Condition Assessment Program (CAP)
Raising Safety, Opportunity and Values
IR-CAP - GUIDELINES
for “Tankers”
Published By:
Indian Register of Shipping
Marine Advisory Services
52A, Adi Shankaracharya Marg,
Opp. Powai Lake,
Mumbai – 400 072
IR-CAP- GUIDELINES for “TANKERS”
Published – November 2013
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, including photocopying and recording, without the prior written
consent of INDIAN REGISTER OF SHIPPING
nkers”
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Index
Section 1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................4 A. Indian Register of Shipping Condition Assessment Programme (IR-CAP) ...........4 B. IR-CAP Ratings ......................................................................................................4 C. Industry Requirements for CAP ............................ Error! Bookmark not defined. D. Transparency, Interface with classification and flag state .....................................5 E. IR-CAP Procedures ...............................................................................................6 Section 2. HULL STRUCTURE .......................................................................................8 A. General ..................................................................................................................8 B. Scope of CAP Hull structure surveys.....................................................................8 C. CAP Hull Rating Methodology ............................................................................ 14 D. Guidelines for overall Hull Structural condition rating ......................................... 16 E. Final CAP Rating for Hull Structure ..................................................................... 18 F. CAP Hull Structure Reporting ............................................................................ 18 Section 3. MACHINERY AND CARGO SYSTEMS ................................................... 20 A. General ............................................................................................................... 20 B. Operational Condition Surveys, Scope and Rating Criteria ............................... 20 C. Machinery and Cargo Systems Groups, Machinery Sub Groups and Machinery
Elements ............................................................................................................. 24 D. Operational Condition Ratings Assessment ....................................................... 24 E. CAP Rating Guidelines for Rating of Machinery and Cargo Systems & Fittings 26 F. Global Rating for Maintenance ........................................................................... 26 G. CAP Rating for Machinery and Cargo System & fittings .................................... 27 Section 4. “IR CAP Thickness Measurements Guidelines”
(Annexure – I)...... 28 A. Requirement for standard extent of Thickness Measurements .......................... 28 B. Standard Extent of Thickness Measurements .................................................... 28 C. Reduced Extent of Thickness Measurements .................................................... 28 D. Important Notes: ................................................................................................. 28 Page 3 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
speed, fuel oil consumption rate or cargo and
ballast pump capacities
Section 1. GENERAL
A. Indian Register of Shipping Condition
Assessment Programme (IR-CAP)
1.
General
• IR-CAP is a voluntary and independent
verification of the actual technical condition of
a ship’s Hull structure, Machinery and Cargo
system
• IR-CAP can be applied to all types of
Tankers.
• Is supplementary to the scope of classification
• Provides a comprehensive survey report in
an easily accessible and understandable
format, which includes observations, ratings
and photographic records
• Is application of 4 point rating system that
easily identifies the condition, reliability and
maintenance standard associated with the
vessels , Hull structure , Machinery and
Cargo systems or sub-system,
being
assessed
• Confirm the ship’s condition to interested
parties like charters, shippers and terminal
operators as an important
tool for risk
assessment
• It is an independent assessment of the
vessel's condition, which can be used to
advertise the vessel to prospective buyers,
charterers, terminal receivers, underwriters
or other parties
• Is not limited to IR classed vessels. IR-CAP
services can be applied to any other classed
vessels.
• Is not an endorsement or negation of
classification
• Is not a substitute for Class Surveys of ships
• Will not affect the classification process
• Will not alter or interfere with the application
of the Class Society’s rules and/or of the
applicable Statutory Requirements
• Does not cover assessment of items and
systems covered by statutory regulations
such as life saving appliances, navigational
equipment, communication equipment etc
• Does not make any judgment pertaining to
other possible charter party items such as
B. IR-CAP Ratings
IR-CAP rates the vessel in accordance with a
rating scale from 1(very good) to 4 (poor).
1.
CAP Hull structure ratings
The CAP Hull structure ratings have the
following description:
a.CAP 1 – Very Good Condition
Items examined and measured found with only
superficial reductions from "as new" or current
rule scantlings. No maintenance or repair
required.
b.CAP 2 – Good Condition
Items examined and measured found to have
deficiencies of a minor nature not requiring
correction or repair and/or found to have all
thicknesses significantly above class limits.
c. CAP 3 - Acceptable Condition
Items examined and measured either found to
have deficiencies, which do not require
immediate corrective action, or found to have
thicknesses, which although generally above
class renewal levels, do exhibit substantial
corrosion.
d.CAP 4 - Poor Condition
(Below Class minimum standard)
Items examined and measured either found to
have a deficiency or deficiencies which may
affect the ship's potential to remain in class, or
found to have, in some areas, thicknesses
which are at or below the class renewal levels.
Page 4 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
2.
the owners/management
standards.
CAP Machinery and Cargo system ratings
a. CAP 1 – Very Good Condition
company’s
own
Components and systems found with no
deficiencies affecting the safe operation and/or
normal
performance.
Maintenance
and
documentation found in very good order. No
maintenance or repair considered necessary.
b. CAP 2 – Good Condition
Components and systems found with minor
deficiencies not affecting the safe operation
and/or normal performance. Maintenance and
documentation found to be good. No immediate
maintenance or repair considered necessary.
c. CAP 3 - Acceptable Condition
Components and systems found with
deficiencies but not affecting the safe operation
and/or normal performance, Maintenance and
documentation considered to be satisfactory.
No
immediate
maintenance
or
repair
considered necessary.
D. Transparency, Interface with classification
and flag state
1.
The CAP is designed to be highly transparent
with the onus on clear and detailed report,
photographic records and certification.
(Below Class minimum standard)
2.
Components and systems found with
deficiencies affecting the safe operation and/or
normal performance. Documentation and
maintenance found to be poor. Maintenance
and repair required to reinstate serviceability
The CAP is a consultancy service and is
independent,
yet
complementary,
to
classification
3.
The CAP service is offered according to a
contract with the client and rendered to ships
with or without IR Class.
4.
Class is a continuous service based on regular
inspection and the issuing of class certificates
with specified validity periods. The CAP
declaration is issued documenting the condition
of the vessel at the time of the inspection
5.
The main purpose of CAP is to evaluate and
report the vessel’s condition above minimum
class standard and the scope for CAP is more
comprehensive than for class surveys.
6.
CAP is also independents from CAS, which is
regulatory survey on behalf of the flag state.
7.
The CAP service is offered according to a
contract with the client and rendered to ships
with or without IR Class.
8.
Class is a continuous service based on regular
inspection and the issuing of class certificates
with specified validity periods. The CAP
declaration is issued documenting the condition
of the vessel at the time of the inspection
9.
The main purpose of CAP is to evaluate and
report the vessel’s condition above minimum
d. CAP 4 - Poor Condition
Table 1: CAP Ratings
C. Industry Requirements for CAP
1.
2.
3.
The CAP report is mainly used as a tool for
documenting the technical condition towards
cargo owners and/or authorities in connection
with renewal of or entry into new charters.
The CAP report can be used for other purposes
as well, such as in connection with refinancing
and sale of the vessel, termination of
management
agreements
or
towards
underwriters.
The CAP report can also be used to establish a
sound basis for decisions on repair or
investments in order to extend the lifetime of
Page 5 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
critical machinery or system may be assessed
by the surveyor as being CAP 3 but the client’s
aim is CAP 1 for Machinery and cargo system.)
class standard and the scope for CAP is more
comprehensive than for class surveys.
10. CAP is also independents from CAS, which is
regulatory survey on behalf of the flag state.
E. IR-CAP Procedures
1.
Request for CAP Survey
a. A request for a vessel condition assessment
needed by the client concerning CAP Survey is
to be submitted using the “Survey Request
Form” provided by IRS.
b. All the defects are informed to the client’s
representative in writing and photographic
records are to be kept. If these items are
upgraded / rectified then a follow up inspection
is made and photographic records taken.
These records form a part of the final CAP
report.
b. The request can be made directly to the IRS
Head Office or any branch office.
2.
Planning of CAP Survey
a. On receipt of a request for CAP, the IRS Head
Office will contact the client to discuss his
requirement and expectation for CAP Rating.
b. On acceptance of quotation, the IRS Head
Office representative shall contact with the
client’s representative(s) to draft out the CAP
planning document (As per Survey Request
Form filled by client) which sets out the scope
and extent of CAP surveys that are to be
carried out.
c. The planning document is finalised onboard the
vessel during meetings between the CAP
surveyor and the client’s representative.
3.
Opening Meeting
a. CAP surveys begin with an opening meeting
held onboard the vessel. This meeting is held to
familiarise all the concerning parties with Indian
Register Condition Assessment Programme for
the subject vessel.
b. Following points are to be discussed during the
meeting:
4.
•
Contents of the CAP planning document
•
Scope of CAP surveys
•
Inspection arrangements
•
Safety requirements
•
CAP defects list
•
Other relevant issues.
CAP Defect List
a. During the condition assessment inspections,
IRS surveyor may find areas of Hull structure,
machinery and cargo system and their fittings
that are either defective or have been assessed
at a rating below client’s expectation. (E.g. a
5.
Closing Meeting
a. On the completion of CAP surveys, closing
meeting is held and the results of the surveys
and inspection are advised to the client’s
representative in the form of visit report.
b. If the CAP survey is carried out over several
visits, then for each time that the surveyor
completes his inspections, a meeting is held
with the client’s representative. The findings of
each survey carried out are discussed and a
defect list, where applicable, is presented at this
meeting.
c. Preliminary ratings for surveyed parts may be
presented during the closing meeting(s)
however the final CAP rating shall only be
determined after final review in IRS Head
Office.
d. It is recommended that CAP inspections are
completed in stipulated time. However, this may
not be possible due to the vessel's schedule, or
due to the type of vessel being surveyed.
Should several visits be necessary, then the
timeframe between the first inspection and the
Page 6 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
last inspection may not exceed 3 months.
Where a vessel is in lay-up, subjected to an
elongated repair timeframe or is being specially
modified, then the CAP timeframe between the
first and the last visit may be extended on
application to an agreement by IRS Head
Office.
6.
fittings and piping are to be cleaned, including
removal from surfaces of all loose accumulated
corrosion scale. Spaces are to be sufficiently
clean and free from water, scale, dirt, oil
residues, etc.
Condition Assessment Certification
Indian Register of Shipping does not assign any
validity period to the Condition Assessment
Program Certificate. They are issued to certify
that the vessel, or vessel sub-system, has a
specific CAP rating on a specific date.
Charterers may, however, choose to apply their
own acceptance periods for the certificate.
7.
Condition Assessment Reporting
a. On the completion of the condition assessment
surveys, the CAP surveyor provides a report
that details the extent of surveys carried out,
the condition of the vessel and vessel subsystems at the time of survey, details of repairs
and upgrades together with photographic
records.
b. The CAP report shall normally be issued within
the period of one month to three months from
the end of the survey, depending on the scope
of the client’s requirements for CAP survey and
certification. The CAP report is provided with
both paper and electronic copies according to
the client’s needs and requirements for
reporting.
c. The CAP report includes a summary of Hull
Structure, Machinery and Cargo System
Assessment which gives an overview of the
surveys carried out, the surveys’ findings and
the CAP rating(s) awarded.
8.
Safety during Surveys
a. The client is responsible for providing the
necessary facilities for the safe execution of the
CAP surveys.
b. The client will assume, with respect to the IRS
CAP surveyor(s), all the responsibility of an
employer for his workforce, such as to meet the
provision of applicable legislation. As a rule, the
surveyor(s) have to be constantly accompanied
during surveys by the client’s personnel.
c. Adequate ventilation and lighting is also to be
provided
for
machinery
spaces
and
accommodation areas if they are under survey.
d. In preparation for survey and to allow a
thorough examination, all spaces, machinery,
Page 7 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Section 2.
HULL STRUCTURE
A. General
1. Concept of condition assessment of hull
structure
a.IR-CAP Condition Assessment Programme for
hull structure identifies and reports on the
actual condition of the vessel’s structure. CAP
structural surveys may be carried out either in
dry-dock or with the vessel afloat.
b.The concept of condition assessment
programme for hull structure combines the full
scale modeling of the vessel obtained from
drawings on a in-house software platform along
with an extensive vessel structural survey to
produce a thorough
assessment
of the
vessel’s condition and the assignment of a
CAP rating. This concept is unique in its own
way for IR-CAP.
c. The extent of surveys required to be carried out
and the subsequent reporting requirements are
discussed and agreed with the client and forms
an input to scope of survey for the CAP
Planning document (PLAN DOC)
identified and paid particular attention by the
attending CAP surveyor.
•
Valid certificates of the ship (All statutory
certificates and class certificates)
•
Survey records of the ship (special survey,
annual survey, intermediate survey and
docking Survey)
•
Repair history of the ship (including
alterations or modifications, deficiencies
and repair methods)
•
The
latest
measurement
•
Previous CAP reports, if any
report
of
thickness
b.Plans and documents required for Hull
Structural modelling and strength assessment
of hull structures:
•
General arrangement
•
Midship Section
•
Transverse section plan
•
Construction profile
•
Longitudinal & Transverse bulkheads
•
shell expansion
•
Deck, Bottom &Inner Bottom
•
Loading manual
•
Stability Booklets
•
Records of thickness measurement at the
time of assessment
•
Other necessary plans
2. Structural Condition Assessment by Visual
Surveys
a.General
B. Scope of CAP Hull structure surveys
The scope of CAP Hull Structural survey will
cover following aspects
1. Check of documents and records onboard
a.Verification of the following documents and
records are carried out prior to the
commencement of CAP Survey in order to
clearly indicate defects found during the past
surveys, especially recurring defects, such as
fractures, cracking, excessive wastage, fatigue
damage etc. so that they can be clearly
The main purpose of the Close up, Overall and
External Survey is to detect and report
deficiencies, local corrosion and to evaluate &
report the general visual condition of the vessel.
All main structural elements in tanks and
spaces are rated independently.
b.Overall Survey, Close Up Survey and external
survey
Visual inspection of the condition of structures
are carried out, the surveyor inspect for
evidence of deformation, indents, buckling,
Page 8 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
pitting, grooving, coatings, anodes,
cracks, leakages etc.
wastage,
An overall survey of the hull structure is a
survey intended to assess and report on the
overall condition of the vessel’s hull.
A close-up survey is a survey where the details
of structural components are within the close
visual inspection range of surveyor i.e. normally
within the reach of hand. On the analysis of
UTM Report, the areas with reduced scantling
must be specially examined and subjected to
close-up survey. Close-up surveys require
access to parts of a tank/hold/void space which
are normally not within reach and this means
that safe access is to be provided for
inspection.
External Survey of Hull Structure is a survey to
assess and report on the structural condition of
vessels external envelops. Mainly it covers
examination of shell plate, bottom plate and
Deck Plate from outside.
c. Requirement for Visual Surveys (Close Up,
Overall & External Surveys)
1. The following divisions of main structural
elements cover all types of tanks and spaces
(not all elements are applicable to all tanks)
•
Deck
•
Side
•
Bottom
•
Inner bottom
•
All Longitudinal bulkheads
•
All Transverse bulkheads
• Internal structures (stringers, web frames,
girders, swash bulkheads, etc)
2. All main structural elements should be rated
independently for all tanks and Spaces (Ballast,
Cargo, Fore Peak, Aft Peak, Engine Room,
Pump Room, Void Tank etc.)
3. All Internal structures (stringers, web frames,
girders, swash bulkheads, etc) should be rated
together with plating of the main structural
element and to be covered for all types of
Tanks.
4. Longitudinal and vertical stiffeners etc. should
be rated together with plating of the main
structural element they are attached to.
5. Only visual condition as observed from inside
the tank which is rated should be taken into
account for that tank.
6. Visual condition from the other side of the main
structural element should be described and
rated in connection with other tanks or with
external structural examination.
7. All main structural elements should be rated
independently for all tanks and Spaces (Ballast,
Cargo, Fore Peak, Aft Peak, Engine Room,
Pump Room, Void Tank etc.)
8. All Internal structures (stringers, web frames,
girders, swash bulkheads, etc) should be rated
together with plating of the main structural
element and to be covered for all types of
Tanks.
9. Longitudinal and vertical stiffeners etc. should
be rated together with plating of the main
structural element they are attached to.
10. Only visual condition as observed from inside
the tank which is rated should be taken into
account for that tank.
11. Visual condition from the other side of the
main structural element should be described
and rated in connection with other tanks or with
external structural examination.
12. Survey of “Hot spots” identified from the CAP
fatigue strength assessment, if applicable.
13. Possible problem areas identified from
examination of class records and historical data
of structural failures such as cracks, buckling,
etc
Page 9 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
14. Any Additional Main and Internal Structural
Elements as considered necessary by the
attending Surveyor
15. The following areas deserve special attention
during the survey:
• End of main girders, stringers and struts with
associated brackets.
Particular attention
should be paid to the toes of brackets,
bracket ends of shell, deck and bulkhead
stiffeners.
• Connections of shell, deck and bulkhead
longitudinals to transverse web frames.
• Discontinuities in the form of misalignment or
abrupt change of section.
• Plating in way of cut or openings.
• Areas of substantial corrosion or other
suspect areas.
close up survey to illustrate an example of
vessel Compartment and individual Panel.
Similar assessment is carried out towards
external and overall surveys.
Defects found during the overall, external and
close up survey are advised to the owner's
representative using the onboard survey
document.
Should defects be found during the close-up
surveys, then these defects will be advised to
the client’s representative in writing using
survey report and photographic records will be
made. If these items are upgraded / rectified, a
follow- up inspection will be made and
photographs are taken to show the
rectifications. These defects/rectifications are
part of the final CAP report and will be taken
into consideration within the structural CAP
ratings issued at the completion of the surveys.
• Areas which show signs of damage or
buckling.
• Areas
identified
for
regular
inspection/monitoring as per vessel's critical
structure area monitoring plan.
Figure 1: Example of assessment of close up
Survey for Compartment and Panel
3. Visual Structural Condition Rating Criteria
During survey the CAP surveyor will take
representative photographs of the structural
condition to enable the client to gain an
overview and insight into the general hull
condition. These photographs are attached to
the hull structure report.
The Visual Surveys data is to be reported by
using the Survey Template created through IR
CAP Software. An example is given in figure 1
below.
Figure 1 shows a hypothetical assessment of
a.Surveys are undertaken to assess the condition
of structure as regards to deformation, indents,
buckling, pitting, grooving, coatings, anodes,
wastage, cracks, leakages and other defects.
b.Visual structural condition of the panels is
assessed during external, overall and close-up
surveys and a rating from 1 to 4 are given to
each panel in each vessel Compartment.
c. The rating for Close up, Overall and External
Surveys are based on the following parameters
•
General Condition
•
Wastage
Page 10 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
•
Coating condition
•
Anode Condition
In accordance with the rating criteria given for
hull Structure, the ratings for visual structural
condition are defined in Table 2
.Table 2: Visual Survey ratings Criteria
The allowable margin for defects is defined by
IRS minimum class requirements for ships in
Service. (Refer Survey Procedures B01-06(3),
B-08 and B-10-01&02). Acceptance criteria for
other deficiencies are divided and rated in a
similar manner.
Note: Crack of structural elements found in the
survey is to be repaired. Once the crack is
found, the rating of the structural element is not
to be higher than CAP 2
4. Wastage of Structure - Ultrasonic Thickness
Measurements (UTM)
a.General
Ultrasonic thickness measurements form a
major element in the CAP surveys of hull
structure and the analysis of these
measurements is a prominent factor to
determine the amount of wastage of each
structural element and subsequent assessment
of CAP ratings.
the CAP Surveyor.
The scope may be extended further where
substantial corrosion is found and as deemed
necessary by the surveyor, after consideration
of findings during overall and close-up surveys.
Failure to carry out thickness measurements in
accordance with this specification may prevent
completion of CAP Survey.
For areas in tanks where coatings are found to
be in GOOD condition, the extent of thickness
measurements required may be specially
considered but not less than Reduced Extent of
Thickness Measurements (Refer Annexure - I).
However, sufficient thickness measurements
shall be taken, in all cases, to confirm the actual
average condition and the maximum observed
diminution of the structure.
Towards Longitudinal Strength Calculation,
minimum three transverse sections shall be
chosen where the maximum diminution are
expected to occur or are revealed from deck
plating thickness measurements. At least one
transverse section shall include a ballast tank
within 0.4L amidships.
The thickness measurement data are to be
reported by using the UTM Template created
through IR CAP Software. An example is given
in figure 2 below.
Figure 2: UTM Template
b.Scope for thickness measurement
The requirements for thickness measurement
are to be carried out in accordance with “IR
CAP Thickness Measurements Specification”
(Ref. Annexure - I).
Thickness measurement is to be carried out by
an IRS or any other IACS member Class
Society approved UTM Firm.
The thickness measurements shall be carried
out either prior to or, concurrently with the
close- up survey. The results of thickness
measurement carried out by the approved
Company within 6 months prior to the
commencement of CAP survey may be
acceptable after the review and assessment by
Table 3: UTM Ratings for wastage of structure
Page 11 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
The full scope of the UTM measurement
requirements is to be included in the CAP
Planning Document (PLAN DOC).
5. Assessment of Structural Wastage Rating
Criteria
A statistical analysis of thickness diminutions is
generally carried out against original “as-built”
scantlings available on the reference drawings
provided by the ship owner / operator.
All UTM readings in way of panels are to be
reviewed against permissible diminution of
structure in accordance with the acceptance
criteria for wastage of structure as defined in
Table 3.
Wastages observed during Visual surveys and
wastage in accordance with UTM report are
mutually supporting towards assessment of
rating calculation.
coatings for the various Panels/ area under
consideration are defined and ratings are
awarded towards coating condition as per
Criteria given in table 4.
8. Assessment of Anode Condition (Cathodic
Protection)
Condition of anodes fitted in ballast tanks,
cargo tanks and other areas of the vessel hull is
to be reported.
During overall and close-up surveys, corrosion
protective anodes (if fitted) are to be assessed
for each panel/ each area under consideration.
Rating for condition of anode is given
depending on the amount of wastage of anode
observed during visual survey as per criteria
given in table 5
Table 4: Coating condition ratings criteria
The ratings for structural wastage applied for
each Panel are then combined with ratings for
visual Survey rating.
Note : Due to various circumstances such as
inaccurate measurement, stray pits, etc., then
there will be some deviations in UTM
readings which means that some flexibility in
assessment
is required.
Therefore an
allowance of 10% of 'errant' readings may be
allowed as long as these are randomly
scattered and no repairs are deemed necessary
by the surveyor.
6. Areas of substantial corrosion
Substantial corrosion is an extent of corrosion
such that the assessment of the corrosion
pattern indicates wastage in excess of 75% of
allowable margins, but within acceptable limits.
i.e. a CAP 3.
Table 5: Anodes condition assessment ratings criteria
If any individual panel of the vessel shows a
rating of 3 then the overall CAP rating awarded
for the vessel’s structure cannot be higher than
CAP 2.
Note: Some charterers make the stipulation
that any areas of substantial corrosion must be
repaired prior to their chartering a vessel i.e.
they only accept a vessel with all assessed
Panels of rating 2 or better.
7. Assessment of Structural Coating Condition
During the overall and close-up surveys, the
vessel's structural protective coatings are
surveyed and reported upon.
9. Strength assessment of hull structures
a.General requirements
The structural strength assessment consists of
three
parts,
i.e.
longitudinal
strength
Calculation, Buckling Strength verification and
fatigue assessment.
During Visual surveys the condition of the
Page 12 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Fatigue strength assessment may be carried
out according to the applicant’s request.
b.Longitudinal strength calculation
Minimum three representative Transverse
sections within Midship 0.4L will be selected in
the cargo hold area for longitudinal strength
calculations, so as to carry out bending strength
and buckling strength calculations.
The ship’s approved allowable still water
bending moments used in the calculations are
to be obtained from loading manual. The
representative cross sections used in this
Section are in accordance with the requirement
of Standard Extent of thickness measurement
(refer Annexure-I)
The following items will be calculated at Deck
and Bottom.
(1) Hull girder section modulus of as Built
Scantling = ‘Zo’
(2) The actual section modulus = ‘Za’
The section modules are rated according to the
criteria given below.
The lowest of the deck and bottom rating is
decisive towards the rating of the buckling
strength.
The lowest of the Longitudinal Strength rating
and buckling strength rating is decisive towards
the rating of the final Structural strength rating
d.Fatigue Assessment (optional)
Fatigue assessment is an optional service
offered in addition to the CAP whenever
requested by the client. It is an evaluation of the
fatigue performance of hull structural details
based on the “as-built” scantling design.
A simplified fatigue analysis is to be carried out
for the end connections of longitudinal stiffeners
to transverse bulkheads and web frames within
the cargo area, located on the strength deck,
side shell, bottom shell, inner bottom and
longitudinal bulkheads using IR_FLA Software.
All areas with longitudinal stiffener end
connections estimated to have fatigue life less
than the current age of the ship + 3 years have
been identified as “hot spots” where fatigue
problems may occur and close-up surveyed as
part of the CAP survey.
The lowest of the deck and bottom rating is
decisive towards the rating of the section
modulus.
c. Buckling strength calculation
The buckling capacities of panels (plate and
stiffeners combined) in deck and bottom of a
representative “as-measured” cross sections
are calculated by using the strength calculation
software.
Fatigue strength assessment is to be carried
out and completed prior to the CAP site survey
to enable the “hot spots” to be subject to closeup inspection during CAP survey. There might
be a possibility of requiring reinforcement for
“hotspots” after the close up inspection.
Rating of the buckling capacity is based on the
buckling utilization factor
‘η = σc /σcr ‘
σc - hull girder compressive stress at deck or
bottom, in N/mm2;
σcr - critical compressive buckling stress at
deck or bottom, in N/mm2.
The Buckling strength is rated according to the
criteria given below.
Page 13 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
e.Tank Testing
Tank testing, usually undertaken during the
vessel’s renewal survey or when tank
boundaries have been repaired.
Where tank testing has been carried out this is
to be reported in the CAP report. The surveyor
examines the bulkheads under test in the
adjacent tanks or holds, voids or cofferdams.
Tank testing is to be performed in compliance
with IRS Rules.
Satisfactory
tightness
is
an
essential
requirement for CAP Survey. Rating will not be
computed if this is ‘Not Satisfactory’
2. Structural Condition rating for panels and
Compartments
a.During the UTM rating calculation, individual
assessment of each panel is calculated and
given a rating towards thickness measurement.
b.The UTM rating for each panel consists of the
detailed average thickness calculation of each
element in the respective panel.
c. During External, close-up and overall surveys,
each Panel is individually assessed and given a
rating for General condition, wastage, coating
and anode conditions.
d.UTM rating and External, close-up and overall
Survey ratings are then formulated with
application of weightage factor to get individual
panel rating with the help of IR CAP Software.
e.All individual panel ratings are evaluated and
lowest panel rating will be assigned towards
structural condition rating of the Compartment
f. An overall Structural Condition rating is then
computed by averaging the ratings attributed to
the different Compartments.
Figure 3 shows a hypothetical assessment to
illustrate an example of vessel’s Compartment
and individual Panel.
Figure 3 Example of vessel’s Compartment
and Panel‘s rating Calculation
C. CAP Hull Rating Methodology
1. Vessel’s Compartments and Panels
a.To facilitate the assessment, review and
reporting of the vessel's structural condition, the
vessel structure is divided into different
“Compartments” such as cargo tanks, ballast
Tanks, Machinery Spaces, slop tanks,
cofferdams, void spaces, etc.
b.Each “Compartment” is divided into several
“panels” which are small enough to be readily
examined and evaluated by the surveyor
c. The number of Panels incorporated into a
vessel Compartment will usually be depending
on the layout of the ship and Compartment wise
Hull modelling created through IR-CAP
Software.
3. Rating Aspects for panel and Compartment
a. The IR-CAP rating system for hull structure
surveys is broadly defined in above para. to
arrive at an overall rating for the vessel’s
structure, the following aspects are rated
individually and collectively during visual survey
(Close Up, Overall and External Survey) for
panels in the compartment.
• Visual inspection of structural general conditionfor deformation, indents, buckling, cracks,
leakages, pitting, grooving, etc.
Page 14 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
• Wastage of structure- Assessment based on
ultrasonic thickness measurements (UTM) and
the percentage diminution of structure.
overall structural condition rating of 1.
Figure 5 - Illustration of overall structural
condition rating Calculation
• Visual inspection of protective coatings- For
coating breakdown, cracking, flaking, blistering,
detachment, etc.
• Visual Inspection of Anode Condition- for
wastage of anodes, etc (if applicable)
b. Individual ratings are awarded for each of the
above aspects. These individual ratings are
formulated with application of weightage factor
to compute an individual Panel rating and
further Compartment Rating through IR-CAP
Software
Figure 4: Example of Panel rating assessment
in close up Survey for Panels
The example described in Figure 6 shows the
final Overall Structural Condition rating cannot
be better than one rating grade better than the
lowest rating.
Figure 6: Illustration of revised
structural condition rating
overall
Figure 4 shows a hypothetical assessment of
close up survey to illustrate an example of
vessel Compartment and individual Panel.
Similar assessment are carried out towards
external and overall surveys
4. Overall Structural Condition Rating
To arrive at an overall structural condition rating
for the vessel’s Hull structure, the ratings
awarded for each vessel compartment are
combined and an average rating is computed.
Figure 5 shows the table of overall structural
condition rating Calculation for the vessel. The
average rating is calculated as 1.40 which is
then rounded to the nearest integer to an
The average Overall Structural condition rating
is calculated as 1.43 which is then rounded
Page 15 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
down to an overall structural condition rating of
1, however, as 'Cargo Oil Tank No. 5 (Center)'
has been awarded a rating of 3, an overall
rating of 1 cannot be awarded. This is because
the final rating cannot be better than one rating
grade better than the lowest rating. In this case,
the best Overall Structural Condition rating that
can be applied to the vessel is a rating of 2.
Note: Some charterers would not charter this
hypothetical vessel because there is existence
of a Compartment with a rating 3. If this
Compartment [Cargo Oil Tank No. 5(Center)] is
subsequently repaired/upgraded to a rating 2 or
better during survey then the overall structural
condition rating, for this hypothetical vessel,
would be updated by the surveyor to a rating 1.
5. Rating
Calculation
Cumulative Diminution
by
Note: Rating from these graphs are for information
and general overview of the whole ship
structure only, however these ratings are not
computed towards final rating of hull structure.
6. Longitudinal Strength Rating
Figure 8 shows the illustration of the
Longitudinal Strength rating Calculation through
IR-CAP Software.
Rating will be derived as per the longitudinal
strength criteria described in section 9 b above.
Longitudinal strength assessment will be
carried out within Midship 0.4 L at Minimum
three representative Transverse sections which
include at least one Ballast tank.
Figure 8: illustration of the Longitudinal
Strength rating Calculation
Percentage
a.Ratings by Percentage Cumulative Diminution
for the following Structural envelop will be
provided for general structural condition
overview of complete vessel at a glance and
will not form the basis for the final
computation of the vessels structural rating.
b.Ratings will be computed for Main Deck, Side
shell, Bottom, Inner bottom, longitudinal
bulkheads, and Transverse bulkheads. It
includes plating and its attached longitudinals
and Transverse members
Figure 6: Rating Calculation by Percentage
Cumulative Diminution.
. The lowest of the deck and bottom rating will be
assigned towards the final rating of each
Transverse Section.
The lowest of the final rating of each transverse
Section will be assigned towards the final
longitudinal strength rating of the vessel.
Structural strength rating 3 indicates that minimum
class requirements for ships in operation are
fulfilled. Structural strength rating 4 indicates
that the vessel does not fulfill IR Class
Requirement for ships in operation.
D. Guidelines for
condition rating
overall
Hull
Structural
1. The vessel structure is divided into different
“Compartments” such as cargo tanks; ballast
Tanks, Machinery Spaces, slop tanks,
cofferdams, void spaces, etc.
2. Each “Compartment” is divided into several
“panels” which are small enough to be readily
examined and evaluated by the surveyor
3. During External, close-up and overall surveys,
each Panel is individually assessed and given a
rating for General condition, wastage, coating
and anode conditions. (E.g. applicable coating
Page 16 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
condition rating 1 is for Good, 2 is for Fair and 3
is for Poor. There is no rating 4.)
4. The UTM rating for each panel consists of the
detailed average thickness calculation of each
element in the respective panel.
5. UTM, External, close-up and overall Survey
ratings are then formulated with application of
weightage factor to get individual panel rating
with the help of IR CAP Software.
6. All individual panel ratings are then evaluated
and lowest panel rating will be assigned
towards structural condition rating for the
vessel’s Compartment
7. An overall rating for the Hull structure surveys is
then computed by averaging the ratings
attributed to the different Compartments of the
hull structure.
8. Rating awarded to a Compartment is then
rounded to the nearest integer e.g. 1.42 is
rounded to 1, 1.60 is rounded to 2 and special
note 1.50 is rounded to 2
9. The rating applied
to Panel for General
condition, wastage, coating and anode
conditions will be an integer, either 1, 2, 3, or 4.
If no rating can be given then a comment is
required to be made e.g. N/F (not fitted), N/S
(not surveyed) or N/A (not applicable) etc.
10.
Where indents are prominent enough
that
they
are
mentioned in class
notes/memorandum then the rating awarded
for visual Surveys within the Panel cannot be
better than rating 2.
than one rating grade better than the lowest
rating applied to Panel for UTM, Close Up,
External and Overall Survey within that
Compartment. (e.g. if one Panel is awarded a
rating 3 for Close Up then the maximum rating
that can be applied to that Compartment is a
rating of 2.)
14.
Irrespective of the average structural rating
calculated for a Panel, the rating awarded for
that Panel cannot be better than one rating
grade better than the lowest rating applied to
Panel for General condition, wastage, coating
and anode conditions within that Panel. (E.g.
rating 3 is awarded for coating condition then
the maximum rating that can be applied to that
Panel is a rating of 2.)
15.
Irrespective of the average structural rating
calculated for the vessel as a whole, the overall
vessel structural rating awarded cannot be
better than one rating grade better than the
lowest rating applied to any vessel
Compartment (e.g. rating 3 is awarded for any
Compartment then the maximum rating that can
be applied to the vessel will be rating of 2.)
16.
Irrespective of the average
rating
calculated for a vessel Compartment, a final
overall structural rating of 4 is given to the
vessel if there is an panel that is awarded a
rating of 4 for UTM, Close Up, External and
Overall Survey and it is left un repaired.
11.
Any Panel within ballast tanks which is
awarded a coating rating of 3 shall be included
in surveyor’s onboard visit report to the client
for regular inspection
12.
Damage to plating and stiffening such as
cracking and buckling caused by in line stress
or fatigue shall automatically lead to a rating of
4 for the Panel. Depending on the structure
detail, cause of defect and complementary
aspects such as age of the vessel; repairs of
such defects may not be sufficient for some
charterers unless design modification is carried
out.
Suitable
repairs/modifications
are
discussed with the client on a case to case
basis in conjunction with the structural and
fatigue assessment.
13.
Irrespective of the average structural rating
calculated for a Compartment, the rating
awarded for that Compartment cannot be better
Page 17 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
E. Final CAP Rating for Hull Structure
1. The finalised CAP rating awarded for the
vessel’s Hull structure is based on a
comparison between the rating awarded for the
overall Hull structural Condition rating and the
rating awarded to Structural Strength Rating
b.The document gives no period of validity, but
charterers
have
introduced
their
own
acceptance periods
The finalised CAP rating for Vessel’s hull structure
shall be the Lowest of the rating values as per
the example given in Table 6.
Table 6: Final CAP Rating for Hull Structure
F. CAP Hull Structure Reporting
1. CAP Survey Defects
a.All defects which would result in Condition of
Class when performing a class survey are
included in the Defects List. These defects must
be repaired.
b.When CAP Surveys are carried out
Independently of class surveys, the CAP
surveyor will ensure that all findings below class
requirements are being repaired.
c. Defects found during the overall, external and
close up survey are advised to the owner's
representative using the onboard survey
document.
d.Should defects be found during the close-up
surveys, then these defects will be advised to
the client’s representative in writing using
survey report and photographic records will be
made. If these items are upgraded / rectified, a
follow- up inspection will be made and
photographs are taken to show the
rectifications.
e. These defects/rectifications are part of the final
CAP report and will be taken into consideration
within the structural CAP ratings issued at the
completion of the surveys.
2. CAP Certificate
a.A CAP Certificate is to be issued at completion
of the CAP project. The overall CAP Hull Rating
is stated in the Certificate along with date of
inspection and ship information
3. CAP Hull Structure Report
The CAP hull report consist the following points
•
Declaration
•
Particulars of the vessel
•
summary of findings from inspection and
Analysis
•
CAP rating summary
•
Structural strength analysis and rating
•
Descriptions, observations and ratings for
each main structural element in each tank /
space
•
Summary of visual surveys and rating
•
Descriptions of defects and repairs
•
Statistical analysis of UTM data for each
Panel in each tank / space
•
Photographic evidence of the condition in
each tank / space
•
Longitudinal strength calculation
•
Report for fatigue strength assessment if
applicable
•
Hull assessment by percentage cumulative
diminution
4. CAP Upgrade Report
a.It is the client’s decision to upgrade the
structure beyond the minimum acceptable
standard to achieve the CAP rating objective.
b.In addition to the defects included in the Survey
Report, findings considered above class
minimum requirements may affect the UTM and
Page 18 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
visual Survey rating. It is up to the owner to
decide if such findings are to be repaired.
Various levels of upgrading above class
minimum requirements may be necessary in
order to reach the client’s local or overall CAP
rating objective. Such items requiring upgrading
are described in a CAP Upgrade Report.
c. The level of detail in the CAP Upgrade Report
will vary depending of the size of the gap
between the observed condition and the client’s
desired CAP rating. In cases of considerable
deviation it will not include lengthy, specific
repair proposals. It should be noted that
upgrading is voluntary, and that it is expected
that the client takes responsibility for it. IRS and
the CAP surveyor will assist in every way
possible in order to achieve a successful
outcome of the project.
d.The rating methodology involves averaging of
several factors, and
it may be
complicated to give exact advice regarding the
level of upgrading necessary to obtain a
specific overall CAP rating. The CAP Upgrade
Report may therefore be seen as an overview
of items that must be upgraded in order to avoid
local ratings below the client’s objective, and
not as a guarantee of a specific overall rating
following upgrading of the described items. This
is particularly the case for an overall CAP rating
of 1. Achieving a CAP 2 rating overall will in
most cases be obtained by repairing defects in
the CAP survey report and upgrading of
findings in the CAP Upgrade report
5. Completion and follow-up
a.A CAP report describes the condition of the
vessel at the time of the inspection, the repair of
defects,
any
upgrading
carried
out,
Photographic evidence and the condition at the
end of the process.
b.In order to update the report and to re-evaluate
of the CAP rating for the upgraded area after
repairs and upgrading, IRS needs to re-inspect
the vessel.
c. Similarly, the UTM analysis and rating in the
CAP report must be updated if steel renewals
due to low thickness have been carried out. In
such cases the UTM report is to be updated by
the UTM company and re-submitted.
d.The final CAP Hull Structure report will be
completed based on the documented condition
of the ship at the end of the CAP process.
Page 19 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Section 3.
MACHINERY AND CARGO
SYSTEMS
A. General
1. Condition Assessment Program for Machinery
& Cargo Systems - Concept
a.IR-CAP for Machinery & Cargo Systems and
fittings is a risk-management tool designed to
assess the overall maintenance condition as
well as the actual operational condition of the
onboard Machineries & Cargo Systems and
fittings.
b.The IR-CAP surveyors assess and make use
of the records of condition monitoring and
planned maintenance systems, analyses and
reports which are already part of the day to
day maintenance management. The vessel’s
records, vibration analysis, lubricating oil
analysis, Insulation resistance test, Infrared
Thermography and other systems’ analyses are
reviewed during this process.
also be supplemented by insulation testing and
infrared Thermography.
c. In general the surveyor will not request to open
up equipment for inspection of component
parts, however, where equipment is found
disassembled for maintenance during CAP
surveys, and then this should be documented
within the Machinery and Cargo Systems &
Fittings report and a photographic record taken.
d.During the operational surveys, the surveyor
may determine to extend the scope of the
surveys e.g. the surveyor may request that a
unit be disassembled for inspection where the
item show signs of deterioration in external
condition or during function testing.
e.Defects found during operational surveys are
advised to the owners’ representative using the
onboard visit report / defect list.
2. Condition Assessment of Machinery & Cargo
Systems - Ratings
The IR-CAP rating system is broadly defined in
Section 1, para B 2, and Table 1. The CAP
rating is awarded for the vessel’s Machinery
and Cargo systems and fittings based on a
comparison between the rating awarded for the
overall operational condition of the equipment
and the global rating for maintenance which is
awarded based on an audit of the vessel’s
planned maintenance system (PMS). The CAP
rating shall be the worst of these rating values.
B. Operational Condition Surveys, Scope and
Rating Criteria
1. General
a.Indian Register of Shipping does not make use
of any weighting factors in order to calculate
final ratings but instead, it uses a group
approach whereby similar Machinery Elements
i.e. Equipment and systems are amalgamated
into ‘Machinery Groups’. This makes it easy for
reporting as well as providing a logical method
for assessment of ratings whereby each group
has equal weight in the calculation of the overall
operational condition rating.
b.Operational condition surveys consist of a
visual condition inspection, a function test and
depending on the equipment type, a review of
vibration analysis and/or a hydraulic or
lubricating oil analysis. These surveys may
2. Visual Inspection
a.Visual inspections are carried out to assess the
overall condition of each machinery unit
together with its appurtenances, bed plates and
supports. The surveyor inspects (depending on
the type of unit) for evidence of damage,
deformation,
cracks,
leakages,
coatings
breakdown, corrosion, pitting, erosion, etc.
b.During these inspections, the CAP surveyor
takes representative photographs which are
attached to the Machinery and Cargo Systems
Report to provide photographic record of the
general condition of the machinery and cargo
systems & fittings. The rating of visual
inspection is done according the criteria in
Table 7.
Page 20 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Table 7: Visual Inspection Rating Criteria
Table 8: Function Test Rating Criteria
3. Function Test
a.Function tests are carried out on equipment
under working conditions with the results
assessed against the operational criteria from
manufacturer, e.g. pumps and compressors are
to be tested run and their performance
assessed, closing appliances are to be tested
for full range of movement, machinery safety
devices are to be tested and proved, alarms
and instrumentation are to be actuated and
inspected, pipelines are to be pressure tested,
etc.
b.All propulsion and auxiliary machinery, fittings
and systems' equipment is required to undergo
function test and to be rated according to Table
8. It is recognised that some vessel's systems
such as CO2 flooding, foam systems, etc. will
not be able to have their performance fully
tested however these can be assessed by
supplemental means such as simulation, level
testing and chemical analysis.
4. Vibration Analysis
a.Vibration measurements on rotating and
reciprocating machineries will be carried out by
IRS Surveyor during vessels voyage/at
anchorage or during cargo operation as per
vessel’s availability.
b.When the vibration evaluation criteria of
machinery and equipments are provided by
manufacturers and measurements are normally
performed under the same operating and
loading conditions as per manufacturer’s
recommendation. Refer Table 9.
c. If there are excessive vibration levels that infer
significant deterioration of the equipment, then
the unit should be opened for examination of
the rotating components.
d. Where no vibration analysis is carried out for
an item of rotating machinery then the best
average rating that may be applied to that Item
is a rating 2, i.e. irrespective of the results of
any visual test, function test or lube analysis, a
rating of 1 cannot be awarded for an item of
rotating machinery if vibration analysis is not
carried out.
Page 21 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Table 9: Vibration Analysis Ratings Criteria
Table 10: Vibration Analysis Rating Criteria for
Rotating Machinery
(Where Manufacturer’s Vibration evaluation criteria are not
available)
e.In case manufacturer’s vibration evaluation
criteria of machinery and equipments are not
available, then the applicable criteria’s for the
evaluation of machine vibrations are specified
in each of the following Groups. The evaluation
criteria relate to acceptance testing and apply
only to the vibration produced by the machine
itself and not to vibration transmitted from
outside. The magnitude of observed broadband
vibration is considered to assess vibration
severity of various machines.
Groups for Rotating Machinery
Group 1: Large machines with rated power
above 300 kW; electrical machines with shaft
height ≥ 315 mm from the base.
Typical machines include turbo generators,
alternators, large electrical motors etc. These
machines normally have sleeve bearings and
an operating speed range from 120 r.p.m to
15,000 r.p.m.
Group 2: medium sized machines with rated
power above 15 kW and up to and including
300 kW; electrical machines with shaft height
160 H < 315 mm.
Typical machines are electrical motors. These
machines normally have rolling element
bearings and operating speed above 600 r.p.m.
Group 3: Pumps with multivane impellers and
with separate driver (centrifugal, mixed flow and
axial flow) with rated power above 15 kW.
Typical machines are steam turbine driven
cargo pumps, electrical driven auxiliary pumps,
forced draft fans, I.G. blowers etc. These
machines normally may have sleeve or roller
element bearings.
Group 4: Pumps with multi vane impellers and
with integrated driver (centrifugal, mixed flow
and axial flow) with rated power above 15 kW.
Page 22 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Note: Different and/or higher values may be
permissible for specific machines and operating
conditions. All such cases are subject to special
consideration.
These values apply to radial measurements on
all bearings, bearing pedestals, or housings of
machines and to axial vibration measurements
on thrust bearings.
Groups for Reciprocating Machinery
Table 11: Vibration Analysis Rating Criteria for
Reciprocating Machinery
(Where Manufacturer’s Vibration
criteria are not available)
evaluation
Note:
1. Where generators are coupled to the
flange housing of the engine the values
measured at the engine end of the generator
shall meet the values for generators
2. For vertically mounted motors the vibration
level may be increased by 50% for the top of
the motor.
5. Lubricating Oil / Hydraulic Oil Analysis
a. Where appropriate, lubricating and hydraulic
oil samples are collected from respective
systems and are to be tested for evidence of
deterioration of the oil or of equipment parts
and for suitability of the oil for continuous
usage.
Systems and equipment that would be normally
expected to have oil analysis carried out are
usually fitted with sumps or 'top up' or 'header'
tank. The result of the analysis then is then
rated according to the Table 12.
Table 12: Lubrication Analysis Ratings Criteria
b.Where hydraulic oil or lubricating oil analyses
are not carried out, for a system or for
equipment which would normally be expected
to have such analyses, then the best average
rating that may be applied to that system or
equipment is a rating 2, i.e. irrespective of the
results of a visual test, function test or vibration
analysis, a rating of 1 cannot be awarded if an
oil analysis is not carried out.
c. In general lube oil sample reports may be
accepted if they are carried out within three
months prior to the start date of CAP survey.
6. Ultrasonic Thickness Measurement
a. Although there is no requirement for UTM
measurements for Machinery and Cargo
Systems & Fittings, the CAP surveyor may
request UTM measurements for machinery
items that show evidence of deterioration during
visual examination or are subject to leaks
during pressure testing.
( e.g. - Sea Water System, Fresh Water
Systems, Machinery Foundation, Steam pipe
lines, Crude oil Cargo Lines, Heat exchangers,
Boiler and its Associated Systems, Hydrophore
Page 23 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Systems, Ballast and fire lines, Sewage Tanks
and Systems, etc.)
equipment being assessed, however, the
results of the IRT assessment will not be rated.
b. The surveyor may also request that pipeline
sections or machinery items be disassembled
for internal visual inspection depending on
measurement results.
C. Machinery and Cargo Systems Groups,
Machinery Sub Groups and Machinery
Elements
7. Insulation Testing
a.Insulation Megger testing is to be carried out in
accordance with class requirements and the
rating criteria, in Table 13 should be applied.
Note: The overall rating assigned for an item
cannot be higher than the Megger test rating if
a rating 4 is assigned for the megger results.
Table 13: Insulation Megger Testing Ratings
Criteria
1. General
To facilitate the assessment and reporting on
the vessel's Machinery and Cargo systems &
fittings,
The Following Subdivisions have been created:
• Machinery Groups are
Machinery Sub Groups and
divided
into
• Machinery Sub Groups Are Divided into
Machinery Elements.
This makes it easier for reporting as well as
providing a logical method for assessment of
ratings where each group has equal weight in
the calculation of the overall operational
condition rating.
D. Operational Condition Ratings Assessment
1. Operational Condition Rating of Machinery
Groups
a.During the CAP Survey of Machinery and
Cargo Systems and fittings, individual
Machinery Element ratings are awarded for
visual condition, function test, vibration
analysis, lubricating oil analysis and Insulation
Resistance as applicable. These ratings are
then combined to give an average rating,
rounded to the nearest first decimal point, for
each Machinery Element.
b.Each Machinery Element average rating is then
combined to give an overall average rating,
which is then rounded to the nearest whole
number to give an operational condition rating
for the Machinery Sub Group that is being
surveyed.
8. Infrared Thermography
Infrared Thermography assessment of the
operational condition of electrical equipment
and cabling may be included as part of the
condition assessment as a supplement to
function testing if the client requests, this to be
included in the CAP report. Where this is
carried out, a summary IRT report is to be
attached to the Machinery and Cargo Systems
& fittings report for additional information on the
c. Each Machinery Sub group average rating is
then combined to give an overall average
rating, which is then rounded to the nearest
whole number to give an operational condition
rating for the Machinery Group that is being
surveyed.
Figure: 9 shows, how the operational condition
rating for a Machinery Sub Group: 1. Auxiliary
Generators/Emergency
Generators/Shaft
generators is tabulated and computed from the
Sub Group Machinery/Element ratings. In given
Example hypothetical rating for Machinery sub
group is assigned as 2.
Page 24 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
Figure: 10 Shows how the operational
condition rating for Machinery Group:
3.
Electrical Power Generation & Distribution
System is tabulated and computed from the
each Sub Group ratings (For Example
Hypothetical ratings of Machinery group that is
being rated is Machinery Group: 3. Electrical
Power Generation & Distribution System.
Additionally there are two more subgroups are
under consideration for Machinery Group 3)
In the above examples the average operational
rating for this hypothetical Sub groups is given
as 1.7 and revised overall operational rating is
2.
Figure 9: Illustration of Machinery Sub Group
Operational Condition Rating
Note 2: Where analyses are not required to be
carried out, then these are left unrated and N/A
has been entered instead of a rating. N/A = Not
Applicable. Where N/A is entered then this
‘rating’ is omitted from the calculation for the
average rating.
2. Overall Operational Condition Rating
a.To arrive at an overall operational condition
rating for the Machinery and Cargo systems &
fittings the individual
operational condition
ratings awarded for each Machinery group are
combined. An average operational condition
rating is then computed and a final rating
formulated.
b.The example described in Figure 11, shows the
table which is normally used to show the ratings
awarded to individual Machinery groups
together with the overall operational condition
rating awarded. In this example the average
rating is calculated as 1.6 which is then
rounded upwards to an overall operational
condition rating of 2.
Figure: 11 Illustration of overall operation
condition Rating
Figure 10: Illustration of Machinery Group
Operational Condition Rating
Note 1: Where there are no sub groups in the
Machinery group then the Average Operational
Ratings of Machinery Elements will be directly
applicable to the Machinery group.
Page 25 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
E. CAP Rating Guidelines for Rating of
Machinery and Cargo Systems & Fittings
1. General
a. The rating applied to an Machinery Element
visual condition, function
test, vibration
analysis,
oil analysis
and
Ultrasonic
Thickness Measurement (UTM) shall be an
integer, either 1, 2, 3, or 4. If no rating can be
given then a comment is required to be made
e.g. N/F (not fitted), N/T (not tested) or N/A (not
applicable), etc.
b.Each average rating calculated for an
Machinery Elements and Machinery Sub
groups, is to be rounded (For Example-.an
average of 1.01 to 1.49 is to be rounded down
to 1 and 1.50 to 1.99 is rounded up to 2)
c. The operational condition rating for each
Machinery group, or for the overall operational
condition rating for 'Machinery and Cargo
Systems & Fittings’ and as a whole, is also
assigned by rounding to the nearest integer, as
above.
d.Where there are no sub groups in the
Machinery group then the Average Operational
Ratings of Machinery Elements will be directly
applicable to the Machinery group.
e. Where no function test or required analysis
are carried out for an Machinery Element then
the best average rating that can be applied to
that specific Machinery Element is a rating of 2,
i.e. irrespective
of the results of other
tests/analyses a rating of 1 cannot be awarded
for any item if a function test or an required
analysis is not carried out. Where no function
test or required analysis is carried out then this
is to be highlighted in the Machinery and Cargo
System & fittings report.
f. Where no function test and required analysis is
carried out for any Machinery Element, then the
best average rating that can be applied to that
specific Machinery Element is a rating of 3. This
is also to be highlighted in that Machinery group
part of the Machinery and Cargo System &
fittings report.
g.Irrespective of the average rating calculated
for an Machinery group, the rating awarded for
that Machinery group as a whole, cannot be
better than one rating grade better than the
worst rating applied to an Machinery Element
for a function test or a required analysis (e.g. if
one Machinery Element is awarded a rating 3
for function test then the maximum rating that
can be applied to that Machinery group is a
rating of 2.) This is also to be highlighted in that
‘Machinery Group’ as part of the Machinery and
Cargo System & fittings report.
h.If ‘Machinery and Cargo System & fittings’
Machinery Elements, that are critical to the safe
operation of the vessel or for the safety of the
crew, have been awarded a rating of 4, then the
rating awarded for that machinery group will
also
be
a
4,
except
where
the
Machinery/element is covered by redundancy
and the secondary unit has a rating of 2 or
better.
(Critical items are Machinery Elements such
as main
engine, Steering Systems,
generators, fuel pumps, boilers, main cooling
water pumps, lube oil pumps, fire alarm
systems, fire fighting systems, anchors, anchor
chains, windlasses, rudder, PV valves etc.)
F. Global Rating for Maintenance
1. General
The global rating for maintenance for the
Machinery and Cargo System & fittings is
awarded based on the results of an audit of
the vessel's planned maintenance system
(PMS). The requirements for a PMS are
reviewed and the scope of the audit of the PMS
is discussed.
2. Scope of Audit
a.The surveyor will audit that part of the PMS
system that covers the Machinery and Cargo
System & fittings.
b.The audit is to cover the timely implementation,
frequency, scope and results of the
maintenance. Postponements and overdue
Page 26 of 29
IR-CAP – GUIDELINES FOR TANKERS
items are to be included in the audit and
reporting and follow-up actions are to be
identified and reviewed.
3. Global Rating for Maintenance
The global rating for maintenance for the
vessel’s Machinery and Cargo System & fittings
is awarded as per the criteria in Table 16.
Table 16: Global Rating Criteria for planned
maintenance system (PMS)
G. CAP Rating for
System & fittings
Machinery
and
and reports, complete
records of the surveys.
with
photographic
3. Update Analysis and Report
All Machinery Element or components of
Machinery are awarded a rating lower than the
minimum rating expected by the client, then
these are analyzed and a report is forwarded to
the client.
Cargo
1. Final Rating
a.As stated in below para b, the CAP rating
awarded for the vessel’s Machinery and Cargo
System & fittings is based on a comparison
between the rating awarded for the overall
operational condition and that awarded for the
global rating for maintenance.
b.The finalised CAP rating for Machinery and
Cargo System & fittings, shall be the worst of
these rating values as the example in Table 17.
Table 17: Final CAP Ratings for Machinery and
Cargo System & fittings
2. Machinery and Cargo System & fittings Report with Photographs
On the completion of the CAP survey, the
surveyor compiles a report for each Machinery
Group, Machinery Sub Group and Machinery
Element surveyed. The report includes the table
for compilation and computation of the overall
operational condition rating to be awarded for
Machinery and Cargo System & fittings and a
set of individual Machinery group rating tables
Page 27 of 29
IRCAP –GUIDELINES For “TANKERS”
Section 4.
Annexure - I
Spaces (Ballast, Cargo, Fore Peak, Aft Peak,
Engine Room, Pump Room, Void Tanks, etc.)
“IR CAP Thickness
Measurements Guidelines”
(Annexure – I)
A. Requirement for standard
Thickness Measurements
extent
of
1. Ultrasonic thickness measurement is required
to establish the extent of corrosion for all tanks,
spaces and structures to be rated. Thickness
measurement gives representative data for all
main and internal structural elements of all
required tanks and spaces. The UTM data is
being presented in the CAP Hull report as
cumulative diminution curves showing the
distribution of steel diminution and tanks local
hull rating.
2. Standard extent of thickness measurement
readings is described in para B below.
Additional measurements are required if
corrosion exceeding CAP 2 requirements is
measured or suspected in any area. Reductions
in standard extent of measurements are only
accepted in accordance with criteria listed in
para C below.
B. Standard
Extent
Measurements
of
Thickness
1. The following divisions of main structural
elements cover all types of tanks and spaces
(not all elements are applicable to all tanks)
4. UTM of all Internal structures (stringers, web
frames, girders, swash bulkheads, etc) should
be carried out for all tanks and Spaces (Ballast,
Cargo, Fore Peak, Aft Peak, Engine Room,
Pump Room, Void Tank etc.)
a.
All longitudinals, girders and other
stiffeners with one point measurement on
both webs and flanges between the frames
b.
All Web frames, Floors, Girders with one
point measurement per strake on both
webs and flanges
c.
Stringer platforms, Swash Bulkheads with
one point measurement per strake
5. Additional measurements are to be carried out
in areas where the CAP surveyor suspects
corrosion exceeding requirements to CAP 2.
C. Reduced Extent of Thickness Measurements
1. Reduction in number of thickness measurement
readings in accordance with above standard
extent of thickness measurement is only
accepted if representative random thickness
measurements confirm that there is no steel
loss.
2. Number of readings may only be reduced if the
structure in question is:
a.
Deck Plating
a.
Made of solid stainless steel
b.
Side Shell
b.
c.
Bottom Plating
Coated with original coating still intact on
both sides of structure
d.
Inner bottom Plating
e.
All Longitudinal bulkheads plating
f.
All Transverse bulkheads plating
g.
Longitudinal Stringer Deck and inner deck
plating
2. Internal structures
elements
consists
a.
Stiffeners
b.
Girders
c.
Web frames
d.
Stringers
e.
Swash bulkheads, etc.
3. Standard Extent of measurements in shell
plating is not to be reduced.
of
following
3. UTM of all main structural elements should be
carried out with two points between each frame
per strake independently for all tanks and
4. Where number of thickness measurements is
reduced, it is to be ensured that representative
random measurements are obtained for all
main structural elements in all tanks and
spaces
5. An absolute minimum of 30 representative
readings for each main structural element and
Internal Structural elements is to be obtained in
all tanks and spaces
D. Important Notes:
1. Readings to be included in the thickness
measurement report are to be representative
for the area measured and are normally to be
single point readings. If a single reading is not
considered to be representative for an area this
should be stated in the comment field.
Additional readings may be carried out in same
Page 28 of 29
IRCAP –GUIDELINES For “TANKERS”
Annexure - I
area and included in the report together with a
comment stating that these are additional
readings.
2. Where additional readings are required due to
corrosion exceeding CAP 2 requirement in one
element (e.g. a web frame or a longitudinal in
one bay), all elements/bays represented by that
element are to be measured to assess extent of
corrosion for that element.
3. Owner and thickness Measurement Company
are responsible for carrying out additional
thickness measurements in areas where they
suspect
corrosion
exceeding
CAP
2
requirement if deemed necessary by the CAP
surveyor.
4. Pits, grooves and local corrosion are to be
measured and included in the report with a
suitable comment. Cracks, buckling and other
defects identified are to be reported.
5. Thickness measurement for all pipes inside the
tanks is to be carried out if deemed necessary
by the CAP surveyor to reveal corrosion and
included in the report with a suitable comment.
6. Thickness measurements are to be witnessed
by IRS surveyor who is to be onboard while the
measurements are taken to the extent
necessary to control the process.
Page 29 of 29