ACME Governor MAN B&W 9K90MC-VI - Laboratory of Marine ...

ADAPTIVE CONTROL OF MARINE ENGINES 

BRITE-EURAM CT95-0091 - STARTING DATE: 1.1.1996 

DG XII Scientific Officer: F. Sgarbi (E. Campogrande) 

ACME 

FINAL PROJECT MEETING 

ATHENS, 24 FEBRUARY 2000

Outline of presentation 

• PART 1: Introduction and background 

• PART 2: The Consortium 

• PART 3: Project outline 

• PART 4: Technical achievements 

• PART 5: Conclusions and exploitation plan 

FINAL PROJECT MEETING, ATHENS 24 FEBRUARY 2000

PART 1 

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 


Introduction - State-of-art 

Marine propulsion propulsion units for new new ships ships are specified specified 

relying relying on power requirements for for calm calm water ship 

resistance adding empirical “service” “service” margins margins for 

actual operation 

Ship delivery trials are are also conducted conducted in calm 

waters waters 

Propulsion system is loaded off-design point under 

transient conditions on the first voyage in heavy 

weather

Background - Pre-ACME history 

1994: DANAOS containership accident in the Pacific 

DANAOS requested the advise of NTUA/LME for 

operation of the ship powerplant in extreme conditions 

Extended discussions with the engine manufacturer 

MAN-B&W 

Consortium formed with the required expertise to 

study the problem

PART 2 

THE CONSORTIUM 


The ACME Consortium 

Danaos Shipping Co. Ltd. 

MAN-B&W Diesel A/S 

ABB A/S 

HSVA GmbH 

LIPS B.V. 

Hapag Lloyd Linie GmbH 

NTUA

PART 3 

PROJECT OUTLINE 


Objectives 

To develop methods based on mathematical modelling 

and process simulation, enabling to examine the 

dynamic behaviour of the propulsion installation in 

advance, during the ship design stage 

To develop engine adaptive control schemes and 

governor algorithms allowing maximum exploitation 

of powerplant capabilities in all ship operating 

conditions 

To verify verify the proposed methods and schemes by 

full-scale ship-board testing

Approach 

To consider the dynamic behaviour of all all the units 

in the propulsion system and especially the intimate 

coupling of the propeller-engine-turbocharger units 

Methodology 

1. Systematic self propulsion 

Governor 

Propeller 

ship model tests inTurbocharger waves 

2. Propeller transient behaviour model 

3. Simulation of engine 

dynamic/thermodynamic behaviour 

? 

4. Control schemes 

5. Prototype and Engine full-scale 

testing

Work Packages 

W.P.1 Specification and Detailed Planning 

W.P.2 Model Tank Tests and Analysis 

W.P.3 Propeller Transient Behaviour Model 

W.P.4 Engine Dynamic Loading Predictions 

W.P.5 Propulsion System Simulation 

W.P.6 Definition of Adaptive Control Options 

W.P.7 Test-Bed Evaluation of Control Schemes 

W.P.8 On Board Installation and Trials 

W.P.9 Full Scale Sea-Passage Tests 

W.P.10 Analysis of Results-Recommendations

Work Packages 

ACME PROJECT CALENDAR 

YEAR 1- 1996 YEAR 2 - 1997 YEAR 3 - 1998 YEAR 4 - 1999 PARTNERS 

M onth nr. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 

Work Package WP M anager 

1. PLANNING NTUA 

2. M ODEL TANK TESTS HSVA 

3. PROPELLER M ODEL LIPS 

4. ENGINE DYNAM I CS M AN-B& W 

5. PROPULSION SI M ULATION NTUA 

6. CONTROL SCHEM ES M AN-B& W 

7. TEST BED TRIALS M AN-B& W 

8. ON BOARD INST. & TRIAL HAPAG-LLOYD 

9. FULL SEA TRI ALS HAPAG-LLOYD 

10. RECOM M ENDATIONS NTUA

PART 4 

TECHNICAL 

ACHIEVEMENTS 


WORK PACKAGE 1 

SPECIFICATION AND DETAILED PLANNING 

WP MANAGER 



MODEL TANK TESTS AND ANALYSIS 



Objective 

To determine determine the propeller torque demand variations 

in regular and and irregular waves, in head and following seas 

Procedure 

Open water tests in calm water 

Open water tests in waves 

Nominal wake measurements in waves 

Self-propulsion tests in regular waves 

Self-propulsion tests in irregular head and following seas

Open water tests 

Self-propulsion tests

Open water tests 

Self-propulsion tests

Video of tank test measurements


PROPELLER TRANSIENT BEHAVIOUR MODEL 



Objective 

• To predict the propeller torque demand a few seconds 

ahead of time 

Procedure 

• Observation of correlation between maximum of aft 

vertical acceleration and minimum in propeller torque 

demand from HSVA experiments. 

• Based on HSVA measurements, develop a simple 

model for the prediction of propeller torque demand

Analytical model (LIPS) 

Input: 

Geometry of submerged blade and 

detailed wake distribution 

Geometry of the partially emerged blade 

The aim of the research of LIPS was to model the partial 

submergence problem with the aid PUF-3a of numerical code lifting 

surface theory in order to predict: 

Empirical • Unsteady model blade forces (HSVA) 

• Thrust 

• Torque 

Model is computationally 

demanding and input data 

difficult to obtain at full-scale 

irregular sea conditions 

Statistical model (NTUA)

Torque prediction method 


Input: 

• Continuously measured torque 

• Propeller speed 

• Propeller relative motion 

Empirical Output: model (HSVA) 

•Torque approx. 1 sec ahead in time 

Statistical NOTE: model (NTUA) 

• Accurate prediction of the relative 

motion of the propeller is essential

• Head Seas 


-3,0 

-4,0 

Empirical model (HSVA) 

-5,0 

-1,0 

Statistical model (NTUA) 

-3,0 

Vertical acceleration aft. 

(m/s^2) 

5,0 

3,0 

1,0 

-5,0 

-7,0 

5,0 

4,0 

3,0 

2,0 

1,0 

0,0 

0,5 

150 

-1,0 

155 160 165 170 175 180 185 190 195 200 

0,4 

-2,0 

t (sec) 

1,0 

0,9 

0,8 

0,7 

0,6 

0,3 

0,2 

0,1 

Torque coefficient*10 

0,0 

AcAf (m/s2) 

10*Kq 

170 175 180 185 190 195 200 205 210 215 2200,5 

t (sec) 

1,0 

0,9 

0,8 

0,7 

0,6 

0,4 

0,3 

0,2 

0,1 

0,0 

AcAf (m/s2) 

10*Kq

4000 

3500 

Q(kNt*m) 

Acceleration 

amplitude 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

A Model output: Torque prediction 

Torque QA 

Max. acceleration 

t 

tB-delay 

tC-delay 

tD-delay 

Torque QB 

B 

Torque QC 

C 

Torque QD 

D 

Propeller 

Torque 

Demand 

approx. 4-8 sec ahead in time 

Vertical 

Acceleration 

time 

Events 

Model input: Aft vertical acceleration, Torque and Torque slope 

• Torque increases to a 

max value QB at tB • Torque decreases Series2 to a 

min value QC at tC • Torque returns to a 

value Q D at t D , where 

the next acceleration 

max occur 

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 

t(sec) 

Series1

Acceleration unit testing 

Objective 

• To calibrate the acceleration unit by on-board ship tests 

Procedure 

• Use an accelerometer hooked to a portable PC and record 

measurements of hull aft vertical acceleration 

• Test arrangement on a model ship

Planned on-board installation

On-board measurements 

Input signals: 

• Propeller shaft torque 

• Propeller shaft speed 

• Aft vertical acceleration 

Signal processing and torque 

prediction algorithm 

Output signal: 

• Torque demand approx. 

4-8 sec ahead in time

A1 

Torque/Power Meter 

Vertical 

Acceleration 

A: INPUT SIGNALS 

A2 

On-board measurements 

DAQ 

Software 

Propeller 

Model 

B: PROCESSING BOARD 

Torque 

Demand 

C: OUTPUT

1 

0 

-1 

3500 

3000 

2500 

Vertical Acceleration 

2000 

0 30 60 

30 

Torque 

60 

2800 

2750 

2700 

2650 

2600 

2550 

2500 

2450 

2800 

2750 

2700 

2650 

TORQUE PREDICTION 6 SEC 

TORQUE PREDICTION 10 SEC 

2600 

30 32 34 36 38 40 

2400 

50 52 54 56 58 60

Hardware: 

• Kistler K-Beam 8304A2 Capacitive Accelerometer 

• Accelerometer Interface Kistler 1572 

• Signal Terminal Box 

• Portable PC with DAQ board (NI DAQCard-700) 

Software: 

• In-house LABView based

Video of acceleration measurements


ENGINE DYNAMIC LOADING PREDICTIONS 



Turbocharger: ABB VTR 714

Compressor surge model 

extended compressor characteristic 

deep surge 

pressure 

ratio 

mild surge 

surge line 

• Unsteady flow compressor model developed 

• Implemented in the ABB simulation code (SiSy) 

• Further improvements needed 

mass 

flow

Video of compressor surge


PROPULSION SYSTEM SIMULATION 



Objective 

• To develop a model for the propulsion simulation in 

transient conditions (variable load) to be used in testing 

various engines control scenarios 

Procedure 

• Use the MoTher, TAPCODE and SiSy engine 

performance codes to perform steady-state simulation 

of the ACME engine 

• Tune sub-models where necessary 

• Develop control schemes based on simulation results 

• Perform engine transient simulations

MAN-B&W 

NTUA 

ABB 

MOTHER 

SiSy 

TAPCODE 

Load variation with high amplification 

and low damping. Compressor is surging !!


DEFINITION OF ADAPTIVE CONTROL OPTIONS 



Conventional Engine Layout 

TACHO 

PROPELLER 

LOAD 

NORD 

SPEED SETPOINT 

PI 

GOVERNOR 

9K90MC 

FUEL INDEX PUMPS

Objective 

• To propose improved control scenarios also 

considering the propeller torque prediction availability 

Procedure 

• Identification of control issues 

• Investigation of possible control options through 

simulation

Control Schedule Test Environment 

Aft Ship Vertical 

Acceleration 

HSVA DATA 

Propeller Torque 

Coefficient, K Q 

PROPELLER 

MODEL 

Predicted Torque Demand 

~(t+5sec) 

Shaft Speed 

LOAD MODEL ENGINE MODEL 

Shaft Torque 

CONTROL 

SYSTEM 

Engine Status 

Engine 

Control

Control issues 

• Overspeed protection during fast load drops 

• Excessive speed during slow load fluctuation 

• Heavy running due to weak load variations 

• Compressor stall during acceleration of the 

propulsion plant

Overspeed protection 

• 

• 

Reduction Load 

Combination 

prediction of I-term 

of 

feedforward 

the 

gain 

above 

for 

strategies 

positive acceleration 

for wider 

protection range 

Max Speed d 

Relative Kq, Engine Speed and Fuel Rack Position 

1.4 


Max Speed 1.3 with Feed Forward 

Min Index with Feed Forward 

Gain of 40, 60 and 80% Speed 

Gain of 40, 60 and Rel. 80% Kq 

Rel. Speed(s) 

Rel. Kq 

1.2 

1.2 

110% 

1.1 1.07 1.07 

80% 

108% 

1 

1 

70% 

106% 

104% 

102% 

100% 

98% 

0 

0.8 0.9 

0.8 

0.6 

0.7 

Fuel Rack 

Position 

0.4 0.6 

Rel. Fuel Rack Position(s) 

20% 

0.5 

0.2 

0.4 

10% 

Rel. Kq 

Rel. Kq 

WITH High Speed Limiter 

WITHOUT 

WITH Load 

High 

Feed 

Speed 

Forward 

Limiter 0% 

WITHOUT Load Feed Forward 

0 

0.350 

Prediction 55 Time 60 

50 55 60 

65 

65 

70 

70 

75 

75 

Seconds 

Seconds 

80 

80 

85Prediction 90 Time 95 

85 90 95 

100 

100 

0.1 

0.2 

0.3 

0.4 

0.5 

1 

Min INdex 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

0 

0.1 

0.2 

0.3 

0.4 

0.5 

1






propulsion plant

Excessive speed 

• Adaptive speed setpoint 

1.03 

1.02 

1.01 

1 

0.99 

0.98 

0.97 

0.96 

0.95 

0.94 

Rel. Speed WITH Adaptive Setpoint 

Rel. Effective Speed Setpoint 

Rel. Speed WITHOUT Adaptive Setpoint 

0.93 

0 50 100 150 

Seconds 

200 250






propulsion plant

Heavy running 

• Raised fuel index limiters in combination with soft 

limiters for speed setpoint conditioning 

1 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

Rel. Speed 

Rel. Fuel Index 

WITH Algorithm 

0.5 

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 

1 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

Rel. Speed 

Rel. Fuel Index 

WITHOUT Algorithm 

0.5 

0 50 100 150 

Seconds 

200 250 300






propulsion plant

Turbocharger 

• Fuel index gradient limiter as a function of outlet 

temperature time derivative 

• Speed Significant setpoint load increase fluctuation 

1.3 1.4 

1.2 

1.2 

1.1 

1 

1 

0.9 

0.8 

0.8 

0.6 

0.7 

0.4 

0.6 

0.2 

0.5 


Compr. Flow / Compr. Flow on Surge Compr. Line Flow / Compr. Flow on Surge Line 

Fuel Rack 

Position 

Rel. Kq 

Speed 

Rel. Fuel KqRack 

Speed Setpoint 

WITH Position Surging Protection WITH Surging Protection 

WITHOUT Surging Protection WITHOUT Surging Protection 

0.40 

1550 55 2060 65 2570 75 

Seconds 

3080 85 3590 95 40 100

Torque Prediction Based Control 

Schemes 

• Generic optimal control scheme using performance 

indices including load tracking 

• Preventive Control Action that adjusts speed setpoint 

to avoid excessive overspeed

Optimal control 

Choice of desired cost function 

(including speed error and fuel index displacement) 

Solution of constrained optimization problem 

(system dynamics) 

Calculation of full fuel index schedule 

for the prediction time interval

Torque Prediction Based Control 

Schemes 

• Generic optimal control scheme using performance 

indices including load tracking 

• Preventive Control Action that adjusts speed setpoint 

to avoid excessive overspeed

Preventive control 

Propulsion system dynamics 

(Expected max. overspeed) α (Expected max. undertorque) 

Calculation of “safe” fuel index value

Simulation of control schedules 

TACHO 

ESPD2 

PROPELLER 

LOAD 

ESPD 

SPEED NORD 

SETPOINT 

ESPD1 

PI 

GOVERNOR 

RPM LIMITER 

SCAVENGING LIMITER 

FUEL RACK LIMITER 

LIMITER BLOCK 

AND DEAD BANDS 

••ORDERED ORDERED SPEED: SPEED: 89.0 89.0 RPM RPM 

••INITIAL INITIAL FUEL FUEL RACK RACK POSITION: POSITION: 0.85 

0.85 


ACTUATOR 

FUEL INDEX PUMPS

CONTROL STRATEGY 

• PI controller 

• Adjustable P and I gains dependent on the engine 

speed error range interval 

• Control action gain discrimination dependent on 

the sign of the differential 

CONTROL STRATEGY WITH 

engine speed error 

PREVENTIVE ACTION 

• Linear overspeed penalty function 

• Superimpose knowledge of the 

• Engine speed and scavenging limiters 

propeller future torque demand 

• Low-pass filtering of the required speed command 

on the controller actions, to avoid 

signal 

engine overspeeds and generate 

smoother rack movements

SIMULATIONS 

• Fixed rack position 0.85 

• PI controller without torque prediction 

• PI controller with torque prediction 

• Clean vs. “dirty” compressor 

ENGINE LOAD (taken from HSVA data) 

10 Kq 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

Time ( sec ) 

10Kq variation used for the simulation tests

Engine Speed (RPM) 

Torque (KN m) 

105 

100 

95 

90 

85 

80 

4500 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

Propeller 

Engine 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

Time (sec) 

Variation of engine speed and torque and load torque (fixed rack position at 0.85) 

Compressor map (fixed rack position at 0.85) 

Pressure Ratio 

Fixed rack position 0.85 

4.5 

4.0 

3.5 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 

Corrected air volumetric flow rate (m^3/s)

Rack Position 


Torque (KN m) 

1.0 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

105 

100 

95 

90 

85 

80 

4500 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

Propeller 

Engine 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

Time (sec) 

Simulation Results (PI control without load prediction) 

PI controller without torque prediction 


4.5 

4.0 

3.5 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 

Corrected air volumetric flow rate (m^3/s) 

Compressor map (PI control)

Rack Position 


Torque (KN m) 

1.0 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

105 

100 

95 

90 

85 

80 

4500 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

Propeller 

Engine 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

Time (sec) 

Simulation Results (PI control with load prediction) 

PI controller with torque prediction 


4.5 

4.0 

3.5 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 


Compressor map (PI control with load prediction)

Mass Flow Rate (kg/s) 

T/C Speed ( RPM ) 

Rack Position 


Torque (KN m) 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

12000 

11000 

10000 

9000 

1.0 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

105 

100 

95 

90 

85 

80 

4500 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

Clean Compressor 

Dirty Compressor 

Clean Compressor 

Dirty Compressor 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

Time (sec) 

Propeller 

Engine 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 

Time (sec) 

Clean vs. “dirty” compressor 



4.5 

4.0 

3.5 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

4.5 

4.0 

3.5 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 


5 10 15 20 25 30 35 

Corrected air volumetric flow rate (m^3/s)

Evaluation of results 

• Sensitive PI governor results to small engine speed 

fluctuation 

• Speed setpoint adjustment adaptation 

• Determination of unique set of constants for the PI 

governor 

• Proper utilization of propeller torque prediction can lead 

to a reduction of overspeed risk in near MCR engine 

operation

Project Mid-term 

Handling of ‘management crises’ 

Redestribution Withdrawal of of budget from to cover the consortium engineering in installation month 18, and 

electrical following Cancellation Four joined month work completion 

the 

of to project the be 

consortium 

performed of extension WP3, 

from 

due newbuilding on-board to to 

month accommodate internal the 

18 

due Hapag-Lloyd 

offering 

staffing to Gdansk vessel a similar 

containership 

containership 

problems. shipyard schedule bankruptsy Remaining (Third ‘Shanghai 

for on-board Contract peripheral Express’ 

tests Amendment (First 

by work STN 

Contract 

redistributed April Atlas 1999). Elektronik 

Amendment 

within 

(Second 

September 

the consortium Contract 

1997). 

and Amendment related task November fully completed 1998). as planned 

(First Contract Amendment September 1997).

Engine and shipbuilding

MAN B&W 9K90MC engine 

Power: 55980 Bhp 

94 RPM 

Pmax: 141 bar 

PE: 18 bar 

SFOC: 128g/Bhph 

SHANGHAI EXPRESS 

4600 TEU Container Vessel 

Length: 281.6 m 

Breadth: 32.5 m 

Deadweight: 66771 MT 

Service speed: 24 kts

9K90MC - SHOP TEST 

Verification of: 

• Engine Performance 

• SFOC 

• Turbocharger performance 

• Turbocharger efficiency 

• Thermal load on engine 

• IMO Regulations 

Atomizers tested for: 

• Minimum thermal load on engine 

• Fuel optimization 

• NOx optimization for expected 

IMO regulation

Video of shop trials


TEST-BED EVALUATION OF CONTROL SCHEMES 



Objectives 

To design the ACME governor through simulation of 

the complete propulsion system under rapidly varying 

load (heavy weather conditions)

Control system integration 



Existing 


MAN B&W 

9K90MC-VI

The ACME Governor 

Hardware platform specifically developed by MAN B&W for 

marine use 

• CPU 32-bit 16MHz Motorola 68332 microprocessor 

• Built-in Time Processing Unit (TPU) for speed tracking 

• Serial RS232/485 interface 

Embedded software in two layers 

• Basic Electronic System (BES) incorporating the Real Time 

Operating System (RTXC) 

• Algorithms for main engine speed regulation

ACME governor integration 

L ˆ 

Existing 


PID 

Controller 

Prediction-based 

Controller 

TP System 


GOVERNOR 

y PID 

+ 

y PBC 

y 

PROPULSION 

SYSTEM 

L 

N


Aft Ship 

Acceleration 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 

Shaft Speed 

Shaft Torque 



I / F 

2 

Existing 




TP system functionality 

• Data acquisition 

• Data processing processing - Speed setpoint conditioning 

• Data logging logging - Database update


Aft Ship 

Acceleration 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 

Shaft Speed 

Shaft Torque 



I / F 

2 

Existing 









Aft Ship 

Acceleration 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 

Shaft Speed 

Shaft Torque 



I / F 

2 

Existing 









Aft Ship 

Acceleration 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 

Shaft Speed 

Shaft Torque 



I / F 

2 

Existing 




TP system 

functional diagram 

Accelerometer 

AFT BULKHEAD 

KISTLER AID-4 

Vertical Ship 

Acceleration 

(analog, -/+2 V) 

INTERFACE 

MODULE 1 

SHAFTING 

SYSTEM 

Shaft 

Speed 

(analog, 

4-20 mA) 

HOPPE 

Torque/Power Meter 

Typ MIP 

RS-485 

Serial Link 

Shaft 

Torque 

(analog, 

4-20 mA) 

SIGNAL 

PROCESSING 

UNIT 

Industrial 

Single-board 

PC 

LOG 

Hard 

Disk 

Drive 

AID-4 

AC POWER SOURCE 

MAIN SWITCHBOARD ROOM 

INTERFACE MODULE 2 

Validation 

Signal 

(digital, 

0-24 V) 

Requested 

Fuel Rack 

Position 

(analog, 4-20 mA) 

RS-485 

Serial Link 

AID-4 



I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 

Speed setpoint 

decrease rate 




Speed setpoint 

decrease rate 

Boost Pressure 

(analog, 4-20 mA ) 

I / F 

2 


9K90MC-VI 

Engine Speed setpoint 


Engine Fuel Rack Position 


Existing 

Governor

Signal processing unit (SPU) 

Hardware 

• Industrial single-board PC 

• CPU 5x86/133MHz 

• 4 Mbytes DRAM 

• 1.4 Gbytes hard disk 


• Embeddable version of the TP algorithm 

• DAQ, pre-processing and communications 

software 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 



I / F 

2 



Existing 


DAQ and transmission 

system (AID-4) 

Hardware 

•CPU AT90S8515/11 MHz with watchdog timer 

• 512 Kbytes RAM 


•Programmable low pass filter and gain amplifier 

• DAQ and communications software 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 



I / F 

2 



Existing 



Aft Ship 

Acceleration 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 

Shaft Speed 

Shaft Torque 



I / F 

2 

Existing 





ON BOARD INSTALLATION AND TRIALS 






Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

Scenario I 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

Scenario I 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

Scenario I 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

Scenario II 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

Scenario II 

Possible Installation Scenarios

Scenario III 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

Scenario I 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

Scenario I 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

Scenario II 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

Scenario IV 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

Possible Installation Scenarios 

Scenario IV 

Selected Installation Scenarios 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

Scenario III 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 




Torque 

Prediction 

System 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

PASSIVE 

RECORDING 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION 

Scenario IV 

ACTIVE 

INTERVENTION


Aft Ship 

Acceleration 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 

Shaft Speed 

Shaft Torque 



I / F 

2 

Standard 




STN installation drawings

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 

Interface Module 1: 

Data acquisition 

- Acceleration 

- Torque 

- (RPM) 

Shaft 



I / F 

2 



Existing 


Aft bulkhead

I / F 

1 


S 

P 

U 





Existing 


- Data acquisition/transmission 

Signal Processing Unit (SPU) 

I / F 

2 

- TP algorithm 

- Storage 

Main switchboard room 

TP system

I / F 

1 


S 

P 

U 



Data acquisition 

- Boost pressure 

- Actual fuel rack position 

- Engine speed setpoint 

- ACME governor rack setpoint 

Data transmission 

- Speed setpoint decrease rate 

- Validation signal 

Signal Processing Unit (SPU) 

- TP algorithm 

- Storage 

I / F 

2 



Existing 



TP system


ACME governor 

I / F 

1 

S 

P 

U 



I / F 

2 



Existing 


Engine room overview


FULL SCALE SEA-PASSAGE TESTS 



Shanghai Express route 

Antwerp 

Bremerhaven 

Port Said 

Hong Kong 

Singapore 

Pusan

Engine prototype system testing 

Main Engine

Engine prototype system testing 

Shaft tunnel

Shanghai Express route 

• Eight months total logging period with more than 90% 

unattended operation of the Data Acquisition system. 

• Total data logged amount to more than 3.5GB disk 

space in binary compressed format.

Objectives 

•• Acquire on-line measurements of both aft ship ship vertical 

acceleration and shaft torque and other engine variables 

• Determine speed setpoint decrease rate

Recorded variables 

Manual log 

Weather conditions - Sea condition 

Real time data acquisition 

Propeller shaft torque 

Propeller shaft speed 

Aft ship vertical acceleration 

Engine boost pressure 


Engine speed setpoint 

Requested fuel rack position 

Actual fuel rack position at fuel pump

Bridge video

-0.15 


Manual log 

-0.21 

Weather conditions - Sea condition 

Real time data acquisition 

-0.25 

Propeller shaft torque 

-0.27 


1600.00 

1400.00 


1200.00 


1000.00 

Engine speed setpoint 

800.00 


Acc. [m/sec 2 ] 

-0.17 

-0.19 

-0.23 

0.0 

8.8 

600.00 

Actual fuel rack position at fuel pump 

Torque [kN*m] 

17.6 

26.4 

400.00 

35.2 

44.0 

0.0 

9.2 

52.8 

18.4 

61.6 

70.4 

27.6 

Speed [RPM] 

36.8 

55.00 

50.00 

79.2 

88.0 

45.00 

40.00 

35.00 

30.00 

46.0 

55.2 

96.8 

105.6 

64.4 

114.4 

123.2 

73.6 

82.8 

92.0 

29-05-99 

11:45-11:50 

132.0 

140.8 

101.2 

149.6 

110.4 

158.4 

167.2 

Time [sec] 

119.6 

128.8 

29-05-99 

29-05-99 11:45-11:50 

11:45-11:50 

176.0 

184.8 

0.0 

8.4 

16.8 

25.2 

33.6 

42.0 

50.4 

58.8 

67.2 

75.6 

84.0 

92.4 

100.8 

109.2 

117.6 

126.0 

134.4 

142.8 

151.2 

159.6 

168.0 

176.4 

184.8 

193.2 

201.6 

210.0 

218.4 

226.8 

235.2 

243.6 

252.0 

260.4 

268.8 

277.2 

285.6 

294.0 

138.0 

147.2 

193.6 

202.4 

156.4 

Time [sec] 

Time [sec] 

165.6 

211.2 

220.0 

174.8 

184.0 

228.8 

237.6 

193.2 

202.4 

246.4 

255.2 

211.6 

220.8 

264.0 

272.8 

230.0 

239.2 

281.6 

290.4 

248.4 

257.6 

299.2 

266.8 

276.0 

Acc 

285.2 

294.4 

Speed 

Torque


1.18 

1.16 

56.00 

Manual log 

1.14 

29-05-99 

52.00 Weather conditions - Sea condition 

Fuel rack Requested [%] Fuel Setpoint Rack [%] speed Boost [%] pressure [bar] 

54.00 

59,00 

57,00 

1.12 

50.00 

52.00 

55,00 

48.00 

50.00 

1.10 Real time data acquisition 

46.00 53,00 

48.00 

1.08 

44.00 Propeller 51,00 shaft torque 

46.00 

42.00 


1.06 44.00 49,00 

40.00 


0.0 

42.00 

47,00 

38.00 

8.8 

17.6 

26.4 

Engine 40.00 boost pressure 

45,00 

0.0 

38.00 Engine speed setpoint 

0,0 

8.6 

9,2 

0.0 

9.0 

17.2 

18,4 

25.8 

27,6 

18.0 

27.0 

35.2 

34.4 

36,8 

44.0 

43.0 

46,0 

36.0 

45.0 

52.8 


51.6 

55,2 

61.6 

60.2 

64,4 

70.4 

54.0 

63.0 

68.8 

73,6 

79.2 

77.4 

82,8 

29-05-99 

11:45-11:50 

Actual fuel rack position at fuel pump 

88.0 

86.0 

72.0 

81.0 

92,0 

96.8 

105.6 

94.6 

103.2 

101,2 

110,4 

90.0 

99.0 

114.4 

123.2 

111.8 

120.4 

119,6 

128,8 

108.0 

117.0 

132.0 

29-05-99 

11:45-11:50 

140.8 

149.6 

129.0 

137.6 

29-05-99 

11:45-11:50 

158.4 

167.2 

Time [sec] 

138,0 

147,2 

146.2 

154.8 

Time [sec] 

156,4 

165,6 

Time [sec] 

126.0 

135.0 

11:45-11:50 

144.0 

153.0 

176.0 

184.8 

163.4 

172.0 

174,8 

184,0 

162.0 

Time [sec] 

180.6 

189.2 

193.6 

202.4 

193,2 

202,4 

171.0 

180.0 

197.8 

206.4 

211.2 

220.0 

211,6 

220,8 

189.0 

198.0 

215.0 

223.6 

228.8 

237.6 

230,0 

239,2 

207.0 

216.0 

232.2 

240.8 

246.4 

255.2 

248,4 

257,6 

225.0 

234.0 

249.4 

258.0 

264.0 

272.8 

266,8 

276,0 

243.0 

252.0 

266.6 

275.2 

281.6 

290.4 

285,2 

294,4 

261.0 

270.0 

299.2 

283.8 

292.4 

279.0 

288.0 

Boost pres. 

Setpoint 

Req. Fuel Rack 

297.0 

Fuel Rack

On board testing 

Main switchboard room video

Typical logged signal fragments 

Disk #1 24/2/1999 23:45 - 23:59 

Shaft Speed (rpm) 

Shaft Torque (kNm) 

95 

94 

93 

92 

91 

90 

3400 

3300 

3200 

3100 

0.5 

0.0 

-0.5 

-1.0 

Vertical Acc. (m/s/s) 3000 

Shaft Torque 

Shaft Speed 


0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 

Sample Number


Disk #2 4/3/1999 17:00 - 17:15 



80 

79 

78 

77 

76 

75 

74 

3000 

2500 

2000 

0.3 

0.2 

0.1 

0.0 

-0.1 

-0.2 

-0.3 

-0.4 

-0.5 

1500 

Vertical Vertical Acc. (m/s/s) 

Shaft Torque 

Shaft Speed 


0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 

Sample Number


Disk #3 4/5/1999 12:15 - 12:31 


Shaft Shaft Torque Torque (kNm) (kNm) 

Vertical Vertical Acc. (m/s/s) 

50 

45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

0.0 

-0.1 

-0.2 

Shaft Torque 

Shaft Speed 


0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 

Sample Number 

Reversal


Disk #3 4/5/1999 12:15 - 12:31 

Speed Setpoint (rpm) 

Fuel Rack (%) 

Boost Pressure (bar) 

55 

50 

45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

1.2 

1.1 


Fuel Rack Position 


0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 

Sample Number 

Actual 

Requested


Disk #4 5/7/1999 23:35 - 23:51 



Vertical Acc. (m/s/s) 

45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

-0.1 

-0.2 

-0.3 

-0.4 

Shaft Torque 

Shaft Speed 


0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 

Sample Number


Disk #4 5/7/1999 23:35 - 23:51 


Fuel Rack (%) 


45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

1.1 




0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 

Sample Number 

Actual 

Requested


Disk #5 13/10/1999 05:25 - 05:41 



87 

86 

85 

84 

83 

82 

81 

80 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

0.0 

-0.1 

-0.2 

-0.3 

Vertical Acc. (m/s/s) 2000 

Shaft Torque 

Shaft Speed 


0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 

Sample Number


Disk #5 13/10/1999 05:25 - 05:41 


Fuel Rack (%) 


95 

90 

85 

90 

80 

70 

60 

2.5 

2.4 

2.3 

2.2 

2.1 

2.0 




0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 

Sample Number 

Actual 

Requested

Typical torque prediction analysis 

2 March 1999 

Event Max 

Error 

Average StDev Duration Weight Cor. Avg Cor. StDev 

1 16.63% 7.8% 6.4% 10.9 3.9% 3.7% 3.0% 

2 16.39% 8.5% 6.0% 10.9 3.9% 4.0% 2.9% 

3 8.21% 3.3% 3.0% 12.7 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 

4 7.66% 4.8% 2.2% 12.9 4.6% 2.7% 1.2% 

5 5.10% 2.1% 1.5% 9.9 3.6% 0.9% 0.6% 

6 9.65% 5.1% 2.8% 19.9 7.2% 4.4% 2.5% 

7 

8 

5.98% 

17.95% 

1.6% 

7.3% 

1.8% 12.7 4.6% 

03/03/99 

7.8% Event 4 77.9 - Duration 8.38 sec 28.2% 

0.9% 02/03/99 1.0% 

Event 24.7% 10 - Duration: 8.8 sec 26.4% 

9 

10 

14.31% 

3160.0 

14.37% 

7.4% 

8.7% 

4.0% 

3300.0 

4.8% 

34.7 

8.8 

12.5% 

3.2% 

11.1% 

3.3% 

6.0% 

1.8% 

11 12.64% 3140.0 3.9% 2.8% 3200.0 56.7 20.5% 9.6% 6.8% 

12 13.44% 5.5% 4.9% 8.8 3.2% 2.1% 1.9% 

3120.0 

3100.0 11.86% 5.5% 4.0% 3000.0 276.6 5.8% 4.6% 

Torque [kN*m] 

3080.0 

3060.0 

3040.0 

3020.0 

3000.0 

6.60 

7.04 

7.48 

7.92 

8.36 

Torque [kN*m] 

8.80 

3100.0 

2900.0 

2800.0 

2700.0 

2600.0 

2500.0 

9.24 

2400.0 

9.68 

2767.6 

10.12 

2768.1 

10.57 

11.01 

Time [sec] 

2768.5 

2769.0 

11.45 

2769.4 

11.89 

12.33 

2769.9 

12.77 

2770.4 

13.21 

2770.8 

13.65 

2771.3 

14.09 

2771.8 

14.53 

2772.2 

14.98 

Time [sec] 

2772.7 

Mes 

Prd 

2773.1 

2773.6 

2774.1 

2774.5 

2775.0 

2775.4 

2775.9 

2776.4 

Prd 

Mes

Achievements 

• Successful ACME prototype governor integration. 

• Data Acquisition system installation and operation . 

• Extensive on-board measurements


RECOMMENDATIONS 



TP algorithm improvement 

• TP system only partially successful in predicting 

propeller demand load. 

• New methodology, implementing neural nets 

technology, proposed for propeller torque 

demand prediction.


Vessel’s structural vibration bandwidth 

Interference to Aft Vertical Acceleration Signal 

Advanced signal 

pre-filtering

TP algorithm extension 

Advanced pre-filtering


Vessel’s structural vibration bandwidth 

Interference to Aft Vertical Acceleration Signal 

Advanced signal 

pre-filtering 

Extension to 

“acceleration-free” version

TP algorithm extension 

Artificial Neural Nets 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

5000 5100 5200 5300 5400 5500 5600 5700 5800

PART 5 

CONCLUSIONS AND 

EXPLOITATION PLAN 


Project conclusions 

• ACME project fully completed contractually. 

• Managerial crises were successfully handled. 

• Project was especially successful in 

�� developing hardware for on-board installation installation. 

�� conducting a complete range of full-scale 

shipboard tests.

Technical achievements 

•• Adaptive control strategies developed for large 

marine marine engines. engines. 

•• Novel Novel control strategies strategies were were implemented on the 

ACME prototype governor which after extensive 

testing to Class standards was installed on-board 

ships. ships. 

• Long term on-board operation with the ACME 

governor resulted in large amount of validation data.

Exploitation items 

• A new Electronic Control Unit (ECU), developed 

by MAN-B&W, leading to enhanced marine 

diesel engine control. 

• Software and associated hardware for real 

time propeller load prediction on-board ship.

ACME Governor MAN B&W 9K90MC-VI - Laboratory of Marine ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?