Fathom
FOCUS
Hull Coatings for Vessel
Performance
FATHOM
FOCUS
“Information
Specialists
for Maritime Eco-Efficiency”
www.fathomshipping.com
‘From the publishers of Ship Efficiency : The Guide’
Published by
”
Information Specialists for Maritime Eco-Efficiency
Fathom has developed a range of technical publications to serve the thirst for eco-efficiency knowledge in the industry. Titles
include ‘Ship Efficiency: The Guide’ ‘Ballast water Management: The Guide’ ‘The Step-By-Step SEEMP Manual’ and ‘Emission
Control Areas: The Guide’ amongst many others.
Fathom’s newest publication range is the ‘Fathom FOCUS’ series. These in-depth guides to specific efficiency topics and market
areas are available to the shipping community to use as a free reference source. The first edition was titled ‘Choosing the Optimum
Lubricant Solutions for your Operation’
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.fathomshipping.com
Proud Sponsors of
‘Hull Coatings for Vessel Performance’
A Century of Pioneering Leadership
Hempel was founded in Denmark in 1915 by Jørgen Christian Hempel. Driven by innovation and the vision of helping to protect
man-made structures from corrosion and fouling, the company has developed and grown into a world-leading coatings supplier
working in the decorative, protective, marine, container and yacht markets.
In 1917, Hempel introduced the world’s first antifouling coating for ships’ hulls based on modern science and technology. Today,
Hempel is among the world leaders within antifouling and fouling release technology, and retains a close bond with the scientific
community. Hempel filed its first silicone patent in 1972 and the company’s first commercial silicone-based coating, HEMPASIL,
was introduced in 1999. This pioneering product created a smooth, non-stick surface on the hull, preventing marine organisms
from attaching to it. The result was less drag in the water, lower fuel consumption and lower CO2 emissions.
Over the years, Hempel’s research and development lab continued to improve this technology by optimizing its long-term stability
and mechanical properties, leading to HEMPASIL X3, Hempel’s flagship fouling release product with a fuel saving guarantee.
Hempel is committed to constant improvement of its performance with regard to energy efficiency and environmental impact. The
development of ActiGuard® technology arose out of a wish to pursue an entirely new concept that would set the bar way above
current standards. Fouling control was no longer enough. The goal now was a Fouling Defence solution that effectively protects
against fouling throughout the service interval.
Hempel’s new patented ActiGuard® technology introduces a new and unique way of producing an underwater hull coating
containing a silicone-hydrogel that not only enables controlled biocide release, but also has the necessary long-term stability
and mechanical properties. Hempel’s latest hull coating product, HEMPAGUARD®, is the first to be based on this patented
technology, offering substantial economic and environmental advantages.
“We are committed to remaining focused on our goals, adaptable in a fast-changing world and quick to implement new ideas.
We will strive to increase our understanding of our markets and customers, and offer innovative solutions that add value to their
business“, Hempel’s Christian Ottosen concludes.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
s
t
n
nte
Co
Chapter One – The Important Role of the Hull in Ship Efficiency
The Hull Roughness Factor.............................................................................. 2
The Science of Smoothness ............................................................................ 3
Optimisation of Hull Smoothness ................................................................. 3
Hull Threats......................................................................................................... 4
Hull Bio-Fouling: A Deep Dive......................................................................... 5
The Scale of the Problem................................................................................. 7
Environmental Impact of Hull Fouling ......................................................... 8
Chapter Two – The Market Landscape
A History of the Market: Key Milestones ..................................................... 10
Regulation of the Hull Coatings Industry .................................................... 12
The Future: Market Barriers and Drivers for Change ................................ 15
Chapter Three - Choosing the Optimum Hull Coating
The Ideal Coating Checklist ........................................................................... 18
Hull Coating Chemistry ................................................................................... 22
A Snapshot of the Market: Hull Coating Manufacturer Profiles ............. 30
Chapter Four - Measuring Hull and Propeller Performance
Hull Fouling and Performance: The Relationship ......................................
How to Measure?...............................................................................................
What to Measure? .............................................................................................
Developing a Standard Method for Measuring Hull Performance.........
Key Industry Studies ........................................................................................
A Snapshot of the Market: Hull Monitoring Software Providers ............
A Snapshot of the Market: Class Society Solutions...................................
A Snapshot of the Market: Hull Coating Provider – Software
Provider Partnerships ......................................................................................
59
60
61
62
63
69
76
78
Chapter Five – Hull Cleaning for Optimal Performance
The Importance of Hull Cleaning ..................................................................
Hull Cleaning Methods ....................................................................................
Underwater Cleaning Methods......................................................................
A Snapshot of the Market: Hull Cleaning Service Providers ...................
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
83
83
84
85
:
r
o
it
M
e
d
n
E
i
r
e
e
h
t
h
a
t
n
a
l
l
i
cM
C
m
m
o
Fro age Fr
s
s
e
AM
Welcome!
Following the success of the inaugural edition of
Fathom FOCUS – Choosing the Optimum Lubricant
Solutions for your Operation –Fathom is proud to
bring you the second edition of Fathom FOCUS Hull Coatings for Vessel Performance.
As you may already know, this is just one of the
technology areas covered in our flagship publication
Ship Efficiency: The Guide.
Ship Efficiency: The Guide maps out a litany
of abatement technologies and ship efficiency
techniques, and is comprehensive in focus. It was
designed to be your road map for the labyrinth that is
ship efficiency.
Our free Fathom FOCUS mini-guides give the reader
the opportunity to have access to comprehensive
information that is in much more depth and that has
focus on a single technology area.
What Information you Should
Expect
Our Fathom FOCUS series is reminiscent of our
guides in that they offer a technically led, but easy
to understand analysis of the solutions on offer,
in addition to offering insight into the key issues
affecting the market.
This edition of the FOCUS series will shine a
spotlight on the apparent lack of faith in the industry
that has resulted from the clash between super slow
steaming, laying up and foul release coatings, and
the banning of tributyltin (TBT), in addition to a
plethora of market influencing events that have
occurred over the last few decades.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
We discuss key emerging trends, including the
legislative landscape, the development of solutions
for Arctic conditions, and increased demand for
more fuel economy, for example.
In keeping with our usual structure, this publication
offers broader market-based editorial and analysis,
coupled with manufacturer profiles that offer indepth technical detail on individual hull coatings
solutions. In addition to the coatings themselves,
Hull Coatings for Vessel Performance includes
a chapter on monitoring hull performance and a
chapter on hull cleaning, with profiles from hull
cleaning service providers.
Why the Publication can
Benefit Your Operations
Biofouling can reduce ship efficiency by up to 40%,
which results in massive fuel penalties that directly
eat into the bottom line of your operations. Quite
simply, an un-healthy hull can really adversely affect
a healthy bank balance.
The hull coatings sector is undergoing a period of
change that posits exciting opportunities for the
sector and is a key stepping stone to a sustainable
and profitable industry.
We hope that you find this publication useful and an
interesting read!
Warmest regards,
Catherine McMillan
SEPTEMBER, 2013
1
R
eH
E
h
t
T
f
o
P
le
A
o
R
H
t
C portan
ip
Sh
n
i
l
ul
cy
n
e
i
c
Effi
Im
e
h
T
The hull of a ship is a key piece of the ship
efficiency puzzle. The physical ability of the ship to
cut through the waves in a streamlined manner is of
paramount importance to fuel economy.
Therefore, improving hull performance plays a
pivotal role, because a smooth hull is an optimally
hydrodynamic hull.
The Hull Roughness Factor
The key factors that affect hull performance are the
shape of the hull, the condition of the hull itself, the
coating used on the hull and the nature and extent of
fouling on the hull.
This edition of Fathom FOCUS looks at those
factors that can vary during the vessel lifecycle – the
coating used on the hull and the nature and extent
of the fouling. This publication also delves into the
anti-fouling coatings market, the monitoring of the
coating’s ‘results’ and also the hull cleaning market.
Each additional 10µm to 20µm of ‘roughness’,
ABS estimates, can increase the total resistance
experienced by the hull by 1% for full form ships
such as tankers and carriers, and by 0.5% for ships at
high speeds.
Ships are regularly delivered with a very low surface
roughness at around 75µm. ABS state that later in
the ship’s life cycle, the very same vessel could
enter a dry dock with a roughness of 250µm, which
would mean that by the time it is dry-docked the
vessel will have been fighting against an increased
resistance of up to 17%, leading to an increase in
fuel consumption of 3 to 4% compared to when it
first went into operation.
Historical records have shown that even with good
maintenance practices average hull roughness can
increase by 10 to 25 μm per year, depending on
the hull coating system, even when fouling is not
included.
In this publication, when we talk about improving
hull performance we are referring to taking those
measures needed to make sure a ship’s hull is as
smooth and friction-free as possible.
ABS comments in its publication Ship Energy
Efficiency Measures: Status and Guidance: “A tanker
at its design speed will use the majority of its fuel
overcoming frictional resistance in calm water…..
The size of frictional resistance is dramatically
impacted by the roughness of the surface exposed to
flow.”
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Image Courtesy of Micanti
1-2
The Science of Smoothness
A hydrodynamic ship, able to cut through the waves
with little resistance and drag to go further on less
fuel.
In essence, creating a hydrodynamic ship is to
create a shape and texture that is able to manipulate
the flow of water around the vessel to allow for
maximum ease of movement and maneuverability.
As mentioned there are two ways to do this:
- Hull form and dimension optimisation:
The shape of the ship itself is arguably the
most important element of ensuring the ship’s
hydrodynamics because it is also one of the few
choices that will stay with the ship for the duration
of the ship’s life-cycle; once the ship has been built,
whilst some parts of the ship can be integrated,
automated and retrofitted for further efficiency
savings, you cannot change the shape of your hull.
- Coatings and hull roughness: Hull coatings and
the circumvention of hull roughness play a key
role in ensuring optimal hydrodynamics of the hull
and ship. The preservation of hull smoothness can
represent significant fuel savings however, when
comparing this figure to the fuel penalties involved
when the hull becomes rough from either physical or
biological fouling, the potential fuel savings become
much, much more.
Optimisation of Hull
Smoothness
For the purpose of this publication, we study two
areas of hull smoothness optimisation; the first
being the choice of an anti-fouling hull coating; and
the second being the maintenance of that coating
through hull cleaning.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Hull Coatings
The era of simply coating a ship with standard
issue paint to protect it from corrosion and fouling
has long passed, some of the options available on
the market are highly complex and a vast amount
of science and chemistry has gone into their
development.
A fast-growing technology in its own right, the latest
hull coatings have shown considerable potential for
substantial eco-efficiency savings over the past few
years. Following the ban on TBT-based coatings in
2008, research into alternative options has increased
tremendously.
Hull coatings now aim to not just reduce fouling but
make the hull surface as smooth as possible.
Most hull coatings today are designed to reduce
hydrodynamic drag and to prevent the build-up
of marine organisms. This also leads to a variety
for ‘fuel saving claims’ and the nature of these are
addressed in Chapter Four but claims for the fuel
savings they can deliver vary.
Coating systems usually consist of a primer, possibly
a tie coat and then one or more coats of the product.
Each product has its own role, the primer is the first
barrier to corrosion, the tie coat bonds the primer
and the final product coating delivers the protection
that the system is designed for.
For the purpose of this publication we focus on the
final product, in other words the anti-fouling product
that delivers its specific type of protection.
Manufacturer and associated anti-fouling product
profiles are provided along with product-specific
technical data in Chapter Three.
Hull Cleaning
It is inevitable that once a ship is in water biofouling will occur, it is therefore essential to keep
the hull clear of all matter to ensure the safety and
efficiency of the vessel. Despite the use of effective
anti-fouling systems and operational practices, biofouling will still accumulate on the hull of the vessel.
To maintain a ship as free of bio-fouling as practical,
it may be advisable for the ship to undertake inwater inspection, cleaning and maintenance.
A full blast and re-application of anti-fouling can
cost about US$10 per square metre, which would
total at around US$300k for a typical VLCC, whilst
just a clean will be about US$50k.
The cost of maintenance is a testament to how
expensive fouling can be when maintenance still
works out to be much cheaper. Cleaning a light slime
results in 7 to 9% reduction in the fuel bill, whilst
heavy slime means up to 18% less, and heavy macro
fouling can offer a reduction of up to 30%.
Typically, every 5 years a ship will be inspected in
dry dock, where a full clean is usually undertaken
and new applications of anti-fouling paint can be
Hull Threats
applied where necessary. However the optimum
interval between the periodic cleanings and
There are two key threats to hull integrity; physical
inspections will vary with the type of vessel, the
threats and biological threats, both of which
location of the vessel and its service profile (speed of
negatively impact the hull in a number of ways, but
operation, idle time, etc).
all with the same result: hull roughness.
BIMCO’s Framework
A recently released BIMCO Circular has suggested
a framework for the delegation of hull cleaning and
hull maintenance responsibilities in the wake of
slow-steaming and long periods of idleness in port,
in particular in tropical waters where fouling has a
tendency to be the most aggressive.
Whilst previously it would have undisputedly been
the responsibility of the ship owner after a period
of docking to clean the hull (failure to do so would
result in the owner being liable to pay the operator
the cost of the resulting fuel penalties), BIMCO has
seen fit to respond to the new market trend that has
seen extensive fouling on hulls due to periods of
idleness – a tactic selected by the operator and not
the owner.
To ensure it is the decision-maker who reaps the
consequences of the decisions taken, BIMCO
suggests deciding the period of idleness in advance
(the default is suggested at 14 days) after which
point responsibility for the condition of the hull
switches to the operator.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Physical Threat: Corrosion
Corrosion is an incredibly common phenomenon.
Ships are made of metal and the sea is a mass of
salty, moving water – metal’s nemesis. To counteract
the corrosive effect of sea water on a Ships metal
hull, a hull coating forms a barrier between the metal
and the water, thereby ensuring the Ships surface
integrity is protected.
However, if for whatever reason the coating is
damaged, corrosion becomes a very real prospect
and the nature of corrosion means that any corrosion
on the hull surface is difficult and expensive to
rectify. Even following repairs, ‘micro-pitting’ can
be present in the repaired area, which weakens it and
makes it a candidate for future damage or fouling.
Other macro physical symptoms of hull damage are
plate laps, seams and butts, weld roughness, weld
quality, and mechanical damage; however (aside
from the obvious issue of coating condition) these
types of hull threats are not linked to the hull coating
and would have to be covered under specific hull
maintenance and repair programmes that include
but also go above and beyond ‘just’ the issue of hull
coatings.
3-4
Biological Threat: Fouling
Like physical hull threats, biological threats to the
hull can be divided across the category of macro and
micro, both of which wreak havoc on the integrity of
the hull via attachment. The build of said attachment
severely impacts the hydrodynamics of the ship.
Also, like physical threats, the relative seriousness
and impact on the overall hull’s health is also
reflected in whether or not it is a micro or macro
issue.
However, even minor bio-fouling has a significant
impact on the overall profitability of the vessel’s
operations when considered across a fleet and a
vessel’s 25-30 year lifetime.
Roughness caused by micro bio-fouling is
caused by slime, and results in an increase in fuel
consumption between 1 to 2%. Macro bio-fouling
refers to animals and plants, and its impact on fuel
consumption greatly varies depending on the nature
of the unwanted guest. Whilst seaweed will cause
a fuel consumption increase of up to 10%, shells –
barnacles, oysters, and mussels for example – can
cause a massive increase of 40%.
In addition to fuel penalties in the short and long
term, extensive bio-fouling will eventually lead to
hull corrosion, which further compounds what was
already a significant additional expense.
Fouling refers to the accumulation of unwanted
material on solid surfaces, most often in an aquatic
environment. As further described below, the fouling
material can consist of either living organisms
(bio-fouling) or a non-living substance (inorganic
or organic) and is often a combination of the two.
Fouling is usually distinguished from other surfacegrowth phenomena in that it occurs on a surface of
a component, system or plant performing a defined
and useful function (such as a ship hull or propeller),
and the fouling process impedes or interferes with
this function.
Bio-fouling is not as simple a process as it sounds.
Organisms do not usually simply suck onto a
substrate. The complex process often begins with the
production of a biofilm.
Contact and colonisation between the microorganism
(biofilm actors) and the surface is promoted by
the movement of water through Brownian motion,
sedimentation and convective transport, although
organisms can also actively seek out substrates
due to propulsion using flagella. Bacteria and other
colonising microorganisms secrete extracellular
poly- meric substances (EPS) to envelope and
anchor them to the substrate thereby altering the
local surface chemistry which can stimulate further
growth such as the recruitment and settlement of
macroorganisms.
Biofilms do not have to contain living material; they
instead contain dead bacteria and/or secretions.
Hull Bio-Fouling: A Deep Dive may
The growth of a biofilm can progress to a point
where it provides a foundation for the growth of
Whilst preventing corrosion is a relatively easy
seaweed, barnacles, and other organisms. They use
requirement of a hull coating, the prevention of bio- this biofilm similar to an incubator. This is a process
fouling build up is much more complex, especially that constantly repeats itself, meaning that high
in the advent of slow-steaming, long periods of
concentrations of micro-organisms can be present
idleness, and the banning of TBT-based paints.
in the affected water after a period of time. In other
words, micro-organisms such as bacteria and algae
Bio-fouling is especially aggressive in tropical
form the primary slime film to which the macroand sub tropical waters, for example ships serving
organisms such as mollusks and barnacles attach. If
Europe/Latin America or Europe/Asia must have
this biofilm is eliminated from the water, it becomes
a coating that is able to function well in both
impossible for micro-organisms to reproduce.
environments.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Biofilm is characterised by 5 stages of growth:
Macro Bio-Fouling
Stage 1 Initial attachment
Macro bio-fouling can be divided into two
categories.
Stage 2 Irreversible attachment
Stage 3 Growth I
Stage 4 Growth II
Stage 5 Outbreak
Micro Bio-Fouling
The first, calcareous or hard fouling can include:
barnacles, bryozoans (which look a bit like an
underwater moss), mollusks, tube worms, and zebra
mussels.
As the name may indicate, calcareous fouling can
be difficult to remove without damaging the hull
coating underneath as it requires more abrasive hull
cleaning techniques than non-calcareous or soft
fouling.
Bio-fouling starts with a biofilm, or slime layer. The
most cost effective efficient option when it comes to The second, non-calcareous fouling, includes: algae,
bio-fouling treating or prevention is to catch it early slimes, hydroids, sponges, and seaweed.
so that the micro-fouling does not have a chance to
Different fouling communities will develop
progress on to attracting macro-bio-fouling.
depending on the type of environment the hull
A biofilm consists of bacteria that has accumulated offers; this preference or distaste helps provide clues
on the surface of the hull. The layer can also consist as to how to avoid the fouling. For example zebra
mussels dislike aluminum-bronze for example.
of some types of seaweed, diatoms (which are a
Cupronickels (copper-nickel alloys) have good
type of algae and a common phytoplankton), and
bio-fouling and corrosion resistance, but may not
secretions from marine organisms.
be able to cope with the demands of a ship that
spans continents involving oceans of varying salt
Diatoms attachment depends on the pH of the
levels and temperatures, as the changes may impact
hull coating. The biofilm-causing bacteria
the coating’s efficacy, or a particular species in a
Vibrio alginolyticus, for example, is sensitive to
particular region may be more resistant.
temperature changes and pH. Many innovative
hull coatings, as profiled in Chapter 4, leverage
organisms’ characteristics and preferences to create This becomes an issue when the bio-fouling species
highly effective, targeted solutions, such as paint that are no longer content to ride on the underside of the
hull but also become invasive species with widechange pH.
spread ecological and bio-fouling implications.
Slime in general – like all bio-fouling– is strongly
impacted by the temperature of the waters. Once the
biofilm is fully established, it will inevitably lead to
macro bio-fouling as the underside of the hull has
now become an attractive environment for a number
of organisms.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
5-6
The Scale of the Problem
Economics
In the absence of hull fouling control systems, within
six months of active service a vessel could have up
to 150 kilograms of marine life per square metre
attached to the hull. This obviously has huge fuel
efficiency and bunker fuel cost implications.
Loss of speed from moderate fouling can range
between 10% to 18%.
With hull resistance and drag having such an
immense impact of bunker fuel consumption, ship
owners and operators are looking for hull coatings
and cleaning solutions that deliver the highest impact
on drag reduction.
His conclusion from the studies was: The main
cost associated with fouling is the increased fuel
consumption from increased frictional drag.
“The costs related to hull cleaning and painting are
much lower than the fuel costs,” Schultz reports
in “Economic Impact of Bio-fouling on a Naval
Surface Ship,” published in the journal Biofouling.
Furthermore, Schultz said, a hull needn’t be fouled
to drag. Even when the hull is free of fouling,
frictional drag on some hull types can account for up
to 90% of total drag, he reported.
According to a white paper released by Hydrex,
entitled ‘The Slime Factor’ published in 2010, uses
A study published by the United States Naval
the example of a cargo ship that requires 100 tonnes
Academy, compiled by Dr Michael P Schultz,
of fuel per day to maintain a cruising speed of 20
released in 2011 entitled ‘Economic impact of biofouling on a naval surface ship’ estimated the overall knots with a completely smooth and unfouled hull,
the way it was at its first speed trials.
economic impact of hull fouling on a mid-sized
naval surface ship in which fuel, hull coatings, hull
coating application and removal, and hull cleaning If that ship were to build up a thin layer of slime in
a month and a thick layer of slime in two months,
costs were analysed and assessed.
by the end of those two months of sailing, it would
Following the report’s release Schultz conveyed the be requiring 110 tonnes of fuel per day to maintain
the same cruising speed. Applying a fuel price of
message:
US$450 per tonne, which is majorly conservative
in today’s market, the slime build-up would cause a
“Ship owners: paint now, or pay later”
fuel penalty of an additional US$4,500 per day just
to keep operating at the same service speed. Even
Schultz’s research quantified the economic
if the fouling remained at that level, in a month it
consequences of drag from ship hull fouling.
would have used US$135,000 more fuel than it
would have if the hull were clean. In a year, at that
The study looked at the hull fouling penalty for
same rate, it would have cost US$1.62 million more
the U.S. Navy’s conventionally powered, midthan if the hull had remained clean.
sized surface combatant: the Arleigh Burke-class
destroyer (DDG-51). The study examined 320 actual
International Paint has also calculated the immense
individual inspection reports from Jan. 1, 2004, to
fuel penalties and savings that can be generated
Dec. 31, 2006.
across various pieces of literature. An example of
such is provided below.
It was found that resistance due to hull fouling
amounted to US$56 million per year for the DDG-51
class destroyer fleet, and about US$1 billion over 15 A 5000 TEU containership that consumes 150 tonnes
of fuel per day at US$500 per tonne, their annual
years.
fuel bill would amount to US$131,625,000. A saving
of 9%, from the optimisation of hull smoothness
through prevention of fouling build up would equal a
saving of US$12million off the annual fuel bill.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Environmental Impact of Hull
Fouling
Emissions
The reduction in fuel burn and emissions is directly
proportional.
The worse the fouling, the slower the ship will sail at
a given RPM. Or in other words, more power will be
required to keep the ship sailing at a given speed.
This results in higher fuel consumption and a
higher fuel consumption results in a greater volume
of greenhouse gases and other emissions being
produced during the process of fuel combustion.
According to Bellona and the Clean Shipping
Coalition (CSC), poor hull & propeller performance
accounts for around 1/10 of world-fleet energy cost
and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
~ US$30 billion increase in energy cost and
~ 0.3% increase in man-made carbon emissions
The previous example of International Paint’s 5000
TEU containership that uses 150 tonnes of fuel
per day as described in more depth in the previous
section, would emit 77,000 tonnes less of CO2 as a
byproduct of the anti-fouling coating application and
associated fuel savings.
Invasive Species – Widening the BioFouling Boundaries
Whilst the problem of ballast water and invasive
species has been widely recognised by both the
media and regulatory bodies – the issue of the
transference of invasive species via other areas of
ship have to date been relatively overlooked.
A noteworthy contributor to the issue of invasive
species imported and exported across the world
along with the world’s trade and goods is the
presence of bio-fouling communities that establish
themselves on the hull.
The zebra mussel for example has caused huge
problems in the US Great Lakes because it is a
voracious eater that has a devastating impact on
other members of the ecosystem.
They also decimate native mussel populations by
subjecting them to their own medicine through biofouling; they attach themselves to the hard outer
shell of the native mussel, decimating the native
carrier.
As this behaviour suggests, zebra mussels are
aggressive bio-foulers and the species proliferates
in a wide variety of environments, thereby exposing
shipping communities to the threat of zebra mussel
bio-fouling areas that were previously safe – and
If the world’s fleet didn’t have proper anti-fouling
protection, International Paint estimates that an extra therefore unprepared.
72 million tonnes of fuel would be burned each year.
If this scenario was flipped, and the savings were not The zebra mussel, for obvious reasons, is in the top
realised, the increased fuel consumption would lead 10 of BIMCO’s ‘Most Unwanted’ list but only one
to the production and release into the environment of many invasive species that bio-fouling has helped
of an estimated extra 210 million tonnes of carbon to introduce to native ecosystems the world over.
dioxide and 5.6 million tonnes of sulphur dioxide.
However, it is only one example of many as invasive
species brought over from far away is an endemic
and systemic problem in shipping; hull coatings have
a vital part to play in limiting the further spread of
invasive species around the world.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
7-8
2
e
R
p
a
E
c
ds
PT
n
A
a
L
H
t
C arke
M
e
h
T
The activity and interest in the marine coatings
market has boomed in recent years. This is due to
a number of factors but not least including ship
owners searching for clean technology solutions that
can offer technical maturity and proven fuel savings
but also factors such as the decline in the ship
newbuilding market and resultant increase in ship
repair and maintenance have played a major part.
There is of course also the growing urgency to
minimise fuel consumption penalties wherever
possible whilst a shift in the regulatory landscape
is enforcing a movement towards reduced
environmental impact.
This change has meant that both industry and its
technology providers, including the marine coatings
sector, have had to respond and reconfigure how the
current and future regulatory and market landscape
can work best for business.
Innovation within the marine coatings market is
evolving at a rapid rate as companies compete to
provide the best products. As a result of the intense
competition, the market is growing and there are
a greater number of high specification, innovative
marine coatings solutions available on the market
than ever before.
There have also been numerous launches of lowcost solutions to respond to a financially troubled
industry where minimising vessel maintenance cost,
including paint investment, is a focus area.
In many ways a polarised hull coatings market has
emerged that has a product cost focus at one end and
investment in vessel efficiency at the other.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
A transition towards more premium solutions,
offering significant savings in fuel consumption and
carbon dioxide emissions compared to the current
market average, is predicted by most of the major
marine coatings companies.
Also, the market is seeing a new driver emerge.
In collaboration with the marine coatings industry
marine coatings provider, Jotun is currently leading
an initiative to establish reliable measurability of
hull performance. This was spurred by a historical
lack of accurate and reliable measurability on hull
performance that has resulted in limited incentives to
invest lifetime performance in both newbuilding and
maintenance situations.
Therefore, this initiative will be absolutely crucial to
increase market awareness and contribute to growth
in the marine coatings market.
A History of the Market: Key Milestones
The Fouling of Ships’ Hulls has Troubled Mankind for Centuries
Timeline courtesy of International Paint – History of Fouling Control
412 BC: A translation from the Aramaic of
a papyrus dated about 412 BC concerning
boat repairs struck an optimistic note: “And
the arsenic and sulphur have been well mixed
with Chian oil thou broughtest back on thy last
voyage and the mixture evenly applied to the
vessel’s sides that she may speed through the
blue waters freely and without impediment.”
16th century onwards: The main form
of protection for wooden ships was copper
sheathing or the use of a mixture containing
sulphur and arsenic. It was not until the
development of iron hulls that copper sheathing
was abandoned.
17th century: In 1625 William Beale was
the first to file a patent for a paint composition
containing iron powder, copper and cement.
In 1670, Philip Howard and Frances Watson
patented a tar, resin and beeswax paint.
1854: James McInnes patented the first practical
composition to come into widespread general
use. It used copper sulphate as the biocide in a
metallic soap composition, which was applied
hot over a quick-drying priming paint of rosin
varnish and iron oxide pigment. This was soon
followed by a similar product known as ‘Italian
Moravian’ which was used well into the 20th
century.
1881: Holzapfels Antifouling Compositions
were introduced. The Holzapfel brothers were
the Founding Fathers of International Coatings
Ltd.
1926: The US Navy developed a hot plastic
paint using coal tar or rosin as binder and copper
or mercuric oxides as toxins. This was followed,
later, by ‘cold plastic paints’ which were easier
to apply.
1960s: Contact leaching antifoulings are
introduced, designed to increase antifouling
lifetimes by increasing the biocide content.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
3rd century: The Greeks were using tar and
wax to coat ships’ bottoms.
13th to 15th centuries: By this time pitch,
oil, resin and tallow were in use. The Chinese
Admiral Cheng Ho had the hulls of his junks
coated with lime mixed with poisonous oil to
protect the wood from worms. Christopher
Columbus was also familiar with the problem:
“All ships’ bottoms were covered with a mixture
of tallow and pitch in the hope of discouraging
barnacles and teredo, and every few months a
vessel had to be hoved-down and graved on some
convenient beach”.
18th century: William Murdock patented
a varnish mixed with iron sulphide and zinc
powder, using arsenic as anti-foulant in 1791.
19th century: By 1870, more than 300
antifouling patents had been registered. Then
as now, the basic principle of the majority of
antifouling paints is to use biocide(s) to deter
the settlement of fouling organisms through a
leaching mechanism.
1863: James Tarr and Augustus Wonson were
awarded a US patent for antifouling paint using
copper oxide and tar.
1885: Zuisho Hotta was given the first Japanese
patent for an antifouling paint made of lacquer,
powdered iron, red lead, persimmon tannin and
other ingredients.
1906: The US Navy began to manufacture its
own antifouling coatings and tested shellac and
‘hot plastic paints’.
Late 1940s onwards: Major changes in paint
technology resulted from a wide range of new
industrial chemicals and the introduction of new
surface preparation and prefabrication methods.
1974: International Paint introduces the first Self
Polishing Copolymer (SPC) antifouling. 9-10
1987: The first TBT-Free Controlled Depletion
Polymer (CDP) polishing antifoulings are
introduced globally.
1999: The first foul release system for Deep
Sea Scheduled Ships. Revolutionary low surface
energy coating technology controls fouling
without the use of biocides.
2002: International Paint introduces the first self
polishing antifouling system blending SPC and
CDP technologies.
2013: Foul release coating technology evolves
with the introduction of International Paint’s
Intersleek®1100SR product, the first micro
fouling-focused fluoropolymer based slime
release technology specifically designed to tackle
the impact of slime.
To understand the current trends and drivers
influencing the market today, and the developments
that could trigger expansion, an understanding of
how the market has evolved is required.
The need to keep a smooth hull and experimentation
around the types of coatings that can be used is as
old as the maritime industry itself. In the industry’s
infancy, various compounds were used to coat the
hull in an attempt to dissuade marine life from
becoming an attached pest.
The first successful anti-fouling surface to receive
general recognition was copper sheathing.
William Beale filed the first coating patent in as early
as 1625. This coating was surprisingly on the right
track, containing iron powder, copper and cement.
In 1670, a tar, resin and beeswax-based coating was
then patented by Philip Howard and Frances Watson.
The historical market pathway has been littered with
scientific discovery.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
1994: Introduction of Interspeed®340, a
controlled depletion polymer (CDP) antifouling
suitable for use at Newbuilding or Maintenance
& Repair.
2000: International Paint launch the first
Linkcoat, Intersleek®717 introduced, allowing
direct conversion of biocidal SPC anti-foulings to
foul release systems.
2007: The next generation foul release coating
is launched by International Paint that is based on
fluoropolymer technology, Intersleek®900.
Naval institutions have spurred a great deal of
ground-breaking research. Prompted by a desire to
obtain more fundamental knowledge as to how to
prevent fouling, various naval institutions arranged
biological investigations which has been fundamental
to shaping the evolution of the market.
The work has supplied valuable information on
the toxicity of potential paint ingredients to marine
organisms, on the nature of the fouling population,
its rate of growth, its seasonal and geographical
incidence, and the relation of the service in which
ships are employed to their tendency to foul.
For example, an early proposal that identified
that slimes produced by bacteria and diatoms on
submerged surfaces had an important bearing on
subsequent fouling aroused much interest, and
has been a pillar for innovation throughout the
development of anti-fouling coatings.
Following much research into the occurrence of
fouling and the development around hull coating
options the problem of preventing the attachment
of organisms became one of applied physical
chemistry rather than a game of permutations and
combinations.
Regulation of the Hull
Coatings Industry
A more recent pivotal market-shaping event in
recent times was the banning of TBT -based hull
coatings. Its presence in hull coatings prevented
marine growth to an unprecedented level and for the
industry it was a revelation.
However, TBT-based paint was also extremely toxic
to non-target organisms. It is an endocrine-disrupting
chemical, which means affected aquatic animals
would have disruptions in reproduction; whelks
would change sex and oysters became deformed.
There was also the frightening possibility of the
bioaccumulative aspect of the compound in some
ducks, fish and seals, and the resultant threat of it
eventually entering the food chain and appearing on
people’s plates.
In reaction to what was perceived as a fast
approaching ecological disaster, the IMO passed the
International Convention on the Control of Harmful
Anti-fouling Systems on Ships (AFS Convention),
which was adopted in October 2001 and came into
force in September 2008.
This Convention is discussed further in the next
section.
Following the ban of TBT-based paint, new paint
formulations evolved which are discussed in great
detail in Chapter Three and also below.
New biocidal anti-fouling paints were rapidly
developed in the wake of the ban, for example the
coatings based on silyl-acrylates or copper, and foulrelease solutions, based on self-polishing silicone
types.
As shipping is global in nature variations in
regional and local environmental regulations have
an industry-wide impact, and this is in addition to
global regulations that govern all areas.
Regulations are making it technically more
challenging to deliver coatings that perform,
however in the same breath, regulations are helping
to increase the value add associated with higher
levels of performance –where the coatings have an
impact on energy efficiency in particular.
Many stakeholders within the industry regard
environmental regulations as an important driver of
innovation in the marine coatings market.
It is a delicate balance however between the benefit
to the environment, the economic impact, and the
constraints of technology.
As described in the previous section, the Antifouling Systems Convention (AFSC) outlawed the
use of TBT-based paints. In response to the AFSC,
the major hull coating manufacturers voluntarily
decided to withdraw tin-containing anti-fouling hull
coatings from the market before the IMO convention
enters into force.
The European Union (EU) also passed legislation
that bans the application of tin-containing coatings
and prohibits vessels with tin-based anti-foulings
from entering EU ports.
Whilst copper has been the go-to substance since the
banning of TBT-based coatings, there are indications
that its time is coming to a close. The reasoning
behind this potential ban is that copper can interfere
with photosynthesis and enzyme function in both
plants and animals in very low concentrations – as
low as 4 μg/l.
As a result of this some regional regulations are set
to address the presence of copper in hull coatings.
The U.S. State of Washington will be banning the
use of copper with effect from 2018, and California
looks set to do the same.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
11-12
In addition to this, the 2013 Vessel General
Permit (VGP) addresses the issue of copper a few
paragraphs after addressing the issue of TBT-based
coatings – the unspoken message being that the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers
them to be part of the same family of undesirables.
“Some ports and harbors are impaired by copper, a
biocide used commonly in anti-foulant paints. These
waters include Shelter Island Yacht Basin in San
Diego, California, and waters in and around the ports
of Los Angeles/Long Beach,” the VGP states.
“When vessels spend considerable time in these
waters (defined as spending more than 30 days
per year), or use these waters as their home port
(i.e., house boats, ferries or rescue vessels), vessel
owners/operators shall consider using anti-fouling
coatings that rely on a rapidly biodegradable
biocide or another alternative rather than copperbased coatings. If after consideration of alternative
biocides, vessel operators continue to use copperbased anti-foulant paints, they must document in
their recordkeeping documentation how this decision
was reached” the document continues.
Another potentially impactful IMO Regulation is the
Ballast Water Convention.
Obviously this is not a coatings specific regulation.
However, it does impinge on coating performance or
lifetime.
This convention aims to stop the transport of
invasive marine species from one part of the globe to
another in the ballast water by ensuring the water is
treated before discharge into the sea or is discharged
into fixed onshore facilities where it can be treated.
Several onboard systems have been developed
to date. However, a factor to consider for the
hull coatings industry is: should these ballast
water treatment processes be compatible with
the prescribed coatings, or should coatings be
compatible with the systems?
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
The Maths: The Cost of Hull Roughness
According to the International Paint ‘Hull Roughness Penalty Calculator’ model. This is a software
programme that predicts the inevitable increase in underwater hull roughness during the specified in
service period and combines this with the risk of fouling associated with different antifouling types.
The model compares fuel usage and cost to the installation cost of different TBT free antifouling and
foul release systems to derive potential net benefit.
The model is also able to compare the exhaust emissions (CO2, SOX) associated with the additional
fuel consumption for a particular vessel. The effect of coating roughness on ship performance can be
calculated using the Townsin1 formulae below:
Fractional Added Resistance ( ∆ R/R) for going from a smooth (AHR = k 1 ) to a rough (AHR = k 2 )
surface:
∆ R/R = ∆ C F /C T = 0.044[(k 2 /L) 1/3 – (k 1 /L) 1/3 ]/C T
Where:
∆ = Change in resistance, power, speed or propeller efficiency due to increased roughness ∆ C F =
Frictional Resistance coefficient increase
C T = Total Resistance coefficient = ([Total Resistance]/0.5 ρ S V 2 ) or very approx. = 0.018 L -1/3 (if C
T value cannot be found otherwise, and where L is in metres)
ρ = Seawater density
S = Surface wetted area of vessel
V = Speed of vessel
L = Length between perpendiculars of vessel Hull roughness gauge in use
Fractional Power increase ( ∆ P/P) at constant speed for going fr om a smooth (AHR=k 1 ) to rough
(AHR=k 2 ) surface: 1+ ∆ P/P = (1 + ∆ R/R) (1+ ∆ η η / η η ) -1
Where:
P = Shaft Power
η = Open water propeller efficiency
For Ro-Ro ships: (1+ ∆η / η ) -1 = 0.17 (1 + ∆ R/R) + 0.83
For Tankers: (1+ ∆η / η ) -1 = 0.30 (1 + ∆ R/R) + 0.70
Fractional Speed Loss ( ∆ V/V) at constant power, for going from a smooth (AHR=k 1 ) to rough
(AHR=k 2 ) surface: ∆ V/V = ∆ P/P (n + 1) -1
Where:
n = speed index = ~2.15 for Tankers and Bulk Carrier
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
13-14
The Future: Challenges, Drivers for Change, and MarketShaping Trends
There are a number of key challenges and drivers
These factors will put pressure on the market
that the industry is facing that will trigger change in whilst other trends will trigger further demand and
the market.
development in the market. The preference for vessel
lay-up and operating at lower loads requires new
Firstly, declines in shipbuilding after many years of solutions, whilst increasing bunker prices makes the
overhang and overtonnage will start to bite; for the demand for an optimised hull condition all the more
hull coatings market this will mean a drop in the
important.
volume of newbuild hull coating application orders.
The clock is ticking for coatings manufacturers to
With a lay-up of 10% worldwide, the coatings
prove to operators that they can offer non TBTindustry has also suffered from cancellations and
based paints with pre-TBT performance. For that
delays in newbuildings and in maintenance work
reason perhaps the current difficulty in the market
when operators have realised that losing their deposit would be more aptly described as growing pains
and idling the ship would result in less losses than
than any more sinister a market trend.
attempting to operate.
A study by Frost & Sullivan in 2011 estimated that
Secondly, ship management companies, as a way
the market earned revenues of over US$5bn in 2011,
of surviving during difficult economic times,
and estimated that figure to reach US$10.2bn by
will consolidate. This consolidation process will
2018.
strengthen the buying power of individual clients,
thereby putting pressure on coatings prices.
“The need to lower fuel consumption is a strong
market driver and antifouling coatings applied to
The technical ramification of this future drop in
ships’ hulls offer one way to combat emissions
pricing is that it will impair the ability of coatings
and reduce fuel consumption,” explained Frost &
companies to invest in R&D projects at a time when Sullivan Research Director Dr Leonidas Dokos.
they are needed more than ever.
“Foul-release technology, which also results in
substantial fuel savings, is particularly useful for
An additional challenge, as Azko Nobel has
large cargo ships, which consume a lot of fuel.”
pointed out in the past, is that hull coatings have
a long development cycle due to the lack of
reliable accelerated test methods and considerable
formulation work required to meet anti-fouling
performance, mechanical and application property
requirements. The development cycle consists
of laboratory and assay tests, field trials and test
patching.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Market Barriers
When considering market barriers, the 2012 study
published by the European Commission (EC)
Analysis of market barriers to cost effective GHG
emission reductions in the maritime transport sector.
(Reference: CLIMA.B.3/SER/2011/0014) is useful
to refer to in order to gain insight into the process
and background of market barrier identification.
In this section we identify the main market barriers
to the uptake of hull coating technology solutions,
split by technical limitations and non-technical
limitations.
Technical Limitations
Slow-Steaming
The EC’s analysis reports that operating ships
at lower speeds is the single “best” solution to
reduce marine GHG emissions. However, as
the study points out, “operating vessels at lower
speeds dramatically changes the economics of
implementing other GHG solutions.”
This is inherently true for hull coatings. A key issue
for foul-release coatings is the fact that they are
dependent on the ship’s movement though the water
to remove the bio-fouling from the hull. The EC
study notes that “certain types of new hull coatings
may not be as effective at low engine loads.”
The technical limitations of a hull coating product is
This is because during periods of no movement,
dependent on a number of factors:
or very slow movement due to slow-steaming, the
natural cleaning effect from the water’s circulation
• The efficacy of the hull coating.
around the hull is minimised, which means that bio• The impact of slow-steaming.
fouling builds up.
• The technical maturity of the products.
• Differences in performance.
Once the bio-fouling has built up as a result of
this reduced engine load, returning to usual speeds
(which would be nonetheless extremely unlikely in
The Efficacy of the Hull Coating
current market conditions, and according to market
“Whereas TBT-based coatings dominated the market forecasts, in the future) would not be enough to
remove the biofouling, especially if the marine
prior to the ban, it is not clear whether the new
organisms have had a chance to develop into macro“biocidal” or “foul-release” coatings will evolve as
the superior approach to hull coating,” the EC study organisms or even established a full-blown biofouling community on the side of the ship.
notes.
“The ability of some of the newer hull coatings to
live up to their claims of extremely long life is a
technical concern” it admitted.
However, the technical issues that surround the
new coating products are not simply down to
the mediocrity of the products; if anything, more
research and precaution is going into the preparation
of the coatings than ever before.
As a result, the ship will have to be cleaned more
often.
To conclude, whilst slow-steaming is the number
one tactic of offsetting fuel costs, it has triggered
other unforeseen costs in other areas of the vessel’s
operations.
It should also be noted that the technical
performance of the coatings has been impacted by
market conditions (e.g. widespread slow steaming
and extended idle periods) that could not have been
foreseen at the time of their development.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
15-16
Technical Maturity
A fundamental market barrier to the uptake of hull
coating solutions is the maturity of the technology,
the relative number of installations and the proven
delivery of promised savings.
With most cutting-edge solutions naturally having
a relatively short track record in the industry, ship
owners and operators can naturally be wary of
utilising them.
However, it should be considered that particularly
following the foul release coatings issue, the hull
coatings industry has learnt valuable lesson on the
research that needs to be carried out to ensure true
market wide applicability and reliability.
The Good News – The
Changing of Market Barriers to
Market Drivers
Market barriers and drivers are sometimes two sides
of the same coin.
There are some market drivers that have spurred the
hull coatings industry to develop best practices and
be ahead of the regulatory curve.
This has allowed the sector to cope with and further
leverage market changes.
The hull coatings sector excels in anticipating
changes in regulation.
The newest generation of hull coatings have been
They make tremendous investment and efforts in
tested under a far greater range of operating profiles early R&D efforts to meet these anticipated changes.
and conditions than ever before
It is no quick process to develop and test coatings.
Non-Technical Barriers
Non-technical barriers include:
• Lack of a market-wide performance measuring
standard to allow for easy comparison between
products, which exacerbates the technical barrier of
possible product under-performance.
• Lack of information or understanding of the
economic returns relative to other coatings on the
market.
• Increased price of non TBT-based paints and
possible need to re-coat more often.
They have also been good at adopting consistent
and coherent regulation globally, with any potential
market changes already identified and expected.
This means that vessels tend not to suffer from
restrictions in trading areas.
Latterly, they have also started to offer performance
guarantees to clients in order to allay concerns about
the coatings not living up to the claims.
It is a multi-billion dollar market and therefore it
tends to swiftly address how to overcome the market
barriers in order to open the opportunity that comes
with their removal.
• Split incentives under term charters.
• Patents that limit the flow of information between
manufacturers and also of performance information
into the market.
The impact of non-technical market barriers could be
mitigated by further investment in new technologies
followed by the effective communication to
industry stakeholders as to the benefits of this new
technology.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Image Courtesy of HYDREX
ul
H
um
3
r
m
i
e
t
t
p
p
eO
ha
C
h
T
g
n
i
s
o
o
g
n
i
t
l Coa
Ch
The Ideal Coating Checklist
There are a number of high level factors which must be taken into consideration when evaluating which
coating system to deploy onto a ship, either at newbuild stage or during routine maintenance of the hull and
its coating.
The different factors listed below are a checklist of the essentials that should be considered when evaluating
and selecting a hull coating system.
For the purpose of this table, anti-fouling paints are the focus.
However, it must be noted that, a system must also be put in place for corrosion protection.
Factors
Longevity
Suitability
Questions to ask
What is the lifespan of
the coating? Will the
coating remain active
5-7 years in-between dry
docking periods?
Why?
Varying systems have a
varying lifespan. Some
systems are designed to last
3 - 5 years. Some will aim to
last the lifetime of the vessel.
This will vary on type of
product chosen.
The lifespan of the coating
can make a real variance
in total ownership cost
of the vessel, factoring in
dry docking time, cost of
materials and labour, and offhire time.
Will the coating system Different ships, fleets, routes,
suit the needs of a
activities operate under
particular vessel or fleet? different conditions, therefore
will demand varying aspects
e.g. Is the hull coating
suitable for use on ships from a hull coating product.
with lay-up times of any
length?
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Check for
Product specific lifespan
information and case
studies of longevity from
manufacturer.
The vessel’s trade route or
voyage path, frequency of
port calls, lay up periods.
Ask for specific evidence
that the product is suitable
for that type of route. It may
not be available but should
be asked.
17-18
Factors
Product
Features
Regulatory
Demands
Condition
Questions to ask
How thick is the
coating? How abrasive
resistant? How
flexible or brittle?
Is it completely
impermeable?
Will the coating have to
be replaced in the future
due to regulations or
legislation?
How smooth will the
hull be after coating?
What rate of fouling
should you expect with
the coating?
Maintenance – How frequently must
Cleaning (hard the hull be cleaned
coatings)
to maintain coating
performance?
How suitable is the hull
coating suitable for
cleaning, in dry dock
and/or underwater?
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Why?
The answers to these
questions have much to do
with how well the coating
will survive under harsh or
varying conditions.
Although there is nothing
immediately in the pipeline,
in the wake of the IMO ban
on TBT, biocidal paints are
continually under scrutiny.
The future potential demands
on the hull coatings market
from regulation should at
least be thought of with ships
in the newbuild stage or
requiring a full repaint.
Different hull coatings will
cause different levels of hull
resistance due to skin friction
even when no fouling is
present.
More skin friction means
higher fuel consumption.
Another key consideration
after basic protection has
been established, is how the
coating system deals with
marine fouling.
It is important to ascertain
how often the hull will
require maintenance and
what impact this will have on
the coating.
In the absence of regular dry
docking, in-water cleaning is
a necessity if a ship is to run
at optimum performance.
Check for
The challenges a vessel may
face on specific trade routes,
such as mechanical force,
bumps and scrapes, ice and
other challenges, varying
water temperate etc.
Is there any likelihood
that the paint compounds
could be banned within the
lifespan of that coating?
Case studies from
manufacturer.
The following points need to
be considered:
- Does routine underwater
cleaning damage the
coating? - Can the coating
be cleaned without damage
to it?
-Will in-water cleaning
of the hull pose and
environmental hazard,
such as a pulse release of
biocides, silicone oils or
other substances? How can
this be mitigated?
Factors
Maintenance
– Repainting/
Repairing
Questions to ask
How often does
the coating system
require major repair or
reapplication?
Does the coating have
any special application
requirements?
Why?
This can be a major cost.
Surface preparation plus
application of paint can vary
from 5 or 6 days for some
coatings to as much as 17 or
18 days for others.
How easy is the coating
to repair or touch up if it
is damaged?
Fuel-Saving
Does the manufacturer The type of hull coating
guarantee performance? product and system can make
a big difference to the ship’s
fuel efficiency.
Does the hull coating
Great care must be taken to
system lead to greater
understand exactly HOW any
fuel efficiency and
therefore reduced GHG fuel savings are calculated.
Note: It is actually ‘reduced
and other emissions?
loss in performance’ that
claims are made on not active
savings themselves i.e. paint
will degrade in performance
less than another.
Environmental Is the coating system
The coating system used on
Concerns
toxic or not toxic to the a ship can have a negative
oceans and waterways? impact on the environment.
Therefore the decision should
include the environmental
Does the in-water
cleaning of the coating consequences of its use.
present any additional
environmental hazard? It may be that corporate
social responsibility concerns
are a factor in the decision
Does the application
process.
or removal of the
coating constitute an
environmental hazard?
Check for
How many coats need to be
applied and how long does
this take in dry dock?
Are there any special
precautions or requirements
for correct application or to
obtain claimed savings?
Third party verification?
Is there an associated
monitoring software
package offered with the
product to measure the ‘fuel
saving’?
Does the product contain:
-Heavy metals
-Biocides
-VOCs
-Toxic waste
-Silicone or fluropolymer
oils
Does the hull coating
system help or inhibit
the translocation of hullborne, non-indigenous,
invasive marine species?
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
19-20
Factors
Cost
Questions to ask
Why?
How much does the paint Cost is a vital consideration
in choosing a hull coating
cost?
system for a new vessel or
What surface preparation for repainting an existing
is required and what does vessel. However, prices
per litre of paint can be
that cost?
misleading, as can cost of
How much does it cost to surface preparation.
apply the coating?
There are a number of factors
How many times can one which contribute to the
expect to have to repaint real cost of a hull coating
system and they must all be
in the ship’s lifetime?
taken into account for a total
ownership cost assessment.
What frequency of inwater cleaning is required
for a particular system
and how much will this
cost?
Check for
Beware of solely looking at
price per litre. What are the
total costs of materials for
coating the entire hull?
Some hull coating systems
require five or more coats
with lengthy curing times
in between, stretching a full
painting job out to as much
as 17 days or more.
Others can be applied in just
two coats with a few hours
between coats and can be
fully prepared and painted
in under a week, ready for
launching or re-launching.
The costs involved include
labour, dry dock time and
off-hire time.
How much will the fuel
penalty incurred by a
particular coating system
add to the total ownership
cost of hull?
Ensure you understand the
whole cost cycle.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Hull Coating Chemistry
Due to the penalties associated with and the severe
impact of the unwanted colonisation of a hull surface
by marine organisms, primarily through negative
impact on hydrodynamics via increased drag, antifouling systems are in great use across the maritime
industry.
The principle mitigation tactic for reducing the
impact of hull fouling is through preventing the
attachment of fouling, and therefore minimising
drag.
Therefore, there have been great advancements in
the manipulation of the chemistry that sits behind
anti-fouling products to prevent the attachment of
fouling.
It must also be noted that although hull cleaning
measures such as under water scrubbing can be
deployed to mitigate hull fouling. Thus far the use
of under water scrubbing as the sole method for
complete hull fouling mitigation has not been proven
to be viable for the vast majority of the world’s fleet.
There are four main tributyltin TBT-free fouling
control technologies currently available:
• Biocidal
- Self-Polishing Copolymer (SPC)
- Contact Leaching Systems
- Controlled Depletion Polymer (CDP)
• Foul Release
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Biocidal Anti-Fouling Coatings
Biocidal anti-fouling coatings function by creating
a microlayer of biocide rich environment at the
paint surface, which prevents marine organisms
from attaching. These coatings also contain active
ingredients, which prevent or slow marine growth.
There are currently only three main forms of
biocides that can be used in anti-fouling systems:
• Metallic
• Organometallic
• Organic
Few biocides have had the necessary combination
of characteristics to make them safe, yet effective
antifouling agents. Mercury, arsenic and their
compounds, and also now the organotins, are
examples of effective antifouling agents that
have been deemed unacceptable due to adverse
environmental or human health risks.
TBT-based coatings were introduced in the mid1960s and were common in the latter half of the 20th
century as an effective anti-fouling solution.
However, their acute toxicity to non-target marine
organisms had severe environmental impacts and a
complete ban on TBT paints entered into force on
17th September 2008.
Copper-based biocides are the most commonly used,
and often in combination with organic biocides in
order to achieve a wider spectrum of activity.
21-22
Releasing Biocidal Agents
For biocidal anti-fouling coatings to be effective, the
biocides have to be released into the sea.
The most common method of releasing biocidal
agents is through a combined leaching/polishing
process. Seawater first diffuses into the coating and
then the biocide leaches out. As each new layer of
paint is exposed and then worn away, new layers
come into contact with the water and the process
repeats.
The so-called “Self-polishing” coatings use a
binder, which is partially soluble in seawater,
meaning that as biocide is released the coating
also becomes smoother over time. The two main
variations of self-polishing coatings are controlled
depletion polymers (CDP) and self-polishing
copolymers (SPC). Both require a current of
water to wash away the coating layers, so are not
suitable for vessels that spend long periods of time
laid up.
Sea water is alkaline (pH ~ 8) and biocidal antifoulings work by having an acidic binder component
that can dissolve in sea water, thus releasing
biocides.
The method behind biocidal release is that the
surface will not foul provided that the release rate
of the biocide(s) is above a critical release rate
threshold value (CRTV). Therefore, the objective
is to control and maintain the release rate above the
CRTV for as long as possible. To address this the
market hosts “Controlled Release” technologies
that are used to give maximum performance and
enhanced lifetimes of the anti-fouling coating.
Modern anti-foul coatings use a binder, which is
partially soluble in seawater, hence allowing the
steady release of sufficient amounts of biocide
and, thereby, extending the active lifetime of the
coating. The two main variations of self-polishing
coatings are controlled depletion polymers (CDP)
and self-polishing copolymers (SPC). Both require a
current of water to wash away the coating layers at
the required rate, so are not suitable for vessels that
spend long periods of time laid up.
The three main soluble acid binder options
to enable biocide release in sea water are:
- Controlled Depletion Polymer (CDP)
- Hybrid SPC
- Self-Polishing Copolymer (SPC)
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
BIOCIDE (DISPERSED IN A RESINOUS MATRIX)
Clarity of Terms Used
Note to the reader: The descriptions “Selfpolishing” and “Self-polishing Copolymer”
(SPC) are not the same.
The term ‘self-polishing refers to the effect
obtained with an anti-fouling coating in which
the coating has a controlled decrease in its
thickness.
The term ‘Self-polishing Copolymer’ refers to a
type of polymers that fulfill the requirement of
Self-Polishing, for example CDP.
Biocide Release: Self-Polishing
Copolymer (SPC)
Self-Polishing Copolymer (SPC) anti-foulings
release biocides via the hydrolysis or ion exchange
reaction of an acrylic polymer with seawater, to form
an acid polymer, which is then soluble in seawater.
This results in thinner leached layers and thus much
better control of biocide release.
SPC coatings require the binder to react with
seawater first before it becomes soluble. This
happens via hydrolysis – the breaking of chemical
bonds by the addition of water. The process results
in thinner leached layers than CDP coatings and so
better control of biocide release over time and selfsmoothening. These paints are claimed to be higher
performance although more expensive.
The main types of SPC polymer are nanocapsule
acrylates, metal acrylate and silyl acrylate. Silyl
acrylate coatings have a slow initial rate of
polishing, while metal acrylate coatings have a fast
initial rate of polishing however both demonstrate
a steady rate of polishing over time. Nanocapsule
acrylates have a more balanced behaviour. All are
long-lasting and easy to re-coat.
SPC coatings can also be formulated with some
co-binders such as rosin or derivatives, to improve
the properties of the film. The combination of SPC
coatings plus co-binder are often referred to as
‘Hybrid SPC’ coatings.
In terms of chemistry, hybrid SPC technology are
formulated via a mixture of hydrolysis and hydration
mechanisms, combining SPC acrylic polymers with
a certain amount of co-binder.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
SPC Features:
- Controlled, chemical dissolution of the paint film,
capable of giving long dry dock intervals
- Predictable polishing, enabling “tailor-made”
specifications by vessel type/operation
- Thin Leached Layers = simple cleaning and recoating
- Ideal for newbuildings
- Excellent weatherability
- Good mechanical properties
Hybrid SPC Features:
- High volume solids content
- Polishing control
- Surface tolerant
- Good film properties
- Control of biocide release
- Good anti-fouling performance
Biocide Release: Contact Leaching
Contact leaching anti-foulings were introduced
in the 1960’s and were designed to increase
antifouling lifetimes by increasing the biocide
content.
Also known as hard racing or long life paints,
contact leaching paints have an insoluble matrix
and continuous biocide release if generated by the
high biocide concentration ensuring that biocide
particles contact each other through the paint film.
As surface biocide is released, microchannels
are created which permit release of biocide from
deeper in the coating. Biocide release rates decrease
exponentially with time and effective life is again
limited to periods rarely exceeding 18 months.
23-24
Biocide Release: Controlled Depletion
Polymer (CDP)
CDP coatings have rosin-derivatives as the main
polishing-inducing binder.
The soluble binder, natural rosin contains around
90% abietic acid and has been used for over 100
years in antifouling paints.
Rosin, as a soluble binder has a low mechanical
strength. As a general rule; the higher the solubility
of the coating, the lower the mechanical strength, so
there is a necessary trade-off in order for the coating
to resist abrasion and damage. Leached layers of
paint can build up, which slows biocide release
down and inhibits smoothing.
Rosin has some disadvantages:
- it is a brittle material, and can cause cracking and
detachment;
- it reacts with oxygen and has to be immersed
relatively quickly;
- it does not prevent water going into the depth of the
antifouling paint film.
Rosin can be used at low level to form hard
“Insoluble Matrix” anti-foulings, or high level to
form soft “Soluble Matrix” anti-foulings.
It is the modern “Soluble Matrix” anti-foulings are
now commonly referred to as CDP anti-foulings.
CDP coating exhibit slow dissolution of the paint
film in sea-water, this dissolution gradually slows
down over time, due to the formation of insoluble
materials at the surface.
Also, leached layers can become thick, suppressing
biocide release and increasing roughness.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
CDP Features:
- CDP anti-foulings have thick leached layers,
which limit performance and negatively affect recoatability.
- CDP anti-foulings are claimed to be not as
effective as SPC systems
- CDP products are the lowest cost per sq. m “value
for money” anti-foulings, and are suitable for use in
lower fouling areas or for vessels with short drydock intervals
Biocide Release: Hybrid SPC
Hybrid SPC coatings are a combination of CDP and
SPC technology. Hybrid SPC technology works by
a mixture of hydrolysis and hydration mechanisms,
combining SPC acrylic polymers with a certain
amount of Rosin.
In terms of performance and price, they are
mid-way between the two. Copper pyrithione is
commonly used as a co-biocide.
Hybrid SPC Features:
- High volume solids content
- Polishing control
- Surface tolerant
- Good film properties
- Control of biocide release
- Good anti-fouling performance
Foul Release Coatings
Foul Release: Silicone
Foul release coatings (FRCs) function by preventing
or reducing the adhesion (“non-stick”) of fouling
organisms to vessel hulls. The flora and fauna
species that colonise on the hull, which contribute to
marine fouling, typically attach to hull surfaces by
exuding special ‘glues’, with the strength of the glue
dependent on the glue’s ability to spread over the
surface and bind to it.
Silicone coatings are the oldest type of foul release
coatings and are still the foundation over which all
modern fouling release coatings have been built on.
In terms of chemistry, foul release coatings typically
have low “surface energy”, which is a measure of the
way they bind with other substances.
This low surface energy degrades an organism’s
ability to generate a strong interfacial bond with
the surface via the aforementioned ‘glues’. The
smoothness ‘Non Stick’ properties of the coating
at the molecular level allows for organisms to be
dislodged once the vessel is moving beyond a critical
velocity.
As a general rule, substances with a low surface
energy are harder to wet (i.e. harder for a liquid to
spread across), and so harder for adhesives to stick
to.
Silicone coatings are still the most common type of
foul release coatings.
Traditional silicone-based coatings foul relatively
fast, so they require that the vessel stays sailing
most of the time and preferably at high speeds (i.e.
above 15 knots).
Silicone coatings have several other properties that
distinguish them from other anti-fouling coatings.
They are generally smoother and have a higher
volume of solids, which reduces their solvent
emissions when applied.
Silicone-based technology relies on the unique
surface chemistry of siloxanes to which fouling
cannot easily adhere. These formulations are
typically comprised of a silanol (SiOH) functional
polydimethylsiloxane, silica, catalysts and an
alkoxy functional silane or silicate crosslinker.
To work effectively, foul release coatings need to
have a minimum thickness in order to have the
required flexibility and assist in the self-cleaning
of any weakly-attached fouling that manages to
settle on the coating. This thickness is always lower
than that of biocide-based anti-foul coatings. All
commercial foul release coatings contain oils, which
migrate to the surface and improve their overall
effectiveness.
There are three main ways of modifying the surface
of silicone-based coatings: modified silicone oils,
fluoropolymers and hydrogels.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
25-26
Foul Release: Fluoropolymer
Foul Release: Hydrogel
Polymers containing fluorine can also be used to
create a low energy surface with non-stick properties
designed to prevent adhesion of marine fouling.
Hydrogel-based fouling release coatings move
the concept of fouling release to the opposite
extreme, hydrophilic surfaces. Inspired by
advanced biomedical research, these coatings
contain a hydrophilic modified silicone polymer
that migrates to the surface upon immersion and
creates a hydrogel layer at the outermost surface of
the coating. Water trapped in this layer presents the
biofouling organisms with a surface unlike other
surfaces in the marine environment. Abundant
research show that this chemistry provides
upgraded fouling protection, and these coatings
claim to release fouling down to 8 knots of speed
and down to 50% of activity.
A Fluoropolymer is a polymer, with multiple strong
carbon– fluorine bonds, with the consumer product
‘Teflon’ being the most commonly recognised
example (but which unfortunately has poor fouling
prevention properties).
Fluoropolymer based fouling release stands for
silicone coatings, which are modified by small
amounts of fluorinated oils.
Fluoropolymer chemistry represents the very latest
advances in foul release technology, significantly
improving upon the performance of the best silicone
based systems as they provide an ultra-smooth
surface.
Fluoropolymer systems provide an amphiphilic
surface. It has been established that marine
fouling organisms secrete an adhesive, either of a
hydrophobic or hydrophilic nature depending on the
fouling species. By having a balanced amphiphilic
surface fluoropolymers can minimise the chemical
and electrostatic adhesion between the surface and
a wide range of fouling organisms. The amphiphilic
surface physically deters the settlement of organisms
simply by nature of the surface.
Therefore, the basic concept behind this is to provide
an amphiphilic surface with both hydrophobic
(“water-hating”) and hydrophilic (“water loving”)
areas
Fluoropolymer oils also are also leached into the
water to increase the effectiveness of these fouling
release coating systems.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Foul Release Coatings Features:
• Foul Release coatings are durable fouling control
systems for Scheduled Ships
• Foul Release coatings give equivalent
performance to SPC systems without the use of
biocides.
• Foul Release coatings generally have an average
hull roughness (AHR) under 100 microns, which
is smoother than most biocidal anti-foulings
• Foul Release coatings are based on silicone
chemistry, and are thus very
• Durable, both above and below water
• They retain their gloss and do not change colour,
even after prolonged immersion periods, in
contrast to biocidal anti-foulings
Costs at Maintenance & Repair can be
lower with FRCs because:
• Only touch up is required at dry docking(s) up to
60 months.
• After 60 months only a single full re-coat (100
microns) of finish is required.
• Washing is easy & quick.
• There is reduced waste during paint application
(fewer cans).
• Draft marks do not need to be re-painted.
Therefore:
Alternative Coatings
• Potentially less time in dry dock.
• Intervals between dry dock can be flexible, up to
60 months.
• No expensive treatment of the wash water or
abrasive is needed.
A number of alternative and innovative approaches
to hull fouling prevention have come onto the
market or are currently in development. A selection
of alternative coating solutions and innovative
approaches to combatting hull fouling are profiled
below.
Advantages of Foul Release Systems:
• No release of biocide in to the environment.
• Unlikely to be affected by future environmental
legislation.
• Reduced paint volume (and solvent emitted) on
first application.
• Good anti-fouling performance on a range of vessel
types.
• Good resistance to mechanical damage.
• Reduced hull roughness giving improvements in
vessel performance and reducing emissions.
• Less time in dock, paint required and application
costs at future dockings.
• Keeps fouling off the propellers.
Disadvantages of Foul Release Coatings:
• Higher initial cost of paint and application.
• Quality of application is very important −Masking
and dedicated equipment required.
• As product is biocide-free, resistance to slime for
silicone foul release systems are lower than some
biocidal anti-foulings.
Hard Coatings
Hard coatings are a third type of marine coating
which, like fouling release coatings, are not reactive
with seawater and do not contain biocides. They
have the advantage of not gradually dissolving and
also provide very good mechanical resistance and
anticorrosive properties.
Microfibre foils consist of a film of tiny fibres
that are applied to vessel hulls.
These can prevent microorganisms from settling
via the density of the foil and the swaying motion
of individual fibres. For single cell organisms that
form chains, such as micro-algae, the swaying
motion damages the cell structure, which causes the
threads of organisms to eventually be cut off rather
than staying attached. This can also prevent algae
spores from sticking and from finding their way to
the hull surface.
Stimulated Release coatings use periodic
stimulus to change the shape of the hull surface and
knock any attached organisms off. This technology
is currently in development by Duke University,
with the stimulus in question being an electric
current, although the technology does not yet have a
commercial application.
Water Encapsulation is a new technology
that Nippon Paint claims to employ. This enhances
the self-polishing properties of an SDP coating by
trapping water in bumps in the hull coating, creating
a smoother surface than the paint alone.
However, the mechanism behind this effect is not
clear; whether it is a function of the polymer being
used or another technology has not been specified.
However, to be truly effective against marine
fouling, use of these coatings needs to be combined
with a regular method for hull cleaning. Such
coatings also need to be able to flex with a vessels
hull, so the best coatings will combine extreme
hardness with flexibility.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
27-28
Natural Product Anti-Foulants
Biomimetics is defined as the study of the
For example, materials harnessed from terrestrial
trees & plants such as tea-tree oil and capsaicin and
materials harnessed from marine organisms & plants
such as furanones, zosteric acid have been widely
used.
A number of technologies inspired by nature are
worth considering as antifouling strategies such as
surface texture, mucus and secondary metabolites.
have been the centre of much research over the last
20 years.
In August 2013, Pettit announced the launch of
Hydrocoat Eco, a self-polishing ablative coating
with naturally-derived biocide.
Hydrocoat Eco consists of self-polishing, waterbased, ablative technology that has as its active
ingredient the organic biocide Econea. The company
claims that tests show that antifoulants made with
6% Econea are as effective as those made with 50%
copper.
Natural product anti-foulants features:
Positive
• Perceived as an environmentally acceptable
solution​.
• Data exists that demonstrates the efficacy of some
natural products.
Negative
• Natural product anti-foulants are natural biocides,
and in many cases very little data exists with
regard to their toxicity and/or degradation in the
environment.
• In many cases the materials are complex organic
molecules that are very costly to synthesise.
structure and function of biological systems
and processes as models or inspiration for the
sustainable design and engineering of materials
and machines.
For example, one strategy is inspired by the lowdrag performance of sharkskin surfaces made
to mimic their grooved scales (placoid scales,
which resemble tiny spines that protrude from
the surface). These scales are almost parallel
to the longitudinal body axis of the shark and
their presence has been shown to reduce drag by
5–10%.
Surface Technology or
Nanotechnology is defined as ‘the
manipulation of matter on an atomic and molecular
scale.’ In essence, nanotechnology can be
described as the science of molecular engineering,
and is currently changing the way many industries
think of surface coatings.
Nanomaterials are finding applications in
marine antifouling. The inherently small size of
nanoparticles means they remain in the lattice of
the antifoul coating. Although they do not readily
leach out, they slowly release ions to provide longterm antifouling performance.
An example of nanotechnology innovation
within for hull coatings application is
described in the academic paper: Natalio
et al, 2012 ‘Inspired by nature: Paints and
coatings containing bactericidal agent
nanoparticles combat marine fouling”
It makes use of tiny vanadium pentoxide
nanowires and is inspired by one of nature’s
own defense mechanisms in which so-called
vanadium haloperoxidase enzymes play a
crucial role.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
A Snapshot of the Market: Hull Coating Manufacturer Profiles
Advanced Marine Coatings
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
Advanced Marine Coatings (AMC) is a specialist
manufacturer of marine coatings headquartered in
Norway. Their product range applies to decks, cargo
holds, ballast tanks and underwater hulls, having
been tested both in laboratories since 2006 and on
commercial vessels since 2008.
Advanced Marine Coatings Antifoul,
Super Sleek
In 2006, the company experimented with a nanomodified epoxy coating formulation applied on
a speed boat. Preliminary tests showed that the
coating made a difference of several knots in terms
of the speed, compared to traditional anti-fouling
paints. Over the next three years, AMC continued to
improve the formula. Subsequent tests on different
types of boats with depths of up to 40 metres
demonstrated an increase in speed of 6 to 10%, or a
corresponding reduction in fuel consumption.
The foremost feature of AMC products is their
use of carbon nano-tubes in epoxy-based coatings.
Preliminary tests showed that the coating made a
difference of several knots in terms of the speed,
compared to traditional anti-fouling paints. Over
the next three years, AMC continued to improve
the formula. Subsequent tests on different types of
boats with drafts of up to 40 metres demonstrated
an increase in speed of 6 to 10%, or a corresponding
reduction in fuel consumption. The use of carbon
nano-tubes is also said to provide a stable, flexible
coating surface without leading to compromises on
other key mechanical properties such as adhesion
and resistance to wear.
AMC also has a heavy involvement in cooperative
research and development initiatives around the
use of nano-technology. They hold partnerships
with a wide range of institutes including SINTEF,
the Max Planck Institute, EADS, Daimler, the YKI
Institute for Surface Chemistry, SP, VTT, SAAB, and
Vattenfall.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
An anti-foul system based on copper oxide slowly
leaking through the coating during a span of several
years. The pore free coating film has proved to be
extremely hydrophobic and water repellent. The
coating remains very smooth and has low friction
against water. In addition the nano reinforcement
ensures that the coating does not lift from the steel
surface if washed by high pressure water cleaners.
Type of Coating: Biocidal
Known Ship Types: Particularly suitable for
vessels involved in washing regimes and high speed
ferries or catamarans.
Savings: Speed trials have proven that it is possible
to increase speed up 10% compared to alternative
anti-foulings.
Manufacturer Application Guidance: It is applied
with roller, brush or spray and without added
solvents (VOC).
Recent Vessels/Clients: AMC states that their AFS
Hybrid coating has been applied on the bulb of a
cruise vessel owned by a “leading cruise operator”
since October 2011. Further details of the trial were
unavailable.
The first ship to test the AMC anti-fouling range
was the LNG carrier Berge Arzew owned by BW
Gas. In mid-2009, large areas of the subsea and
topside of the vessel were covered with the paint,
with trial results said to be positive. Several types
of coatings have also been applied to passenger
ferries for Torghatten Nord, with results stated as
promising although no specifics listed.
29-30
Brunel Marine Coating
Systems
Brunel Marine Coating Systems are headquartered in
Gibraltar.
In 1995, Brunel embarked on a project to ‘develop
the most environmentally friendly and durable
underwater coating possible’. Their first product,
EnviroMarine, was launched in 1999.
The products in Brunel’s range are said to
be completely inert, are able to be applied in
high humidity conditions and harmless to the
environment. Brunel can also supply bespoke
coating systems tailored for the requirements of
specific customers, such as for difficult substrates or
diverse application circumstances.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
EnviroMarine
EnviroMarine is a hard, inert coating. It is the only
hard coating on the market that is made up of 100%
solids. The finished coating has a surface co-efficient
of friction less than that of glass, and is selfcleaning - very low speeds or water movement being
sufficient to clear the surface of any growth.
According to Brunel, the impervious surface of
this coating does not support marine growth, and
performance is maintained without the need to shed
sacrificial layers.
EnviroMarine only requires a total of three coats of
100 microns each, minimising application costs, dry
docking time and additional vessel weight.
Type of Coating: Foul Release.
Known Ship Types: All.
Manufacturer Application Guidance: Can be
applied quickly using a conventional airless pump.
No specialised equipment or training is needed.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Certification: DNV has certified EnviroMarine as
the only coatings system in existence approved for a
ten year docking interval.
Other Stated Benefits: A coefficient of friction less
than that of glass.
Recent Vessels/Clients: EnviroMarine was first
applied to the forward and aft thirds of the M/V
CP Prospect, a 225m containership, in 2000.
The middle was coated with a top of the range
anti-fouling paint system, supplied by a leading
manufacturer, with an identical application method
aside from the number of coats being greater due to
requirements.
After six years of service which covered both
sub-zero and tropical waters, the areas coated with
EnviroMarine showed no signs of delamination
or reduction in film thickness, compared with the
middle third which has shed 85% of its coating. The
owner subsequently elected to have the middle third
coated with EnviroMarine.
In July 2009 EnviroMarine was also applied to
the 6800m2 RoRo the MV Slingeborg, owned by
Cobelfret. Which Brunel states is now realising
significant fuel savings. However, the levels of
these savings have not been made publically
available.
Chugoku Marine Paints
Chugoku Marine Paints is a global supplier of
high quality paints headquartered and based in
Japan, with product ranges tailored for the marine,
industrial and container sectors.
The company has been manufacturing marine paints
since 1917 and has a service network that extends
to 40 countries across Asia, America, the Middle
East and Europe. Technical research laboratories
are located in Otake City and Yasu City in Japan,
Shanghai in China as well as in Singapore.
Chugoku Marine Paints offer the product series
SEAFLO NEO.
SEAFLO NEO is a high performance TBT-free
hydrolysis anti-fouling coating, utilising a unique
polymer to deliver an ultra smooth surface and
self-polishing performance. SEAFLO NEO is the
lowest VOC (330g/L) antifouling in the hydrolysis
category.
Extra Stated Benefits: Long paint life, reduction
in paint consumption leading to a reduction in
labour costs. A 30% reduction in the amount of
paint used and 40% reduction in VOCs compared to
conventional paints.
Technical Maturity: Over 100 vessels to date.
In-service Interval: Up to 60 months.
Recent Case Studies: Mitsui OSK Lines (MOL)
adopted the low-friction SEAFLO NEO in 2011 for
two newbuild car carriers. According to analysis
by MOL, the paint offers improvements in fuel
efficiency compared to conventional paints on
newbuilds.
Information of Interest: Even lower friction
can be obtained if SEAFLO NEO is used in
combination with Universal Epoxy Primer
“BANNOH 1500” which obtains high solid (73%)
content and self-levelling technology.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
SEAFLO NEO
The SEAFLO NEO series is a hydrolysis antifouling
coating, which uses polymers to deliver an ultra
smooth, self-polishing surface. SEAFLO NEO is the
lowest VOC (330g/L) anti-fouling in the hydrolysis
category, Chugoku Marine Paints claim. The product
promises fuel savings at 3 - 5 % due to the reduction
of friction, and is effective for up to 90 months.
Type of Coating: Biocidal
Known Ship Types: Product Carrier, Chemical,
Bulk Carrier, General Cargo.
Fuel Savings Claim: 3-5 %.
Verification: Company estimate based on joint
tests with the Tokyo University of Science and the
National Maritime Research Institute.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
31-32
Hempel A/S
Hempel A/S is an international coatings supplier
based in Copenhagen, Denmark. The company was
founded in 1915 and is currently represented in more
than 80 countries.
Hempel supply coatings to the decorative, protective,
marine, container and yacht markets. They operate
24 production plants across six continents. The
company has a strong focus on research and
development and operates 3 main R&D centres in
Denmark, Spain and China as well as 7 Regional
R&D application centres in the US, Bahrain,
Singapore, Korea, Germany, France and the UK.
Their strategy for the marine industry is to offer
efficient coating solutions for all vessel segments,
with significant cost-saving benefits for vessel
operators. As part of this, they have calculated
average fuel savings for all their antifouling coatings
and launched a new high-solids anti-fouling range in
September 2012.
In the same year, Hempel also rolled out a new
standard for evaluating antifouling performance the Antifouling Performance Index (API). The API
assesses the performance of an antifouling on a
scale of 1 to 100, based on observed appearance and
taking into account the three main types of fouling
as slime, algae and animals. It is based on the ASTM
D6990-05 performance standard for marine coatings.
In September 2013 Hempel launched an innovative
silicone-hydrogel coating with a controlled
diffusion of biocide. The product, HEMPAGUARD,
showcases ActiGuard hydrogel technology, sustains
fuel efficiency at a high level over a docking interval
and keeps vessels free of fouling regardless of water
temperature.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
HEMPAGUARD – first with ActiGuard
HEMPAGUARD is the first coating product
from Hempel to use ActiGuard technology in a
commercial product.
According to Hempel, HEMPAGUARD releases
95 per cent less biocide than a standard SPC
antifouling. Moreover, the biocide is temporarily
retained at the surface during its release, thereby
activating the surface, and eliminating the need
for polishing as well as requiring only one coat
compared to the two or three coats, needed in
the case of antifouling. The surface has the same
smoothness as conventional biocide-free siliconebased fouling release coatings.
The ActiGuard technology features a special
active hydrogel micro-layer that provides a barrier
between the solid silicone binder and the fouling
organisms, thus boosting the antifouling barrier and
significantly prolonging the fouling-free period. The
performance and durability of the products has been
tested over several years with outstanding results.”
Hempel scientists have developed ActiGuard
technology a biocide-activated hydrogel that not
only protects against fouling, but also enables
controlled release of biocide, irrespective of vessel
speed.
According to the company, the low friction of the
silicone hydrogel combined with the deterrent effect
of biocides ensures an ultra-smooth hull surface for
a significantly longer time than any conventional
fouling control coatings.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: Recommended for all ship
types whose owners wish to benefit from flexible
trading, fuel savings and fouling defence at any
speed or during idle periods.
Service Interval: Up to 90 months.
Technical Maturity: Launched in September 2013.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Dynamic
Dynamic is an anti-fouling based on a hydrolysing
silyl acrylate binder.
Dynamic also includes an innovative formulation of
inorganic fibre reinforcement which is said to ensure
an extra high level of mechanical strength.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Interval: Up to 60 months.
Technical Maturity: Commercially available since
2012 but based on a technology commercial since
2006
Variations on this product include:
GLOBIC 9000
• Dynamic 79540 – for vessels operating at medium
to high speed and high activity with short idle
periods
• Dynamic 79560 – for vessels operating at medium
speed and medium to high activity with short idle
periods
• Dynamic 79580 - for vessels operating at low to
medium speeds and low to medium activity.
GLOBIC 9000 is an anti-fouling coating built on
a nano-capsule acrylate binder to enable highly
controlled self-polishing. This unique, patented
technology has been developed by Hempel over the
past 10 years.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Interval: Up to 90 months.
Manufacturer Surface Preparation: When
applying over an existing old self-polishing or
ablative antifouling, use a suitable detergent
followed by high pressure fresh water cleaning to
remove possible oil and grease and for a thorough
removal of any possible weak structure of leached
antifouling.
Whether to use a tie coat or sealer coat depends on
the condition and type of the existing antifouling.
GLOBIC 6000
GLOBIC 6000 is an anti-fouling coating based on
Hempel’s patented nano-capsule binder technology.
GLOBIC 6000 also includes an innovative
formulation of inorganic fibre reinforcement which
is said to ensure an extra high level of mechanical
strength.
GLOBIC 9000 also includes an innovative
formulation of inorganic fibre reinforcement which
is said to ensure an extra high level of mechanical
strength.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Interval: Up to 90 months.
Manufacturer Surface Preparation: When
applying over an existing old self-polishing or
ablative antifouling, use a suitable detergent
followed by high pressure fresh water cleaning to
remove possible oil and grease and for a thorough
removal of any possible weak structure of leached
antifouling.
Whether to use a tie coat or sealer coat depends on
the condition and type of the existing antifouling.
Technical Maturity: GLOBIC NCT, first nanocapsule technology product launched in 2006.
GLOBIC 9000 launched in 2012.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
33-34
OCEANIC +
OLYMPIC +
OCEANIC+ is a self-polishing SPC antifouling with
high solids content. An efficient bioactive mixture
makes it suitable for protection on vessels operating
in medium aggressive fouling waters.
The controlled self-polishing is made possible partly
by hydrolysis and partly by ion exchange. The
patented inorganic fibre reinforcement of the binder
ensures good mechanical strength.
Variations on this product include:
OLYMPIC+ is a self-polishing antifouling coating
with a high solids content.
• Oceanic+ 73950 – for vessels operating at medium
to high speed and high activity with short idle
periods
• Oceanic+ 73900 - for vessels operating coastal
trade at low to medium speed and (down to) low to
medium activity with short idle periods
• Oceanic+ 7395B – for flat bottom of deep sea
going vessels operating at medium to high speed and
high activity with short idle periods
Variations on this product include:
Ion exchange plays a major role in the controlled
self-polishing and the bioactive package makes it
suitable for protection on vessels operating in not
overly aggressive fouling waters. The patented
inorganic fibre reinforcement of the binder gives
mechanical strength.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
• Olympic+ 72950 – for vessels operating at medium
to high speed and high activity with short idle
periods
• Olympic+ 72900 - for vessels operating at low to
medium speed and (down to) low to medium activity
with short to medium idle periods
• Olympic+ 7295B – for flat bottom of deep sea
vessels operating at medium to high speed and high
activity with short idle periods
Known Ship Types: All.
Type of Coating: Foul Release.
Service Intervals: Up to 60 months.
Known Ship Types: All.
Technical Maturity: Commercially available since
2012.
Service Interval: Up to 36-months.
Technical Maturity: Commercially available since
2012.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Hempasil X3
The Hempasil X3 coating, a third-generation foulrelease paint based on hydrogel is free of any
biocides. The smooth texture of the paint, enhanced
by the thin hydro-gel layer, gives it a non-adhesive
quality, and the silicone polymers facilitate selfcleaning.
Hempel guarantees fuel savings of up to 8% in
the first year of using this coating and up to 6% in
the second year when Hempasil X3 is combined
with most of the on-board performance monitoring
systems available on the market. However, the
percentage guarantee varies with ship type.
In July 2011, Hempel signed a multi-million USD
contract with United Arab Shipping Company
(UASC) for use of its coatings on nine newbuild
A13 containerships. In addition to the Hempasil X3
fouling release coating, the contract also included
use of one-coat Nexus X-Seal tie coat solution,
the Sea Trend fuel consumption data monitoring
software and the Hempasil Helix propeller coating.
In 2011, Hempel also signed a contract with Vale
to supply 150,000 litres of Hempasil X3 for the
conversion of five VLCCs.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All ships travelling at speeds
above 8 knots.
Savings Claim: Ranges from 3.5% for an OSV
to 8.2% for a VLCC. Specific estimates by Force
Technology for full hull-application are as follows:
• RoPax: 4.8%
• Container: 6.5%
• Aframax Tanker: 7.2%
• Bulk Carrier: 5.9%
• VLCC: 8.6%
• Gas Tanker: 5.1%
• Supply Vessel: 3.5%
Fitting: Only a single coat is required.
Service Interval: Up to 90 months.
Verification: Estimates by company and client
testimonials as listed on website.
Technical Maturity: Since November 2008.
Recent Vessels/Clients: British Navy, Spanish
Navy, Vrontados, Holland America Line, A.P.
Moller-Maersk, IDO, BW Shipping.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
35-36
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Interview with Claes Skat-Rørdam, Marketing
Manager, Fouling Control, Hempel
Hempel has launched their innovative new anti-fouling product at Fathom’s Ship Efficiency: The
Event, during London International Shipping Week – What is the product and how does it differ
from other anti-fouling products on the market?
HEMPAGUARD® is a new groundbreaking fouling defence coating from Hempel using patented
ActiGuard® technology. It offers unlimited trading flexibility, significant fuel savings, and outstanding
idle periods compared to standard anti-fouling.
Hempel scientists spent five years developing and testing the ActiGuard® technology. We have used
a silicone-based hydro-gel product, which has then been merged with biocides known from antifoulings.
What biocide agent does HEMPAGUARD release?
We have chosen to formulate the coating with a component that does not contain copper oxides. It
contains the same biocide that is currently being used in Hempel’s top range of anti-foulings, which
has also been used in top anti-fouling products by other coatings producers. HEMPAGUARD®
releases 95 per cent less biocide than a standard SPC. Moreover, the biocide is retained at the surface,
thus eliminating the need for polishing as well as requiring only one coat compared with the two or
three that are normally necessary in the case of anti-fouling.
Does HEMPAGUARD have a minimum speed at which it is most effective?
The effect is always the same, regardless of the trading pattern of the vessel and, in particular, when
sailing at speeds as low as 8 knots or even during idle periods in aggressive waters. We have developed
different variants of the product so that we can tailor-make products for the operational profile of the
vessel. For one of the products there will be no requirement for minimum speed; instead, the criteria
used to judge the suitability of the coating will be based on the activity of the vessel. Another product
is along side the ‘one speed fits all’ product that will have a minimum speed requirement of 8 knots.
Which vessel types have been tested under sea trial conditions?
The sea trials have been very promising, and HEMPAGUARD has been used on a wide range of
vessels, including:
• Bulk carrier;
• Chemical tanker;
• Chemical/Products tanker;
• Container ship;
• Crude oil tanker;
• Cruise ship;
• Fishing vessel;
• General cargo;
• Ro-Ro/passenger ship;
• Ro-Ro/vehicles carrier;
• Supply vessel;
• VLCC;
• VLOC.
The applications are predominantly full ship applications.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
37-38
Our flagship publication, Ship Efficiency: The Guide, notes that savings claims for hull coatings
can be particularly substantial. What fuel savings figures can ActiGuard offer?
It is pretty substantial indeed. The coating delivers fuel savings up to eight per cent on average, which
we are very pleased with.
Based on the aforementioned sea trials, what is the projected return on investment (ROI) of
ActiGuard?
We anticipate a ROI of less than 6 months, which we are happy about. This can be partly attributed
to the cost of docking where the paint is applied. It also depends on whether or not the owner/operator
chooses to apply it on top of the anti-fouling paint already on the hull of the ship, or if the operator
chooses a full blast for their vessel and then uses the complete paint system.
A key factor for choosing a hull coating is how a coating is able to perform during periods of
idleness, super slow steaming, and in tropical waters. How has HEMPAGUARD performed under
the conditions mentioned?
We guarantee idling periods of up to 120 days.
We are testing our products across the world, both on vessels and rafts. We have rafts in cold waters,
medium waters and warm waters in Singapore. In all test areas we have seen outstanding results
during periods of idleness.
Our tests have shown that HEMPAGUARD® retains its effectiveness when switching between slow
and fast steaming anywhere in the world as well as during extended idle periods. This is particularly
interesting for bulk carriers that can be redirected at short notice as well as larger container vessels
and tankers that may wish to increase speed to meet schedules or slow steam to achieve extra fuel
savings.
Could you explain the unique selling points of ActiGuard in more detail?
The unique selling points are fuel savings and that we are able to offer in the same product the ability
to provide fuel savings during operation but also excellent levels of bio-fouling protection during
extended periods of idleness.
We see our product as an advantage for ship owners in the market today, especially owners of bulk
carriers and tankers, who due to fluctuations in trade volume cannot be certain of what their vessel
will be doing even in just a few months’ time.
As global trade continues to contract and over-tonnage persists, the future operational pattern of a
vessel is more uncertain than ever. With this product, we can provide fuel savings whilst the vessel is
sailing, and then when the vessel is not sailing, the operator can enjoy anti-fouling protection for a
long time. It is a single product with dual benefits.
A key issue with coatings that the industry has struggled with historically is that coatings have been
designed for a specific operational profile: a vessel with a specific activity level at a specific speed and
at a certain water temperature.
Other products are designed for static conditions and low speed, which are then sloughed off the
hull if the vessel speeds up. The choice of hull coating has until now also been a choice of operational
profile. In contrast, Hempel has now given the industry the flexibility to respond to market conditions
in real time.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Currently there is no industry standard for measuring hull coatings performance. What is your
view on the development of a global hull coatings standard?
We welcome the introduction of a global standard. We would prefer for there to be only one standard,
as if there are several then each standard on its own would not be worth e as much worth when
compared to the one standard scenario. We believe that the development of a global standard will
allow for easy differentiation between well and worse performing products.
Is there a particular measurement method that Hempel recommends above others?
Not particularly; what we welcome is a standard that has wide applicability and that has the backing
of the industry. We would advocate an approach that is simple for ship owners and operators to
familiarize themselves with and implement, because if the process is too complex we will not achieve
the necessary uptake required to make the standard meaningful.
What is the process of widespread commercialization for HEMPAGUARD and the time frame?
The product will be globally launched at Fathom’s Ship Efficiency: The Event, which will be taking
place at London International Shipping Week in September 2013. After that, other events in other
markets will take place.
How will Hempel leverage HEMPAGUARD moving forward? Will it represent a separate line of
hull coating solutions or become part of an existing product range?
This will remain a separate line of hull coating solutions. We are currently looking at two products:
firstly one with a life span of 36 months, and another with a life span of 60 months with scope to
extend that up to 90 months.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
39-40
HullSpeed Performance
Marine Coatings
HullSpeed Performance Marine Coatings is a
division of Greenfield Manufacturing Inc., based
in New York, USA. The company was established
in 1998 as a chemical manufacturing facility, with
the HullSpeed product line established in 2002
originally for the performance sailing market.
Between 2009-2012, Greenfield was awarded
US$340,000 in funding from New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA)
to further develop and commercialise the HullSpeed
product line. Applications now extend beyond
commercial and recreational marine vessels, with
other viable uses including the aircraft, automotive,
energy, industrial and construction markets.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
3000 Series
The 3000 series are water-based silicone/epoxy
copolymer coatings containing proprietary
technology. These coatings are said to provide the
abrasive protection of epoxy while also providing
the surface release properties of dimethyl silicone,
and are designed for improved fuel efficiency.
According to HullSpeed, the 3000 Series will adhere
to a broad range of hull substrates including steel,
epoxy, gelcoat, aluminium, fibreglass, carbon fibre
and wood, as well as most plastics including epoxies,
polyurethanes, and alkyds. The unique chemical
bonding of these products is said to allow for easy
repair and overcoating with a fast drying time.
Type of Coating: Foul release.
Known Ship Types: Tankers, cargo ships, passenger
liners, military vessels, tug boats, supply vessels.
Fuel Savings Claim: 1-8%.
Cost: US$55/litre.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Verification: In-service data.
Certification: Meets EPA, USDA, and FDA 21
CFR 175.300 requirements.
Extra Stated Benefits: A low co-efficient of
friction and ease of maintenance. According to
HullSpeed, use of their coatings also results in
smoother cornering, acceleration and deceleration.
Manufacturer Surface Preparation: No tie-coat is
required prior to applying.
Manufacturer Application Guidance: Easily
applied with conventional application equipment.
In-service Interval: 60-84 months depending on
use and bio-fouling conditions
Technical Maturity: Since 2002.
Recent Vessels/Clients: New York Naval Militia,
Florida Fish and Wildlife, Potomac Riverboat
Company, Scotia Fire and Rescue.
Hydrex
Hydrex is the world leader in underwater repairs,
replacement and maintenance, pioneering new
methods and technology for in-water techniques to
enable ships to continue operations without the need
to drydock, and by insisting on the highest standards
of quality for underwater repair and maintenance.
The company was founded in Antwerp in 1974 by
Boud Van Rompay who continues as CEO. They
are headquartered in Antwerp with regional offices
in the U.S.A and Spain. From these offices Hydrex
operates fast emergency-response diving teams
which travel worldwide on call.
Hydrex repair specialities include stern tube seal
repairs, bow thruster replacement, underwater hull
repairs, propeller cropping and straightening and
rudder repairs. Many operations are now conducted
using Hydrex-pioneered flexible or rigid mobdocks,
which dramatically shorten the time needed for
repair.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
ECOSPEED
Hydrex manufactures and supplies Ecospeed,
the original hard, non-toxic coating system for
underwater hulls. Ecospeed was developed starting
in 1994 and has been adopted by shipping lines in all
major sectors of operation since 2002.
The coating is classified as a Surface Treated
Composite (STC), which consists of relatively large
glass flakes in a resin base. Once conditioned by an
in-water process involving special tools, the coating
provides a very smooth, extremely hard protection
for the life of the hull, guaranteed for at least 10
years, requiring only minor touch-ups during routine
dry-docking. Unlike conventional anti-fouling and
foul-release coatings which markedly deteriorate as a
ship ages, Ecospeed becomes smoother and achieves
maximum hull efficiency and fuel savings through
routine in-water cleaning.
Due to Ecospeed’s environmental safety, in-water
cleaning of ships coated with Ecospeed is approved
in ports where in-water cleaning is normally
banned.
Ecospeed does not offer conventional biocidal
anti-fouling properties and Hydrex suggests that
in-water cleaning of the hull should be conducted
regularly, the frequency to be determined by the
ship’s operating pattern and local water conditions.
Because of the product’s non-toxic and non-metallic
properties, this type of cleaning can occur even in
ports with the strictest environmental regulations,
such as Rotterdam and Seattle.
Ecospeed has proven to be a superior protection
against ice and has had great success with
icebreakers and ice-trading ships. Lloyd’s Register
has certified Ecospeed for ice going ships, and
permits a reduction of thickness of the steel
plating in way of the ice belt of up to 1 mm where
Ecospeed is used as the coating. Ecospeed is also
particularly suitable for offshore vessels or those
that are often stationary and not drydocked very
often since the coating can be cleaned underwater
as aggressively as needed to bring it back to its
original pristine condition without fear of damaging
the coating or harming the environment. It is also
used by major ferry lines, cargo vessels, cruise
operators, navies and others.
As part of an EU-LIFE demonstration project in
2008, stringent tests proved that the Ecospeed
coating is 100% non-toxic with no negative effect
on water quality or the marine environment at any
point of its use or application. The product was
awarded the 2012 National Energy Globe Award for
sustainability.
Image Courtesy of Hydrex
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
41-42
Type of Coating: Hard Coating, Surface Treated
Composite (STC).
Known Ship Types: All, including ice-class vessels
and offshore ships and rigs.
Cost: Initial cost comparable to conventional AF or
FR coatings and total ownership cost much less.
Savings Claim: 10 – 25% total ownership cost
savings compared to conventional AF or FR
coatings (includes fuel savings, reduced frequency
of drydocking and time spent in drydock, the cost of
reapplication, environmental clean-up costs).
Fitting: Two coats required with a minimum overcoating time of 3hrs, no maximum.
Class Society Approval: Lloyds Register, ABS,
DNV.
Certification: Certificate of design assessment.
Abrasion resistant ice coating certificate. Class B1
superior ballast tank coating.
Verification: Tank tests carried out under
supervision of the Antwerp Maritime Academy
and the University of Ghent. Cavitation protection
carried out in Grenoble, France. Ecological safety
tests conducted in The Netherlands and British
Columbia.
Manufacturer Recommended Spray Procedure:
Ecospeed cures by chemical reaction, which starts
as soon as catalyst is added and then proceeds quite
quickly. When spraying use the minimum amount of
catalyst permissible i.e. 1 % by volume.
Manufacturer Application Guidance: The surface
shall be grit blasted to minimum Sa 2½ standard.
The surface profile shall be minimum 75 microns
(Rz). Ecospeed is a two-component coating. The
quantity of catalyst used can be varied to suit the
ambient temperature, and rate of cure desired. The
range is from 1% to 2% for spray application. Airless
spraying is the preferred method of application.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Using spray equipment to apply one full coat
of catalysed material to a DFT thickness of 500
microns (WFT thickness of 616 microns). Allow
to cure. The second coat can be applied as soon as
the first coat is cured, approximately 3 hours at a
temperature of 20 °C. Using spray equipment to
apply the second full coat of catalysed material to
a DFT of 500 microns (616 microns wet). The total
DFT shall be minimum 1000 microns.
Recent Case Studies: Application on the Royal
Research Ship Ernest Shackleton between 2009 and
2011 demonstrated that Ecospeed can survive the
harshest conditions. At dry-docking in 2011, the
hull coating was virtually intact and undamaged,
despite over two seasons of breaking through ice up
to 2.5m thick and with a high content of gravel and
volcanic lava adding to the abrasiveness.
Ecospeed was applied to the container vessel M/V
Baltic Swan between dry-dockings in 2008 and
2010. At dry-docking in 2010, the underwater hull
was observed to be in virtually the same condition
as it was when the vessel undocked two years
before, with no damage from the large floating ice
encountered on winter voyages. The captain of
the vessel and the technical superintendent who
specified the new coating were impressed with the
hull coating condition.
A major cruise line (unnamed) converted two
cruise ships from a TBT-based antifouling coating
to Ecospeed in 2005/6. Executives of the cruise
line announced a subsequent 10% fuel savings.
When the company ordered two new cruise ships
in the last few years, Ecospeed was specified as
the coating. The cruise line subsequently won a
prestigious environmental award mainly due to the
non-toxic hull coating.
Information of Interest: The product comes with
a 10 year warranty from Hydrex. More than 150
rudders have now been coated with Ecospeed.
International Paint
International Paint Ltd. is part of AkzoNobel.
AkzoNobel is a leading global paints and coatings
company and a major producer of specialty
chemicals.
The International Paint group is headquartered
in Singapore and controls 13 specialist marine
laboratories and operates in 60 countries worldwide.
The company claim to be technology leaders in
antifouling coatings, abrasion resistant coatings,
ballast tank coatings and foul release coatings,
with over 17 years experience in the latter. They
introduced the first self-polishing copolymer (SPC)
antifouling product in 1974.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
Intersleek 1100SR
Type of Coating: Foul Release
Known Ship Types: All. Suitable for slow steaming.
Technical Maturity: Released in February 2013.
Trial vessels coated since August 2011.
Savings Claim: Intersleek 1100SR offers
proven fuel and emissions savings of up to 10%
in comparison to controlled depletion polymer
antifoulings.
Verification: “We are extremely happy with the
performance of the new Intersleek which has to
given us over a year virtually slime-free performance
on two of our Caribbean vessels,” stated Carnival
Cruise lines.
Intersleek 900
Intersleek 1100SR is the first biocide free fouling
control coating to feature unique patented Slime
Release technology to combat micro fouling.
Until the launch of Intersleek 1100SR, Intersleek 900
was the premium product in the range. Intersleek
900 is a patented fluoropolymer foul release coating,
This product contains a new patented fluoropolymer which presents the organisms with an amphiphilic
surface, combining hydrophilic and hydrophobic
which is an enhancement of the slime resistant
polymer used in earlier generations of Intersleek, to properties in order to minimise the chemical and
influence and resist the adhesion and settlement of electrostatic adhesion between the surface and the
fouling organism.
organisms that make up slime.
The development of the new polymer included
a three-year fundamental research programme
involving a multi-disciplinary team of marine
biologists, hydrodynamicists and polymer scientists.
International Paint say that the team was supported
by world renowned independent academic institutes,
four years of laboratory testing and in service, full
vessel performance data, from some of the world’s
leading ship owners and operators.
Type of Coating: Foul Release.
The coating is said to have improved static resistance
even for ships travelling in warm waters. Slime
that does build up during static periods is said to be
released by the movement of the ship through water.
Verification: In 2008, Cunard converted their
flagship liner the Queen Mary 2 from a silyl-based
TBT-free self-polishing copolymer antifouling to
the fluoropolymer foul release coating Intersleek
900, improving vessel efficiency by over 10% or the
equivalent of US$30,000 a day.
Known Ship Types: All vessels sailing faster than
10 knots, including scheduled ships, tankers, bulkers,
general cargo ships and feeder containers.
Savings Claim: Intersleek 900 offers proven fuel
and emissions savings of up to 10% in comparison to
controlled depletion polymer antifoulings.
Technical Maturity: Released in 2007.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
43-44
Intersleek 700.
Intercept 8000LPP
Intersleek 700 is a foul release coating based on
silicone technology.
Intercept 8000LPP is a biocidal antifouling product
featuring International Paint/AkzoNobel’s patented
LUBYON® polymer technology.
Type of Coating: Foul Release.
Known Ship Types: High activity, scheduled ships
such as Container vessels, Reefers, LNG/LPG
Carriers, Cruise Liners, RoRo’s and Vehicle Carriers
which travel at 15-30 knots.
The company claims that LUBYON delivers
predictable long-term hull coating performance.
The coating has been extensively monitored with
in-service performance validated on over 4 million
DWT thus far.
Savings Claim: Intersleek 700 offers proven fuel
Intercept 8000LPP is said to replicate the linear
and emissions savings of up to 7% in comparison to polishing behaviour of previous tributlytin based
controlled depletion polymer antifoulings.
antifoulings, unlike typical silyl and metal acrylate
biocidal antifouling systems. Silyl acrylate based
Verification: VELA International Marine, converted
products typically polish slowly initially, with the
the vertical sides of VLCC Alpha Star to Intersleek
rate of polishing steadily increasing thereafter,
700 in May 2005. Results were presented at Offshore whereas typical metal acrylate systems polish fast
Arabia Conference in 2006 and vessel speed
initially before reaching a steady state.
improved by over 3% (equivalent to an efficiency
improvement of over 8%).
The LUBYON polymer technology is also said to
give the coating a ‘superhydrophilic’ surface creating
Technical Maturity: Released in 1999.
a lubricating effect at the coating surface that also
swells on contact with water helping to smooth out
imperfections and potentially further reducing drag.
LUBYON polymer technology reacts with seawater
via a constant surface active zone releasing only the
optimum amount of biocide over the scheme life to
control fouling settlement. Critically, this biocide
release rate is largely
unaffected by seawater temperature meaning
Intercept 8000LPP has trading flexibility and can
operate across global routes and through all seasons.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All, though specifically
designed for deep-sea vessels.
Manufacturer Surface Preparation Guidance: All
surfaces to be coated should be clean, dry and free
from contamination.
Savings Claim: Intercept 8000LPP offers fuel and
emissions savings of up to 5% in comparison to
controlled depletion polymer antifoulings.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Intercept 8000LPP cont..
Intersmooth 7465Si SPC
Verification: The coating has been monitored with
in service performance validated on multiple vessel
types including containers, tankers, bulk carriers and
LNGs representing over 4 million DWT.
Intersmooth 7465Si SPC is a low friction, SPC
antifouling, based on patented silyl acrylate polymer
technology.
In-Service Period: Up to 90 months.
Technical Maturity: Launched in February 2013.
Intersmooth 7460HS SPC and
Intersmooth 7465HS SPC
Intersmooth 7460HS SPC and Intersmooth 7465HS
SPC are low friction, true, pure hydrolysing selfpolishing copolymer antifoulings for deep-sea
vessels featuring high volume solids and low VOCs.
Patented copper acrylate technology delivers
controlled chemical dissolution of the paint film,
which ensures continued smoothing over long
drydocking intervals.
Predictable polishing enables specifications to be
tailored to specific ship types and
operational profiles, while thin leached layers allow
simple cleaning and recoating at drydockings.
Intersmooth 7465Si SPC features 55% volume
solids. Compared to lower volume solids products,
this results in shipyard benefits of faster application,
reduced wastage and pail consumption and lower
solvent emissions to the atmosphere. Reduced
overspray leads to lower contamination levels in
dock and reduced applicator exposure. Particularly
suitable for use where solvent emissions need to be
reduced, this product has solvent emission levels
of less than 400g/l VOC - some of the lowest silyl
acrylate solvent emission levels in the industry.
Intersmooth 7465Si SPC offers the same fouling
control, up to 4% fuel savings and excellent patina
resistance as its copper acrylate SPC counterpart,
Intersmooth 7460/7465HS SPC.
Type of Coating: Biocidal
Known Ship Types: Designed for deep sea vessels
at newbuilding and maintenance and repair.
Manufacturer Surface Preparation Guidance: All
surfaces to be coated should be clean, dry and free
from contamination.
Intersmooth 7460HS SPC and Intersmooth 7465HS
SPC provide fouling control for up to 60 months and
share in the proven track record of Intersmooth SPC Savings Claim: Intersmooth 7465Si SPC offers fuel
and emissions savings of up to 4% in comparison to
on over 34,000 vessels worldwide.
controlled depletion polymer antifoulings.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: Designed for deep sea vessels
at newbuilding and maintenance and repair.
In-Service Period: Up to 90 months.
Technical Maturity: Launched in 2012.
Savings Claim: Intersmooth SPC offers fuel and
emissions savings of up to 4% in comparison to
controlled depletion polymer antifoulings.
In-Service Period: Up to 90 months.
Technical Maturity: Launched in 2009.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
45-46
JOTUN
The Jotun Group is headquartered in Norway. The
company offers a range of decorative paints as well
as marine, protective and powder coatings and is
represented in more than 90 countries worldwide.
Jotun offers a variety of high performance antifouling products and hold themselves at the
forefront of technology innovation. The group has
71 companies and 36 production facilities on all
continents.
Savings Claim: Around 15% propulsion efficiency
gain on average over a 60 month dry-docking
interval as compared to a market average solution.
This equates to around a 13% fuel cost and GHG
emission saving if speed is to be maintained over
the interval. The saving is based on comparing
guaranteed minimum performance under a High
Performance Guarantee with market average
performance as per MEPC63-4-8.
Marine coatings is a major part of the business,
with 32% of sales in 2012 coming from this sector
and a track record in the industry stretching back to
1926. More than 30,000 ships are painted with their
wide range of marine products. It is well known as
a market leader within high technology antifouling
systems.
ROI: Typically 6 to 18 months depending on ship
type and trade. Jotun also states that, under its High
Performance Guarantee, the‘additional investment”
in SeaQuantumX200 will be paid back if the
guaranteed level of performance’ is not delivered.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
Class Society Approval: American Bureau of
Shipping (ABS), Det Norske Veritas (DNV),
Germanischer Lloyd (GL), Korean register of
Shipping (KRS), Lloyd’s Register (LR),
Hull Performance Solutions w/
SeaQuantum x200
Since 2011, Jotun has offered Hull Performance
Solutions (HPS) designed to make it easy to
maximise hull performance and thereby reduce
both fuel cost and GHG emissions. The solutions
combine state-of-the-art antifouling and application
technologies with reliable measurability and high
performance guarantees.
As a part of its Hull Performance Solutions Jotun
employs, at any time, the best coating technologies
available in its portfolio. The current antifouling of
choice is SeaQuantum X200. SeaQuantum X200 is
Jotun’s first anti-fouling purpose designed coating
to maximise initial performance (low friction
properties) as well lifetime performance (antifouling properties) with no limitations in terms of
formulation cost.
Known Ship Types: All. High Performance
Guarantees are available for most, but not all, trades.
Cost: Around US$8.5 per m2 and year depending on
ship type and year.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Fitting: Approximately one week in dry-dock.
Verification: Performance over the full dry docking
is documented based on Jotun’s Hull performance
Measurement Method. This method has been
judged sufficiently reliable so as to be used in
performance based contracts by a number of ship
owners worldwide. The methodology is also the
starting point for on-going work on an ISO standard
–ISO 19030.
Technical Maturity: Since 2000; Based on the
next generation Silyl Methacrylate technology,
SeaQuantum X200 is the culmination of more than
10 years of experience, 15 000 trial formulations
and close to 8,000 full applications with the original
SeaQuantum technology.
Technology Progress Since 2011: The Jotun Hull
Performance Measurement method is currently
in version 2, and has now been proposed as the
baseline for work on an ISO standard. Jotun High
Performance Guarantee is also currently in version
2, with a version 3 being planned for release later in
2013.
SeaQuantum
SeaQuantum is a self-polishing antifouling product
based on a third generation silyl acrylate polymer
technology, which hydrolyses when exposed to
seawater. SeaQuantum offers tailor made solutions
for special trading circumstances, for vessels with
service intervals of up to 90 months.
Variations within this product range include:
• SeaQuantum X200 – The first silyl methacrylate
antifouling (see Hull Performance Solutions);
• SeaQuantum Ultra S – For low activity vessels and
intense conditions;
• SeaQuantum Classic S – For medium activity
vessels;
• SeaQuantum Plus S – For high activity vessels.
• SeaQuantum Static – For static and laid-up vessels;
• SeaQuantum Pro – For universal trades;
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Savings Claim: Around 10% efficiency gain on
average over a 60 month dry-docking interval as
compared to a market average solution. This equates
to a ~9% fuel cost and GHG emission saving if
speed is to be maintained over the interval. The
saving is based on comparing expected performance
with market average performance as estimated in
MEPC63-4-8.
Manufacturer Application Guidance: The
coating should not be exposed to oil, chemicals
or mechanical stress until it is thoroughly dried.
During application and the initial drying of the
coating, the coating should not be exposed to high
humidity as this can result in loss of gloss and
discolouration.
Class Society Approval: American Bureau of
Shipping (ABS), Det Norske Veritas (DNV),
Germanischer Lloyd (GL), Korean register of
Shipping (KRS), Lloyd’s Register (LR).
Verification: Saving potential is based on
estimations of product performance and can be
verified by Jotun Hull Performance Measurement
Methodology.
Information of Interest: Increasing film thickness
will lead to increased drying time. When three
or more antifouling coats are applied in a rapid
succession, Jotun recommend a doubling of time to
launch.
Technical Maturity: Since 2000 with over 8,000
vessels coated.
ROI: Within 2 years, compared to a market average
system calculated on a LNG vessel in average
activity trade over 60 months.
Fitting: Approximately one week in dry-dock.
Manufacturer Surface Preparation Guidance:
All surfaces should be clean, dry and free from
contamination prior to paint application, with high
pressure fresh water cleaning used to remove surface
contamination. Paint to be applied on a clean, dry
approved primer/undercoat or intact self-polishing
anti-fouling.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
47-48
SeaMate
SeaMate is a self-polishing anti-fouling based on
silyl acrylate binder technology providing a linear
polishing rate. By providing excellent fouling
protection and good hull performance the solution
ensures maintained speed and schedule of the vessel.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Savings Claim: Around 6% efficiency gain on
average over a 60 month dry-docking interval as
compared to a market average solution. This equates
to a ~5% fuel cost and GHG emission saving if
speed is to be maintained over the interval. The
saving is based on comparing expected performance
with market average performance as estimated in
MEPC63-4-8.
ROI: Within 2 years (Compared to a market average
system calculated on a LNG vessel in average
activity trade over 60 months).
Fitting: Approximately one week in drydock.
Manufacturer Surface Preparation Guidance:
All surfaces should be clean, dry and free from
contamination prior to paint application, with high
pressure fresh water cleaning used to remove surface
contamination. Paint to be applied on a clean, dry
approved primer/undercoat or intact self-polishing
anti-fouling.
Manufacturer Application Guidance: The
coating should not be exposed to oil, chemicals or
mechanical stress until it is thoroughly dried. During
application and the initial drying of the coating, the
coating should not be exposed to high humidity as
this can result in loss of gloss and discolouration.
Verification: Saving potential is based on
estimations of product performance and can be
verified by Jotun Hull Performance Measurement
Methodology.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Class Society Approval: American Bureau of
Shipping (ABS), Bureau Veritas (BV), Det Norske
Veritas (DNV), Germanischer Lloyd (GL), Korean
register of Shipping (KRS), Lloyd’s Register (LR),
Registro Italiano navale (RINA), Russian Maritime
register of Shipping (RMSR).
Compliance: IMO Anti-fouling System Convention
(AFS/CONF/26).
Technical Maturity: Since 2008 with over 1 400
vessels coated.
Information of Interest: Increasing film thickness
will lead to increased drying time. When three
or more anti-fouling coats are applied in a rapid
succession, Jotun recommend a doubling of time to
launch
SeaLion Repulse
SeaLion Repulse is a biocide free anti-fouling based
on Nanorepellent Technology. It has a low surface
energy which is both hydrophobic and hydrophilic
that creates a bivalent surface to confuse the settling
of organisms. This smooth and hostile surface
secures good fouling control throughout the service
period.
In order to meet different vessel operational
requirements and budgets, the SeaForce brand range
contains three products – SeaForce 30, 60 and 90 –
allowing the most appropriate anti-fouling solution
to be selected for specific vessels.
Type of Coating: Foul Release.
Known Ship Types: All.
Known Ship Types: All.
Savings Claim: An efficiency gain of 3% on
average over a 60 month dry-docking interval as
compared to a market average fouling solution.
This equates to a ~3% fuel cost and GHG emission
saving if speed is to be maintained over the interval.
The saving is based on comparing expected
performance with market average performance as
estimated in MEPC63-4-8.
Savings Claim: Around 4% efficiency gain on
average over a 60 month dry-docking interval as
compared to a market average solution. This equates
to a ~4% fuel cost and GHG emission saving if
speed is to be maintained over the interval. The
saving is based on comparing expected performance
with market average performance as estimated in
MEPC63-4-8.
ROI: Within 3 years (Compared to a market average
system calculated on a LNG vessel in average
activity trade over 60 months)
Fitting: Approximately one week in dry-dock.
Class Society Approval: Det Norske Veritas (DNV),
Lloyd’s Register (LR), Germanischer Lloyd (GL),
Verification: Saving potential is based on
estimations of product performance and can be
verified by Jotun Hull Performance Measurement
Methodology.
SeaForce
Jotun’s SeaForce range balances anti-fouling
performance with cost economy.
SeaForce limits the hull deterioration caused by
fouling throughout the whole in-service interval.
It has gained global recognition as an anti-fouling
brand of proven quality, with 30 million litres
applied on more than 15,000 vessels.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
ROI: Within 3 years (Compared to a market
average system calculated on a LNG vessel in
average activity trade over 60 months).
Fitting: Approximately one week in drydock.
Class Society Approval: American Bureau of
Shipping (ABS), Bureau Veritas (BV), Det Norske
Veritas (DNV), Germanischer Lloyd (GL), Korean
register of Shipping (KRS), Lloyd’s Register (LR),
Registro Italiano navale (RINA), Russian Maritime
register of Shipping (RMSR).
Compliance: IMO Anti-fouling System Convention
(AFS/CONF/26).
Verification: Saving potential is based on
estimations of product performance and can be
verified by Jotun Hull Performance Measurement
Methodology.
Technical Maturity: Since 2004 with over 15,000
vessels coated.
49-50
SeaLion Resilient
SeaLion Resilient is the newest product offering
from Jotun: an efficient biocide-free hull protection
that only requires the application of two coats.
According to Jotun, this is the industry’s first antifouling coating to include epoxy-polysiloxane, a
compound of resins and hardeners that provides
highly resilient hull protection.
It is especially suitable for vessels where simple
maintenance and efficient dry-docking are of utmost
importance. The strong surface of SeaLion Resilient
significantly reduces the risk of mechanical damage,
maintaining the condition of the hull over the service
period.
Type of Coating: Foul Release.
Known Ship Types: Especially suitable for vessels
with fairly short docking intervals, such as passenger
ferries, cruise vessels, offshore supply & service
vessels, tugs, barges and navy vessels.
Savings Claim: 1 day less in dock based on docking
efficiency due to a reduced need for vessel repair.
Off-hire, dock hire and labour costs are also said to
be reduced although not quantified by Jotun.
Fitting: Compared to any other anti-fouling, a
minimum of one day less.
Class Society Approval: Det Norske Veritas (DNV)
and Lloyd’s Register (LR).
Compliance: IMO Anti-fouling System Convention
(AFS/CONF/26).
Manufacturer Application Guidance: The
coating should not be exposed to oil, chemicals or
mechanical stress until cured.
Verification: Saving potential is based on
estimations of docking efficiency and can be verified
together with customer by using Jotun’s benefit
calculator.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Micanti
Micanti was founded in 2006 and is headquartered
in the Netherlands. Micanti developed a non-toxic
fouling defence technology and patented it in
2006. The technology behind the coating is based
on the theory of; by applying specific short fibres,
organisms are unable to settle.
After several years of intensive testing on both
static and moving objects, Micanti started to market
the Thorn-D anti-fouling product into the shipping
industry by 2011.
The Commercialisation of Thorn-D began with
the aquaculture industry in Turkey, with Micanti
expanding into this industry internationally before
carrying out the first tests for commercial ships in
2009. After several years of research with institutes
such as MARIN, TNO, and Delft Technical
University, Micanti now provides Thorn-D to a
range of commercial vessels in Europe, the Middle
East and the US.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
Thorn-D
Thorn-D is a special type of non-toxic coating which
uses microfibres to create a physical barrier against
marine growth. A surface of nylon microfibres on
a polyester film prevents micro-organisms like
mussels and barnacles from attaching directly to a
vessel’s hull surface.
Class Society Approval: ABS, Lloyds Register,
Bureau Veritas.
Manufacturer Recommended Surface
Preparation: For newbuilds, Thorn-D is applied
directly on the anti-corrosive paint. For existing
vessels, the hull needs to be hydro washed to
remove all marine growth and a primer will need
to be applied to seal the old anti-fouling layer
underneath.
Recent Clients/ Case Studies: In February 2013,
Micanti applied Thorn-D anti-fouling to the Lady
Rasha crew vessel owned by Gulf Glory Marine
Services.
Micanti reported in May 2013 that the owner of
BMS Towing BV was very pleased with the result
of nine months of Thorn-D application on the
Willem-B tugboat.
In May 2013, the workboat operator Acta Marine
chose to use Thorn-D anti-fouling on the Sara
Maatje X.
Starting in May 2013, the Port of Amsterdam is
conducting a year-long trial of Thorn-D on a patrol
boat which will be compared with a sister vessel
that has a conventional coating.
Tests with marine institutes such as MARIN have
confirmed that these fibres have no effect on drag
and will remain on a ship’s hull at speeds of up to
30 knots. The company also claims that this product
will reduce fuel costs.
Micanti states that Thorn-D has a lifetime of 5 years.
Type of Coating: Foul Release.
Known Ship Types: All.
Savings Claim: Said to “lower fuel costs” although
no specific claim made.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
51-52
Nippon Paint Marine Coatings
Nippon Paint Marine Coatings (Nippon Marine) are
based in Japan with wholly owned subsidiaries in
China, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and
Malaysia.
Although they have been in existence for over
40 years, the company began to independently
manufacture their own marine coatings range in
2004.
Verification of Savings: Towing tank estimates;
verified by in-service data on one vessel.
Use of the LF-Sea on the 28,000 DWT Seacliff
bulk carrier is claimed to show a 4% power saving
during sea trials.
Technical Maturity: Since 2007, with application
on over 700 vessels.
The company claims to be technology-orientated
and has developed a unique series of coatings based
on research around the hydrodynamic adaptations
of sharks, dolphins, tuna, penguins and other marine
animals that enable them to travel through the water
efficiently. While some researchers have tried to
reproduce the riblet structure of sharkskin, Nippon
Marine chose instead to model their range on the
mucous membrane employed by dolphins and tuna.
Application Guidance: Directly applicable on
existing tin-free anti-foulings without blasting.
Nippon Marine also has an explicit focus on
environmental issues, having developed a tinfree hydrolytic anti-fouling paint in 1990, and has
been ISO 4001 certified since 2003. Their stated
manufacturing goal is to develop a revolutionary
environmentally friendly technology based on a
completely new concept, rather than improvements
to existing technology and products.
American Eagle Tankers also applied LF-Sea to
four of its vessels in 2008. The first vessel to be
coated was the Aframax tanker Bunga Kenanga.
Fuel savings from this trial are unclear.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
LF-Sea
LF-Sea is a low-friction antifoul claimed to be
more cost-effective than silicone type coatings. The
coating contains a ‘hydrogel’ which traps sea water
in tiny irregularities in a ship’s hull, so creating a
smoother surface and reducing resistance.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Fuel Savings Claim: 4%
ROI: Cost simulator available on website.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Recent Clients/Case Studies: A 2010 trial of LFSea onboard the Neptune Ace, a 6,400 car PCTC
owned by Mitsui O.S.K Lines, confirmed that
this coating improved fuel efficiency. However,
the level of fuel savings was not made publicly
available.
EcoloFlex SPC
ECOLOFLEX SPC was the first TBT-Free
hydrolysing self-polishing anti-fouling in the
world from Nippon Paint. The coating contains a
special acrylate copolymer developed with patented
technology as the basic resin, and cuprous oxide as
the main biocide.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Technical Maturity: As of December 2005, the
product has been applied to far over 10,000 ships.
In 2003, its perfect anti-fouling performance was
proved on 4 large containers after the operation for
59 to 61 months.
In-Service Period: Up to 60 months.
ECOLOFLEX HyB
ECOLOFLEX HyB series was developed to further
improve the performance and predictability of
anti-fouling paint to new levels. Therefore, the
development of this product was based on the
original Ecoloflex SPC product. This product
provides very accurate polishing rates and eliminates
skeleton layers on the coating’s surface.
This has been achieved by combining in a unique
hybrid the ultra- reliability of Copper acrylate and
the silyl resins.
ECOLOFLEX HyB types possess progressive
patented technology to constantly expose fresh antifouling film to the ship’s surface.
The silyl resins in this product form the basis of the
LF-Sea product.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Verification: Both new building and repair vessels
have verified ECOLOFLEX HyB anti-fouling
efficiency. The company claims that conventional
self-polishing types usual have a life of around 2
years before the anti-fouling efficiency expires.
ECOLOFLEX HyB provide constantly reliable
levels of performance right up to the end of the
service period.
In-service Period: Up to 30 months.
Case Studies: Various case studies are available on
the website.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
53-54
PPG Protective and Marine
Coatings
One of the world’s largest coatings companies, PPG
has built a track record with the clear and consistent
way it researches, tests and releases products to the
marketplace.
PPG has a policy of intensive, continuous
development of their products, with their teams of
Research and Development (R&D) scientists having
worked on biocide-free technologies for over 20
years.
The R&D department uses state-of-the-art
techniques such as surface analysis, contact
angle measurements and sophisticated equipment
including electron microscopes in order to assess
and understand fouling protection mechanisms, and
also partners with customers and suppliers to better
understand their needs. To assess and continuously
improve the quality of PPG coatings, the R&D teams
also conduct raft testing at various locations around
the world as well as trial applications on commercial
vessels.
Premium Anti-Fouling Products:
SIGMAGLIDE Range
The SIGMAGLIDE range, including SIGMAGLIDE
990, is completely biocide-free and is therefore
unaffected by such legislation as the BPD (Biocidal
Products Directive). With a very high solids content
(80%), SIGMAGLIDE 990 easily meets stringent
VOC regulations like the SED (Solvent Emissions
Directive).
Type of Coating: Fouling Release.
Known Ship Types: Many different vessel types
such as bulk carriers, cruise liners, container vessels,
oil and gas tankers, Ro-Ro vessels, tugs.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Manufacturer Application Guidance: For
newbuild vessels or spot blasting or full blasting,
SIGMAGLIDE 990 should only be applied
over SIGMAGLIDE 790. As a re-fresh coat,
SIGMAGLIDE 990 can be applied over itself or
SIGMAGLIDE 890 in line with PPG Protective &
Marine Coatings SIGMAGLIDE General Working
Procedures.
Savings Claim:
Vessel Type Daily
Bunker cost (USD/t)
bunker
​​​​​​​Yearly fuel savings
consumption (t) (USD x 1000)
Oil Tanker
40
400 500 600 700
409 234 292 350
Bulk Carrier 33
400 500 600 700
337 193 241 289
Container
400 500 600 700
920 526 657 788
90
Note : The final saving percentage achieved is subject to a range
of operational parameters like the average speed and operational
activity of the vessel.
Recent Vessels/Clients: Greek operator Tomasos
Group decided to convert their RO-PAX vessel
Partenope to the SIGMAGLIDE 990 solution
in 2012. This coating considerably reduced
the vessel’s frictional resistance and delivered
extremely low surface energy, leading to
“significant” fuel savings which were recognised
immediately after the vessel’s return to sea postdocking, although the exact figures are not publicly
available. The company was so satisfied with the
results that they decided to convert the sister vessel,
the Trinacria.
Princess Cruises chose to apply the SIGMAGLIDE
foul release system on the Star Princess in a
project that first started in April 2004. After
removal of the conventional anti-fouling system
the SIGMAGLIDE system was applied, showing
excellent hull conditions when inspected at regular
dry-dockings in both 2008 and 2011. During the
latter dry-docking, the owner also decided to apply
a full refresher coat of third generation pure silicone
SIGMAGLIDE 990 coating on the vertical sides of
the vessel.
SIGMAGLIDE Range Contd overleaf.....
SIGMAGLIDE 990 was applied to the hull of the
Neptune Okeanis in Sept 2010. Neptune Lines
recorded an 8% reduction in the main engine fuel
consumption per nautical mile at the same average
speed of the vessel.
SIGMA SYLADVANCE Range
SIGMA SYLADVANCE 800
SIGMA SYLADVANCE 700
Pure silyl acrylate binder with high fuel savings
potential. For vessels with medium- or highoperational rate at medium speed. High-volume
solids 56%.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Savings Claim: fuel savings can be achieved,
Hydrolysing anti-fouling coating with self-polishing reduced GHG emissions.
and self-smoothing for both deep sea and coastal
vessels. Suitable for a wide range of applications,
Fitting: Suitable for newbuilding and dry docking
SIGMA SYLADVANCE 800 can be specified
applications.
for newbuilding and maintenance and repair
applications.
Information of Interest: Highest solids content of
all premium anti-foulings.
Type of Coating: Biocidal.
Known Ship Types: All.
Savings Claim: savings above 3% can be achieved,
reduced GHG emissions.
Fitting: Suitable for newbuilding and dry docking
applications.
Information of Interest: Highest solids content of
all premium anti-foulings.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
55-56
Sherwin-Williams
SeaGuard Sher-Release Surface Coat
Sherwin-Williams is a global provider of protective
and marine coatings, headquartered in the USA and
with a presence in 120 countries worldwide.
The Sher-Release system is a foul release system
that consists of the SeaGuard Surface Coat and
SeaGuard Tie Coat in a three-layer tie coat formula.
It is silicone-based and biocide free, with a key
feature of the product said to provide its superior
durability compared to similar coatings.
The company offers a line of high performance
coatings for the maritime industry with a particular
focus on protection against corrosion.
A unique feature that the company also offers is the
IMAGE (Information Management and Graphics
Engine) system as a tool to help maritime customers
select optimal coatings for their needs.
The biofouling protection of this system is said to be
up to 50/% better than comparable fluoropolymer/
silicone-based systems, causing marine organisms
to be released from surfaces even at slow speeds and
light water pressure.
IMAGE provides access to an archive of thousands
of data points and photographs to visually illustrate
the performance history of many protective coating
systems.
Features of the SeaGuard Surface Coat are listed
below.
This application can be used to produce
photographs, data plots and generate customised
image reports of coating performance.
Known Ship Types: Vessels trading at speeds
down to10 knots e.g. container ships, cruise vessels,
RoRos, tankers
Type of Coating: Foul Release.
Savings Claim: 6-10%
Key Stated Benefits: Long-life fouling protection
and a reduction in operating costs and extended drydocking intervals
Manufacturer Application Guidance: Apply over
SeaGuard Tie Coat in observance with specified
recoating intervals. The tie coat must be dry and free
of any surface contamination.
Information of Interest: Sherwin-Williams advises
consultation prior to use on vessels with cooling
coils or cooling equipment positioned on submerged
hull exteriors, due to the insulating effects of the
cooling system
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
fo
r
e
P
ller
4
e
r
p
o
e
r
t
P
d
p
n
a
a
h
ll
C
ce
n
a
rm
u
Mea
gH
n
i
r
su
By improving hull and propeller performance,
the world fleet can reduce fuel costs by as
much as US$30 billion per year and achieve an
estimated 0.3% reduction in manmade GHG
emissions. The main barrier to realising this
potential has been a lack of an accurate and
reliable method for measuring hull and propeller
performance over time.
However, these small percentages saved or spent on
each voyage add up to significant dollars saved or
spent on the annual operating cost of a vessel.
Numerous anti-fouling hull coating solutions have
entered the market over the last decade, all that
offer eye-catching fuel savings, attractive ROIs and
bountiful operating cost reductions.
The performance of hull coatings can be quantified
by their impact on a ship’s speed and so it’s overall
energy efficiency. However, there is more than one
way to measure performance, more than one set of
factors involved, and more than one time to capture
the measurements.
If a shipowner or operator is looking to be able to
quantify the savings (or not) of any technology or
measure, accurate measurement and monitoring of
fuel consumption is vital.
The energy efficiency of a vessel can effectively
be thought of as being directly linked to the fuel
oil consumption. The fuel oil consumption can
fluctuate to the extent that, without truly accurate
measurement, savings can be difficult to identify,
especially if they are in the region of 1-2 percent.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
However alluring the savings offered may be,
what actually matters to shipowners is that the hull
coating or hull-related fuel saving solution that is
chosen delivers the savings promised and a reliable
ROI.
It is crucial that a shipowner and operator therefore
truly understands what is being measured and how it
is being measured and on what basis any claims are
made. ‘Savings’ could be perhaps a misleading term
when it comes to hull coating savings claims.
57-58
Hull Fouling and Performance:
The Relationship
The performance of a ship’s underwater hull
deteriorates over a drydocking interval (the interval
between two dry dockings). This deterioration
is mainly caused by biological fouling and by
mechanical damage to hull and propellers. The
aforementioned damage and bio-fouling build
up on the hull is also known collectively as ‘hull
roughness’
Understanding hull roughness is an important
factor in understanding ship, and therefore hull
performance. Any increase in hull roughness will
increase the hull frictional resistance which will
either require additional power and fuel to maintain
vessel speed or, if maintaining constant power, will
result in speed loss and longer voyage times.
‘Hull and propeller performance’ is a term used to
identify changes in the performance of a vessel’s
hull and propeller over time, assuming no design
alterations have been made during the dry docking
interval. Specifically, it refers to the relationship
between the condition of the hull and propeller and
the propulsion power required to move the vessel
through water at a given reference speed.
As a part of developing a definition for “hull and
propeller performance” the propulsion power was
selected as the metric (the alternative being speed).
According to this definition there is a 1:1
relationship between hull and propeller performance
on the one hand and propulsion efficiency on the
other.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
According to MEPC\63\4-8 - A transparent and
reliable hull and propeller performance standard:
For a typical vessel in a typical trade,
deterioration in hull and propeller performance
is now estimated to result in a 15 to 20 percent
loss in vessel efficiency on average over a
typical sailing interval for the entire world fleet
(approximately 50 months). This corresponds
to a 15 to 20 percent increase in bunker
consumption and GHG emissions if the vessel
maintains its speed. Given that a share of the
bunkers consumed is used for purposes other
than propulsion, and given that speed is not
always maintained, the deterioration in hull and
propeller performance is broadly estimated to
account for 9 to 12 percent of current world fleet
GHG emissions.
How to Measure?
There has been a great deal of attention amongst
ship hull paint manufacturers on the subject of fully
transparent measurements of hull and propeller
performance.
3. Directly measuring the same fouling control
system over a given time period. For this method a
rule that a vessel on average will lose five percent
speed over a 60-month period can be used.
Broadly speaking, three different methods can
be deployed to confirm the effectiveness of hull
coatings at preventing marine fouling:
However, Jotun estimates that the average speed
loss is 5.9%, rounded up to 6% (based on historical
performance data now from more than 100 full drydocking intervals across all major sub-vessel types
and anti-fouling technologies). As an indication,
a 5% speed loss would translate to roughly a
maximum average of 15% increase in fuel in order
to maintain speed. This assumption is not specific
on fouling control type. The baseline data is then
compared to the performance predicted or measured
in service.
1. Comparing two different coatings against each
other, on different vessels of a similar type, over the
same period of time.
2. Comparing two different coatings against each
other, on the same vessel, in two different service
intervals e.g. before and after dry docking.
3. Comparing one coating against “baseline” ship
performance, over a period of time.
The above are the methods explained at their
most simple. International Paint and BMT
explain these three methods thus:
1. Directly comparing the in-service vessel
performance when using one fouling control system
over its full lifetime to that of another fouling control
system over its full lifetime.
2. Directly comparing a period of time in-service
prior to dry-docking with one fouling control
system to the same period after the dry-docking and
application of a new fouling control system.
Different periods can be used, however it is
recommended that the full intended lifetime of a
system is used as a basis of comparison, especially
if the comparison is to be used for commercial
decisions. The use of comparing systems on a 12
month‘snapshot’is thought to be inaccurate by some
in the industry as if solely the first period is used as
basis for comparison, such a system would appear
an attractive investment as the coating may perform
better immediately out of dry dock immediately
after the coating has been applied, however, it may
perform worse prior to dry-docking due to the time
elapsed since coating.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Each method has its pros and cons:
- To be most accurate, method number 1 requires
hull coatings to be analysed over their full lifetime
and to be analysed on vessels that travel in similar
operating conditions.
- Method number 2 has the advantage of giving a
comparison over the vessel’s lifetime, as described in
method 1, however the method being of applicable
for shorter in-service periods such as 12 months is
questionable. In any case it requires that no other
changes to the hull are made at dry-docking and if
fuel consumptions is to be compared, no changes to
the engines are made at drydocking.
- Method number 3 relies on an assumption
regarding “baseline” deterioration in hull
performance, for example typically 5-7% of their
speed over a 50-month in-service period.
None of these aforementioned methods offer
a perfect comparison of performance but they
certainly all offer a valuable proxy.
59-60
What to Measure?
A commonly used proxy for measuring hull coating
performance is to measure the resistance of the hull,
in other words how easily a ship moves through the
water.
However, ship resistance is difficult to measure
directly unless under towing tank conditions with
minimal variables and there are a wide range of
factors that influence it.
These include environmental factors such as wind,
waves, currents, water depth, water temperature and
density, and ship-specific factors such as the state of
the propeller, propeller pitch, draft, trim and rudder
activity.
A standard approach to singling out the individual
factors is to create theoretical or empirical models
for each single factor and then use those models to
make resistance corrections to a standard baseline of
performance.
Separate models are commonly developed for each
component of resistance by using tank tests of smallscale models.
However, this approach has several problems.
Firstly: the practitioners measuring resistance tend
to include varying components in their calculations.
This makes the results of different tests inconsistent,
and makes it difficult to compare predictions of
power across similar ships.
Secondly: the exploration of interactions between
these components can be left uncharted. Fluctuations
in one factor can affect changes in another, leading
to complex effects that can be difficult to account
for.
Thirdly: using small-scale ship models also has
drawbacks. When it comes to scaling these models
up to real life size the accuracy of the calculation can
be affected.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
An alternative method, utilised by software
providers MACSEA for one, demonstrates the use
of the ships propeller as the primary measuring
instrument of ship resistance. The work output of
the propeller is measured, with the general rule of
increased fouling equaling increased propeller work.
Analysing the horsepower of the propeller over time
and comparing this with ship speed can quantify the
effects of hull fouling.
One limit of this approach is that to rule out the
influence of other factors, the measurements need
to be taken in the same operating conditions every
time.
However, MACSEA claim that this method has
proved incredibly accurate. The company quotes that
through the use of a data set of 3,326 measurements,
their calculated difference between predicted and
actual performance was only 0.04% of the maximum
power range.
Once the method of comparison has been chosen
and the key performance factors identified, the actual
measurements can take place at varying times.
In a presentation to Bellona Foundation in January 2013, MARIN summarised each method as well as
their pros and cons:
Method
Pro
Dedicated Speed trials Most accurate method
Results easily understood
Noon reports
Easy to implement
Data is already there
Continuousmonitoring Big volumes of data
Can detect short-term
changes in performance
Con
Only for performance decay over time
Interesting effects may be missed due to time
between trials
Dedicated manoeuvres needed
Limited volume of data
Changing weather conditions over 24hrs must
account for acceleration and deceleration
Manual input from crew limits accuracy
Time between measurement points very large
Less accurate than speed trials
Requires sophisticated analysis
Large dataset which can contain inexplicable
performance deviations
The best method will depend on the objective of the monitoring. This will depend on factors such:
- ​the person in charge;
- the available resources;
- the operational profile of the ship;
- the ship type.
Developing a Standard Method for Measuring Hull Performance
Key conclusions of the January 2013 workshop:
• A commonly accepted framework for measuring hull and propeller performance would offer both
economic and environmental benefits.
• An ISO Standard is a suitable way of achieving this.
• Agreement on a set of relevant measurement purposes for such a standard, including the need
to measure the success of any improvements made to a ship's hull and/or propeller, both to enable
performance-based contracting by companies and inter-company reporting.
• To explore a standard with tiered levels of accuracy, to be fit for specific purposes and yet still
applicable to large portions of the world fleet.
• To only use the standard to rank ships against themselves, not create rankings within classes.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
61-62
The Current Status of the
Standard
It was recently announced that a New Work Item
Proposal has now been approved by the International
Standards Organization (ISO).
The working group now has a deadline of 18
months to develop its draft deadlines under ISO
requirements. With this tight timeframe in mind, the
ISO working group will produce a draft standard
over the next 6 to 12 months. This means that with
a subsequent period of open voting following the
standards submission to the ISO, they could be
finalised by mid 2015.
The new work for the ISO would be to develop
a voluntary code, not for regulatory use. But the
fact it is considered necessary is likely to drive the
impetus for other bodies to push ahead with similar
standards.
How will the Standards be
Formulated?
The standards are being worked on in three parts,
namely the principles of how to use them, the level
of accuracy needed, depending on how the standard
will be used, and also in-company learning — how
to ensure ships’ crews and other involved parties can
best use the data.
The standards can also be used in commercial
guarantees, written into contracts between ship
operator and the coatings manufacturer.
One of the biggest hurdles for the standards, and one
found with any fuel efficiency drive, is the hurdle
of charterparties that give owners little incentive to
maintain a fuel-efficient vessel when they do not
reap any benefit from operational savings.
This has to be overcome, otherwise any operational
standard between supplier and operators could be
pointless if all the parties are not involved.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Key Industry Studies
In-depth information on the benefits of hull
coatings and hull solutions and a range of industry
papers have been published with a plethora of
comprehensive data sets and case studies.
For this publication, Fathom has chosen key papers
and summarised their key points for easy reading.
Clean Shipping Coalition – Submission
to IMO MEPC 63rd Session - 63/4/8
In December 2011, the Clean Shipping Coalition,
in partnership with Jotun, presented a paper to
the IMO’s MEPC 63rd session regarding “A
transparent and reliable hull and performance
monitoring standard”. Although this paper was not
a case study per se, it did summarise several key
pieces of information about the state of anti-fouling
performance measurement.
Key conclusions: For typical vessels, CSC estimates
a 15-20% decrease in vessel efficiency on average
due to hull and propeller deterioration over a sailing
interval.
A review of performance guarantees from coatings
manufacturers showed that the most ambitious
promised a maximum speed loss on average of 1.5%
over the dry-docking interval. This corresponds
to a maximum vessel efficiency loss of 4% over
54 months, meaning that the vessel efficiency
improvement potential associated with anti-fouling
can be estimated as 11-16%.
Measuring performance based on a reliable and
unbiased standard is recommended.
Eniram – Hull Fouling on Cruise Ships
Jotun - Clean Shipping Coalition
In 2012, Eniram completed a rigorous analysis of
cruise ship performance in order to help shipowners
and operators estimate the impact of fouling in
different areas.
Jotun submitted a paper to the Clean Shipping
Coalition on hull and propeller performance which
fed into the above summary submitted to the MEPC
in December 2011.
Method: Eniram analysed 60 cruise ships over
38,000 operative sea days, taking measurements
of performance data at up to 25 times per second.
By complementing this data with temperature and
salinity databases, the study was also able to account
for the impact of dry-docking and washing on
fouling.
Method: Jotun analysed changes in hull and
propeller performance on 32 vessels over 48 drydocking intervals, covering most sub-vessel types
and anti-fouling technologies. The typical length
of the sailing interval was 54 months. The study
also included vessel performance data from 8 LNG
vessels covering 12 dry-docking intervals.
These cruise ships in question were between 90120,000 GRT and sailed through the Caribbean, the
coastal seas round California and Alaska as well as
the Mediterranean and the Baltic. Each vessel sailed
at least 30 days in a single area.
Key conclusions: Average speed loss per year
across all the dry-docking intervals was 2.36%. This
implies a cumulative speed loss of 10.6% over a
typical dry-docking interval, corresponding to a 32%
reduction in vessel efficiency.
Key Conclusions: The study showed that operating
in areas with a heavy development of fouling could
increase costs by around US$500,000 per year on a
single cruise vessel.
On average over a typical dry-docking interval
this results in a 16% efficiency loss. However, a
number of the vessels included in the study had
also conducted ad-hoc or regular hull and propeller
cleaning. If these cleanings had not been done, the
efficiency loss would have been even higher.
There are significant differences in the
aggressiveness of fouling between regions: on
average, the Caribbean caused the most fouling and
the Alaskan area the least.
Analysis of in-water hull cleaning also showed
that the first and second of these washes decreased
the added power consumption of vessels by 2%
depending on the coating. However, fouling
continued to increase rapidly after the washes,
and brushing also had the negative side-effect of
removing some of the coating from the hull itself.
On average over a typical dry-docking interval the
LNG vessels experienced a 17% vessel efficiency
loss attributable to a deterioration in hull and
propeller performance.
On the other hand, dry dock cleaning was able to
reduce the added power consumption by 5%.
Similar studies are being planned in order to provide
more examples of the costs of cleaning strategies,
study the effects of different cleaning techniques,
and analyse the impact of different coating systems
on the extent of hull fouling.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
63-64
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Jotun’s Hull Performance Solutions may be a sign of what’s to come in the hull
coatings market. The solutions combine Jotun’s top-of-the-range SeaQuantum
X200 antifouling with what Jotun refers to as “state-of-the-art paint application
procedures, reliable performance measurements and high performance
guarantees”. According to Jotun, for ships operating on a fixed schedule, the
Hull Performance Solution can be expected to deliver a 13% fuel cost and
GHG emission saving – making it “one of the most attractive investments in
shipping today”. Fathom sat down with Geir Axel Oftedahl, Director of Business
Development for Jotun’s Hull Performance Solutions, to better understand what
underlies these bold claims.
Q. A 13% fuel cost and GHG emission saving is very impressive. On what do you base this
claim?
A. In close cooperation with a number of our ship owning customers we have analysed historical ship
performance data from more than 150 full dry-docking intervals – covering all major antifouling
technologies from Jotun as well as from our competitors. Based on the data, the average propulsion
efficiency drop, attributable to deterioration in hull and propeller performance, was found to be 18%
over a 60 month dry-docking interval. This is in line with findings from other studies and, in our
opinion, the best available estimate of what may be referred to as market average hull and propeller
performance today.
As a part of our Hull Performance Solutions we guarantee that propulsion efficiency loss on average
over a 60 month dry docking interval shall not exceed 4.5%. The difference between market average
and our guaranteed level represents a 13.5% gain in propulsion efficiency.
In addition, the combination of the low friction properties in SeaQuantumX200 and state-of-the art
application procedures result in an improvement also in initial performance. We very conservatively
estimate the additional propulsion efficiency gain to be in the range of 1.5% - for a total gain of 15%
on average over a 60 month dry docking interval.
On an average ship around 85% of fuel is consumed for propulsion purposes while the rest is
consumed for other purposes. Therefore, on ships on a fixed schedule, a 15% propulsion efficiency
gain would typically translate into a 13% saving in overall fuel cost and GHG emissions. On ships that
must maintain speed only half the time, and that can accept a loss of speed the other half, the fuel cost
and GHG saving would be around 8.5%.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Q. As a part of your solution you offer your own method for measuring delivered hull and
propeller performance – Jotun’s Hull Performance Measurement Method. Why should a ship
owner trust this method?
A. In order for our High Performance Guarantee to be meaningful to our customers, we need an
accurate and reliable methodology for measuring hull and propeller performance. When we started
work on our Hull Performance Solutions back in 2008, there was no commonly accepted methodology
available on the market so we saw no other choice but to develop such a methodology ourselves.
Jotun’s Hull Performance Measurement Method has been judged sufficiently reliable so as to be used
in performance based contracts by a number of leading ship owners worldwide. The methodology is
also the starting point for on-going work on an ISO standard – the ISO 19030.
Jotun’s Hull Performance Measurement Method is fully transparent. The full details of the
methodology have been placed in the public domain and the performance data is generated by the
ship owner’s own measurement equipment. Therefore, whenever the need arises, an independent
third party can be called upon to verify any aspect of the methodology or the resulting measurements.
Q. And what happens if expected performance is not delivered?
A. With our Hull Performance Solutions we have made it our business to deliver performance– not
only paint. Therefore, if promised performance is not delivered, the customer should not pay.
Our high performance guarantee is really a cash-back guarantee. If guaranteed performance is not
delivered we pay back a sum of money – typically amounting to the difference in price between our
high performance solution and a market average solution.
Thereby, while the expected return on the investment is considerable, the investment is virtually risk
free. This is why we are so confident that our Hull Performance Solutions is one of the most attractive
investment opportunities in shipping today.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
67-68
A Snapshot of the Market: Hull Monitoring Software Providers
ABB/Amarcon - Octopus
BMT Group - SmartVessel
ABB has been delivering the Octopus software suite
since it s acquisition of Amarcon in 2012. This broad
range of software tools builds on core elements of
motion sensors and weather forecasting to offer
performance and fatigue monitoring, wave and
motion data, dynamic positioning advice and fleet
management.
BMT offers the SmartVessel performancemonitoring tool as part of the SmartServices
software suite, a package of measures to help
owners and operators make informed decisions on
maintenance and operations.
The “OCTOPUS-Performance” module is the key
extension to the system, designed to deliver fuel
savings it allows for onshore analysis of vessel data
to produce recommendations of optimum throttle
and trim settings, as well as giving an assessment of
hull and propeller condition to assist with conditionbased maintenance strategies.
All information regarding hull performance is
stored and used to give clear insight into hull and
propulsion economics, including the calculation of
power speed curves.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Provided: Decision support and hull
performance integrated into data analysis suite, plus
onshore analysis of data.
Real-time Feedback: Yes. Using the onshore
database, owners can identify the performance of
their fleet at any place.
Fuel Savings: 2-10% possible when combined with
Octopus Onboard.
SmartVessel measures factors such as speed,
shaft power and fuel consumption, presenting
this information visually to the crew using graphs
and data comparisons next to traffic light Key
Performance Indicators. The causes of degradation
in performance can be measured over time.
Known Ship Types: Tanker, LNG and Cruise Ships.
Monitoring Method: Hydrodynamic modelling is
used to formulate five key performance coefficients,
which incorporate the state of the hull.
• Power Coefficient – an increase in this coefficient
correlates to increased power absorption, due to the
effect of fouling on the ship’s hull or propeller.
• Hull Coefficient – this is a proxy measure to the
hulls condition due to fouling over time.
• Propeller Coefficient – indicates the propulsive
efficiency of the propeller in isolation.
• SFOC (Specific Fuel Oil Consumption) Coefficient
- a measure of the fuel consumption of the main
engine is a direct indication of engine efficiency.
• FOC (Fuel Oil Consumption) Coefficient –
highlights the overall changes in fuel consumption
and is an indication of total vessel performance.
Users can perform data analysis on the results to
isolate trends in individual factors and so identify
changes in hull performance over time.
Real-time Feedback: Yes. Visual plots of
performance.
Information of Interest: New software tools, based
on BMT SmartPower which was released in 2008.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
DNV Petroleum Services
Limited (DNVPS) - TOP
Monitoring
DNVPS offers the Technical Operations
Performance (TOP) monitoring service that collects
onboard data on main engine performance, auxiliary
engine performance in addition to the hull and
propeller.
This data is sent to DNV experts for analysis, who
generate customised recommendations to improve
performance and carry out necessary maintenance
tasks.
Known Ship Types: All types with two-stroke
engines.
Monitoring Method: TOP collects engine
performance data from participating vessels
equipped with two-stroke engines. The monitoring
system uses normal engine monitoring equipment
plus a torque meter and a Mean Indicated Pressure
(MIP) calculator as the only additional hardware.
Calculation Method: Derives a Technical Condition
Index (TCI) from the above data, corrects for ISO
conditions and then creates performance trends
which are used to generate recommendations.
Service Provided: Onboard monitoring and analysis
by DNV experts.
Real-time Feedback: It appears not, due to need for
third party analysis.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Eniram - Onboard/ Onshore
Eniram offer a range of modular software solutions
from onboard applications to comprehensive onshore
fleet analysis and data analytic services. All Eniram
solutions are fed data by the Eniram Vessel Platform
(EVP), a data collection platform that holds accurate
real-time data from multiple sources.
Hull Fouling Analysis is an analytics service,
which helps to identify and quantify performance
degradation due to impact of hull fouling and
hull aging. This service uses both the extensive
data collected and the experience and skills of
Eniram’s mathematical modelling and interpretation
capability.
Eniram has also carried out one of the most
comprehensive studies of fouling on cruise ships
(See previous listed study).
Known Ship Types: All large commercial vessel
types.
Service Provided: Monitoring and analysis.
Real-time feedback: Yes.
Key Features: A performance forecast for the
following quarter, recommendations for cleaning/
polishing, document hull performance over time
and notification of unexpected changes to hull
performance.
Key Stated Benefits: Plan optimum hull cleaning
intervals on a cost-effective basis, monitor the
effects of different cleaning methods, and evaluate
the effect of fouling on hull structure after several
dry docks.
69-70
FORCE Technology – SeaTrend
FORCE Technology offers the ‘SeaSuite’
software product range that focuses on fuel
efficiency and safety. This range is based on the
company’s experience of over 50 years in offering
hydrodynamical consultancy, services and products.
The SeaTrend product combines an on-board
reporting tool and shore-based web-enabled
database. This includes analytics which can
assess hull and propeller condition through use
of hydrodynamic models and also analyse charter
parties and voyage reporting.
Known Ship Types: All.
Cost: Around US$2000 a year according to hull
coatings manufacturer Hempel.
Service Provided: SeaTrend can produce analysis
reports which contain a graphical trend analysis
of the fouling of a hull and propeller. From these
graphs it is possible to determine the speed loss or
fuel increase over time due to fouling.
Real-time Feedback: Limited. FORCE Technology
states that reporting is “normally on a daily basis”.
Monitoring/Calibration Method: Shipowners send
details of their vessels to Force, who then create
mathematical models of these and configure the
software to align with them.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Kongsberg - Ship Performance
System
Kongsberg offers the Ship Performance System
(SPS), an onboard system designed to assist
operators in optimising the fuel consumption of the
vessel. It is based on a combination of Kongsberg’s
automation technology and Marorka software
modules and monitors performance and emissions in
real-time.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Provided: The software includes an analysis
module, which measures hull performance in terms
of kWh per nautical mile.
Real-time Feedback: Yes. The SPS includes Ship@
Web, an information management system designed
to enable continuous access to primary vessel data
both on-board the vessel and from ashore.
Kyma - Ship Performance
Analysers
Kyma offer high quality performance monitoring
products for all types of vessels. The company
offers the Ship Performance monitor as an online
performance-monitoring program.
Kyma Performance Monitoring makes it possible to
evaluate the economic impact of reduced propeller
efficiency and increased hull resistance. It is said
to be able to show the effect of any action taken to
improve hull or propeller smoothness.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Provided: Performance monitoring which
can be accessed online.
Real-time Feedback: Yes, data streaming over the
internet.
Monitoring Method: Information from this system
is based upon inputs from the shaft power meter, fuel
meter, speed log, GPS and anemometer. The output
information is presented as noon to noon and voyage
reports, trends as well as graphs where the actual
operating data is compared to reference data.
Recent Vessels/ Clients: An extensive list which
includes major names in the industry such as
Maersk, Chevron and Mitsui OSK.
MACSEA - Hull Medic
MACSEA offers the Hull Medic software module
as part of its DEXTER suite of ship performance
monitoring tools.
The software is said to be able to detect the onset of
hull fouling and determine the optimal intervals for
hull cleaning and painting. It can also quantify fuel
savings from prudent hull condition maintenance,
measure the long-term degradation in hull and
propeller efficiency, and determine if the hull coating
is performing as advertised.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Provided: Expert analysis by onshore teams
plus continuous monitoring.
Real-time Feedback: Yes, data analysis is
automated.
Cost: US$495 per ship per month for a two year
subscription (for 10 ships or more).
Monitoring Method: Uses the ship’s propeller
as a ‘power absorption dynamometer’, comparing
actual performance to “clean-hull” performance and
collecting over 100,000 data points each month to
measure the difference between measured power and
model-derived power and analyse the influence of
individual factors.
Information Outputs: Speed, power, and fuel
losses due to hull fouling.
Calibration Method: A model of a fully functional
and clean propeller is created immediately after hull
conditioning in dry-dock, and measurement of the
ships performance in placid sea conditions. That
data is then used as a baseline against which power
increases over time are measured.
Information of Interest: The software is also said
to be able to evaluate the effectiveness of alternate
paint systems, validate energy-saving technologies
related to ship performance.
Recent Clients: Thirty years of experience with US
Navy.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
71-72
Marorka - OnBoard
ClassNK-Napa Green
Marorka markets a comprehensive ship efficiency
management tool called OnBoard. The system
is modular, with elements of the tool relevant
to navigation, hull monitoring and efficiency of
auxiliary systems.
NAPA Group offers the ‘NAPA for Operations’
range of products that include specific software
modules with energy and fuel saving benefits.
The “Propulsion Optimization” application can
monitor the efficiency of the hull in terms of
performance, as well as helping operators make
efficient use of their propulsion system by providing
a clear picture of the energy efficiency of each other
component.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Provided: Monitoring of the hull and
remote fleet management.
Marorka OnBoard includes propulsion optimisation
module, which monitors the engine, shaft and
propeller to give an overview of propulsion
efficiency and hull condition. The module also gives
decision support in terms of RPM, pitch, rudder and
thermal efficiency.
Marorka Online is a web-based fleet management
application that gathers performance data from ships
equipped with Marorka OnBoard products, allowing
the fleet manager to track and compare energy
performance and the condition of the fleet.
It is currently developing the Class NK-NAPA Green
software system, which is claimed to be a total
solution for planning, monitoring and follow-up of
ship operations with a focus on fuel efficiency.
Key modules relevant to hull performance include
real time monitoring for keeping track of multiple
data sources onboard the vessel, analysis services
for analysing hull and propeller condition, voyage
reporting for collecting and recording data, and an
office portal for follow-up and analysing the results.
This software is said to be able to automatically
determine the cause of changes to the ships
efficiency or operating conditions.
Known Ship Types: All.
Service Provided: Monitoring, data analysis and
decision support.
Real-Time Feedback: Yes.
Savings Claim: Potential saving of up to 30%.
Class Society Approval: Joint project with ClassNK.
Real-time Feedback: Yes, can collect data from
over 500 data sources every 15 seconds.
Verification: Sea trials pending.
Key Vessels/Clients: Contract signed in 2011 to
install system onto the entire fleet of Greek owner
Thenamaris, comprised of around 45 tankers, bulkers
and container ships
Recent Vessels/Clients: Imabari Shipbuilding and
Sayonas Shipbuilding to install Class NK-NAPA
Green on board several existing vessels with further
development and verification to take place in 2013.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Propulsion Dynamics - CASPER
Propulsion Dynamics offer the CASPER
(Computerised Analysis of Ship PERformance)
service, which compares the actual performance of
the ship to its performance as new.
The primary products of this service are CASPER
reports, which include a variety of indicators that
can be used to create an energy management plan.
Specifically, the reports enable operators to make
cost-benefit decisions on dry-dock treatment, coating
selection, hull cleanings, and propeller polishing as
well as evaluating the merits of slow steaming.
Active ships in the CASPER service increased by
20% in 2012.
Cost: US$700,000 based on Teekay fleet feedback
of 90 vessels. Low vessel entry fee with monthly
subscription service. No capital investment or
equipment required. The company says specific fees
available upon request.
Savings Claim: In their Carbon Disclosure Project
Report in 2011, Teekay stated that it found 1-3%
efficiency savings through timely hull and propeller
cleaning, which CASPER’s calculations can aid.
ROI: One year but some customers have noted less
than that.
Technical Maturity: Since 2002; over 350 vessels
and 5,000 CASPER reports.
Known Ship Types: All vessels with single
displacement hulls over 5,000 DWT in blue water
operation (voyages of at least 18 hours or more).
Propulsion arrangements include: slow speed diesel,
diesel electric, single or twin screw.
Recent Vessels/Clients: Teekay is reported to have
subscribed 90 of its tankers to the CASPER service,
as well Norden, reportedly subscribing 50 vessels to
the service
Service Provided: Analysis by onshore teams of
naval architects.
Information of Interest: Over 50% of the ships in
the CASPER service are with shipowners who have
won the Green Ship or Clean Air Award
Real-Time Feedback: No, as vessel performance
data is recorded at periodic intervals.
Monitoring Method: Performance data is captured
by the crew and forwarded to the Propulsion
Dynamic offices for analysis, resulting in precise
calculations of speed, fuel consumption and
resistance. By incorporating factors such as the
speed of the ship through water, data from sea trials,
and calculated resistance into mathematical models,
Propulsion Dynamics is then able to calculate the
ships “added resistance”, which is the difference
between its ‘new’ and ‘actual’ performance.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
73-74
Market Overview
Company
ABB/Amarcon
BMT Group
Product
Octopus
SmartVessel
DNV Petroleum
Services Limited
Eniram
TOP Monitoring
Form of Analysis
Integrated into software
Specific module – hull
performance coefficient
Integrated into software
Onboard/ Onshore
Integrated into software
FORCE
Technology
Kongsberg
Kyma
SeaSuite
Specific module - SeaTrend
Service Provided
Software modules
Software modules and
expert analysis
Software modules and
expert analysis
Software modules and
expert analysis
Software modules
SPS
Performance
Monitoring suite
SPMNet
Integrated into software
Integrated into software
Software modules
Software modules
Integrated into software
Analysis
DEXTER suite
Specific module – Hull Medic
OnBoard
ClassNK Napa
Green
CASPER
Integrated into software
Integrated into software
Software modules and
expert analysis
Software modules
Software modules
M.A.C System
Solutions
MACSEA Ltd
Marorka
ClassNK-NAPA
Propulsion
Dynamics
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Integrated into software
Software modules and
expert analysis
A Snapshot of the Market: Class Society Solutions
Several class societies also offer software and training solutions to monitor and simplify hull performance
measurement and maintenance. While these solutions tend to focus on hull integrity rather than hull coating
performance, they can offer a useful complement to hull performance measuring and monitoring.
Germanischer Lloyd (GL) –
HullManager
GL Maritime Software offers the GL HullManager
service package for shipowners, operators and
managers. This software integrates hull condition
monitoring (HCM) with lifecycle management tools
and 3D vessel models.
It makes vessel maintenance easier by monitoring
and assessing the condition of a ship’s cargo tanks,
hull and coatings throughout their entire lifecycle.
GL HullManager can also record a complete history
of the hull condition for use in surveying.
Maintenance jobs can be integrated with GL’s
planned maintenance software – GL ShipManager
–and the results of thickness measurements recorded
by thickness measurement companies using GL
Pegasus software can also be integrated.
Key Benefits: An early warning when hull condition
deteriorates, reducing maintenance efforts, repair
costs and dry-docking time.
Extra Feature: Overview of fleet status and
comparison of ships of the same series.
Bureau Veritas – VeriSTAR HLC
Bureau Veritas offer the Veristar Hull Lifecycle
(HLC) service, which creates a 3D model of a
specific ship and enables the recording of thickness
measurements, cracks and other structural defects
to be placed onto the model during class surveys or
onboard inspections.
The aim of the service is to simplify the day-to-day
routines of superintendents when dealing with drydocking, class surveys and inspections on board.
However, once the data is in the system it can be
used for broader purposes as well.
Bureau Veritas states that “easy specification of
coating repairs” is coming soon as a new feature of
FATHOM FOCUS
the
Veristar HLC.
www.fathomshipping.com
Det Norsk Veritas – Hull PIMS
DNV offers a Planned Hull Inspection and
Maintenance System (PIMS), for close systematic
monitoring of a ship’s hull condition. This allows
for the early detection of defects, and a cross-fleet
approach to inspection, reporting and maintenance
of the hull as well as improving the quality and
efficiency of crew inspections.
Implementation is carried out in stages:
1. Development of the Hull Inspection Manual and
a review by DNV, which will normally take 3-6
months.
2. Training of personnel that are assigned to carry
out PIMS (Hull) inspections.
3. Implementation of system on board/ashore.
4. Periodical annual audits of the system.
ABS – NS5 Enterprise Software
ABS offer the NS5 Enterprise Software to simplify
the day-to-day operations of fleet managers. The
current software suite offers extended business
intelligence tools which include hull inspection
monitoring as well as tools for dry docking, ondemand reporting and vessel drawings management.
This is said to synchronise management systems,
operations and onboard personnel details across
an entire fleet into a centralised data entry and
information system.
The Energy & Environmental Manager module
can create graphs of ship performance in real time,
although there is no mention of measuring hull
performance specifically.
Recent Clients: The Taiwanese tanker operator
Formosa Plastics Marine Corp is trialling the NS5
software onboard its ships.
75-76
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
A Snapshot of the Market: Hull Coating Provider – Software
Provider Partnerships
In order to provide further validation of the quality of their hull coatings product offerings, several hull
coatings manufacturers have teamed up with providers of performance monitoring solutions to also offer
measurement services for their products. These partnerships enable owners and operators to independently
test the performance of what they have been sold.
Jotun + Kyma/Marorka, M.A.C
System Solutions + MACSEA
International Paint + BMT
ARGOSS
Jotun states that they strive to work with leaders and
innovators with regards to hull performance, in order
to contribute to the continuous development of the
best possible method for measuring it.
International Paint and BMT announced their
partnership in 2011. The BMT Smart Services
system has been adopted by International Paint to
verify, through independent monitoring and software
analysis, the contribution to vessel performance, fuel
savings and reduced emissions made by their highest
performance fouling control coatings, Intersmooth
SPC (self polishing copolymer) anti-fouling and
Intersleek foul release coating.
Their policy on working with technology partners
includes never having a direct commercial interest
in any one partner’s business and never letting any
one partner have a direct commercial interest in
theirs. They also stated that their contribution to the
measurement method resulting from any of their
partnerships shall be placed in the public domain,
to the extent that this is possible. This does not
prohibit further use/implementation of the method in
equipment or solutions.
Current partners include Kyma, Marorka, M.A.C
System Solutions, and MACSEA. All current
partners offer solutions that have been verified
as compatible with Jotun’s Hull Performance
Measurement Method.
Hempel + FORCE Technology
Hempel and performance monitoring company
FORCE Technology have an official agreement to
monitor all applications of HEMPASIL X3 with the
SeaTrend performance monitoring software.
The collaboration extends beyond ongoing testing.
The third generation Hempasil coating was itself the
product of exhaustive studies conducted by FORCE
Technology in towing tanks, as well as over five
years of static raft and dynamic rotor testing.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
The MetOcean data gathered automatically from
high resolution, accurate satellite monitoring is
essential to monitor information on board, such as
the relationship between hull roughness condition
and fuel consumption. This information needs to
be integrated with the environmental conditions
being experienced by the ship. This MetOcean data
includes factors such as wind speed and direction,
currents, (speed and direction) and wave height and
direction.
The system has been modelled using weighted
performance coefficients to provide the basis for
measurement of vessel performance against the
condition of the propeller, hull, engine and fuel
consumption. In depth analysis can be used to
monitor the propulsive performance of a ship and to
indicate how much additional power, or fuel, would
be required as a consequence of the combined effects
of weather and fouling or of the isolated effects of
fouling on the hull or propeller. This analysis enables
data trending, which can be used to optimize any
scheduling of hull and propeller cleaning events
and can be subsequently used to quantify the
effectiveness of any such events.
77-78
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Measuring and monitoring efficiency
for the global fleet
- John Willsher, Market Manager, International Paint
There is no doubt that shipping is becoming increasingly proactive towards emissions reduction. The
truth is that the industry now has little choice. Fuelled by sustained high bunker costs and the need
to generate efficiencies wherever possible whilst complying with growing emissions regulation, ship
owners and operators are investing in operational and technical measures to safeguard the future of
their fleet.
Whilst the choice of viable technologies continues to grow, this is only one half of the emissions
reduction equation. The missing piece is a credible, universally agreed and independent methodology
for measuring and verifying emissions reduction.
For the market to fully realise the fuel and emissions reductions benefits of new and emerging
technologies, it will need to fully trust the fundamental data and analysis behind performance and
efficiency claims. The lack of an independent standard and verification is a claim that has been
pursued against the clean technology sector for some time. The conventional wisdom would certainly
suggest that the take up of clean technologies would be boosted even further with one.
For owners and operators, such a methodology would provide a significant commercial advantage
as they seek to increase and prove their fleets’ efficiency. An agreed standard would also demystify
current fuel savings claims and provide technology providers with a ‘level playing field’ from which to
measure their products.
However, in order to substantiate these assumptions, an objective and independent consortia are
required to undertake an independent study to corroborate these assumptions. Once gathered, this
data can be used to reflect the industry’s sentiment for a unilateral and independent methodology
standard for measuring emissions reduction; importantly it is the sentiment of multiple industry
stakeholders, particularly owners and operators, and not just technology companies that inevitably
have a vested interest.
To measure is to know, and real-time, automated performance monitoring has the potential to enable
the crew on board a vessel to take necessary actions early in response to changing conditions that can
adversely affect fuel consumption. From an onshore management perspective, real-time, onboard
performance monitoring enables long-term trends to be measured and analysed to enable faster and
more precise decision making within the long-term goal of developing more efficient fleet operations.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Currently, most ship owners and operators have limited information about the fuel consumption
and the energy efficiency of their fleet. For most, performance analysis is carried out manually with
operators comparing energy performance reports and audits in isolation against budget estimates.
Many ship owners and operators today have to rely on inadequate information and data to justify
investments. If they don’t have confidence in the fuel and emissions reduction figures that are claimed,
the take up of these technologies and further innovation will be stifled and customers will spend more
on fuel than they need to at a time when budgets are being significantly stretched and charterers are
increasingly scrutinising their fuel spend. With current technology and innovation there is the scope
for a meaningful framework and roadmap for calculating fuel consumption and a level playing field
provided for all.
With hull coatings being the most widely used eco-efficient technology on the market, and as a leading
global marine coatings supplier, International Paint has the opportunity, and responsibility to lead
the way. However, it should not, and cannot be up to hull coatings companies to set the parameters
and methodologies by which their products are measured; a principle that is relevant to all clean
technologies and their manufacturers.
The best and most appropriate thing we can do is to let independent, third party expert fuel and
emissions monitoring organisations, in consultation with a cross-section of industry stakeholders
develop a standard model that can be applied to measure fuel consumption and the savings that
can be generated through technology. Tapping into accurate, high-quality and high-frequency
fuel consumption and vessel performance data, collected from ships’ sensors monitoring engine
torque, navigational systems and the speed log, throughout the service life of a vessel could become
a fundamental way of improving the operational efficiency of the global shipping fleet. Ensuring
independence is critical and the most responsible and effective way to generate credibility and
accurate eco-efficiency benefits for clean technology manufacturers, which will serve to build trust
with ship owners and operators and the wider shipping industry.
Accurate measurement can only serve to challenge coatings manufacturers to continue to develop
technology to better serve future demands for greater efficiency within the industry. Technology
providers for their part must seek to understand customers’ needs and calibrate investment in
research and development to stay ahead of the challenges that emerge.
The current economic challenges and the realisation of multi-faceted regulation facing the industry
are not the first time in shipping’s long history that it has been faced with making hugely impactful
decisions. As in the past, challenges should inspire innovation to create long-term sustainability.
Investing in innovation now is most certainly the way ahead.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
81-82
o
f
r
e
al P
5
m
r
i
t
e
p
t
O
p
r
a
o
f
h
C
ce
n
a
rm
g
n
i
n
lea
C
l
l
u
H
The Importance of Hull
Cleaning
From the outset, the purpose of hull cleaning has
been to prevent deterioration of the hull and increase
a ship’s speed.
The use of TBT largely eliminated the need for hull
cleaning, however since it was banned hull cleaning
has been reinstated as a necessary part of hull
maintenance regardless of what protective coatings
are applied.
A recent report from the Clean Shipping Coalition
(CSC) estimated that inadequate hull and propeller
performance could reduce the entire world’s fleet
efficiency by 15-20% over a typical 4 to 5 year
sailing interval. This represents a serious economic
liability.
Source 1 below represents real data measurements
from a vessel clearly shows the impact regular
cleaning of a ship’s hull has on fuel consumption.
In this chapter of the FOCUS we concentrate on
the underwater hull cleaning market and what the
different options are with snapshots of companies
that provide these different methods.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Hull Cleaning Methods
There are essentially two ways to clean a ship’s hull:
- Pressure wash and scraping in dry dock
- Underwater cleaning
- White metal blasting
Cleaning in dry dock is more effective and safer
however the cost of dry docking rules this out as a
regular practice and tends to occur just at scheduled
dry dock for obvious reasons. Ships entering their
second or third 5-year docking can significantly
improve fuel efficiency by white-metal blasting the
hull but this really appropriate or cost effective at
every dry docking.
This therefore leaves underwater cleaning as the
most frequent form of hull cleaning.
However, underwater cleaning is not without
liabilities and restrictions:
1. Softer coatings such as biocidal anti-fouling
and foul release coating systems can be damaged
with underwater cleaning, particularly where an
aggressive approach is needed.
2. During cleaning coatings which contain toxic
substances such as biocides may shed and can be
considered an environmental hazard with a pulse
discharge of these substances out in to the water.
3. Cleaning a heavily fouled hull, where the fouling
was acquired elsewhere, can be an invasive species
risk.
Because of these factors, underwater cleaning,
especially of toxic coatings, is forbidden or restricted
in many ports and areas. The concern about pollution
from heavy metals, toxic substances and invasive
species underlies these restrictions.
Underwater Cleaning Methods
The most prevalent method of underwater hull
cleaning requires divers to use rotating brush
equipment to remove the accumulated fouling.
This method involves large, self-propelled,
hydraulic, diver-operated, rotating multiple brush
units that are used to rapidly clean the hull of large
ships.
Smaller areas and niche areas can be cleaned
underwater by lighter brush tools or with underwater
high pressure water jet equipment.
It is very important that service providers choose the
least aggressive cleaning brush that will effectively
remove the fouling in order to avoid excessive antifoul paint wear.
However a diver requires certain conditions however
including fair visibility and acceptable current.
This places a restriction on location and conditions
although this is not by any means insurmountable.
Other options for underwater hull cleaning include
remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and some further
innovative technologies.
Propeller Cleaning/Polishing
In addition to hull cleaning, there is also demand
in the market for services that clean and polish the
propellers.
It has proved economically and environmentally
beneficial to clean propellers frequently than to wait
until they are thoroughly fouled and have calcareous
deposits.
Images Courtesy of Hydrex
Rudders and propellers are intrinsically more
complex structures and will require divers to carry
out the service. Typical costs are in the range of
US$6,000-12,000 per polishing.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
83-84
A Snapshot of the Market: Hull Cleaning Service Providers
CleanHull AS
The following service providers are profiled just
to show a snapshot of the different methods and
innovative technologies available.
CleanHull AS is an underwater cleaning specialist
which relies on an automated remote underwater
vehicle called CleanROV to carry out hull cleaning.
The company is based in Norway.
It is by no means an exhaustive list as there are many
hull cleaning providers all over the world
Locations: Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Spain and
Singapore.
Limpieza Purotecnica S.A.
Limpieza Purotecnica S.A. is a provider of hull
cleaning equipment founded in 2000 and based in
Spain. They were set up especially to promote the
Cavi-Jet cleaning technology and related services,
which the company has been delivering worldwide
since 2012.
Locations: The Mediterranean, Asia, America,
Europe, Russia, the Middle East and West Africa.
Vessel Types: All.
Specialist Equipment: The Cavi-Jet System uses
salt or fresh water to create a high-speed water jet
which contains microscopic bubbles of gas and
steam. These bubbles collapse when they meet the
hull surface, producing micro-explosions up to
150,000 bar that are said to lead to rust and fouling
being destroyed.
Cleaning rates are as follows:
• Cavi-Jet pistols - 250-350 m2/hr
• Self-propelled Cavi-Jet heads – 600-900 m2/hr
• Self-propelled twin Cavi-Jet heads – 1200-1500
m2/hr
Other Benefits: The Cavi-Jet equipment is said
to have operational reliability without requiring
frequent servicing or replacement of parts.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Vessel Types: All.
Fuel Saving Claim: An average of 5% although up
to 8% according to company literature.
Cost: Between US$15,000 and US$30,000 per
cleaning dependent on vessel size.
Verification: In-service data.
Specialist Equipment: CleanHull uses a patented
high-pressure water cleaning technology which
is a brushless cleaning method delivered by an
autonomous underwater vehicle. This “CleanROV”
crawls around a ship’s hull, rotates on its own axis,
and documents the cleaning process with multiple
cameras. It can clean 800-1000 sq m an hour.
Verification: According to CleanHull, tests by
independent surveyors prove that CleanROV does
not cause damage or abrasion to the anti-fouling.
Commercial Diving Services
ECOsubsea
Commercial Diving Services Pty Ltd is an Australian
company with over 55 years of underwater cleaning
experience. They have extensive experience
with shipping, maintenance, and mobile offshore
operations.
ECOsubsea is a new underwater cleaning company
founded in 2008 and based in Norway. The founder,
Tor M. Ostervold, received the Young Entrepreneur
Award at NorShipping 2013.
In 2009 their Hull Surface Treatment (HST) was
awarded 1st prize for Environmental Innovation at
the Lloyd’s List Asia Awards.
In 2010 HST was shortlisted as one of the top five
emerging technologies in Maritime Environmental
Protection in the Seatrade Asia Awards.
Locations: Australia.
Vessel Types: All.
Costs: Typical costs are US$6,000 - $12,000 per
polishing. Divers are required to carry out services
on rudders and propellers which are typically more
complex devices.
Vessel Types: Not specified.
Locations: Approved for use in five ports although
details not specified.
Specialist Equipment: ECOsubsea technology
consists of a cleaning and suction unit that enables
in-water cleaning of hulls while also collecting
debris at the same time.
Validation: The collection efficiency of the cleaner
is above 95% based on model trials.
Key Partners: Wilh Wilhelmsen ASA, Innovation
Norway
Specialist Equipment: HST technology uses a
containment device that attaches to a ship’s hull and
pumps out hot salt water in order to kill off marine
slime, algae and weeds. This method relies on the
dead growth then being washed off the hull under
normal operating conditions. The HST process does
not remove or damage existing anti-fouling paints
and is non-toxic.
Fathom Comment: While HST received multiple
innovation awards in 2009 and 2010, the recent
development of this technology is unclear. More
recent case studies would help validate the benefits
of this environmentally friendly offering.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
85-86
Hydrex
Ship Maintenance Underwater
Hydrex is the world leader in underwater repairs,
replacement and maintenance, pioneering new
methods and technology for in-water techniques to
enable ships to continue operations without the need
to drydock, and by insisting on the highest standards
of quality for underwater repair and maintenance.
Ship-Maintenance Underwater (SMU) is a provider
of hull cleaning solutions based in Denmark.
The company was founded in Antwerp in 1974 by
Boud Van Rompay who continues as CEO. They
are headquartered in Antwerp with regional offices
in the U.S.A and Spain. From these offices Hydrex
operates fast emergency-response diving teams
which travel worldwide on call.
Hydrex repair specialities include stern tube seal
repairs, bow thruster replacement, underwater hull
repairs, propeller cropping and straightening and
rudder repairs.
The company has a reputation for
innovative in-situ solutions to problems which
previously required days in drydock. Many
operations are now conducted using Hydrex
pioneered flexible or rigid mobdocks, which
dramatically shorten the time needed for repair.
Technical expertise and problem solving abilities are
hallmarks of the company’s diver/technicians.
Locations: Offices in Belgium, USA, Spain, India,
Gabon.
Vessel Types: All.
Specialist Equipment: Underwater high pressure
water jets for cleaning sea chests and other nooks
and crannies. Hydrex also uses flexible “mobdocks”,
mini dry-docks that enable divers to create dry
underwater environment around a vessels hull in
order to carry out repair work.
Information of Interest: Hydrex has a policy not to
carry out underwater cleaning activities which could
spread toxic compounds and result in an increase in
marine pollution.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Their trained team of divers operates in all Danish
harbours as well as offshore, and has also carried
out ship maintenance activity in a select few other
countries.
Locations: Danish waters, Sweden and Germany.
Known Ship Types: All.
Partners: Maersk, UMC International, EA Diving
Services Ltd.
Specialist Equipment: SMU has patented a new
form of hull cleaning system in 2013 which is
operated from above the water surface and so does
not require divers in the water. This system is said to
be gentler on the hull as well as on the environment
compared to using brushes.. It is suitable for vessels
of more than 100 metres in length.
SMU has also developed and patented a collection
and filtration system for propeller polishing,
designed for use in ports. It captures the material
released from the propeller and extracts the
discharge to a mobile onshore unit where the water
is passed through a filtration system before being
pumped back into the harbour basin.
Information of Interest: SMU always offers fixed
prices on hull cleaning and the service includes a
written debriefing report as well as photo or video
documentation.
SCAMP
UMC International
SCAMP is a leading provider of underwater hull
cleaning machines as well as services for propeller
polishing and underwater hull maintenance. The
company is part of the Gibraltar-based Gibunco
Group and has over 45 years experience in fuel
conservation and underwater engineering.
UMC International are specialists in underwater
maintenance and marine repair based in the UK and
with 40 years of experience. They carry out work
on more than 1500 vessels and platforms each year
worldwide, from tankers to warships to cruise liners
and including jack-up rigs.
The company has been providing propeller polishing
and underwater hull cleaning for the US Military
Navy for over 30 years.
The company has dedicated operational hubs in
60 locations spanning the globe, meaning that
UMC can provide rapid and effective support. The
company continues to expand since acquisition by V
Ships in 2006.
Locations: More than 280 locations worldwide.
Vessel Types: All.
Specialist Equipment: SCAMP machines were
introduced in 1971 and are said to enable “powerful
and effective cleaning without damaging ships’
paints”. They have a very strong reputation within
the industry.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
UMC is ISO9001:2008 Quality Management
certified.
Locations: More than 300 locations worldwide.
Vessels: All.
Specialist Equipment: The ‘Mini Pamper’ is a
versatile compact hull-cleaning machine used by
UMC divers. The operators of the machine can
bring a choice of cleaning heads into contact with
the hull until the cleaning pressure is just strong
enough to remove fouling without damaging the
surface. The Mini Pamper will then maintain this
level of cleaning pressure throughout the operation.
87-88
The Future of Underwater Cleaning
An interview with Boud Van Rompay, CEO of Hydrex
Boud Van Rompay began underwater cleaning on ships in the early 1970s. Since then he has built a leading
international underwater repair and maintenance company, Hydrex, and has developed and brought to
market a non-toxic, durable hull coating with a full line of advanced underwater cleaning equipment to go
with it.
Q: Where do you think underwater cleaning will go from here?
A: Since the ban on TBT, underwater cleaning has become increasingly important. It will continue to grow,
especially as restrictions on heavy metals and biocides in antifouling coatings are implemented, longer
drydocking intervals are sought, bunker prices rise and pressure to reduce GHG emissions and eliminate the
hull-borne spread of invasive species increases.
Q: What direction do you think this growth of underwater cleaning will take?
A: You can’t separate the cleaning from the coatings used. In order for widespread, routine in-water cleaning
to become a reality, the industry will need to move away from toxic coatings. It’s not sustainable to keep
pouring hundreds of thousands of tons of heavy metals and toxic chemicals into our oceans. They don’t just
go away. So the future of underwater cleaning includes a shift to non-toxic, really non-toxic coatings. Then
ports can allow cleaning without fear of pollution. If ships are cleaned often enough to prevent the fouling
from going beyond a medium slime layer, there will be no fear of spreading nuisance species. The demand
for industrial strength cleaning will lead to a global infrastructure that can cope with the existing world fleet,
just as there is an infrastructure around the world which can cope with the demand for fueling of commercial
and other ships. But while the industry continues to put toxic coatings on ships persists, the subject of
underwater cleaning will remain confused and problematical.
Q: Is there a resistance to more frequent cleaning?
A: There are a few factors. Slow, poorly done underwater cleaning by inept providers using inferior
equipment may have given the subject a bad name with some ship operators. This will improve with demand
and competition. They also know that soft coatings are easily damaged and depleted by underwater cleaning
and so avoid it. Ports are understandably unwilling to have ships coated with toxic substances cleaned in
their area due to the resulting pollution. Again, it’s more a coatings problem than a cleaning problem.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
Q: What about guidance and regulation, such as from the IMO?
A: This is tending, albeit very slowly, in the direction of phasing out toxic hull coatings and requiring greater
attention to how much biofouling a ship is carrying. This will gradually lead to the obvious solution which
is to apply hard, cleanable coatings, build up the infrastructure for economical, widely available industrial
strength underwater cleaning.
Q: How is Hydrex involved?
A: Well, we have developed and are delivering a non-toxic hard coating which lasts the life of the hull
without need for replacement. We have simulated 500 cleanings on this coating and it only became
smoother. We have developed a line of industrial cleaning equipment for the main hull and the niche areas
and proved them in commercial use. We have researched and prototyped reclaim systems and found that that
line of research is, unfortunately, a dead end.
Q: What’s next?
A: Get the word out. Get more shipowners and operators to opt for this environmentally benign approach.
We have considered developing a car-wash like procedure for cleaning ships. It would be designed for
frequent, rapid cleaning without any interruption to a ship’s schedule. It would require a tough, surface
treated composite (STC coating system) in order for it to work. Because all of this makes economic as well
as environmental sense it will eventually be adopted by the industry. The sooner the better to my mind.
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com
89-90
FATHOM FOCUS
www.fathomshipping.com