conversion of bauxite to alumina at the source,
which halves the transportation requirements. Particularly alumina is dusty and requires
precautions against soil and air pollution.
11.3 Dry Bulk Ships

Dry bulk carriers are designed for the transport of commodities such as grain, coal, iron
ore derivates, bauxite, phosphate, cement, etc. In the past carriers have also been designed
and built for the transport of both dry and liquid bulk cargo. These were for example the
so-called OBO carriers (ore/bulk/oil). Since the holds are alternatively used for the dry
and liquid bulk cargo, they need to be cleaned at every change, which is a disadvantage.
The OCO carriers (ore cum oil) had separate holds for liquid and dry cargo, in this way
avoiding the many cleaning operations. Neither the OBO nor the OCO carriers have been
used on a big scale, due to their limited application potentials. At present they are not built
anymore.
The loading of bulk carriers virtually always occurs by shore-based equipment. Unloading
may be done by shore-based equipment -the most common method- as well as by ship-
borne equipment. In the latter case, one can distinguish between geared bulk carriers and
self-unloaders. Geared bulk carriers are vessels equipped with deck-mounted grab cranes,
generally one for every hold. Self-unloaders are equipped with a continuous unloading sys-
tem. It usually consists of one or more longitudinal horizontal belt conveyors in the lowest
part of the ship, which are fed from funnel-shaped holds through hydraulically operated
valves or doors. The horizontal conveyor unloads onto an inclined or vertical conveyor
which, in its turn, transfers the cargo on a third conveyor mounted on a revolving boom (up
to 80 m long). From there, the cargo drops into a shore-based hopper (see Figures 2.31 and
11.1).
These self-unloaders originate from the coal trade on the big lakes in the USA, but are more
widely used now in different parts of the world for the shorter transport distances (coal from
Sumatra to Java) or for through-transport from a main port to a temporary terminal. The
advantage is that no shore cranes are required, but particularly that a simple dolphin berth
(instead of a continuous marginal quay) is sufficient to berth the ship, even in case of very
wide slopes (see Figure 11.1). The disadvantage is that the ships are more expensive per
tonne capacity and more vulnerable to mechanical breakdowns, e.g. a broken conveyor belt
is difficult to repair in the confined space at the bottom of the ship. For smaller required
capacities, the short sea traders are used, also called coasters. They have the advantage of
being able to visit virtually all ports due to their restricted draught. They are equipped for
transport of bulk and general cargo and, usually, have their own unloading gear.
transfer
point stacker
stockpile
mooring dolphins hopper on piled platform
breasting conveyor
dolphins boom
Figure 11.1 Dolphin berth for self-unloaders
For non-conventional bulk carriers, typical dimensions are given in Table 11.1
Table 11.1 Dimensions non-conventional bulk carriers

self-unloaders short sea traders
DWT [t] 20,000 - 70,000 300 - 3,000
Loa 200 - 250 40 - 95
Bs [m] 20 -30 5.5 - 13
D [m] 7.5 - 12.5 2.5 - 6
It is emphasized that the type of cargo (low or high relative density) is governing the actual
draught of the carrier.
The actual draught, in its turn, controls the possibility to enter a port with restricted depth.
Therefore, it is important to judge the most efficient -and economic- relation between:
• Types of commodities to be transported, and their bulk densities

• Type of carrier most suitable for that purpose
• Cargo combination possibilities
• Technical restriction of ports of call
11.4 Unloading Systems

11.4.1 General
There is a variety of unloading systems and equipment, some continuous, some discontin-
uous, and with a wide range of capacities. The main systems are:
grabs bucket elevators

pneumatic systems slurry systems
vertical conveyors self-discharging vessels
The capacity of the unloading equipment is usually decisive for the throughput capacity of
the terminal, as the capacities of other terminal equipment should be geared to that of the
unloading facilities. However, there is confusion in defining capacity.The following three
definitions are currently used in dry bulk terminals:
(i) Peak capacity, also known as cream digging rate, is defined as the maximum (hourly)
unloading rate under absolute optimum circumstances: a full hold, an experienced
crane operator and at the start of the shift.
This unloading rate has to be the design capacity of all down-stream plant and equip-
ment: belt conveyors, weighing equipment and stackers. If not, it would give rise to
frequent blockages and stoppages in the cargoflow. It is, therefore, of prime impor-
tance for the systems designers and equipment suppliers.
(ii) Rated capacity, also known as free digging rate, is defined as the unloading rate,
based upon the cycle time of a full bucket or grab from the digging point inside the
vessel to the receiving hopper on the quay and back, under average conditions and
established during a certain length of time.
(iii) Effective capacity is defined as the average hourly rate attained during the unloading
of the entire cargo of a ship. The necessary interruptions for trimming, cleaning
up, moving between holds, etc., are taken into account, but not the scheduled non-
working periods, such as night time, weekends, etc.
The effective capacity multiplied by the annual operational availability of the berth times
the permissible occupancy rate gives the annual berth capacity which is the main parameter
for the port planner. In other words, whereas the equipment designer is primarily interested
in the peak capacity, the port planner’s interest is in effective capacity.
For the grab unloading system, the different capacities relate about as follows:
Peak capacity 2.5

Rated capacity 2.0
Effective capacity 1.0
For the continuous unloading systems, the differences are smaller, but vary considerably
from one system to another. For example, a mechanical chain unloader for raw tapioca still
requires trimming and cleaning up in the hold, which results in a large discrepancy between
rated and effective capacity, but self-unloading vessels can maintain the rated capacity over
almost all of the unloading time.
To add to the confusion, port authorities, in their marketing efforts, at times use a ’maximum
berth capacity’ or sometimes simply called berth capacity, which is the effective capacity,
but calculated for a 100% occupancy rate. Such figures have no real significance because
in those conditions, a tremendous congestion would develop and the port or terminal would
be out of business in a very short time. In the following, the main unloading systems will
be discussed.
11.4.2 Grabs
The grab, normally, is used for picking up material from the vessel hold and discharging it
into a hopper located at the quay edge, feeding onto a belt conveyor (see Figure 11.2).
The attainable handling rate for a grab is determined by a number of factors, such as hoist-
ing speed, acceleration of the grab bucket, travelling speed, horizontal and vertical dis-
tances, closing time of the grab, skill of the operator, the properties of the material being
handled, shape and size of cargo holds, and cleaning requirements. Mechanical restric-
tions and operator fatigue restrict the number of crane cycles per hour that can be attained
to about 60, though 40 is closer to a normal average. The payload deadweight ratio of
the grab bucket affects the net production; the normal ratio is 1:1, but new designs are
approaching 2:1.
cantilevered boom
in raised position
b
b
125.000 13.500
main trolley
+37.750
y
grab tor
ajec 50.000 hopper
70.000
b tr
gra view b-b
67.700
10.800
± 0.00
belt conveyors
Figure 11.2 Heavy grab ship unloader by PWH with 85t lifting capacity. The unloading capacity is
4,200 tonne per hour on coal
A bulk cargo terminal for a range of commodities will require a set of 2 or 3 grab buckets
per crane (one in use, one on standby and/or one in repair). Commodities with significantly
different physical characteristics need an additional set of grabs. The types of grabs vary
considerably, depending on the product which has to be handled. The principal materials
handled often by grab are iron ore, coal, bauxite, alumina and phosphate rock. Smaller,
mobile, grabbing cranes deal with raw sugar, bulk fertilizers, petroleum coke and varieties
of beans and nutkernels.
Another type of grabbing crane different from the already mentioned overhead trolley
crane, is the revolving grabbing crane (see Figure 11.3).
Here, the grab lifts the material and discharges it into a hopper at the front to eliminate
slewing during operation. The hopper feeds a conveyor or it can discharge directly into
trucks or railwagons. Lifting capacity of a grab goes up to 85t.
boom in raised position
conveyor
grab
hopper
quay conveyor belts
Figure 11.3 Revolving grab crane
Typical ranges of rated capacities are:
• Travelling overhead trolley grabbing crane unloader 500 - 2500 tonne/hour

• Revolving grabbing crane, lifting only 500 - 700 tonne/hour
• Revolving grabbing crane, with 90 handling 200 - 250 tonne/hour
(Occasional lower and higher capacities occur). Based on measurements, Tata Steel (ex-
Hoogovens) in IJmuiden distinguishes the unloading process in three stages with decreas-
ing productivity as indicated in Figure 11.4.
11.4.3 Pneumatic Systems

Pneumatic equipment is classified into:
1500
1000
average tonnage per nett hour
500
a b c
intermediate trimming
free digging stage stage
stage
35% of the 15% of the
50% of the load load load
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
time as a percentage of the unloading time (%)
Figure 11.4 Unloading rate as a function of unloading time
• Vacuum or suction types (from several places to one spot)

• Pressure or blowing types (from one spot to several places)
Bulk cargo with low specific gravity and viscosity, e.g. grains, cement, powdered coal, fish,
fish-meal, etc., may be handled by pneumatic systems. A disadvantage of the pressure type
is the dust problem.
The construction of vacuum pneumatic conveyors is simple, and there is no spillage of
materials during transport. However, the power consumption is high, compared with other
transporting systems.
The pneumatic elevator can be:
• Quay-based (see Figure 11.5)

• Floating (mounted on a pontoon)
Typical unloading rates (rated capacity) are in the 200 to 500 tonne/hour range, but ca-
pacities as high as 1,000 tonne/hour occur. In case of relatively small throughputs and/or
non-dedicated terminals, portable pneumatic equipment may be used with a capacity of
about 50 tonne/hour. More than one unit may be used at a time, serving different holds (see
Figure 11.6).
11.4.4 Vertical Conveyors

Different types of vertical conveyors for unloading purposes are:
Figure 11.5 Portable pneumatic handling equipment
4
5 3
2 4
3 6
8 7 1
9 2 1. conveying pipeline
2. receiver
3. filter
4. blower
5. discharger
1 6. material transfer
conveyour
1. vertical telescopic suction pipe 5
2. horizontal telescopic suction pipe
3. swivel bend
4. receiver
5. filter 6
6. blower rotary discharger, rotary valve or airlock
7. silencer
8. discharger
9. material transfer conveyor
Figure 11.6 Pneumatic suction conveying system for ship unloader
typical rated capacity

Chain conveyor 200 t/hr
Vertical screw conveyor 900 t/hr
Spiral conveyor 75 t/hr
The chain conveyor is usually built inside a rectangular casing, whilst the vertical screw
conveyor (see Figure 11.7) is a full-blade screw contained in a tubular casing. Transport
by chain conveyors is restricted to dry, friable materials, whilst the screw conveyor can
deal efficiently with fine-powdered and granular materials, suitably sized lumpy materials,
semi-liquid materials and fibrous material. The throughput is restricted to the rate at which
material can freely flow into the feed aperture.
For unloading or loading of bulk (in bags or boxes), a vertical spiral conveyor may be used
(see Figure 11.8).
Figure 11.7 Feeder for coal with collecting vanes and digging blades
11.4.5 Bucket Elevators

A bucket elevator consists of a continuously rotating bucket wheel, suspended from the
luffing boom of the travelling unloader. This bucket wheel digs up the material and feeds
a continuous bucket elevator. The quay has to be constructed to withstand the dynamic
digging forces and the weight of the structure of the equipment. Alternatively, a bucket
chain elevator can be used, with the buckets acting as digging scoops. As in the case of
the wheel elevator, the bucket elevator is suspended from the luffing boom. Often, still the
full hold of a ship cannot be covered whilst the different travelling, luffing and slewing
motions to be performed during unloading make the equipment mechanically vulnerable
(see Figure 11.9).
3500 mm
1400
mm
bulk loading
chute
Spiral conveyor
XQORDGLQJEDJVRIWKU
2100 mm ORDGLQJEDJVRIWKU
EXONORDGLQJWRQQHKRXUPD[LPXP
Figure 11.8 Spiral conveyor
Figure 11.9 Movements of a continuous unloader

Maintenance costs of bucket elevators may be considerable. In terms of cost per tonne
unloaded, they appear to be less efficient than grabs, taking into account the total capital
expenditure and the operatingcosts. However, the free digging rates of the biggest unload-
ers built to date are around 5,000 t/h, against about 4,000 t/h for a grab system.
A bucket elevator has the following functional features:
• The bucket elevator assembly is always held vertical for easy operation due to the
application of the parallel link (pantograph) motion.
• The bucket elevator can rotate freely to enable high unloading efficiency and easy
operation.
• The swing-out and catenary mechanism of the bottom half of the elevator are pro-
vided for easy access of material under the hatch overhang and for efficient clean-up
operation.
• An L shaped configuration can be made by swinging the elevator 90 at the second
sprocket wheel for digging the bottom layer (see Figure 11.10).
• The elevator, the boom conveyor and the transfer points are totally enclosed to elim-
inate dust.
• Variable speed control of the bucket elevator can be provided for handling materials
with different densities.
IHI's Continuous Ship Unloader for

Reynolds Metals CO., Corpus Christi,
boom slewing Texas, is designed to unload 70,000 dwt
ships at the rate of 2,000 t/h bauxite. Year
of delivery: 1991.
bucket elevator (Photo taken during erection of machine).
slewing
derricking
tilting
telescoping
Figure 11.10 General arrangement and main operating functions of IHI’s continuous unloader
In some designs for free flowing material, the buckets are attached to a steel wire which
is pulled over and through the cargo (see Figure 11.11). In other installations, the digging
function is performed by a bucket wheel that unloads onto a vertical conveyor (see Figure
11.12).
Figure 11.11 Continuous unloader with 762 mm buckets supported by a revolving crane. Enclosed
elevating, dumping and take-away design with integrated dust collecting system
2
5
1. bucket wheel
2. vertical cell conveyor
3. boom conveyor
4. portal tower
5. horizontal feed conveyor
6. stacker
Figure 11.12 Design of the continuous bulk unloader
11.4.6 Slurry Systems

Ore and coal, after mixing with water, can be transported as slurry. But, so far this form
of bulk transport did not yet find a very wide application. Coal slurry pipelines occur in
the USA for the land transport of coal to powerplants and, e.g., in India for iron ore to a
pellet plant. To limit pumping velocities, and thus transportation cost, the coal or ore has
to be ground very fine, which gives problems for the later de-watering. The lower limits of
transport distance and transport quantities for economic viability appear to be in the order
of 50 km and 5 million t/y respectively.
In the maritime transport, it is the Marcona Corporation which has pioneered the slurry
system, using vessels from 50,000 t to 140,000 t, a.o. for the transport of iron ore from
Australia to Japan. But, worldwide the maritime transport of slurries is only a small frac-
tion of the total bulk transport.
One of the difficulties is the environmental problem posed by the slurry water. In case of
land transport, the slurry water, after the de-watering process, can be returned by separate
pipeline for re-use. But, when loading a ship -for economic reasons, the slurry is trans-
ported in the form of about 85% solids and 15% water-, the excess water generally will
have to be collected and treated to avoid serious water pollution. This is expensive and also
technically difficult.
At the unloading terminal, waterjets have to be used in the ship’s holds to bring the solid
matter again in suspension, which is necessary for pumping. Before use in power plant
or blast furnace, the slurry must, once again, be de-watered to an acceptable low water
content of 10% or less. This can be done for not too fine materials in settling ponds, and
otherwise by filters, cyclones or thermal drying. Whatever process is selected, there is,
once again, the problem to get rid of the polluted excess slurry water, which explains the
limited application of the slurry system till the present.
11.4.7 Self-unloading Vessels

A discussion of these vessels and some of their advantages and disadvantages has already
been given Section 11.3. A more complete listing of these advantages and disadvantages is
given hereafter.
Advantages
• Reduction in voyage times due to high unloading rates (up to 10,000 tonne/hour and
over for iron ore and large vessels).
• Multi-port discharge because no -or only very simple-shore-based unloading equip-
ment is required.
• Cargo blending; cargo of different qualities, requiring blending, can be loaded in
separate holds and blended into the conveyor belt system.
• Ship discharging flexibility: direct to stockpiles
– into hoppers located on platforms offshore

– into other vessels
– into warehouses or silos with a rooftop access
• Environmental and pollution control; stringent requirements can be met.

• Simple and cheap berth structure; a few dolphins will do.
• No stevedoring assistance required
Disadvantages (as compared to conventional bulk carriers)
• Higher capital cost of vessel (about 15%), leading to higher tariffs.

• Higher crew costs; specialized unloading experts required
• Lower carrying capacity; the self-unloading equipment takes space.
• Greater mechanical vulnerability and, thus, higher downtime.
11.5 Loading Systems

The loading of bulk cargo is virtually always a continuous process in which one or more
movable ship loaders are fed by a belt conveyor system from the stockpile and drop the
cargo in the different holds of the ship. In case of dry and dusty products, the ship loader
will have to be provided with a telescopic or spiral chute to reduce drop height and fall
velocities.
Load capacities vary from a few thousands t/h to 20,000 tonne/h (Tubarao, Brazil). Partic-
ularly for the very large loading terminals, receiving big bulk carriers and requiring great
water depths, the selection of location, terminal layout and loading system should be a
joined effort of mechanical and civil engineers as the respective problems are very much
inter-related.
The most common ship loader is a travelling crane on a quaywall or jetty, to which the
ship is berthed (see Figure 11.13). But, as for large bulk carriers quaywalls of some 300 m
length are required, with a great retaining height, the civil sub-structure becomes relatively
expensive.
For that reason, the so-called radial and linear ship loaders have been developed, which
are less expensive in terms of sub-structure (see Figure 11.14).
Linear loaders
The bridge of the loader rotates around a pivot, and is supported by this pivot and by a
straight railtrack parallel to the ship. Apart from rotating, the bridge also travels longitudi-
nally across the pivot. Due to this combined movement, the frontside of the bridge moves
parallel to the ship’s side. In order to reach the holds of the vessel, a loading boom with
horizontal and vertical motion is connected to the bridge.
Radial loaders
The bridge of this loader also moves around a pivot, but is supported at the other end by a
circular track. A telescopic loading boom is attached to the bridge. This boom can reach
Figure 11.13 Loading terminal
radial shiploader travelling shiploader

90 e
idg
250 runway
br
om
bo
42
60.000 DWT 160.000 DWT

160 220 hatch coverage
hatch coverage
e
idg 130 runway
br 0
m 9 linear shiploader linear shiploader
o
bo
42
160.000 DWT 160.000 DWT
220 hatch coverage 220 hatch coverage
Figure 11.14 Ship loaders
all the holds of the ship which is berthed at a number of dolphins placed in one line. An
alternative to this system, allowing the ship to head in different directions, has the dolphins
placed in a circle segment, or provides a buoy mooring for the ship. The latter solutions are
used for unsheltered terminals to minimize wave effects.
11.6 On-terminal Handling and Storage

11.6.1 Transport Systems
Transport systems are required to bring the cargo from the quayside to the storage area(s),
and viceversa. These storage areas can be in the open air or under cover in sheds or silos.
This transport is mostly effectuated by conveyors, but occasionally by cable ways -a looped
steel wire with buckets-, special rail cars or off-highway trucks. Here, the discussion will
be restricted to conveyors.
Most conveyors are belt conveyors which are widely used for handling of dry bulk. In the-
ory, unlimited distances can be covered, but the use of conveyors is generally restricted, for
transport-economic reasons, to a few kilometres. For longer distances, rail or road transport
often becomes more appropriate, although belt conveyors of more than 100km occur, e.g.
for the transport of phosphate from mine to port in Morocco.
Advantages of the belt conveyor system are:
• Simple construction
• Economy of maintenance
• Efficiency, with low driving power requirements
• Adaptability
• Complete discharge of handled materials
A disadvantage is the limited vertical angle at which normal belt conveyors can operate. A
substantial difference in height requires a considerable amount of space.
Conveyor belts for bulk materials are troughed; flat belts are used for packaged materials.
For special applications, so-called pipe conveyors and hose belt conveyors have been devel-
oped (see Figure 11.15). These are essentially normal troughed conveyors which beyond
the loading and off-loading points are folded into a U-shape which, first of all, results in
an enclosed, dust-free system, and, in the second place, allows rather narrow curves and
steep gradients to be introduced. For the conventional straight conveyors, transfer of cargo
from one belt to another occurs at transfer points, which for dusty commodities have to
be enclosed (see Figure 11.16). In view of more stringent dust control requirements many
modern dry-bulk terminals have the conveyor belts covered over the full length.
Figure 11.15 a. Aero-bande system b. Tokai system [source: Bulk Solids Handling]
Figure 11.16 Storage shed
11.6.2 Stacking, Storage and Reclaiming

Stockpiles must be planned in such a way, that a maximum amount of material can be
stored on a minimum area. The possibility thereto depends on the bearing capacity of the
subsoil, the characteristics of the materials and on the outreach and height of stackers and
reclaimers.
If weather conditions may affect the quality of the material, a covered storage will be
required. The feed-in generally takes place from a high belt conveyor, situated along the
apex of the building, and reclaiming occurs by means of a scraper/reclaimer or underground
conveyor (see Figure 11.17).
apex conveyor with

travelling tripper
sugar capacity - 175.000 tonnes per shed

( 2 sheds installed )
discharge gates and

tunnel conveyor 0 5m
scale
Figure 11.17 Enclosed transfer point
The area required for stockpile depends on the following factors:

• Height and shape of stockpiles

• Size of shipload distribution
• Ship arrival distribution
• Through-transport distribution
• Ship loading and unloading rates
• Strategic reserves to be maintained
• Relation gross net area
Both the ship arrival distribution and the through-transport distribution, in addition to nor-
mal stochastical fluctuations, may well show seasonal fluctuations. Therefore, no general
rules apply, and area requirements have to be calculated according to the specific project
conditions.
Bulk commodities must often be segregated according to their properties. For unloading
terminals, each stockpile must be able to accommodate at least a full shipload from each
source.
When using motortrucks or railcars for transport from ship to storage, it may be convenient
to use a storage bunker or truck silo in conjunction with the open storage. Special care must
be taken to avoid segregation of free-falling material, entering an empty bunker. Specially
designed spiral chutes arrest the free fall of the material.
The equipment used for bringing the bulk cargo into storage are the so-called stackers,
whilst for retrieving material from the stockpile reclaimers are used. Stackers are travel-
ling machines with a stacking boom with belt conveyor. Transfer of the bulk material from
the main transport conveyor onto the stacker conveyor occurs by means of a tripper (see
Figure 11.18) which is attached to the stacker and, thus, can move back and forth along the
stockpile. (Note: a tripper is also used in a travelling loader).
Reclaimers are similar travelling machines, but equipped with a reclaiming device, e.g. a
bucket wheel, and an intermediate belt conveyor. Sometimes, bulldozers are required to
push parts of the stockpile within reach of the reclaimer.
Often, the capabilities of stacking and of reclaiming is built into one and the same machine,
which results in the well-known stacker-reclaimers (see Figure 11.19).
The above equipment is virtually all bulky and heavy, and requires sturdy and heavy crane-
track foundations.
11.6.3 Blending, Processing, Weighing

Particularly for iron ore and coal, blending of different grades is often required before de-
livery to the powerplant or steel industry, with rather strict requirements of the homogeneity
of the mix. The desired result can be achieved by specific stacking and reclaiming meth-
ods. For example, the stockpile may be built up in longitudinal layers of different grades,
centre of stacker
n
ctio
g se
risin
discharge pulley
lifting-off section
gle
g an
R
risin return pulley
conveying direction
R length of approach
Figure 11.18 Principle of belt loop or tripper
Figure 11.19 Stacker-reclaimer
whilst reclaiming is effectuated by transverse scraping drum reclaimers. A great variety of

tailor-made solutions may be found in different terminals around the world.
Processing of dry bulk is limited in port terminals. It is mostly restricted to bagging of

grains, sugar, cement and similar products.
Bulk commodities must often be weighed immediately prior to loading or after unload-
ing, for payment purposes or for checking against shipping documents. Batch weighing
methods are employed as well as continuous weighing of the material on a moving belt
conveyor. Sampling is sometimes required to satisfy the customer. For obtaining a correct
composition of a particular batch, it is essential to take a series of samples automatically at
timed intervals.
Figure 11.20 gives a bird’s eye view of a modern multi-product bulk terminal.
11.7 Design Aspects of Dry Bulk Terminals

A first order estimate of total length and width required for the stockpiles can be made with
the following simple equation:
1
V b h l mb (11.1)
2
Figure 11.20 EBS Vlaardingen terminal, Rotterdam
in which:
V = maximum volume of cargo in storage

b = width of stockpile
h = height of stockpile
l = total length of stockpile
mb = utilisation rate
In this calculation the angle of repose of the bulk material is taken at 45 and the shape
of the pile is cross-section triangular. In reality the angle of repose will vary between 35
and 40 and the pile cross-section may be trapezoidal (depending on the design of the
equipment).
11.8 Climatic and Environmental Considerations

The climatic conditions prevailing at the terminal location may influence the planning of
the stockyard operation to a great extent. In very cold areas, special low temperature steel
has to be used for the construction of the reclaimer equipment, gears have to be heated,
and one has to cope with high cutting forces in frozen material. In rainy seasons, some
materials require covered storage.
The same is true where the environment must be protected against dust and noise. Environ-
mental considerations begin to play an ever increasing role. As a result, provisions like a
waterscreen at hopper openings, fully enclosed conveyor belts, no-spill grabs and partly or
fully enclosed storage are common practice at new installations. For coal terminals it be-
comes good practice to spray the piles with water, to keep the dust down. The spray-water
is collected by a drainage system, cleaned and reused.
Finally the planners and designers of dry bulk terminals and their hardware should be well
aware of safety aspects, in particular the risk of dust explosions. There is quite a history
of such dust explosions with major damage to terminals and extensive loss of life. Coal
dust and grain dust are probably the most susceptible, but even cement and bauxite dust are
explosion prone. A dust explosion resembles a gas explosion, but is usually relatively much
stronger. This is because the primary explosion causes a dust-laden whirlwind in adjacent
areas with a chain reaction as result. The nature of risk reducing measures depends on the
product handled.
11.9 References
Ocean Shipping Consultants, Self-discharging bulk carriers - a market study, 1991
UNCTAD, Port Development, United Nations, 1985
Wöhlbier, R.H. (ed), The best of bulk solids handling, 1981-1985, Transtech Publications,
1986
Chapter 12
Fishery Ports
12.1 Introduction
Over the years, fish has gained importance as a source of food (protein). While fishing in
many waters is restricted by quotas, most developing countries bordering the sea are -and
will be- looking for ways to create or improve their fisheries and are, therefore, involved in
fishery port development.
A fishery port can comprise, in addition to the unloading, handling and marketing of fish
through a specialised terminal, industrial areas where fish is processed, and also service
and maintenance facilities for vessels, nets and gear.
Most fishing activity is dependent on the availability and nearness of fish, and is also sea-
sonally influenced. Therefore, the fishing activity shows peaks and lows with either the
majority of the fishing fleet at sea or almost all of the fleet resting at the port.
It is advisable to separate fishery activities from commercial port activities. First of all,
for reasons of nautical safety, small-craft traffic, including the movement of fishing ves-
sels, should be kept away from deepsea ports as much as possible. Secondly, waterdepth
requirements and, thus, basic design criteria are totally different for the two types of ports.
Thirdly, the smell of a fishing port will often not be acceptable in commercial ports, whilst,
reciprocally, the fishery products may become contaminated by e.g. ore dust. Fourthly, the
type of operations, the equipment used and the mentality of the people running the ships
and the terminals are so different that they do not fit very well under one and the fsame
umbrella.
12.2 Types of Fishery Ports

Fishery ports can be distinguished according to the purpose they serve, e.g. as follows:
221
12.2.1 Simple Landing Places

They serve fishermen, bound to a certain location, generally operating on fishing grounds
at a short distance away. It may be that such landing places can hardly provide any natural
shelter for beaching and launching of vessels. Sometimes, protection is available when the
landing place is located in bays, rivermouths, estuaries and the like.
In order to improve the effectiveness, the landing place should provide a ramp or small
berthing quay, together with simple facilities for handling of the catch. The provision of
some services and facilities for maintenance and repair will increase its value.
12.2.2 Coastal Fishery Ports

(see Table 12.1)
Table 12.1 Coastal fishery characteristics and required functional facilities

Item Characteristics Required facilities Comments
Facilities for one by one, then auctioned off.
catches Different types of fish are lined Handling sheds
Fish is kept fresh, packed in ice Ice-storehouses
and shipped off immediately. (Freezer warehouses)
Seabream and other high-price fish Live fish-tanks Special live-fish transport
are often shipped live. vehicles are necessary
to convey live fish to consuming
district.
Facilities for Storage warehouses and repair areas Fishing gear warehouse
fishing boats will be necessary when nets and Fishing gear drying area
and gear similar fishing gear items are used.
When located away from neighbour Oil storage tank
ports, the need will exist for fuel oil (Oil supply equipment)
supplies at home port.
For small boats, it will be easier Slipway
to use the slipway than the wharf.
It will also be possible to perform
maintenance and repair work, such as
barnacle removing and painting.
Facilities for Areas for gathering, discussions, Fishing village centre
people training and other activities by
local people are a must.
Fishersmen’s unions are organized to Fishermen’s cooperative
lensure smooth fisheries operations. office
These are the home-base for small coastal fishing vessels up to some 20 m in length. Fish-
ing grounds may be a bit further away, requiring trips of a few days’ duration.
The vessels are equipped with somewhat more sophisticated gear and equipment, com-
pared with those of the first mentioned group. Hence, more protection is required, and the
provision of services, with the related infrastructure, should be more elaborate.
Chapter 12. Fishery Ports 223
12.2.3 Near-distance Fishery Ports

(see Table 12.2)
Table 12.2 Offshore fishery characteristics and required functional facilities

Item Characteristics Required facilities Comments
Facilities for Fish landed is sorted by type, Handling sheds Catches are sometimes
catches boxed, auctioned, shipped. transported directly from the
wharf by truck
Large fish volumes mean large Fish boxes
amounts of fish boxes required. Storage areas
Fish is handled fresh, with the Refrigerators
great majority refrigerated or Freezers
frozen after landing Cold storage
Reefer vehicles
Parts of catches will be salted and Processing plants
dried, boiled and dried, canned or
processed in similar fashion.
Processed products are temporarily Processing products
stored in warehouses. warehouses
Large amounts of polluted water will Waste water treatment
be stored in warehouses. warehouses
Large amounts of polluted water will Waste water treatment
be created by processing and facility
handling areas
Facilities for Catches are packed in ice in transport Ice-making plants
fishing boats ship storage bins for hauling to port. Ice-storehouses
and gear Large amounts of ice are, thus, Ice supply equipment
needed to preserve freshness.
Voyages vary from 1-2 days with Oil supply equipment
extended trips 3 weeks in length. Oil storage tanks
Steady supplies of fuel oil at
stable prices are demanded.
Net fishing gear may need to be Fishing gear storage and
repaired and stowed away. repair stations
Offshore fishing boats are Fishing boat repair
comparatively large, with special station
facilities required for repairs.
Need to treat waste oil produced by Waste oil treatmentplant
fishing boats plant
Facilities for Large volume and value of catches Auction building
people attract many fishmongers and Offices
middlemen.
Comparatively large size of offshore Fishing port
fishing port creates need for administrative office
comprehensive port administration.
Desirable to separate fishing port Park
from the cities. Greenbelt
Public transportation to and from Park Bus service
the port.
These will frequently include a number of provisions, required by the smaller coastal ves-
sels, but they are mainly meant for vessels with lengths from 25 m to 40 m. Fishery grounds
may be several hundred miles way, requiring trips of several days to some weeks.
Vessels may be equipped with limited processing facilities on board, e.g. heading, gutting
and icing in containers and, occasionally, with a chilling unit. Navigational aids and other
mechanical and electronic equipment belong to their outfit. The ports must, therefore,
provide the means to supply, repair and service these types of equipment in addition to the
normal port services.
12.2.4 Ocean Fishery Ports

(see Table 12.3)
Such ports are used as home-base by the large, modern factory-type fishing vessels. These
vessels are equipped to make long trips on the ocean, and they have a great flexibility as to
the location of its homebase. When fishing at faraway locations, they may stop at ports of
call for discharging purposes and for taking provisions. Sometimes, servicing takes place
at advanced bases and even transhipment can be established to enable the vessel to remain
a longer time on the fishing grounds. Processing of the fish takes place on board, such as
deepfreezing, canning, etc
The port has to be fully equipped to handle and maintain these types of ocean going ves-
sels, and to deal with the large, but already processed catches. In consequence, normal
commercial port facilities are often used by these vessels.
12.3 Site Selection

Generally, fishermen establish settlements near to existing fishing grounds, even if little or
no natural shelter can be found for beaching and launching of vessels. If possible, a fish-
ery port should be developed at a site where, in addition to favourable natural conditions,
fishing activity already takes place. Fishermen are usually reluctant to change. Fortunately,
fishermen usually settle in locations where some protection against nature is already avail-
able (bays, rivermouths, estuaries).
At potential sites for port development, surveys, including hydrographic, hydraulic, mete-
orological and sub-soil investigations, should take place. Table 12.4 gives an idea of the
required information at each site. Some of this required information is common to all ports.
Other items are specifically related to fishing ports. Preliminary lay-outs and cost estimates
should be prepared for comparison. In an economic analysis, the expected catch volumes,
the composition of the fishing fleet, distance to fishing grounds and to fish markets should
be considered. Also, the presence of a labour force should be taken into account.
Fishing techniques change. Since in future developments bigger vessels may be introduced,
it is advisable to select locations where later on a deepening of the port and its access from
70?C4A 8B74AH '>ACB
!"+% )23!-3 L2(%18 #(!1!#3%1)23)#2 !-$ 1%04)1%$ &4-#3).-!+ &!#)+)3)%2
-& "+-+#,-#, *.#+ #%#-#, (&&'-,

028;8C84B 5>A #0A64 20C274B <4270=820; D=;>038=6 0A6> 70=3;8=6 4@D8?<4=C B><4C8<4B 3>=4 1H B78?JB
20C274B 0=3 BC>A064 B?024 34AA82: 2A0=4
<>18;4 2A0=4B 5>A:
;85CB 2>=E4H4A 14;CB
#0=343 20C274B 0A4 0D2C8>=43 0=3;8=6 B743B 0C274B 0A4 ?;0243 >=4 1H >=4
B78??43
8A42C CA0=B54A C> 2>;3 BC>A064 5028;8C84B 8= )45A864A0C8=6 5A44I8=6 ?;0=C C>
<0=H 20B4B
'A>24BB8=6 3>=4 >= 1>0A3 >A 8= ?>AC 'A>24BB8=6 ?;0=CB %443 5>A CA40C<4=C 5028;8C84B >A
F74A4 ;0=343 A4BD;C8=6 ?>;;DC43 ?A>24BB F0C4A
028;8C84B 5>A D4; >8; 2>BCB 022>D=C 5>A ;0A64 &8; BD??;H 4@D8?<4=C <?;4 >8; BC>A064 20?028CH 85 B?024
UB78=6 1>0CB ?4A24=C064 >5 UB74A84B 2>BCB =443 5>A &8; BC>A064 C0=:B 0;;>FB
0=3 640A BC01;4 ?A824B C7A>D67 BC>A064
#>=6 E>H064B 2A40C4 =443 5>A ;>C78=6 0=3 5>>3 BC>A4B 'A>2DA4<4=C 5A>< ;>20; B7>?B
?A>2DA4<4=C >5 2;>C78=6 5>>3 4C2 8= <>BC 20B4B
%443 5>A 4;42CA82 ?>F4A BD??;H 5A>< ;42CA82 ?>F4A >DC;4CB %>A<0; ?>F4A 0=3 F0C4A
B7>A4 F74= 1>0CB 3>2:43 8= ?>AC BD??;84B DB43 85 034@D0C4
#>=6 E>H064B 2A40C4 =443 5>A A8=:8=6 F0C4A >DC;4C 4C2
;0A64 E>;D<4B >5 3A8=:8=6 F0C4A
*2AD?D;>DB A4?08AB 0=3 2742:B 0A4 8B78=6 1>0C A4?08A BC0C8>=B %443 5>A 5028;8C84B 8=2;D38=6
E8C0; 1>0C >A 4@D8?<4=C 1A40:3>F= 3>2:B
0C B40 2>D;3 <40= 38B0BC4A
%443 5>A 8=5>A<0C8>= >= B785C8=6 )038> BC0C8>=B
<0A:4C ?A824B C> 1>0CB 0C B40
.40C74A A4?>ACB 0A4 0;B> E8C0;
028;8C84B 5>A >0CB 20AAH 2A4F<4<14AB 0=3 #>368=6
?4>?;4 CA0E4; ;>=6 38BC0=24B 50<8;H
<4<14AB >5C4= B4=3 >55 >A 6A44C
UB74A<4= F74= 1>0CB B4C B08; >A
A4CDA=
40;C7 20A4 5>A UB74A<4= 8B E8C0; ;8=82B
867 E>;D<4 0=3 E0;D4 >5 ?A>3D2CB &5U24B 10=:B 0D2C8>=
70=3;43 0CCA02C <0=H CA034AB 0=3 1D8;38=6
<833;4<4=
'>ACB 0A4 ;0A64 F7827 A4@D8A4B 0 8B78=6 ?>AC
2><?A474=B8E4 03<8=8BCA0C8>= 03<8=8BCA0C8E4 >5U24B
*DAA>D=38=6 0A40B 0A4 DBD0;;H '0A:B
34E4;>?43 28C84B 34B8A01;4 C> A44=14;C
B4?0A0C4 UB78=6 ?>AC 5A>< ;854BCH;4
02C8E8C84B
'D1;82 CA0=B?>AC0C8>= C> 0=3 5A>< DB B4AE824
C74 ?>AC
C74 B40 0??40AB C427=820;;H 0=3 42>=><820;;H 540B81;4

Table 12.4 Site information to be considered

Sea Port Land
Tides Vessels Access
amplitude type, size and number road
type peak landing volumes rail
trend forecast
Winds Distance to fishing grounds Settlement
directions size
durations Nearness to commercial ports fishermen
storms size
directions labour
Expansion possibility
Waves Available services
types Natural shelter water
height and period distributions electricity
dominant directions fuel
workshops
Bathymetry
Topography
Areal photographs
Sub-soil profiles
Currents
at different tide stages Availability or nearness to
construction materials
Sub-soil profiles timber
gravel
Coastal conditions rock
littoral drift sand
expected siltation, erosion
dredging
12.4 Fishing Vessels

The fishing vessels, method and gear used, depend on the kind of fish caught, whether
pelagic (close to surface, moves fast) or demersal (close to bottom, moves slowly) and, in
general, on the state of development of the fishing industry in a country. The number and
characteristics of the vessels as related to the catch determine the required facilities to be
provided by the fishery port.
Small coastal vessels, with a length of 3 m to 15 m, operating with inboard or outboard

motors, sails or rows, are mainly made of wood (nowadays also of reinforced plastic),
whilst vessels from 15 m to 25 m length are, more often, made of steel. Hold capacity in
this category is usually between 0.5 and 20 tonne, whereas the bigger vessels can go up
to 60 tonne in special cases. Catches are substantially lower when fish is caught for direct
human consumption in comparison with catches for processing into fishmeal. Draught of
the former vessels is in the order of 1 m to 2 m, whilst the larger ones have draughts up to
3.5 m. Typical draughts are shown in Figure 12.1.
4.5
4
Dmax
3.5
Dmin
draught (m)
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
capacity (gross tons)
3.5
Dmax
2.5
Daverage
draught (m)
1.5
0.5
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
capacity (gross tons)
Figure 12.1 Small fishing vessel draughts
The fishing cycle of the smaller coastal vessels is 1 or 2 days, and up to a week for the
larger vessels using ice of salt to preserve fish. Smaller vessels generally use gillnets, lines
and traps for fishing, while the larger vessels make use of purse seining1 or trawling2 . The
use of ice onboard and boxing at sea is a measure for the state of development of the fishery.
Big coastal vessels, ranging from 30 m to 40 m length, have a draught up to 4.5 m, and can
carry up to 500 tonne of fish, with 1 to 2 weeks autonomy. Usually, fish is refrigerated or
iced on board. Some limited processing can take place onboard, like heading and gutting.
Dimensions are given in Figure 12.2.
1 Using a large fishing net that hangs vertically with floats and the top and weights at the bottom, the ends
being drawn together to enclose fish as it is hauled aboard.
2 Using a large wide mouthed fishing net dragged along the bottom of the sea.
10
7
beam / draught (m) Beam
6
4
Draught
3
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
LOA (m)
Figure 12.2 Beam and draught of fishing vessels
High-sea vessels, ranging in length from 25 m to 80 m, have up to about 3,000 tonne fish
hold capacity and an approximately 1 month autonomy. Fish is iced, refrigerated, frozen
or processed on board. Tuna vessels fall in this group. For dimensions see Figure 12.3.
Factory ships have tonnages and draughts similar to smaller commercial vessels, and are
often supplied with fish by smaller vessels. Generally, these ships utilise commercial port
facilities, since the investment necessary for accommodating them in a fishery port is eco-
nomically unattractive.
120
110
100
90
80
70
length (m)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
deadweight (DWT)
Figure 12.3 Length DWT relation for large Seiner vessels
The gross tonnage (GT) is commonly used to classify fishing vessels for administrative pur-
poses. However, the method of the tonnage measurement differs considerably from country
to country. 2.83 m3 (100 cubic feet) of enclosed space is considered as 1 gross tonne. One
method of calculating the gross tonnage is based on the cubic number of a vessel, which
is the product of length, beam and depth. This method necessitates the introduction of a
block coefficient (CB ) to take the streamline of the vessel into account. This block coeffi-
cient ranges from 0.5 to 0.65 for the smaller fishing vessels when the cubic number of the
vessel is based on length overall. The gross tonnage then ranges from 0.18 to 0.23 times
the cubic number.
As a first approximation, the following formula can be used:
GT 0 2 LOA Bs D
Figure 12.4 gives the average cubic number for trawlers and purse seiners.
3000
2500
cubic number / fish hold capacity (m3)
2000
1500
1000
Cubic number
Hold
500
–500
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
LOA (m)
Figure 12.4 Cubic number and fish hold capacity of fishing vessels
The fish hold capacity of the various types of fishing vessels varies so greatly, that not even
average figures can be given, but only average maximum and average minimum values.
Figure 12.3 gives these averages for purse seiners and trawlers.
12.5 Port Planning

12.5.1 Access Channels
Width
Access channels should have a width in accordance with the required number of lanes.
Figure 12.5 gives an idea of the required width for a two lane channel. Approach conditions
to the port should be taken into account, regarding wave action, currents and wind and
extra margins near hard obstacles like breakwaters. The channel width is also influenced
by the ease and the accuracy with which a navigator can determine his vessel’s position
with respect to the centre line. As such, the width is effected by factors like the horizontal
movement of channel marker buoys due to tidal and other currents.
An overall minimum value for a one lane channel width would be about 30 m to 40 m,
applicable to small indigenous vessels and favourable nautical conditions. Widths for two-
lane traffic vary from 90 m to 100 m. For an outer channel for two-way traffic, as a rule of
ship clear-
ance manoeuvring bank
lane clearance
outer channel 3 Bs
inner channel 2 Bs Bs
1.5 Bs 1.5 Bs
Bs Bs
Figure 12.5 Channel width
thumb, the minimum width is about 10 times the beam of the maximum size vessel. For an
inner channel, 8 times the beam of the maximum size vessel will do.
Depth
The minimum depth of an entrance channel is determined by the following factors:
• Maximum draught of the maximum size vessel

• Ship motions due to waves
• Variations in waterlevels due to tides and wind
• Sinkage of the vessel due to squat
• Minimum keel clearance
• Channel bottom topography
• Character of the bottom material (also of importance for side slope)
Reference is made to Equation (5.11). One should be aware that the wave response may
vary greatly from one case to another.
12.5.2 Basins and Berths

Basin width
The basin width should be sufficient for easy manoeuvring and turning around of the
biggest vessels (without tug assistance), while others are moored to the quays. This signi-
fies that for a maximum ship size of 30 m, the basin width should measure approximately
160 m to 170 m, i.e. 5 L to 6 L.
The basin should provide unloading, resting, mooring, manoeuvring and servicing areas
for the vessels.
Acceptable wave action at the berths

Acceptable wave action at the berths depends on height and period of waves, and whether
vessels are berthed parallel or perpendicular to penetrating waves. For periods under about
6 s, small coastal vessels can be unloaded with a significant wave height Hs up to 0.3 m
when berthed perpendicular to approaching wave crests, or about 0.15 m when berthed
parallel.
Bigger vessels can be unloaded and serviced up to about Hs = 0.5 m and Hs = 0.25 m
respectively, for abovementioned wave approach directions. For the latter vessels and wave
periods over about 6 s, an Hs up to 0.3 m and 0.15 m for perpendicular and parallel berthing
respectively, is acceptable.
Acceptable wave heights are given for normal unloading procedures with a small crane or
derrick, and are not valid for special unloading devices.
Berthing arrangements
Berthing can take place:
Parallel to the quay (Figure 12.6)

This is advantageous for unloading, since fish can move directly from the vessel into the
terminal: Consequently, high unloading speeds can be attained, but the required quaylength
is large. Along such a marginal pier, services like fuel, water and ice, are usually only
provided over part of its length. However, for bigger fishing vessels which generally make
only a brief stop for unloading, refuelling and crew change, services should be available
over the full length of quay.
Lb = about 1.15·Ls
Ls Ls
Lb Lb
Figure 12.6 Quay length with parallel berthing
Oblique berthing (Figure 12.7)

This reduces required quaylength and can be advantageous, provided that there is only little
variation in the size of the vessels, in case of a saw tooth quay shape. In case of a straight
quay, vessel size variation is not so important a factor.
Perpendicular to the quay (Figure 12.8)

Berthing can take place either head-on or stern-on. Required quaylength is considerably re-
duced. This type of berthing, however, vitually limits the unloading possibilities to manual
operations.
Figure 12.7 Quay length with oblique (a) and saw tooth (b) berthing
Bs Bs Bs
Lb = about 1.3·Bs
Lb Lb Lb
Figure 12.8 Quay length with perpendicular berthing
Fingerpiers perpendicular to the quay (Figure 12.9)

This is a variation of perpendicular berthing, but one that requires transport equipment
from the unloading point to the storage zone in order not to limit the unloading capacity
too heavily. An advantage of the fingerpier is that both sides can be utilised for berthing. It
thus minimises the required quaylength.
B B B B
1/2 · Bs
2/3 · LOA
Figure 12.9 Quay length with finger piers

Required quay length

Factors, influencing the required quay length for unloading, are:
• The number of vessels, based at the port

• The quay length required per vessel while berthing, which depends on the berthing
arrangement
• The time that vessels spent unloading in relation to the time spent resting and at sea
(fishing cycle periods)
• The influence of fishing seasons and peak periods (fishing vessels normally operate
between 150 and 240 days per year)
• Non home-based vessels, using the port
• The accumulation of boats inside the port, e.g. before national holidays
It is hardly possible to set up a calculation system which is valid for all types of situa-
tions, keeping in mind the many factors involved. If the behaviour pattern is reasonably
predictable, average values can be used, and an irregularity factor can be introduced to
compensate for the essentially stochastic character of the different parameters. If suffi-
cient statistical data are available, or if an intelligent guess can be made of the different
probability density distributions, quaylength can be optimized with the aid of a logistic
simulation model. A first estimate of the required unloading quaylength can be made with
the following formula:
cd Ls s fr
Lq (12.1)
cs h nhd
in which:
Lq = quay length [m]
cd = total peak daily discharge in the ports [t/day]
cs h = mean unloading rate per vessel per hour [t/hr]
nhd = number of unloading hours in a day [-]
Ls = mean vessel length [m]
s = space between vessels [m]
fr = irregularity factor for the vessels (between 1 and 2) [-]
Resting quay or jetty length, as an alternative to mooring for unloading, can be estimated
with the following formula:
Nsr Ls s
Lq (12.2)
Nsa
in which:
Lq = required berthing quaylength for resting of vessels [m]

Nsa = number of vessels abreast (2 - 3) [-]
Ns ndr ndu
Nsr = number of vessels at rest = ndc fr [-]
Ns = total number of vessels [-]
ndr = resting days in a cycle [-]
ndu = unloading days in a cycle [-]
ndc = number of days comprising a fishing cycle [-]
fr = irregularity factor [-]
s = space between vessels [m]
In case of the resting quay, flexibility can be found in berthing vessels more than 2 or 3
abreast. In special situations, it is possible to berth up to 8 abreast, which gives a consider-
able increase in capacity (Figure 12.10).
1.1 · LOA
2.5 · LOA
BB B BB B
normal situation
1.1 · LOA
B BB B B B 12 · LOA B BB B B B
special situation
Figure 12.10 Beam-on at finger piers

Quay apron width

Considerations for determining the width of the unloading quay, are the following:
• Exposure of the fish to rain or sunshine should be as short as possible.
• If operations are mechanized, the passage of, e.g., service trucks should not be ham-
pered too much.
• When mobile transport equipment such as forklift trucks or lorries are used, adequate
space should be available for turning and passing.
• When transport is mainly perpendicular to the quay, the required width can be less
than when there is also parallel transport.
A number of these considerations are, however, contradictory among themselves. For each
case, an appropriate compromise should be sought.
As a first approximation, the following values can be given for the width of a marginal quay
apron:
• For manual operations, with or without help of ships gear: 1.5 m 4 m
• For operations with shore-based cranes and conveyors or roller tracks: 4 m 8 m
• For operations with forklift trucks and/or lorries: 8 m 20 m
The width of fingerpiers can vary up to 15 m. Sometimes, the reception shed is located on
the fingerpier if the available land area is very restricted.
Quay level
Quay platform level is determined by adding tide, waveheight and construction height
above waterlevel. For big tidal differences say, 5 m to 6 m or more , dock harbours
may be made to facilitate unloading and to avoid high and expensive quays. However, the
construction and operation of the necessary ship lock will generally only be economically
justified for relatively large fishing centres (see Figure 12.11).
Ship-maintenance and repair

For vessel repair and maintenance, a conventional slipway or simple lifting device is usually
sufficient (Figure 12.12). Where larger vessels are involved, synchrolifts may be required.
Vessels up to 250 tonne can be handled by mobile straddle carrier-type ship lifts. The ca-
pacity of repair and maintenance facilities can be determined on the basis of 5 to 15 days
per ship per year, depending on the efficiency of the facility and the skill of its labour force.
In tidal ports with sufficient tidal range, repair and maintenance work is sometimes carried
out during low tide, whilst the vessels rest on keelblocks in front of the quay.
In addition to the hauling/lifting facilities, workshops will be required (mechanical, wood-

working, electrical, electronics, etc.) as well as storage sheds to hold repair materials, e.g.
timber and steel elements. A problem, especially in developing countries, is the difficulty
of obtaining spareparts due to the lack of standardization in the fishing fleet, absence of a
local service agency, restrictive foreign exchange policies and import limitations.
pilotage and
steel plants weather forecast
stations
outer
harbour
bassin Loubet
tidal
dock
fish r
oad
zone allocated to
fishery related industries
Figure 12.11 Boulogne-sur-Mer: Fishing port and areas reserved for the fishing industry
transfer
beaching and hauling off
lift
slipway boat lift with transfer system
Figure 12.12 Dry-docking arrangements
Fish flow
Fish flow through the port, as from the ships hold, can comprise all or some of the following
activities (Figure 12.13 and 12.14): unloading, washing, sorting, boxing, weighing, icing,
marketing, distribution, storage. It requires a good organization and a terminal lay-out
enabling a smooth commodity flow.
sea
unloading
washing sorting boxing repair and supply
resting area
marketing chilled storage area
loading trucks
shed
processing consumption
Figure 12.13 Vessel cycle and fish flow
Simple operation
More complex operation

1.5 - 15 m
15 - 45 m 5m
P
*note:
sorting
unloading washing marketing loading distribution
boxing
chilled storage
*note: washing, sorting and boxing of fresh fish is sometimes performed in
this zone to permit direct transport to inland consumers
Figure 12.14 Fish handling procedure
Buildings and other facilities

Market hull or shed (Figure 12.15)
After unloading the catch from the vessels, fish for direct human consumption is usually
brought into a market hall or shed, where it is sold to merchants who take care of the on-
ward transport and distribution of the fish. The various activities that may all or partly take
place in the market hall or shed, are the following: cleaning, sorting, grading, weighing,
re-icing, boxing, display, auction, packing, discharge. Facilities may further have to be pro-
vided for boxes and equipment storage, internal transport, temporary cold storage, auction
room, offices, amenities, merchant stalls.
The lay-out arrangement and the total space requirements for market halls depend very
much on the types and quantities of the catch, the extent of preparation before sales, the
system of display, the auction system and the number of auctions, the destination of the
catch and the distribution system. Depending on the above factors, the total space require-
ments may range from 6 m2 /t to as high as 25m2 /t per auction. As first approximations, the
following figures can be given:
• Preparation of the catch before sales: 4 m2 /t per auction

• Display and auction, varying types and qualities: 12 m2 /t per auction
• Display and auction, uniform products: 6 m2 /t per auction
• Storage of boxes and equipment and temporary storage of products: 4 m2 /t per auc-
tion
• Offices and merchant stalls: 4 m2 /t per auction
For access to the hall, lifting doors extending along both sides of the hall between structural
columns, are the most flexible solution. The floor of the shed should not consist of ordinary
concrete, but must, in one way or another, be provided with an anti-skid surface. In the
shed, electric power and lighting and running water must be available. The water supply
is often separated in a fresh- and a sea-water supply. The latter should be a high-pressure
system (4 to 5 bar) for cleaning purposes. The installation of the electric wiring, receptacles
and switches requires special care, because of the very wet and corrosive environment. The
electric lighting should not change the natural colour of the fish.
Ice factory In the initial port planning stages, it may not be required straightaway to
plan an ice factory in detail, but it is strongly recommended to allocate a certain area of
land for the establishment of such an ice factory in future. Ice is not only required for the
preparation of fish on board the vessels, but it is also required for preparation of the fish for
public auction and for onward transport.
There are two main types of ice factories:
• Block-ice factories (blocks from 10 kg to 150 kg)

• Small-ice factories
A characteristic difference in the lay-out of these types of factories is that block-ice facto-
ries have a horizontal transportation system, while small-ice factories usually work verti-
cally, with the ice falling from the ice producing machine into the storage silo underneath.
Space requirements for block-ice production range from l0 m2 to 20 m2 per tonne of ice
per day capacity. Block-ice stowage factor is 1.4 m3 /t. Block-ice storage requires some 1.5
m2 /t.
sorting
grading
auction
display
weighing
offices and merchant stalls

boxes
equip
-ment
16.5 m
cold
storage
16.5 m
33 m
9m 10 m 5m
24 m
Figure 12.15 Possible lay-out of market hall
Space requirements for small-ice production range from 1 m2 to 6 m2 per tonne of ice per
day capacity. For some types, a building height of up to 10 m may be required. Small-ice
stowage factor is 1.6 m3 /t to 2.1 m3 /t. Small-ice storage requires some 0.5 m2 /t to 1 m2 /t.
Cold storage Fresh fish is mostly stored, while being iced, in a so-called chill room
which is cooled to a few degrees centigrade below zero. Frozen fish is stored in a frozen
storage room with a temperature of 20 C. Space requirements can be estimated to range
from some 0.5 m2 /t to 1.5 m2 /t, including access space and the relation gross building area
over nett cold storage areas.
Offices, canteens, rest rooms Space requirements depend entirely on the type of
fishing port, the number of people involved in fishing operations, port management and
administration.
Other facilities These include:
• Net drying and repair

• Fire-fighting
• Supply stores
• Fuel storage
• Gear sheds (maintenance and repair)
• Waste and waste water treatment
• Drainage
• Roads and parking lots
Example lay-out Figure 12.16, in addition to Figure 12.10, gives an example of the
lay-out of a fishing port, namely the port of Kalajoki in Finland.
1
3 6
1 Entrance channel 8
2 Harbour basin 4
3 Wharf for fastening the
fishing vessels
4 Discharging wharf 2
5 Discharging crane for fish 9
6 Suction apparatus for fish sweeping level 4
and chain conveyor –3.50 7
7 Slipway for pulling the
boats ashore
8 Fish refinery 10
5
9 Factory for crushed ice 3 3
10 Service facilities for
the fishermen 3 11
11 Incoming road
scale
0 50 m
Figure 12.16 Lay-out of the fishing port of Kalajoki, Finland
12.6 Unloading Equipment

Sometimes, vessels use on-board equipment, but more often quay-side cranes, derricks,
etc., are used for unloading. The unloading technique further depends on whether the fish
arrives un-boxed or boxed. A number of unloading devices are available, such as pneumatic
systems, vertical and horizontal conveyor belts, bucket elevators, pumps, etc. (see Figures
12.17 and 12.18). In each case, it should be very carefully considered what the most cost-
effective equipment is.
manual
derricks - cranes
derricks - cranes
roller tracks - conveyors
Figure 12.17 Unloading operations
12.7 Fishery Port Organisation and Management

Quite extensive information on this subject, including legal and institutional aspects of fish-
eries industry, are present in the PIANC Report Planning of Fishing Ports (1998).
Various organisational systems exist:
• Privately owned
• Autonomous port or port trust
• Municipally owned
• State owned
In all instances, a port manager or port director is in charge of the proper functioning of
the port. The port captain or harbour master will control all vessel movements inside the
port to ensure a proper utilization of the quays as well as to ensure the nautical safety. The
port engineer will deal with maintenance and repair of the structures and facilities, and will
propose extensions and improvements and supervise development works. An administrator
will keep a record of statistical data on landing operations and catch rates. He will also be
in charge of the usual administrative functions.
Other services such as unloading, sales, ice supply, cold storage, water and power supply,
waste treatment, security, fire-fighting and the provision of repair facilities may form part
of the port organisation’s activities and, as such, require separate offices. But, it may also
fish conveyor
to shore
bucket
e
chut elevator in
fish fish hold retracted
te position
chu
ice
conveyor
Tube and chute Shipboard bucket elevator
chute
fish conveyor
to shore
air
vacuum chamber
ducting exhaust fan
fish & conveyor
bucket ice
elevator water level
fish hold
to be water inlet
removable water seal fish ice & air
and stored
on wharf
conveyor
fish ice & air

Shoreborne bucket elevator Basic air unloader
Figure 12.18 Unloading equipment
be that a number of these activities are dealt with by fishery organisations or private owners
under the general regulations of the port authority.
In case of small ports, the organization can be reduced to a one-man administration force
with some clerical and technical assistants.
12.8 References
FAO, Fishery Harbour Planning, Fisheries Technical Paper no. 123, Rome, 1973
PIANC, Planning of Fishing Ports, Report of WG PT II-18, Brussels, 1998
UNCTAD, Port Development, United Nations, New York, 1985
Chapter 13
Marinas
13.1 Yachting and Yachts

Yachting covers so many different aspects, that a very thorough analysis of the requirements
to be met must take place before port development can be initiated. It stands to reason that
the facilities to be built and the services to be put into operation are closely dependent on
the specifications of the ships to accommodate and on the way they are operated. This
varies according to:
• The origin of yachtsmen (local people living more or less near the harbour and using
their boat during weekends or holidays, tourists staying in a resort in the port vicinity,
charters, etc.).
• Their tastes (sailing, ocean cruising, yacht races, fishing, water-skiing).
Thus, the facilities to develop can fit into the pattern of the development plan of a whole
maritime waterfront oriented at yachting or, conversely, they can be limited to a local yacht-
ing club. It cannot be overemphasised that such options should be duly considered, since
the blind transfer of lay-outs that were successful elsewhere, may give rise to great disap-
pointment.
The structure of the fleet that enables one to determine the lay-out and the size of berthing
facilities is a factor of major importance for the preliminary survey. The diagram of Figure
13.1 shows that, from port to port, the assumptions that have to be taken into account for
the drawing up of plans vary quite a lot. The disparities would certainly be bigger if one
was considering the actual frequency of ships’ visits at these very ports. The port structure
is directly connected with the characteristics and operating conditions of boats, viz.:
• The general design of the entrance fairway and its dimensions may depend, to a large
extent, on yachts that call at the port, which sail to the wind at less than 45 (at least,
small-sized boats having no auxiliary engine).
• Small craft can and often have to be put ashore, their launching taking place
on ramps. Weather conditions can even entail a quasi-permanent lay-up of big craft
under shelter, in which case a small crane is needed.
243
'>ACB 0=3 +4A<8=0;B

(@C @?EC #CA

0F?F8=
)6?:D %
)?:D; >
!AEC

!;8;CD %
-!6?D@
!6??C $
06DD 20

#?CF@D; %

)'41% %1#%-3!'% .& 2()/2 %7#%%$)-' 3(% ')5%- +%-'3(2
L A05C <0:8=6 2AD8B4B A4@D8A4 3DA8=6 C748A BC>?B 022><<>30C8>= 5028;8C84B A4;0C43 C>
;854 0V>0C
L =2>A?>A0C8>= >5 <08=C4=0=24 0=3 A4?08A >?4A0C8>=B 8= C74 <0A8=0 A4@D8A4B C74 34E4;
>?<4=C >5 B?4280; 5028;8C84B H0A3B 3AH3>2:8=6 5028;8C84B
*8I4B >5 H027CB 0A4 68E4= 8= 86DA4B 0=3
7
Motor boats
(1) width of berthing front
6
(2) mean width
5
Beam (m)
3
width of berthing front =
beam of the ship + side clearance for fenders
2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Length (m)
)'41% )9%2 .& ,.3.1".!32
%(# -&+* & * &(*

.70C 0 H027CB<0= 4G?42CB 5A>< 0 $)!% 8B 0 B4A84B >5 B4AE824B 68E4= 8= 0 ?;40B0=C 4=E8
A>=<4=C
Chapter 13. Marinas 245
6
Sailing boats
(1) width of
5 berthing front
(2) mean width

of ships
Depth / Beam (m)
4
(3) depth of water to
be provided at low
tide in (sheltered)
3 anchoring areas (depth
of dredging to be planned)
(4) mean draught
2
(1),(2) Width of berthing front = ship's
width + side clearance for fenders
1 (figures do not allow for multi-hulls)
(3),(4) Multi-hulls are not included in the
statistical figures
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Length (m)
Figure 13.3 Sizes of sailing boats
• Adequate shelter from high seas

• Docking services: periodical maintenance of his boat at reasonable prices and with-
out undue waiting
• Mooring and watching of ships
• Seasonal storage ashore of small ships in open yards or in sheds
• Parking for yachtsmen’s cars
• Quick execution of incidental repairs
• Marketing of new and used boats
• Administrative or private services (harbour master’s office, weather forecasts, cus-
toms, clubs, medical needs, etc.)
The choice of a site for a marina, if not dictated by recreational facilities which have to be
integrated in the new project, should result from maritime and nautical considerations, with
a view to simplifying the nature of the works to be carried out, and to lowering the cost.
It should also depend on environmental considerations in accordance with rules, standards
and regulations that locally apply. Lastly, the integration of the port into all other develop-
ments in progress or being planned ashore, has to be ensured.
For master planning purposes, the most important factor usually concerns wave conditions.
Along open coasts, marinas must generally be protected by solid breakwaters. In more
protected areas, other systems can be considered, e.g. floating breakwaters.
Ports often comprise an outer harbour in which waves are still somewhat rough, and an in-
ner harbour - better sheltered - in which the actual berths are located. When the tidal range
is small, the inner harbour can be designed to provide a sufficient depth of water to keep
boats afloat at all times. When the tidal range is big, it is often accepted that the berths fall
dry at LW. If not, a relatively expensive shipping lock has to be provided.
Access conditions to the harbour have to be carefully considered. The lay-out, of course,
will have to ensure an adequate protection of the entrance channel against wave action
and against siltation. Furthermore, the lay-out should be such that small boats without
an engine can enter or leave the port, which implies that channels shall be wide enough
to tack, whenever needed. Moreover, ship movements must be able to continue without
undue problems, even during rush hours. Especially in view of the dense traffic in most
ports the engine is required for those vessels that have one. The above implies that the
entrance channel must be properly oriented, and should have a width of 40 m or more.
13.3 Basins and Berths

In port zoning or basin designation, distinction is usually made between:
• Basins in ports of call that do not require large back-up areas (no car park), and
around which the harbour master’s office, administrative offices (customs, border
police, weather forecasts, etc.) and different service facilities (lavatories, showers,
information, post office) are set up.
• Basins assigned to yachts registered at the port, surrounded with big car parks.
• Basins for maintenance which, in addition to floating repair berths, comprise lifting
equipment and a general technical area, including yards for boats to be dry-docked,
workshops and laying-up sheds.
The size of the basins, or zones, will have to be determined according to the particular
requirements of the port. As a first estimate, their total area A can be taken as equal to 80
the total capacity of the port, in terms of number of yachts Ns that can be accommodated:
A 80 Ns
Mooring facilities are oriented in such a way, that ships will be moored in the eye of the pre-
vailing wind. The scheme adopted for the position of the different berths, and, especially,
the clearance between the piers and berths, depends on several factors that have to be care-
fully weighed in every case. Any port characterised by high tidal range and, consequently,
by strong tidal currents, or by frequent and strong winds, will require larger manoeuvring
areas in-between piers (and shorter piers) than a sheltered port at which the tidal range is
small.
Some arrangements involving floating pier systems are shown in Figure 13.4. The parallel
berthing arrangement is common for visiting piers. It can also be used in initial phasing
for small marina developments. Several types of perpendicular berthing arrangements exist.
The two most common appear to be the bow-out mooring system, where the craft is boarded
across its stern directly from the floating pier, and the popular slip/finger arrangement,
where the boat can either berth the bow or the stern towards the main walkway and is
boarded from the side finger. The former is less costly, while the latter is more convenient
for mooring and ship access and hence safer.
land water
shore access:
“bridge” “gangway” float element
“brow” “ramp” ...
etc. perpendicular
parallel berthing
berthing
1. perpendicular berthing
bow out - no side fingers

med. moor
common in
mediterranean and in
some other areas
of the world
outboard mooring
either guide piles
fixed or dropped anchors
2. bow in or out berthed
boats in slips with side
fingers slips either
single (1 boat) or double
(2 boats) loaded
common in northern
europe, u.k., western
hemisphere and pacific
rim
Figure 13.4 General arrangement involving floating docks
In dimensioning the basin, including fairways and berth areas natural standards have been
published in several countries, e.g. Australian Standards (1991), British Guidelines (1993)
or US Guidelines (ASCE, 1994). A comprehensive overview of these standards and guide-
lines is given in PIANC (1997). The main dimensions concern the marina’s wet areas, i.e.
the length and width of a slip and the width of the fairway, all in relation to length and
beam of the boats Ls and Bs :
(i) The length of the slip, Lb , in most standards equals the largest length of boat that can
by regulation be berthed in the slip. In some guidelines the length of the finger, L f ,
may be chosen shorter than Ls by up to 1 3 Ls .
(ii) The slip width is determined by adding a double clearance to Bb is case of a single
slip and a triple clearance for a double slip. This clearance varies from 0.3 - 0.5 m,
whilst for boat lengths above 15 m values of 1.0 m are found.
(iii) The fairway, in this case the water area between the slips, has a minimum width of
1 5 Ls with 1 75 Ls preferred.
These guidelines are summarised in Figure 13.5. The width of walkways and finger piers
are standardised by the manufacturers of these systems and depend on the length of the
walkway and Bs respectively.
(iv) For lengths of walkways up to 200 m a width of 1.8 m is standard.

(v) The finger piers have a minimum width of 0.6 m, increasing to 1.5 m for Ls 15 m
basin perimeter gangway
navigable depth
floating docking system
B A LB
A = fairway width - perpendicular slips = 1.5 – 1.75 Ls

B = fairway width - side parallel berth
Ls = length of berthed boat
LB = length of ship = Ls,max
Figure 13.5 Guidelines for marina’s wet areas
Figure 13.6 shows an example of the lay-out of a large marina.
lake drift
2850 ft
405 120 1955 170 200
ft ft ft toc of rock rock of water line ft ft
flasher light marina esplanade
toilet toilet
toilet
318
ft
570
ft
park
flusing captain of the port red
152
channel channel
ft
and harbour patrol beacon

turning park
yacht
1116
club
basin
ft
guest moorage
harbour green
entrance beacon flasher light
1406
ft
1406
h
trailer 250 ft launching

eac
ft
parking ramp
600
ft
db
marina esplanade
marine service
san
station 836
service ft
concessions
work yard station

toilet restaurant
boat
service yard lift
moorage
290
290
parking area parking area marina esplanade box

ft
ft
work
shop
office approximate shore line

525 1565 marine suppliers and store 310 280 170
ft ft ft ft 450 ft
2400
ft frontage ft
Figure 13.6 Lay-out marina Lake Michigan
The size of car parks to be developed, depends mainly on the kind of utilisation of the
boats accommodated in the harbour. The number of vehicles to park can range from a
few units to twice (or even 2.5 times) the number of boats laying in the harbour. Taking
into account the high cost and all environmental inconveniences of car parks at the seaside.
The trend is towards minimising facilities in the port and transfer of the parking lots to
inland locations. Boats carried on road trailers have to be provided with ordinary launching
equipment (usually a ramp, at least when the tidal range is not too big) and close to a vast
parking lot for boats and, if need be, for cars. This applies, in any case, to ships laid-up
ashore.
13.4 Port Structures

Jetties and breakwaters generally represent a big share of the total cost of the marina. Thus,
they deserve a thorough design effort.
The breakwaters should be designed to prevent wave overtopping - at least, when there
is no outer harbour, since pleasure craft riding at anchor can only bear very small waves
(amplitudes of 30 cm, at the utmost, with respect to the comfort of people living afloat, or
60 cm with respect to safe mooring). Such requirements entail high crest levels for break-
waters, which may be conflicting in some cases with the recreational aspects of the marina.
Such considerations require that the breakwaters do not limit the view of the landscape
and horizon for people walking around the port area. The crest of the breakwater could be
lowered through such means as a seaside berm, a spilling basin or a very flat slope. The
most commonly used types are rubble-mound breakwaters. However, vertical or composite
breakwaters are sometimes used in deeper waters.
Marinas in lakes or natural bays can be protected by floating breakwaters, that provide
sufficient wave reduction for short wave periods, prevailing in these areas. Such structures
are usually cheaper than solid breakwaters, and allow more exchange with the surrounding
water, thus improving the water quality inside the marina. For the port planner, the amount
of wave reduction is determining whether a floating breakwater can be used. The wave
transmission had been determined for different types of floating breakwaters, both by ex-
perimental and numerical methods. For a flat vertical plate, extending to a depth of z from
the water surface in water of depth h the percentage wave height transmitted is shown in
Figure 13.7. In case of a rectangular pontoon the transmission coefficient CT becomes a
function of both depth of submergence and width of the pontoon, as shown in Figure 13.8
for a ratio of wave length over water depth L h = 1.25. For more details on wave transmis-
sion reference is made to Ofuya (1968). An overview of design and construction aspects of
floating breakwaters is given in PIANC (1994).
Quays and stationary jetties are only found in marinas where the tidal range is low (less
than 1.50 m), for the level of the boat deck must stay close to that of the berthing facility to
facilitate embarkation and disembarkation.
00
1.
relative depth z/h
0. .60
0. 0
0
5
40
30
0.
0. 0
2
10
0.
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0
% wave height transmitted
Figure 13.7 Wave height transmission as function of water and structure depth
1.0
power theory
estimated transmission
0.8
b
d/h=0
0.6
d
h
CT
0.4
d/h=0.2
0.2
d/h=
0
d/h=0.6.4
0
0 1 2 3 4
b/L
Figure 13.8 Transmission coefficient for rigid, rectangular surface barrier (L/h = 1.25)
13.5 References
Anonymous, Guidelines for design of marinas, Australian Standards, AS 3962-1991
Anonymous, Planning and design guidelines for small craft harbours, ASCE, New York,
1994
Ofuya, A.O., On floating breakwaters, Queens University C.E. Research Report No. 60,
1968
PIANC, Floating breakwaters, a practical guide for design and construction, Report WG
PTC II-13, Brussels, 1994
PIANC, Review of selected standards for floating dock designs, Special Report SPN Com-
mission, Brussels, 1997
The Yacht Harbour Association, Code of practice for marinas, 1993
Chapter 14
Ports and Terminals for Inland Water

Transport
14.1 Location and Lay-out of IWT Ports

An inland water transport port can vary in scope from a sophisticated multiple basin com-
plex with up-to-date handling equipment, to a one-berth terminal on the bank of a river or
canal where, now and then, some goods and/or passengers are (un)loaded. But, a commer-
cial IWT port always is an inter-modal node of land-based and water-borne transport.
In addition to the commercial ports, one can distinguish along rivers and canals:
• Harbours of refuge, providing shelter to ships during floods or ice drift

• Night stop ports, where ships without night navigation aids may lay overnight
• Service harbours for contractors equipment, survey launches, etc.
Among the commercial ports one can distinguish:
• The general-purpose port which is a multi-user interface between IWT and other
modes of transport (road, rail) and which, generally, offers storage facilities.
• The dedicated container or other port terminal, sometimes multi-user, sometimes
single-user.
• The industrial port which is, in general, the end of the line of IWT, and directly
unloads raw materials and loads (half-)finished products.
With the rapid growth of barge transport in Western Europe, especially for containers, also
new terminals are developed along the main rivers and canals.
14.2 The Vessels

14.2.1 General
The type and size of vessels used for inland navigation varies widely from one region or
river basin to another, and is often the result of historic developments and of specific local
251
conditions as available water depth, current velocities, type and volume of the commodities
to be carried and degree of techno-economic development. On rivers, coastal canals and
’backwaters’ in India, one can still observe a multitude of small wooden ships with sail-
assisted human propulsion (the so-called country craft), next to motorised barges.
At the other end of the line are the huge push-barge convoys, carrying up to 50,000 tonnes,
travelling up and down the Mississippi River in the USA, and the sea-going vessels plying
up the Amazon as far as Iquitos in Peru.
14.2.2 The European Waterways

In Europe, self-propelled vessels and barges for push-tows have been standardised and di-
vided in classes which correspond with waterways with a given minimum water depth and
width. The CEMT classification has been recently modified in 1992; the new version is
given in Table 14.1.
Nowadays, the self-propelled vessels form the majority of the craft plying the European
waterways. Occasionally, they can be seen pushing or side-towing a dumb barge to increase
their carrying capacity.
At present, a number of cargo vessels are being converted, and new ships are being built, to
carry containers which, at long last, have found their way in numbers to waterborne trans-
port. This is not surprising as, except for the short distances, IWT is quite competitive. A
special feature, although not new, is the retractable wheelhouse needed for good visibility
over the stack of containers in front.
New designs of barges for container transport are found at both sides of the range. Where
the large Rhine vessel (Class Va) can carry only about 120 TEU, a specially designed
container barge with a length of 134 m and a beam of 16.8 m has a capacity of 400 TEU.
Two of these ships are presently in service (see Figure 14.1).
And for small canals a modern version of the Kempenaar (Class II), the Neo-Kemp has
been developed, with dimensions Ls = 63 m, Bs = 7 m and D = 2.8 m, carrying maximum
32 TEU (see Figure 14.2). A special design feature is the wheelhouse being placed at the
bow, in order to limit its height to the upper level of the containers. Another important
innovation is the anti-heeling system, that keeps the barge horizontal, even when there is
unbalance in the number and/or load of containers on both sides of the longitudinal axis.
This avoids the reduction of (un)loading rate, caused by heel.
!"+% +!22)L#!3).- .& 6!3%16!82 "8 C
+H?4 >5 8=;0=3 F0C4AF0HB ;0BB4B >5 $>C>A E4BB4;B 0=3 10A64B 'DB743 2>=E>HB $8=8<D<
=0E8601;4 74867C D=34A
F0C4AF0HB 1A8364B <
+H?4 >5 E4BB4; 64=4A0; 270A02C4A8BC82B +H?4 >5 2>=E>H 64=4A0; 270A02C4A8BC82B
4B86=0C8>= #4=6C7 40< A0D67C +>==064 #4=6C7 40< A0D67C +>==064
< < < + < < < +
&5 A468>=0; +> .4BC >5 0A64
8<?>AC0=24 ;14
0<?8=4
0A64
"
+> 0BC >5 A>BB4 8=>F
;14
0A:0
$>C>A>F0

&5 8=C4A=0C8>=0; 8<?>AC0=24 - )" >A
-0 #0A64 )78=4
-4BB4;B
-1 >A
-0 >A
-1 >A
-2 10A64B ;>=6
70?C4A '>ACB 0=3 +4A<8=0;B 5>A =;0=3 .0C4A +A0=B?>AC
10A64B F834

-

Figure 14.1 Container ship ’Jowi’ has a capacity of 398 TEU
63000
7000
3100
Figure 14.2 RPC standard 32 TEU containership
There is a big fleet of tankers ranging in size from 300 tonnes till over 3,000 tonnes, plying
all the navigable waterways. Since the first inland tanker was constructed in 1903, their
technical outfit has been gradually improved and adapted to the various POL-1 products,
of which the safety requirements form an important aspect. The majority of the tanker fleet
consists of self-propelled vessels. Other more specialised tankers carry chemical products
and liquid gases, and are equipped with extensive and expensive safety devices. But, skill
and knowledge of crew and operators form the basic ingredients for a safe transportation
and handling of dangerous products.
Traditionally, the coasters used to penetrate deep inland with their overseas cargo. How-
ever, their manoeuvring characteristics are not exactly what is required for navigation in
confined and shallow waters. Often, a dangerous situation or accident occurred when coast-
ers merged into the inland traffic. Nowadays, the ’Rhine coaster’, a new type of sea-river
vessel, is growing popular for this purpose of linking inland ports with overseas destina-
tions without transhipment. Based on the lines of modern inland vessels and adapted to
sea-going requirements, they operate successfully and safely.
Chapter 14. Ports and Terminals for Inland Water Transport 255
Push-barges have grown in size from 1,200 tonnes at 3.00 m draught till 2,700 tonnes at
4.00 m draught by increasing length as well as beam. Consequently, the tow sizes grew
from 5,000 tons in a four-barge convoy to over 10,000 tonnes. Nowadays, the maximum
size convoy on the Rhine consists of 6 barges, carrying 15,000 tonnes and needing all of the
6,000 HP installed in fourth-generation pushers. These 6-barge push-tows were formally
accepted after a long period of tests and trials in the seventies and early eighties.
In 25 years, the installed push-boat power has dramatically risen from the initial 1,200 HP
on 2 screws to 6,000 HP on 3 propellers. However, the rising fuel prices have somewhat
dampened the ideas of this unrestricted expansion. Often, it can be observed that big push-
ers sail at lower than normal cruising speed with throttled power.
In the present conditions, the 4,500 HP pusher may turn out to be the optimum size, con-
sidering also the economic speed in restricted water. A draught of 2.4 m (pusher) is more
or less the maximum for year-round commercial navigation in the Rhine catchments area.
Self-propelled cargo vessels have grown substantially as well, carrying up to 4,000 tonnes.
Whereas the principally private owners of these vessels did not dare to think of ships bigger
than 1,300 tonnes some time ago, they now have also fallen for the economy of scale. Still,
quite a number of the 300 tonnes ’Peniche’ class vessels are in operation, and all sizes in
between.
Passenger vessels have shown a remarkable development as well, but on the Rhine these
vessels are commercially operated in the summer season only.
All of the IWT fleet makes use of the available waterway infrastructure of which, in aver-
age, the cost per shipload is quite low compared to other modes of transport.
14.3 Types of Ports

14.3.1 Open River Ports
Open ports on rivers with a confined flood plain may be located either in that flood plain,
i.e. in between the river and the HW dike, or beyond the flood plain outside the dike.
If inside the HW dike (Figure 14.3)
• To keep quays dry, the area must be reclaimed above HW. This may obstruct the river
discharge during floods.
• The entrance channel will also disturb HW current patterns, and ships will be im-
paired by cross-currents when entering or leaving the port basin.
dike
rec
are laim
a ed
Figure 14.3 River ports and reclamation inside dike; flooded during HW; possible flow constriction
If outside the HW dike (Figure 14.4) the entrance channel cuts through the dike, so the port
must be enclosed by new dikes and/or quays with a deck level equal to the crest level of the
dikes.
Figure 14.4 River ports outside original dike with open connection
Main advantages and disadvantages of open ports are:
Advantages Disadvantages
always accessible variable water level
full-width entrance channel available wave disturbance from the river
expensive berths due to water level
difference
low cargo handling efficiency due to
relatively much vertical transport
siltation
expansion often difficult
14.3.2 Closed River Ports

Closed river parts are provided either with a retaining lock or a ship lock.
River port with lock gate (Figure 14.5)
The lock gate serves as an HW defence, and can be closed when the river exceeds a certain
level. This closure blocks all traffic (but at such high water there will be no traffic to/from
the port).
Figure 14.5 River ports outside dike with lock gate
Main advantages and disadvantages are:
less expensive berths than for open port periodically, vessels are locked in
easy expansion (including those with dangerous goods!)
gate width limits ship size
upgrading means new lock gate
pumping required when gate is in use
(seepage and leaks)
when open, same as for open port
construction, operation and maintenance
costs of lock gate
An example is the port of Cuyk on the river Meuse (Figure 14.6). The lock gate is closed
during a few days per year only. It limits ship widths to 14 m.
River port with ship lock (Figure 14.7)
Main advantages and disadvantages are:

constant water level loss of time due to locking
sheltered mooring (against waves from lock width limits ship size
other vessels) pumping needed
minimum vertical transport of cargo in case of calamities, difficult evacuation
relatively cheap berths construction, operation and maintenance
costs of lock
waiting berths needed for lock
An example is the port of Oss on the river Meuse (Figure 14.8).
lock gate
HW dike
Cuyk
Figure 14.6 Port of Cuyk
Figure 14.7 River ports outside dike with ship lock
Maas
HW dike
lock gate
harbour
Berghem
0 5 10 km
Oss
Figure 14.8 Port of Oss

14.3.3 Canal and River Ports: Lay-out and Dimensions

For the lay-out of IWT ports and the dimensions of entrance and basins general guidelines
have been developed by the Dutch Commissie Vaarweg Beheerders (CVB, Commission
Inland Waterway Authorities) in its report of 2006. The following guidelines are taken
from this report:
(i) (Un)loading quays along the channel shall be avoided, in case of waterways with
more than 15,000 barges per year and in any case along waterways Class V and
higher. Where allowed, it is desirable to have the ship at berth entirely outside the
theoretical channel boundary. The quay wall will be placed at a minimum distance
from the channel boundary of Bs , the beam of the design ship. When more than one
berth is needed, these should preferably be separated in order to keep sight of the
original channel boundary (see Figure 14.9).
Figure 14.9 Berths along the waterway
The length of the quay wall amounts to 1.1 Ls , Ls being the length of the design ship.
The earth retaining structures on both sides shall have an angle less than 1:2 with the
channel boundary in order to facilitate arrival and departure manoeuvres.
(ii) Harbour basins along the waterway will be located in or connected by means of side
channels. At the connection there has to be sufficient line of sight (see Figure 14.10).
The width of a harbour basin has to be minimum 4Bs , if there are berths on both
sides.
Along rivers the harbour entrance should preferably be oriented in an upstream di-
rection, i.e. in such a way that the vessels can enter against the current (manoeuvring
is easier and safer in this way). Wherever possible the entrance will be located on an
outer curve of the river to benefit from available natural water depth and to minimise
siltation in the entrance (see Figure 14.11).
Ls
waterway
Ls line of free sight
Figure 14.10 Line of free sight at side channels
Figure 14.11 Entrance to a harbour along the river
The harbour entrance has to be sufficiently wide for ships to pass each other. A
minimum value is 60 m for ships up to class Va. If push-tows frequently visit the
harbour basin the minimum value is 80 m. Alternatively a mooring berth is provided
near the entrance, where the push-boat and the different barges can be disconnected.
The barges are subsequently towed to their berths by a small tug. For a 4-barge push-
tow the mooring berth needs a space of 225 25 m outside the waterway boundary.
(iii) Turning circles are needed in the vicinity of (un)loading quays and at the end of
harbour basins with a length of more than 5 LS . The diameter of the turning circle
amounts to 1.3 LS . If located adjacent to the waterway, the turning circle shall fall
within the axis of the waterway (see Figure 14.12). Again for push tows the length
of the individual barges shall be applied.
1.3 Ls
quay wall
Figure 14.12 Turning circle at unloading quay
A last comment is related to dangerous cargo. Ships with dangerous cargo require special
treatment. Since the inland water transport of mineral oil products and liquefied gases
increases rapidly, this issue constitutes a point of special concern for many IWT ports.
Whenever possible, these vessels should be in fully current-free water in basins, exclusively
reserved for these cargoes and which can be easily sealed off by floating booms in case of
spills or other accidents.
14.4 Terminals
14.4.1 IWT Cargo Terminals
When cargo is moved over the waterway from an inland terminal to a seaport terminal, and
vice versa, or between IWT terminals, suitable provisions should be present for cargo han-
dling, for storage and for interchange with other modes of transport. The main component
at an in land terminal’s infrastructure will be a quay or jetty, where vessels can safely moor
at any water level, and where loading and unloading can be performed efficiently. Quays
will often be used for terminals in closed river ports.
Jetties for terminals in open river ports can be either fixed or floating. A choice between
the two is dependent on the method of cargo transfer that will be applied (manual or mech-
anised), but also on the water level variations to be expected as well as the configuration
of bank or embankment at the selected site for a terminal (see also Section 14.4.4). A
fixed jetty has the advantage that it can be constructed rigidly and stable, even allowing
heavy equipment and trucks to drive on it. A serious handicap is that, even with limited
water level variations, the jetty platform rises high above the vessel’s deck during the low
water stage. This can be met by the construction of a number of jetties for various levels,
but the costs involved could easily turn the balance in favour of floating jetties. Another
disadvantage of fixed jetties is that they can seldom be moved to other and more suitable
locations, when a changing configuration of the river bank or a changing transport pattern
would require so. A floating jetty has the flexibility to be moved at any time, but the weak
side is often the construction of a land-connecting footbridge or ramp. This is particularly
so when this bridge has to span a considerable length of shallow water or mud along the
bank. A floating jetty must also be secured against lateral movements, either by anchors,
moorings or guide poles. Especially during high floods, the force of the current against the
pontoon and a pack of vessels moored alongside, may be considerable.
14.4.2 Cargo Handling

In developing countries, the (un)loading of barges is sometimes still done manually. How-
ever, in most cases some form of mechanisation, or partial mechanisation, has been intro-
duced on terminals in the developing world.
From an engineering point of view, mechanisation of cargo handling has a considerable
impact on the design of an inland terminal and, especially, on the design of a jetty. The
jetty is the crucial part of the process of cargo transfer from vessel to land, and vice versa.
There, a substantial amount of vertical transport happens, combined with horizontal trans-
port over the jetty to or from truck, wagon or storage shed (Figure 14.13).
When the cargo is handled manually, the jetty platform should preferably be level with
the vessel deck, but there remains a notable vertical lift from the vessel’s hold onto the
deck. Some sort of lifting gear, preferably on the jetty itself, will facilitate this part of
handling, and will also eliminate the problem of a jetty towering above the vessel during
low water stages. This lifting gear can range from a simple (hand-operated) derrick to an
electric hoist, or even a more sophisticated piece of equipment as a mobile crane. With this
equipment, further mechanisation is within reach when additional trucks, flatcars or forklift
trucks are used for horizontal transport. Still, it will require stable and not too sloping jetty
platforms as well as metalled roads or rail tracks for through-transport.
In case of a floating jetty, connected to the bank by a footbridge or ramp, a part of the verti-
cal and horizontal transport can be achieved with conveyor belts, provided that, in general,
the slope does not exceed 25 to 30 . The conveyor belt, being a very versatile piece of
equipment for cargo handling, can also be used on a fixed jetty with large water level vari-
ations. This installation is not only perfectly suited for the transfer of bulk cargo as sand,
gravel, rock and coal, but also for bags, small bundles, cartons and small crates. Bulk cargo
should preferably be carried on flat-top barges, from where it can be easily shovelled onto
the conveyor belt.
Other methods of mechanised cargo handling include the use of overhead ropeway systems,
cable-suspended drag buckets, various types of grab or continuous barge unloaders, and the
like, which are usually designed for applications in industrial ports or terminals.
IWT container terminals require one or more container cranes with a lifting capacity of
about 40 tonnes. Since the beam of IWT vessels or barges is less than that of sea-going
container ships, the crane’s outreach from the quay edge can be appreciable less than that
of cranes of deep-sea terminals. Also, the trolley and hoisting speeds are mostly lower,
resulting in lower investment cost. Nevertheless, a capital outlay of some NLG 2 million,
or over, is still a big investment in IWT terms.
barge
revetments (a) Jetties in tidal reaches for

floating fixed manual cargo handling
revetments
(b) Fixed jetties with a cargo
handling derrick or crane
revetments (c) Conveyor belt, used on a

floating jetty
revetments
(d) Conveyor belt, used on a
fixed jetty
Figure 14.13 Types of jetties
14.4.3 Storage
Storage area at IWT terminals depends on the type of cargo handled. If this is general cargo
or (increasingly) containerised cargo the surface area can be determined with the respective
equations in Chapter 8 and 7.
14.4.4 IWT Jetties on Rivers with a Large Seasonal Water Level

Variation
The considerable investments in the construction of a terminal capable of coping with large
water level differences must be justified by the throughput. As long as that throughput is
not guaranteed, the investments should be kept to a minimum. Often, a shore connection
with planks on floats, e.g. empty drums, will allow loading and unloading with a local
workforce. But, when the cargo flow is growing, a more permanent facility will be needed.
Once a feasibility study shows that the investment in a jetty is justified, the design of a
jetty adapted to the local conditions can start. Figure 14.14 shows a schematic shore cross-
section and the hydrograph.
shed
HHW
.
ax
m
n.
mi 50% of LLW
the time
50% year
hydrograph
Figure 14.14 IWT stepwise jetty
It appears logical to design one jetty for HHW and one for LLW, and, if desired, one or
more in between. But, in practice it is rarely provided so for the following reasons:
• For an appreciable period of time, the water level is in a zone where the lowest jetty
is too low and the middle one too high.
• HHW is exceptional and lasts for a short period only (e.g. 1 week every 10 years)
and, therefore, does not justify the investment in a jetty. Furthermore, during such
exceptional high levels, the current will reduce shipping to a minimum, and road
and/or rail connections are probably flooded.
• During the period that a jetty is flooded, but not yet enough to float a barge over it, the
terminal is hard if not impossible to use (Figure 14.15). The water levels, pro-
jected on the hydrograph, demonstrate that this situation can last for several months
per year.
Figure 14.15 Interruption of terminal operations

• Even when the three, or more, jetties are constructed staggered along the shore, the
solution is not attractive because the lowest jetty is used more than twice as long as
the others combined, and, therefore, should attract more than half of the investment.
In general, a floating jetty is the cheapest solution (Figures 14.16 and 14.17). It allows
trucks to come near the barge and, thus, reduce carrying distance for the dock labour.
The road should not be constructed too steep (maximum 1:15) to allow a loaded truck to
negotiate it without undue effort. Along the road, rails or channel irons should facilitate
movement of the connecting bridge or ramp when it has to be raised or lowered. The ramp
must be connected to the pontoon with solid hinges. This allows the use of the anchor and
mooring winches of the pontoon to move the ramp. If required, a winch near the top of the
slope may be needed to help pull the ramp upward.
HHW
5
. 1:1
max
LLW
Figure 14.16 Pontoon terminal
HW
LW
Figure 14.17 River terminal cross-section AA
Bollards or mooring rings should be installed along the slope for fixing strong mooring
wires. The anchors should be provided with enough shackles of heavy chain to resist cur-
rent and mooring forces. An additional advantage of this kind of jetty is the possibility to
move the floating part to another site once the terminal becomes obsolete.
Some examples are given in Figures 14.18 and 14.19. Figure 14.18 shows terminal fa-
cilities in Bangladesh for relatively low water level fluctuations in the lower reaches of
the Brahmaputra/Ganga river system. Figure 14.19 shows port facilities at Iquitos on the
Amazon in Peru, designed for a water level difference of 10.60 m. Certain navigable river
stretches in China sustain level fluctuations of as much 30 m for which it becomes quite
difficult to design good terminal facilities.
0 h
10 nc
ft nch
ft
× lau
Barisal river
60 u
× ll la
25 ig
b
16 ma
s
200 ft
100 ft 100 ft
50 ft
25 ft
waiting waiting
25 ft
room room
anchor
40 ft
anchor
10 ft 10 ft
cross section 60 ft 40 ft
Figure 14.18 Barisal, design of floating launch station with anchors
14.4.5 Design Aspects for a Simple IWT Canal Berth

A berth may be a quay wall, a fixed jetty or a floating jetty. Whatever it is, the structure
must be capable to carry the vertical loads of cargo, trucks, people, cranes, etc. (see Figure
14.20). In addition, it must withstand the horizontal loads. The indicated forces may
fluctuate considerably, so a thorough analysis is needed. Particular attention should be
given to sudden change of the water pressure caused by passing ships.
Ship impacts may be considerable, e.g. in case of a failing manoeuvre (kinetic energy to
be absorbed). In this respect, a very subjective criterion plays a role, namely how rough a
berthing manoeuvre is still considered ’normal’ or ’acceptable’. For quay wall designs, the
concentrated design load (acting on 0.5 m2 ) is taken as shown in Figure 14.21.
expanded land-based facilities existing facilities
expanded
new uncoverd storage area
land-based
facilities existing coverd
storage facilities
new coverd storage
facilities
area = 400 m2
third parties
properties
1 73.2 2
13 13 12 EL. 120.5 m
8 18
9 4 10
60
16
5
14
30
15 1
18
85
9.3
upgraded dock
15.4
Amazon river 2 87 7 6 3 187.2
11 36.6 36.6
48
12
Section 1-1 1 2
4 3
EL. 119.15 max. W.L. EL. 118.60
13 15 max. W.L. EL. 108.00
18
11
12
Section 2-2
EL. 119.15 10 3
max. W.L. EL. 118.60
13 max. W.L. EL. 108.00
18 17 11
12
30
15.4
1 Location of an old dock 10 Depressed inshore mooring cables

2 Part of an old dock incorporated into 11 Offshore mooring cables
the new pier 12 Anchors
3 New pier 13 Land-based piled deadmen
4 Acces bridge 14 Winch
5 Bridge support pontoon 15 Upstream floating log
6 Ramp between bridge and pier 16 Downstream navigational aids
7 Ramp between two parts of a new pier 17 Concrete block
8 Inshore mooring cables 18 Slope protection
9 Bridge keeping prestressed cables
Figure 14.19 Port of Iquitos on the Amazon river, Peru: general lay-out and typical cross-sections
cargo, trucks, cranes
ship impacts
mooring forces
anchor fo
rce
soil pressure
water pressure ground water pressure
screw race erosion
Figure 14.20 Design loads for quay walls
300
200
mooring
force (kN)
100
design load
on 0.5 m2
5000 10000
displacement of ship (m3 or tonnes)
Figure 14.21 Design load on quay walls and bollards
The given values of design loads on quay walls and bollards apply to stiff structures (sheet
pile walls). If a good flexible fendering is provided, the impact loads will decrease. One
should check if a design load for the quay wall can really be exerted, considering the design
ship’s own strength.
Bollards should be situated near the quay or jetty edge so that a deckhand can put a mooring
line directly over the bollard when the ship approaches the berth. The design load depends
on the mooring lines on board of the ships. The rule of thumb for the mooring forces
is the same as for the aforementioned collision loads; so, for inland vessels about 10 to
30 tonnes. These forces may act both in a longitudinal and a lateral direction. Spacing
between bollards should be about 10 to 30% of the design ship length (Figure 14.22). This
will also fit for many smaller vessels. The shape and size of the bollards on the jetty are
very important to prevent unnecessary wear and to avoid lines slipping over the bollard’s
top.
design ship length L

s
Ls / 3 Ls / 3 Ls / 3
Figure 14.22 Spacing of bollards
Near a berth, ships will often be manoeuvring. Consequently, the risk of concentrated
screw-race erosion is relatively high, and should be given due attention. To prevent stability
problems, possible sheet piling should be given some overdepth.
The external forces acting on a jetty (Figure 14.23) are much alike the forces on a quay
wall. Special stiffening will be needed to withstand the longitudinal forces exerted by a
moored ship, which is affected by passing ships and/or regular flow in the canal. Attention
should also be given to the risk of screw-race erosion, because it is very likely to attack the
bank slope. Damages of that slope may not be noticed in time, and a serious bank slide
might be the result. Repair of the slope revetment under the jetty will be very troublesome.
For a further discussion of design aspects and relevant guidelines, reference is made to
EAU (1990).
cargo, trucks, cranes
ship impacts
mooring forces
screw race erosion
Figure 14.23 Forces acting on a jetty terminal
14.4.6 Inland Passenger Terminals

Even at a pure passenger terminal, a certain amount of cargo has always to be handled,
ranging from personal luggage and unaccompanied baggage to crates and barrels for local
stores, depots and shops. This sort of cargo is usually light and limited in volume, and is
not to be compared with regular freight movements to and from factories or with transport
of agriculture products, bulk commodities and the like. Hence, the design of a passen-
ger terminal must not be mixed with the completely different criteria applying to a cargo
terminal.
Both types of terminal have in common that the jetty, or landing stage, is the most im-
portant component. For a passengers jetty, the prevailing requirement is to have a landing
platform which is, more or less, level with the vessel’s embarkation deck. In most cases,
this will result in the choice for a floating jetty. This is certainly the case for stations where
substantial seasonal level variations do occur. In most tidal areas, a fixed jetty with stepped
levels may be used.
14.4.7 Seaport Terminals for IWT Vessels and Lighters

In seaports with IWT connections to the hinterland the barges are mostly handled at the
same quays as the seagoing vessels. This has several disadvantages:
(i) The cranes are designed for the seagoing vessels and often too large for (un)loading
of barges. Hence the efficiency of this operation is too low.
(ii) Due to the difference in cost/day, the seagoing vessels always have priority over the
barges. Barge handling is often interrupted, when a seagoing vessel demands the
berth space.
In some cases this has led to the separation of the sea terminal and the barge terminal. An
example is the special IWT container terminal of ECT at the Maasvlakte. Although this so-
lution has disadvantages (additional capital costs, extra transport between the main storage
yard and the barge terminal), the trend is to create those so-called Barge Service Centres as
part of a modern container port.
Lighterage cannot be successfully performed without a special terminal where lighters, or

barges, can be loaded or unloaded in an efficient way. Such a terminal can be part of the
original port complex, for instance, where shallow berths or space restrictions make the
location less suitable to receive any more sea-going vessels. But, more often, a lighter ter-
minal will be located away from the original port site, where new links with the hinterland
can be created that bypass congested areas around an old port. Similar to the seaport’s IWT
complex, but on a smaller scale, the lighter terminal is an intricate set-up where rail, road
and water transport modes meet, and where transfer of cargo has to be performed, often
complicated by intermediate storage. The throughput capacity of a lighter terminal may
range from 1,000 to 2,500 tonnes of cargo per year per meter of quay length, depending
on the type of commodities and the efficiency with which they will be handled. The above
figure is based on an effective working time of 75% out of the maximum available hours
per year, or 0.75 24 365 = say, 6600 active hours.
14.5 References
CVB, Guidelines Inland Waterways, Rijkswaterstaat AVV, Rotterdam, 2006 (in Dutch)
Recommendations of the Committee in Waterfront Structures, Harbours and Waterways,
EAU 1990
ESCAP IWT Seminars, The Netherlands, 1988 and 1991
Guide to Inland Water Transport Development, PIANC PCDC 2nd Seminar, Surabaya-
Brussels, 1992
Index
access channels, 229 Brahmaputra/Ganga river system, 266

added mass, 184 breadth Bs , 8
Alicon system, 28 break-bulk, 11
alignment of an approach channel, 87 break-bulk cargo, 10
all-weather terminal, 151 breakwater, 105, 249
alluvial coastline, 64 breasting dolphin, 182, 183, 188
annual berth capacity, 203 bridge system, 166
annual number of calls, 141 Brunei LNG loading terminal, 195
approach bridge, 181 bucket elevators, 208
approach bridges and jetty heads, 183 buildings and other facilities, 237
apron area, 143 Built-Operate-Transfer (BOT), 50
at the quay, 130 bulk cargo, 29
auto-disconnect, 189 bulk commodities, 217
automated guide vehicle, 132 buoy body, 194
automated stacking crane, 135 buoy recordings, 61
average dwell time, 145 burst, 74
bagged goods, 10 captive ports, 49

barge service centres, 150 car carrier, 22
basin width, 230 car parks, 248
basins and berths, 230 cargo blending, 212
batch weighing, 218 cargo forecasts, 58
bathymetry, 60 carrier haulage, 48
bauxite/alumina, 201 cassette system, 11
beam, 8 chain conveyor, 208
belt conveyor system, 215 channel bound traffic, 87
berth, 179 channel depth, 91, 230
berth capacity, 203 channel width, 90, 229
berth lay-out, 163 Chart Datum (CD), 92
berth occupancy, 141 chassis, 132
berth productivity, 140, 141 chill room, 239
berthing arrangements, 231 climate, 61
berthing dolphins, 183 climatic conditions, 219
berthing energy, 187 closed basins, 104
berthing facilities, 163, 164 coal, 200
berthing or breasting dolphins, 181 coal slurry pipelines, 211
between quay and storage yard, 131 coastal fishery ports, 222
big coastal vessels, 227 coasters, 36, 201
blending, processing, weighing, 217 cofferdams, 33
block trains, 150 cold showers, 190
blowing types, 206 configuration coefficient, 185
bollard pull, 97 construction cost, 63
bottom protection, 168 container terminals, 117
bow thrusters, 76 container transfer area and buildings, 149
bow-out mooring system, 246 container types and sizes, 128
272
Index 273
container vessels, 15 equipment designer, 203

continental containers, 19 equipment within the stacks, 136, 142
continuous unloading systems, 203 evaluation techniques layout, 65
continuous weighing, 218 excitation, 77
conventional buoy moorings, 192 export or import, 177
conventional sheltered port with storage areas, 175 exposed jetty terminals, 189
conveyors, 214
country craft, 252 factor ATEU , 146
course control, 77 factor Cm , 184
crane productivity, 143 factor Cs , 185
crane track spacing, 144 factor mc , 146, 157
crash stop, 77 factor rst , 146
cream digging rate, 203 factory ships, 228
crude oil tanker, 30 fairway, 247
cruise ships, 25 Fast Ship, 28
cruise terminals, 121 feeder, 36
cryogenic transport, 33 feeder ships, 37
CSU’s (Continuous Self Unloader), 35 ferry, 26
cubic number, 228 ferry and cruise terminals, 121
current force coefficient, 84 ferry terminal, 162, 163
current forces, 82 fetch, 101
final stopping distance, 97
dead slow ahead, 77 finger piers, 183
degrees of freedom, 79 fish flow, 236
demersal, 226 fish handling facilities, 119
density currents, 108 fish hold capacity, 229
design capacity, 203 fishing techniques, 224
dolphin piles, 188 fixed landing area, 164
draught, 7 fixed offshore terminals, 194
draught D, 7 floating breakwaters, 249
dredge spoil, 74 floating dry-dock, 25
drift of the ship under influence floating pier systems, 246
of current and wind, 98 forklift truck, 131, 154
dry bulk cargo, 199 free digging rate, 203
dry bulk carriers , 34 free floating vessel, 77
dry bulk terminals, 118 free-falling material, 217
dry infrastructure, 113 from storage yard to hinterland transport, 136
dwell time, 125, 149 fruit terminals, 118
dynamically stable, 75 fuel economic, 77
dynamically unstable ship, 75 fugitive type, 103
eccentricity coefficient, 185 gang productivity, 155

economic and financial port analysis, 69 gas pockets, 191
Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR), 69 geared bulk carriers, 34,201
ECT’s Delta Terminal, 150 general cargo ship, 11
effective capacity, 203 general cargo terminal, 114
Eigen period, 80 grabs, 204
elastomeric fenders, 187 grain, 200
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), 4 green-field port development, 60
entrance channel, 246 Gross Domestic Product (GDP), 59
entrance speed, 97
environmental considerations, 220 harbour basin resonance, 104
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), 57 harbour master, 241
Heavy Lift Carrier (HLC), 24 Maasvlakte 2 (MV2), 55

heel, 95 main port, 37
high-sea vessels, 228 Main port Rotterdam, 55
hindcast, 61 major bulk, 199, 200
hinterland connections, 154 Marcona Corporation, 212
horizontal dimensions, 8 marginal pier, 231
hose belt conveyors, 215 marginal quay, 112
hub-and-spoke, 37 marina, 244
human resources, 114 mass-break-bulk, 10
maximum allowable slope, 165
ice factory, 238 maximum annual capacity, 122
incident wave period Ta , 79 maximum berth capacity, 203
incident waves, 81 maximum instantaneous capacity, 122
inland barge terminals, 120 maximum tidal variation, 165
inner channel, 99 MBMs in the port of Beirut, 192
intermediate storage, 111 mega carriers, 37
International Standards Organisation, 128 minimum breaking load, 189
Iquitos, 266 modal split, 138
iron ore, 200 monetary evaluation, 66
island berth, 117 moored ships, 81
IWT (inland water transport), 111 mooring dolphins, 181, 182, 184, 188
mooring facilities, 246
jetty head, 181
multi trailer system, 132
knots, 9 multi-criteria analysis (MCA), 66
multi-port discharge, 212
L and T jetties, 180 multi-purpose terminal, 115
landlord port, 50 multiple berths, 143
Lash ship, 23, 24 multiple buoy mooring, 192
latitude, 8 multipurpose ship, 13
lift, 11 multipurpose terminal, 159
lifting device, 235
light displacement, 5 natural roll period, 78
linear loaders, 213 nautical bottom, 95
linear ship loaders, 213 nautical depth, 95
Liner trade, 37 nautical safety, 67, 99
link span, 164, 166 near-distance fishery ports, 223
liquid bulk, 171 neo-bulk, 10
liquid bulk carriers, 30 Nomenclature uniforme des marchandises
liquid bulk terminals, 117 pour les Statistiques de Transport,
liquid gas carriers, 171 Reviseé, 10
liquid gas tanker, 33 non-conventional bulk carriers, 202
littoral transport, 64, 105 NSTR, 9
LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas), 33 numerical evaluation, 66
LNG carriers, 34
OBO carriers, 201
Lo/Lo, 19
ocean fishery ports, 224
load capacity, 172
OCO carriers, 201
loaded displacement, 5
off-shore multiple buoy moorings, 176
loading and unloading of liquid gas, 176
off-shore terminals with floating storage, 176
location of the terminal, 177
Oil Companies Marine Forum, 182
longitude, 8
oil tankers, 171
Lowest Low Water Level (LLWS), 92
open ended basins, 104
LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas), 33
operating hours, 155
LPG/LNG jetties, 190
Index 275
operational conditions, 102 radial ship loaders, 213

operational costs, 67 rail mounted gantry, 135
operational storage capacity, 191 Rail Service Centres, 150
optimum annual capacity, 123 ramp and bridges, 165
optimum average occupancy rate, 146 rated capacity, 203
reach stacker, 132
parcel size, 141 reclaimers, 217
parcel tanker, 32 reefer, 14, 15
parking area, 165 refrigerated containers, 15
passenger ferries, 121 refrigerated general cargo ship (reefer), 14
payload, 128 Report Planning of Fishing Ports, 241
peak capacity, 203 required quay length, 233
pelagic, 226 resiltation factor, 108
phosphate, 200 resonance, 78
pilots, 97 resonance phenomena, 104
pipe conveyors, 215 Response-Amplitude factor, 79
Plimsoll Mark, 7 Response-Amplitude Operator (RAO), 79
pneumatic systems, 205 revolving grabbing crane, 205
port basins, 100 Ro/Ro, 19
port captain, 241 Ro/Ro container ships, 161
port director, 241 Ro/Ro ferries, 161
port engineer, 241 Ro/Ro ships, 161
port entry speed, 77 Ro/Ro terminal, 115, 164
port layout development, 63 Ro/Ro vessels, 19
Port Life Cycle theory, 47 roads and parking area, 163
port manager, 241 Ross-Mosenberg system, 173
Port of Amsterdam, 143 rubber tyred gantry, 135
Port of Iquitos, 268 rudder angle, 74
port planner, 203 rudder control, 96
port planning obstacles, 71
port structure, 243 safety and reliability, 177
Post Panamax ships, 141 safety distances, 178, 179
pressure types, 206 safety requirements, 173
product tanker, 31 sailing ships, 77
project optimisation, 68 saw tooth quay shape, 231
propeller flow, 74 SBM buoy, 194
Public Private Partnership (PPP), 50 sea containers, 19
SeaLand containers, 16
Q-Flex, 172
second-order wave forces, 81
Q-Max, 172
sediment and soils characteristics, 62
quay apron width, 235
sediment deposition, 108
quay length, 143, 156
sedimentation inside the port, 108
quay length and number of portainer cranes, 140
self unloader, 113, 201
quay length design, 139
self-unloading vessels, 212
quay level, 235
service lane, 144
quay to storage transport systems, 135
service port, 49
quay-transit shed, 154
service time, 162
Quays, 249
service time of GC ships, 156
quays and jetties, 124
ship hydrodynamics, 77
queuing theory, 141, 143, 156
ship manoeuvrability, 74
quick release hooks, 189
ship-maintenance and repair, 235
quick-release device, 195
ship-quay, 154
radial loaders, 213 ship-to-shore gantry cranes, 130
shiptainer, 19 tide and current conditions, 62

short sea trader, 36 tool port, 50
siltation, 107 trailer, 19
siltation of approach channels, 107 tramp trade, 38
simple landing places, 222 transit shed, 156
single berth, 143 transport capacity, 4
single buoy mooring, 176, 193 transport systems, 214
site data, 60 transshipment, 37
slip width, 247 trim, 91
slip/finger arrangement, 246 tugboat control, 96
slipway, 235 turning diameter, 75
slurry systems, 211 turning manoeuvre, 75
small boats, 246 Twenty Feet Equivalent Units (TEU), 6, 16
small coastal vessels, 226 twist locks, 16
Smart Card, 4 types of general cargo, 152
spatial planning, 67 types of terminals, 175
special container terminal, 115
specific effects, 95 ULCC’s, 31
SPM (single point mooring), 112 Unit Load Concept (ULC), 13
spreader, 129 unproductive intervals, 140
squat, 91
vacuum types, 206
stacker-reclaimers, 217
vertical conveyors, 206
stackers, 217
vertical dimensions, 7
stacking, storage and reclaiming, 216
vertical screw conveyor, 208
stationary freeboard h f , 7
vessel length, 8
stationary jetties, 249
vessel manoeuvring characteristics, 74
stevedoring assistance, 213
vessel speed, 9
stockpiles, 216, 218
Vessel Traffic Service (VTS), 46
stopping distance, 76
visiting piers, 246
stopping length, 97
VLCC’s, 31
storage area, 177
VLOC’s = Very Large Ore Carrier, 34
storage yard, 144
straddle carrier, 132, 147, 149 water depth, 177
stripping, 145 wave agitation, 101
stuffing, 145 wave celerity, 79
suction types, 206 wave conditions, 61
suprastructure, 113 wave forces, 81
surface marker buoy, 192 wave height, 102
wave penetration, 101
Techno Super Liner, 28
wave spectrum, 79
terminal areas, 125
wet infrastructure, 112
terminal building, 164
wharf, 112
terminal capacity, 122
wind forces, 84
terminal equipment, 113
within the storage yard, 135
terminal lay-out, 137, 157
terminal logistics, 153 yachtsmen, 243
terminal processes, 129
TEU, 128
TEU-factor, 139–141
the consignee, 153
the gate, 136
tidal range, 166
tidal window, 94
Ports and Terminals
By nature port planning is a multi-disciplinary activity. It involves
By nature port planning
expertise is eld
in the a multidisciplinary activity.
of transport-economics, It involves
shipping, nautical
expertise in the fieldsafety
matters, of transport economics,
and logistics. shipping,ofnautical
But also knowledge waves and
currents, sediment transport and coastal morphology, dredging and
matters, safety
landand logistics,
reclamation, but
and alsoofknowledge
design breakwatersof waves
and quays.andHence port
currents, sediment
planningtransport
is teamwork. andButcoastal morphology,
within this team the portdredging and a
planner plays
central role in developing the concepts and obtaining the required
land reclamation, and design of breakwaters and quays. Hence port
expertise at the right time. Most port planners are civil engineers with
planning is teamwork and withintraining
hydraulic engineering this team the port planner
and experience. playstoahave
But they need
two important qualities in addition to that:
central role in developing the concepts and obtaining
i. a basic understanding of the other disciplines involved
the required
expertise at ii.
the right time. Most port planners are civil engineers with
creativity
The rst quality
hydraulic engineering is needed
training to direct the work
and experience. done by these
In addition theyexperts
need
and to integrate the results into a balanced design of the port lay-
to have a basic
out.understanding of the itself
The integration process otherisdisciplines involved,
the creative part as well
of the work:
as creativity.after having determined the basic dimensions of approach channel
Cover photograph: Europoort Rotterdam, Source Aeroview B.V. (www.aeroview.nl)

and turning basins, of quays and terminals and of the corridors for
hinterland connections, there are often many ways how to physically
This book is not justthem
arrange focused
into aon
portthe planning
lay-out. andsecond
Here the designquality
of very large
mentioned
above plays a crucial role in developing the right one.
ports and sophisticated terminals. Much of our experience related
The rst part of these lecture notes (Chapter 1 through 6) are aimed
to smaller ports and ports
at providing in developing
the basic elements to countries
perform thishasplanning
been included
process.
in the book, The individual case study, which is part of the curriculum, allows
thereby also referring to valuable sources such as
the students to test their creativity. Those who have it, qualify to
the
UNCTAD Handbook
play theon Portrole
central Development.
of port plannerPorts andprojects.
in future Terminals aims
Others at
should
not be
guiding planners discouraged:
and designersthe ofport
anyplanning
type ofteamportneeds alsoall
facility, specialists
over the in
coastal engineering, breakwater- or quay design.
world. In Chapter 7 (still part of the lectures wa4330) the detailed planning
of container terminals is treated, including the logistic process.
Further attention is paid to design aspects, which are typical for such
terminals and therefore not treated in other courses. The target is to
provide the basis for an all-round port engineer, somebody who can
URL on this book: http://www.vssd.nl/hlf/f031.htm
participate in the design of any given type of port or terminal.
Chapters 8-14 present the planning aspects of other types of
terminals and together constitute the lectures wa5306.
Published byContents
VSSD
1. Introduction
2. Maritime transport
Printed version ISBN
3. Port 978-90-6562-288-4
functions
4. Principles of integrated port planning
Electronic version ISBN 978-90-6562-303-4
5. Planning and design of a port’s water areas
NUR 956 6. Landside planning and design
7. Container terminals
8. General Cargo and Multipurpose Terminals
9. Ro/Ro and Ferry Terminals
10. Liquid Bulk Terminals
11. Dry Bulk Terminals
12. Fishery Ports
13. Marinas
14. Riverports and Barge Terminals
On behalf of the Section of Hydraulic Engineering published by:

VSSD
Leeghwaterstraat 42, 2628 CA Delft, The Netherlands
tel. +31 15 278 2124, telefax +31 15 278 7585, e-mail:
hlf@vssd.nl • internet: http://www.vssd.nl/hlf
CT4430PortsTerm_omslag 1

(2012, Velsink) - Ports - and - Terminals

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

(2012, Velsink) - Ports - and - Terminals

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(2012, Velsink) - Ports - and - Terminals

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ports and Terminals

H. Ligteringen and H. Velsink

Key words: ports and terminals

Delft, Winter 2012 H. Ligteringen and H. Velsink

List of Symbols xiii

3 Port Functions and Organisation 45

4 Port Planning Methodology 53

5 Planning and Design of the Water Areas 73

6 Planning and Design of Port Terminals 111

7 Container Terminals 127

8 General Cargo and Multipurpose Terminals 151

9 Ro/Ro and Ferry Terminals 161

10 Liquid Bulk Terminals 171

10.6.1 L and T Jetties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180

11 Dry Bulk Terminals 199

12 Fishery Ports 221

12.5.1 Access Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

14 Ports and Terminals for Inland Water Transport 251

Parameter Unit Description

d50 m average grain size diameter; characteristic diameter

N20 - number of TEU’s

Ve f f m/s ship speed with respect to channel bottom

1 actually a ton-force (a non-SI unit), but in practice referred to as ”ton”.

By nature port planning is a multidisciplinary activity. It involves expertise in the ﬁeld

(i) a basic understanding of the other disciplines involved

Chapters 8-14 present the planning aspects of other types of terminals.

Table 2.1 Freight rates across the Atlantic Ocean

Transport mode Door-to-door time (days) Freight rate (US$/kg)

Air transport 550 g

2.2 Speciﬁc Data of Merchant Ships

GRT Gross Register Tonnage

Figure 2.1 Cost elements in a transport chain

tions can serve as a ﬁrst approximation:

General cargo ships: DWT 1 5 GRT 2 5 NRT,

Figure 2.2 GRT versus DWT

Tonne or metric ton (t = 1000 kg)

Length = 20 feet = 6.03 m,

2.2.2 Vertical Dimensions

Figure 2.3 Ships dimensions

Most common letters are:

LR: Lloyds Register (England)

TF = Tropical Fresh Water

A certain safety margin is also incorporated in the markings of maximum permissible

2.2.3 Horizontal Dimensions

LBP : Length Between Perpendiculars, and

Both lengths are indicated in Figure 2.3.

LBP : is the horizontal distance in meters between the points of intersection of

Figure 2.4 Kamewa bow thruster

2.2.4 Other Relevant Data

2.3 Commodities and types of vessels

0. Agricultural products and livestock

2.3.2 Break-bulk or Conventional General Cargo

General cargo ship

Table 2.2 Freight rates across the Atlantic Ocean

Categories of break-bulk Shape or packing Cargo handling method

Length Over All: 113.22 m

Figure 2.5 General cargo ship ’Sakti’

Figure 2.6 Horizontal cargo handling through side loading doors

a. The robust shape and heavy lift deck equipment.