KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Journal of Naval Sciences and Engineering / 2026 / Volume: 20 Issue: 1

THE RELIABILITY EVALUATION OF THE DECK MACHINERY AND GALLEY EQUIPMENT OF A BULK CARRIER BY UTILIZING THE FAILURE RECORDS

Alper Seyhan(ZONGULDAK BULENT ECEVİT UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-3707-6706
Murat Bayraktar(ZONGULDAK BÜLENT ECEVİT ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DENİZCİLİK FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-7252-4776
Onur Yüksel(ZONGULDAK BULENT ECEVİT UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-5728-5866
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2024-06-28
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Therefore, regular failure records, planned and proactive maintenance strategies, and also extra efforts should be performed on this equipment to ensure sustainable and seamless operations in the maritime sector.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Among various modes of transportation, maritime transportation holds critical importance since it provides substantial carrying capacity with low unit costs.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Creating reliable systems onboard is possible through the implementation of planned and proactive maintenance strategies and leveraging experiences gained from past failures. 10-year failure records of bulk carriers have been scrutinized within the scope of system reliability to determine critical equipment and units.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Therefore, regular failure records, planned and proactive maintenance strategies, and also extra efforts should be performed on this equipment to ensure sustainable and seamless operations in the maritime sector.
🔬Tür:Research Article
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Reliability Analysis · Navigation Equipment · Communication Devices

Abstract

Among various modes of transportation, maritime transportation holds critical importance since it provides substantial carrying capacity with low unit costs. To perform seamless and efficient operations in maritime transportation plays a pivotal role in achieving sustainable development goals and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) targets. The execution of uninterrupted operations can only be carried out with the existence of reliable systems. Creating reliable systems onboard is possible through the implementation of planned and proactive maintenance strategies and leveraging experiences gained from past failures. 10-year failure records of bulk carriers have been scrutinized within the scope of system reliability to determine critical equipment and units. The data has been categorized into subgroups under four fundamental headings, and subsequent reliability analyses have been conducted on each subgroup. Within the subgroups, the reliability of navigation equipment should be improved since it has the highest failure rate and its malfunction can cause very serious marine accidents. This equipment is followed by fire-fighting systems, cargo equipment, and GMDSS instruments which are essential for ship operations based on reliability results. Therefore, regular failure records, planned and proactive maintenance strategies, and also extra efforts should be performed on this equipment to ensure sustainable and seamless operations in the maritime sector.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Seyhan, A., Bayraktar, M., Yüksel, O. (2024). THE RELIABILITY EVALUATION OF THE DECK MACHINERY AND GALLEY EQUIPMENT OF A BULK CARRIER BY UTILIZING THE FAILURE RECORDS. Journal of Naval Sciences and Engineering, Volume: 20 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.56850/jnse.1430191

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (43)

  1. Alamri, T. O., & Mo, J. P. (2023). Optimisation of preventive maintenance regime based on failure mode system modelling considering reliability. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 48(3), 3455-3477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-022-07174-w
  2. AIS. (2018). Warranty & Terms and Conditions. Retrieved on March 7, 2024, from https://www.ais-inc.com/files/AISTermsWarranty.pdf
  3. Aslanpour, M. S., Gill, S. S., & Toosi, A. N. (2020). Performance evaluation metrics for cloud, fog and edge computing: A review, taxonomy, benchmarks and standards for future research. Internet of Things, 12, 100273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iot.2020.100273
  4. BahooToroody, A., Abaei, M. M., Banda, O. V., Montewka, J., & Kujala, P. (2022). On reliability assessment of ship machinery system in different autonomy degree; A Bayesian-based approach. Ocean Engineering, 254, 111252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.111252
  5. Bayraktar, M., & Nuran, M. (2022). Reliability, availability, and maintainability analysis of the propulsion system of a fleet. Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin, Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Morskiej w Szczecinie, (70). https://doi.org/10.17402/509
  6. Bayraktar, M., & Yüksel, O. (2023). Reliability Analysis on the Engine Room Systems of the Ro-Ro Passenger Ship. 8. International Sciences And Innovation Congress, Ankara.
  7. Bicen, S., & Celik, M. (2023). A RAM extension to enhance ship planned maintenance system. Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean Affairs, 15(3), 357-376. Bicen, S., & Celik, M. (2023). A RAM extension to enhance ship planned maintenance system. Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean Affairs, 15(3), 357-376.
  8. Bicen, S., Kandemir, C., & Celik, M. (2021). A human reliability analysis to crankshaft overhauling in dry-docking of a general cargo ship. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 235(1), 93-109. https://doi.org/10.1177/14750902209483
  9. BlueLine. (2024). ECDIS Marine Panel PC-8800. Retrieved on March 7, 2024, from https://blue-line.com/products/maritime-displays-computers/blue-line ecdismarinepanel-pc-8800
  10. Breneman, J. E., Sahay, C., & Lewis, E. E. (2022). Introduction to reliability engineering. John Wiley & Sons.
  11. Ceylan, B. O., Karatuğ, Ç., Ejder, E., Uyanık, T., & Arslanoğlu, Y. (2023). Risk assessment of sea chest fouling on the ship machinery systems by using both FMEA method and ERS process. Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean Affairs, 15(4), 414-433. https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2022.2104494
  12. ChartWorld. (2024). ECDIS Solutions. Retrieved on March 7, 2024 from https://www.chartworld.com/web/ecdis-solutions/.
  13. ClassNK. (2024). Register of Ships. Retrieved on January 1, 2024 from https://www.classnk.or.jp/register/regships/regships.aspx.
  14. EO Lifesaving. (2024). Lifeboat. on January 1, 2024 from https://www.eolifesaving.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/LB-TE-DC-JY-QFP-1180-spec.pdf
  15. Eriksen, S., Utne, I. B., & Lützen, M. (2021). An RCM approach for assessing reliability challenges and maintenance needs of unmanned cargo ships. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 210, 107550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107550
  16. Furuno. (2024). Complete Operator’s Guide to Marine Radar. Retrieved on March 7, 2024 from https://www.furunousa.com/-/media/sites/furuno/reference_materials/furunoradarguide_lr.pdf.
  17. Ghosh, S., & Rana, A. K. (2011). Comparative study of the factors that affect maintainability. International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering, 3(12), 3763.
  18. Gullo, L. J., & Dixon, J. (2021). Maintainability Requirements and Design Criteria. Design for Maintainability, 79-96. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119578536.ch5
  19. Ivanovskaya, A. V., Klimenko, N. P., & Popov, V. V. (2022). Statistical analysis of fishing vessel deck equipment elements failures. Vestnik Gosudarstvennogo universiteta morskogo i rechnogo flota imeni admirala SO Makarova, 14, 440-448.
  20. James, A. T. (2021). Reliability, availability and maintainability aspects of automobiles. Life Cycle Reliability and Safety Engineering, 10(1), 81-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41872-020-00130-3
  21. Karahalios, H. (2018). The severity of shipboard communication failures in maritime emergencies: A risk management approach. International journal of disaster risk reduction, 28, 1-9.
  22. Karatuğ, Ç., Arslanoğlu, Y., & Soares, C. G. (2023). Design of a decision support system to achieve condition-based maintenance in ship machinery systems. Ocean Engineering, 281, 114611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.02.015
  23. Kimera, D., & Nangolo, F. N. (2022). Reliability maintenance aspects of deck machinery for ageing/aged fishing vessels. Journal of Marine Engineering & Technology, 21(2), 100-110. https://doi.org/10.1080/20464177.2019.1663595
  24. Kuzu, A. C. (2023). Application of fuzzy DEMATEL approach in maritime transportation: A risk analysis of anchor loss. Ocean Engineering, 273, 113786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.113786
  25. Marine Deck Crane. (2024). Marine Stiff Boom Crane. Retrieved on March 7, 2024 from https://www.marinedeckcrane.com/sale-37983491-marine-stiff-boom-crane-60-90-days-delivery-1-year-warranty-on-site-installation.html
  26. Perera, L. P. (2018, June). Autonomous ship navigation under deep learning and the challenges in COLREGs. In International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering (Vol. 51333, p. V11BT12A005). American Society of Mechanical Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE2018-77672
  27. Perera, L. P., Carvalho, J. P., & Soares, C. G. (2013). Solutions to the failures and limitations of Mamdani fuzzy inference in ship navigation. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 63(4), 1539-1554. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2013.2288306
  28. Sayareh, J., & Ahouei, V. R. (2013). Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) for reducing the delays of cargo handling operations in marine bulk terminals. Journal of Maritime Research, 10(2), 43-50.
  29. Simrad. (2024). Warranty Information. Retrieved on March 7, 2024 from https://www.navico-commercial.com/support/warranty-information/
  30. Smith, D. J. (2021). Reliability, maintainability, and risk: practical methods for engineers. Butterworth-Heinemann.
  31. SperryMarine (2022). Compass Solutions. Retrieved on March 7, 2024 from https://www.sperrymarine.com/system/files/downloads/8caf952b-fc8e-47ca-86eb-1a5b0ff87ae9/SperryMarine_Compass_Brochure_CompassSolutions.pdf
  32. Stopford, M. (2008). Maritime economics 3e. Routledge.
  33. Sürücü, L., & Maslakci, A. (2020). Validity and reliability in quantitative research. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(3), 2694-2726. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v8i3.1540
  34. Tortorella, M. (2015). Reliability, maintainability, and supportability: best practices for systems engineers. John Wiley & Sons.
  35. Tsarouhas, P. (2020). Reliability, availability, and maintainability (RAM) study of an ice cream industry. Applied Sciences, 10(12), 4265. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10124265
  36. United States Department of Agriculture. (2021). Bulk Vessel Types and Capacity. Retrieved on December 2, 2023, from https://agtransport.usda.gov/stories/s/Bulk-Vessel-Fleet-Size-and-Rates/bwaz-8sgs/.
  37. Velásquez, R. M. A., & Lara, J. V. M. (2018). Reliability, availability and maintainability study for failure analysis in series capacitor bank. Engineering Failure Analysis, 86, 158-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2018.01.008
  38. Wärtsilä. (2024). Automatic radar plotting aids (ARPA). Retrieved on March 6, 2024, from https://www.wartsila.com/encyclopedia/term/automatic-radar-plotting-aids(arpa)#:~:text=Automatic%20radar%20plotting%20aids%20are,plotter%20or%20separate%20plotting%20aid.
  39. Xiaoxia, W., & Chaohua, G. (2002). Electronic chart display and information system. Geo-spatial Information Science, 5(1), 7-11.
  40. Yang, G. (2007). Life cycle reliability engineering. John Wiley & Sons.
  41. Zacks, S. (2012). Introduction to reliability analysis: probability models and statistical methods. Springer Science & Business Media.
  42. Zhang, Y., Jin, H., Jia, N., & Zou, A. (2013, August). Cascading failure evalution of ship fire-fighting system. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation (pp. 622-626). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMA.2013.6617988
  43. Zhou, Q., & Thai, V. V. (2016). Fuzzy and grey theories in failure mode and effect analysis for tanker equipment failure prediction. Safety science, 83, 74-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.11.013