Using Air to Reduce Ship Running Costs

The cost of fuel is a significant contributor to naval vessel running costs. Last year the Japanese carrier NYK Line announced it had successfully completed trials of the Mitsubishi Air Lubrication System (MALS) which put quite simply, uses air bubbles to reduce drag. They have reported a not insignificant fuel reduction of 6%. With continuing pressure on Royal Navy operating costs is this something that could be retrofitted to existing ships and designed in to new ones?

NYK used two heavy equipment carriers, the Yamatai and Yamato, both just under 20,000 dwt.

The NYK press release provides more detail

The air-lubrication system effectively reduces the frictional resistance between a vessel’s bottom and the seawater by means of bubbles generated by supplying air to the vessel’s bottom. In fact, this was the world’s first permanent installation of a system using an air-blower. The system was installed on the two vessels when they were built, and the experiments were conducted during actual sea passage. This project has been subsidized through Japan’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism’s “Support for Technology Development from Marine Vessels for Curtailing CO2” project from fiscal 2009, and has also been supported by the ship classification society Nippon Kaiji Kyokai (ClassNK).

The experiments were designed to verify fuel reduction, examine the behavior of the air bubbles supplied to the vessel bottom under various operational and sea conditions, confirm the relationship between the amount of air supplied and its effect, and validate CO2 reduction.

After reviewing the data obtained by the two vessels for two years under various weather and sea conditions, the optimal control mode of how the bubbles behave in actual sea conditions was confirmed. Compared to the 10 percent reduction measured during sea trials, the reduction of CO2 emissions was confirmed to average 6 percent under various weather and sea conditions. This project was done as a challenge toward the world’s first permanent installation of such a system, and we are proud to have confirmed such meaningful energy savings during actual sea voyages.

The project has been completed, but NYK, MTI, and NYK-Hinode Line will continue to conduct performance analyses on actual vessels and device reviews during dry docks to achieve optimal operation. At the same time, the NYK Group will strive to install the system on other types of vessels for greater energy-saving operations.

Air is discharged through a series of hull bottom vents via a header tank and pressure control system

http://www.flickr.com/photos/73614187@N03/8612271221/in/photostream

Both the Yamatai and Yamato have a relatively shallow draft so in order to confirm the systems suitability for use on larger conventional deep draft vessels the Soyo, 91,000 dwt bulk coal carrier has also been fitted.

The German cruise line, Aida, has also ordered the system for its new cruise ships and work is ongoing to create a system that traps the bubble layer so it does not slip up the sides of the hull reducing efficiency.

The conventional wisdom is that frigates and destroyers with their deep V shaped hulls  don’t work very well with an air lubrication system but the larger and fatter ships are much better suited.

However, MHI has fitted their system to a ferry owned by the A Line company, the Naminoue is a high speed slender hull design.

Ferry Naminoue
Ferry Naminoue

MHI and A Line have confirmed a 5% reduction in wave heights of up to 3m

An obvious problem in the naval domain is the hydrodynamic noise that an in use system would make but it would not have to be switched on in high threat environments and this might even be an advantage, masking acoustic signatures.

The DK Group from Denmark has an air lubrication system that can be retrofitted to existing vessels, they claim an installation time of 14 days and a return on investment of between 18 and 30 months.

DK produce a good primer on the technology, click here and here

I expect its not all rosy though, questions remain about its impact on handling, corrosion and maintenance. As with all new technologies, kinks are there to be ironed out.

The Royal Navy has shown great interest in fuel saving measures, from advanced anti fouling coatings to transom flaps, it fully recognising that fuel is going to be an increasingly large factor in running costs.

Could air lubrication play a part in future large Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels or is it a system that is limited to flat bottomed vessels, none of which we have now or will have in the future?

 

 

12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom
Tom
April 3, 2013 8:43 am

Interesting possibility. The biggest issue would be what effect it has on the vessels acoustic signature.

The other issue would be how much space it would take up inside the ship? Not a problem for large bulk carriers but a frigate? The system needs to be viewed holistically as part of the ships power and propulsion system.

Kevin
Kevin
April 3, 2013 8:45 am

I think the immediate and obvious reason not to fit and use this is cavitation – bubbles on your hull/propulsion system are very noisy underwater and thus make you a very easy target for any underwater adversary.

DomS
DomS
April 3, 2013 8:58 am

Bubble-generators are already used for acoustic masking on surface ships:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prairie-Masker
I understand that these are effective in masking radiated noise (so countering passive sonar) but are also ineffective against active sonar as they increase sound reflection.

JJ
JJ
April 3, 2013 10:05 am

The Australians came up up with this system;
http://www.gamma-lhi.com/

a bit more than 6%,at least that is what they claim..

Regards,
JJ

PS;nice new look TD,a couple of weeks ago I got “forbidden access” when I tried to read TD,I figured the UK
no longer wanted readers from Holland!:-)

Ace Rimmer
April 3, 2013 11:55 am

Very interesting idea, although I was wondering how it would affect buoyancy?

Ace Rimmer
April 3, 2013 3:13 pm

After pondering over a coffee, would there be any advantage of having a probe projected forward of the bow and aerating the water ahead of the ship to reduce drag? I was thinking along the lines of the aerospike for aircraft which ionised the air ahead of aircraft to reduce drag.

I may have another coffee and ponder some more……

Wstr
Wstr
April 3, 2013 5:54 pm

At the moment not quite in the right position for P-M given distance from the props and not masking the side of the below-waterline machinery spaces; but who knows what can be accomplished in a frigate sized hull. Even if it can mask part of its own operation for a negligible net increase in detectability, then its still quids in, as we have plenty of modern experience with rafts and other dampening approaches to help out as well.

@AceRimmer ‘I may have another coffee…’ and a smoked kipper?

Pete Arundel
Pete Arundel
April 3, 2013 8:47 pm

Didn’t Thornycroft try this out over 100 years ago?

Simon
April 3, 2013 9:28 pm

Ooh, boundary layer control goes all nautical.

Next they’ll fit little wings to “fly” under water and lift the whole hull out of all that horrible gooey, viscous water… another great idea never pursued far enough :-(

Swimming Trunks
Swimming Trunks
April 4, 2013 12:47 am
SomewhatInvolved
April 5, 2013 10:51 am

We pretty much already have the system fitted as Masker covers a significant proportion of the hull. Might get Navs to try a fuel trial – overnight with Masker on, and overnight with it off, and see if there’s a difference.

Edit – that’s on a T23 though, nothing bigger.