Scientific Journals

Zeszyty Naukowe
of the Maritime University of Szczecin Akademii Morskiej w Szczecinie
2018, 54 (126), 120–126
ISSN 1733-8670 (Printed) Received: 20.02.2018
ISSN 2392-0378 (Online) Accepted: 08.06.2018
DOI: 10.17402/293 Published: 15.06.2018

Numerical analysis of MOB manoeuvres in regard

to a body suffering from hypothermia

Eric Kulbiej1, Jakub Rosik2

1
Student of Maritime University of Szczecin
1-2 Wały Chrobrego St., 70-500 Szczecin, Poland
e-mail: [email protected]
2
Student of Pomeranian Medical University
1 Rybacka St., 70-204 Szczecin

corresponding author

Key words: MOB, search and rescue, maneuver, Williamson turn, hypothermia, survival
Abstract
The following paper’s aim is to provide a numerical analysis of well-known man overboard (MOB) manoeu-
vres undertaken by vessels’ masters’ in critical situations, when a passenger or crew member falls out from
a vessel. The simulation, based on a complex hydrodynamical model of a merchant ship, which compares
3 variants of this manoeuvre, shows that the Scharnov turn is the shortest and the quickest one, but the ship
finishes the Anderson turn with the lowest velocity. Also, the time of the Williamson turn is short enough, to
successfully finish the operation. The duration of MOB manoeuvres is likened to the results of a medical over-
view, with not only the duration of MOB, but also the time between falling overboard and the beginning of the
manoeuvre playing a crucial role in saving a casualty’s life.

Introduction • Working in low visibility or in rough sea

conditions.
Man-overboard In the years 2003–2007 in the USA alone, MOBs
were 24% of all boating fatalities (Neale, 2012).
Man-overboard (MOB) is one of the most infa- Most of them happened on small boats and in good
mous situations that may happen to a seafarer. conditions (76% during the daytime and 90% in non-
Depending on numerous variables it can be lethal or windy time). These statistics encourage one to think
may leave the person involved virtually unharmed. about the reason for so many deaths. The answer
It is therefore significant for the ship’s personnel to is probably recklessness, which is further indicate
act instantly and execute the exact recovery meth- by the facts that a significant proportion of young
ods so that the life of the individual in the water is men were involved in fatal accidents and that 27%
not endangered. Some of the reasons why seafarers of deaths were due to overuse of alcohol. Lack of
go overboard in the sea are as follows (Mukherjee, support also led to most of these accidents, because
2017): about 75% of fatal accidents happened on 1 or 2-per-
• Slipping on ratlines or on a board; son vessels. In other research, it was found that 77
• Being swept overboard by waves; – 86.2% – of the people who drowned did not wear
• Being pulled by mooring lines; a life-jacket (USA Coast Guard, 2012).
• Falling from an accommodation or ladder; This problem ought to be shown also from anoth-
• Climbing on to or sitting on the ship’s railings; er perspective. Statistics which describe the passen-
• Being under the influence of alcohol or drugs; gers of cruise ships are similar. Here, young men also

120 Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin 54 (126)

 Numerical analysis of MOB manoeuvres in regard to a body suffering from hypothermia

most often went overboard and the reasons for that • manoeuvring characteristics of the vessel;
were alcohol and bravado. Only 21% of cruise-ships • sea state and wind direction;
passenger survived falling overboard; first, because • experience and qualifications of the crew;
their disappearance was very noticed only after many • geographical location of the accident;
hours; second because of lack of manoeuvrability of • visibility level;
those ships in comparison to small boats; and lastly • the immediate capability of the engine plant;
because of lack of training on how to behave in cold • method of collecting MOB;
water (TravelPage, 2018). • the possibility of acquiring assistance from near-
In regard to the initial situation, the man-over- by ships.
board scenario may be classified as one of the fol- Assessing the recovery technique used in the
lowing three situations: event of a person falling overboard is the main
• immediate action – the victim is seen directly objective of this paper. In order to do this, the widely
from the bridge and rescue actions onboard are acknowledged recovery techniques are to be briefly
executed with no delay; explained.
• delayed action – the victim is seen by a witness The most commonly taught method is the Wil-
(e.g., co-worker) standing nearby. The informa- liamson turn. It is regarded as a simple manoeuvre.
tion is then transferred to the bridge with the min- The main aim is to make good to the original track
imum possible delay; line, yet with opposite course. Although it is con-
• reported missing – the victim is found to be miss- sidered effective even in reduced visibility, due to
ing during a particular event involving check- the mathematical principles of its execution, it is
ing presence of the personnel; commonly it is deemed rather slow and, in the initial part, it does
a meal-time. take the ship farther away from the scene of the inci-
Generally, the course of initial actions undertak- dent. An example of the Williamson turn is shown in
en by a crew should more or less follow a set sche- Figure 1; the procedure may be summarised in the
ma, such as the following: following points:
• throwing a life-ring over the side as close as pos- 1. Rudder hard over, to the side of the casualty.
sible to the person in the water; 2. After deviation from the original course by 60°,
• informing the master, radio operator or OOW and rudder hard over to the opposite side.
other members of the crew; 3. When heading 20° short of the opposite course,
• sounding three prolonged blasts of the vessel’s rudder to midship position and ship to be turned
whistle; to opposite course.
• yelling “Person overboard” etc.; Another technique undertaken in MOB situations
• commencing a particular recovery manoeuvre; is the Scharnov turn. Although it bears an obvious
• noting position, wind velocity and direction, the
time, in the bridge logbook;
• putting engine-room on standby;
• posting look-outs to keep the person in sight;
• setting off a dye marker or a smoke flare;
• preparing lifeboat for a possible launching;
• distributing portable VHF radios for communica-
tion between bridge, weather deck, and lifeboat.

Man overboard manoeuvres

Whenever a person is reported missing, there is

a high probability that the victim may be already
drowning. Due to that, the man-overboard manoeu-
vre has to be executed as soon as possible; the time
plays a crucial role when it comes to the effective-
ness of the action.
There are many factors that determine the effi-
ciency of the MOB manoeuvre, among which the
most important are (IMO, 2010): Figure 1. Example of Williamson turn manoeuvre execution

Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Morskiej w Szczecinie 54 (126) 121

 Eric Kulbiej, Jakub Rosik

resemblance to the previous manoeuvre, it has dif- to a common problem with low track stability. An
ferent uses; namely, it allows constant visual contact example of this method is shown in Figure 3.
with the survivor. Yet again, it cannot be fully imple- On the whole, the planning of any MOB manoeu-
mented in the case of an immediate action situation, vre is more difficult than a conventional one because
unless the time elapsed between the accident and the of the individual turning and stopping characteristics
commencement of the manoeuvre is known. It does of the ship and the need to eventually bring the ship
allow the vessel to return to her wake but it ought to to a halt. It is to be noted that guiding the ship in the
be used in a delayed action scenario. The technique direction of MOB is a major but not sufficient part
is shown in Figure 2; since the manoeuvre is a mirror of the rescue mission (Neri, 2016). Another task for
image of a Williamson turn, the steps do not need to picking up a person in the water might be the use of
be provided in this paper. a fast rescue boat; however, to release such a boat
would be possible at low speed only after substan-
tial speed loss. Therefore, it might be useful to look
for the manoeuvre with the maximum speed loss
(Benedict, Fischer & Gluch, 2011). Finally, it should
be mentioned that there are dependencies on the ini-
tial ship speed and on the available water depth. It is
clear to see that adaptation of the manoeuvre plan
has to be performed for each single, varied situation
parameter. On the other hand, the simulation soft-
ware module is able to provide the corresponding
data accordingly (Baldauf, 2011).

Theory of hypothermia

Hypothermia is a state of the body in which the

temperature measured in the rectum or oesophagus
or on the eardrum is below 35°C or 95°F (Szczeklik,
2017). The body temperature falls below the cor-
rect range because heat production is smaller than
Figure 2. Example of Scharnov turn manoeuvre execution
heat loss. It is crucial to distinguish three causes of
hypothermia: not enough heat production, too great
The last of the three techniques is the Anderson heat loss and temperature lowering caused by both
turn, also known as single turn or as 270° manoeu- of these reasons.
vre. It is undoubtedly the fastest recovery method, Hypothermia is a major threat for people in the
good for ships with a compact turning circle. That water, because this fluid is a much better heat con-
notwithstanding, the non-straight approach may ductor than air. Hence, the heat loss could be even
create difficulties for a single-screw vessel due 20–30 times higher than in air. It is obvious that
a body cannot deal with such a dynamic process.
The increase of heat production (shivering and con-
striction of skin vessels) is barely capable of slow-
ing this negative process, let alone halting it com-
pletely. Another way to fight hypothermia is to take
a specific position, with elbows crossed by the chest
and bent-up knees (WHO, 2007). Avoiding unneces-
sary movement is vital. It has been proven that this
position may increase the survival time even three-
fold, provided that one is equipped with a life jacket
(WHO, 2007).
When body temperature gets below 32°C (90°F),
muscles cease to contract. If the body temperature
is lower than the this, it is impossible to stay on the
Figure 3. Example of single turn manoeuvre execution surface without a life-jacket. Around 26°C (79°F)

122 Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin 54 (126)

 Numerical analysis of MOB manoeuvres in regard to a body suffering from hypothermia

the person loses consciousness. As the temperature Methods

gets lower, the heart action gets slower and reflexes
get weaker. Body temperature below 24°C (75°F) is The scenario is based on the following assump-
likely to be fatal. tions:
Figure 4 shows the time of probable survival in • The manoeuvring data provided in this article
a specific temperature of water. Results shown here are generated using a hydrodynamic model of
are approximate and depend on many factors, e.g. a ship’s behaviour. The state vector of a vessel in
body surface to body volume ratio (thin people lose this mathematical model is expressed as follows
their heat faster), age, metabolism pace, strength, (Kulbiej, 2017):
inherited and acquired abilities to prevent hypother-
mia (Button et al., 2015). S  x u v   (1)
T
y 

100 where:
48 x, y – the position coordinates;
24 ψ – the heading;
12 u, v – longitudinal and lateral velocities of the
10 6
hull;
ω – the radial speed.
Time [h]

2.5 • The mathematical model is based on 3 degrees

3 of freedom of the Newtonian dynamic of a rigid
1 body (Kulbiej, 2017). Therefore:
1.5
1
0.5
0.3   Fx m2
u  m  m rv
 1 1
 Fy m1
0.1 v   ru (2)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26  m2 m2
Water temperature [°C]  N
r 
Figure 4. Survival time as function of water temperature  I zz
(Button et al., 2015) where:
Fx, Fy, N – sums of forces and momentum;
Cold shock response can kill much faster than m1, m2 – effective masses of a ship in longitudinal
hypothermia. This process is associated with a reduc- and lateral directions;
tion of brain flow. The rapid decrease of surrounding Izz – the effective momentum of inertia.
temperature could lead to hyperventilation (which Effective mass and momentum of inertia stand for
could result in choking) or tachycardia (Stjepanovic, a corrected value of the body in respect for the
Nikolaidis & Knechtle, 2017). The victim also suf- added masses of water (Kulbiej, 2017).
fers from dyspnoea. Such reactions could be lethal, • Finally, the sums of forces and momentum can be
especially for people with heart problems. The first described as a function:
seconds in cold water may lead to the drowning of
people without life-jackets, even if they are able to  Fx 
swim, because it is hard to coordinate movements.
 y  x y 
 F   f t , x, y,  , v , v ,  , G, C, E, S (3)
Even rapid MOB does not guarantee the effective-  N 
ness of first aid after cold shock response.
Hypothermia is a significant phenomenon, but where:
a person without a life-jacket or with health problems Fx, Fy – the resultant forces affecting the vessel in
will probably die before the body temperature falls X and Y directions;
below 24 °C (75 °F). That is why maintaining safety N – the resultant momentum.
levels onboard and good medical care of the crew All of these are a compound function of the fol-
could lead to a similar increase in MOB effective- lowing variables:
ness to that from MOB training. It is worrying that t – time since the commencement of the
only 8% of non-swimmers were wearing life-jackets simulation;
at the time of the fatal accident (Neale, 2012). x, y – initial position of the vessel;

Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Morskiej w Szczecinie 54 (126) 123

 Eric Kulbiej, Jakub Rosik

ψ – course of the ship; Models

vx, vy – velocities of the vessel alongside the X and
Y direction; The situation described in the previous paragraph
ω – ship’s radial velocity; has been analysed in respect of three different meth-
G – vector responsible for ship’s hull parame- ods of MOB manoeuvres. The results are shown in
ters; Figures 5 to 7.
C – vector responsible for ship’s control param-
eters; 1400
E – vector responsible for the environmental
situation (weather and hydrological cir- 1200
cumstances);
S – vector responsible for surrounding’s param-
1000
eters.
• the meteorological situation included in the paper
is assumed as follows: 800
–– wind velocity is 20 knots, NE;
–– waves of 2 metres amplitude; 600
–– no wind or wave-induced current.
• the manoeuvre is executed by a Panamax-size
400
bulk carrier (195 m, 50k DWT).
• XY coordination system with metres as the main
unit is used as a datum. 200
• Williamson, Scharnov and Anderson turns are
used as the recovery techniques. The authors 0
decided to include the Scharnov turn’s results, -300 -100 100 300 500 700 900 1100
notwithstanding the fact that it is nearly identical
to the Williamson turn. Figure 6. Ship’s trajectory during the Scharnov turn
manoeuvre

1800
1100

1600
900

1400
700

1200
500

1000
300

800
100

600
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
-100

400 Figure 7. Ship’s trajectory during the Anderson turn

manoeuvre
200

Discussion
0
-200 0 200 400 600
The main characteristics of the manoeuvres are
Figure 5. Ship’s trajectory during the Williamson turn displayed in Table 1. As it turns out, the manoeuvres
manoeuvre do not typically have a similar duration. Specifically,

124 Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin 54 (126)

 Numerical analysis of MOB manoeuvres in regard to a body suffering from hypothermia

the Williamson turn takes 732 seconds, while the Conclusions

Anderson takes 604 seconds, which makes it approx-
imately 20% shorter in time. Scharnov places rough- Regarding the numerical experiment undertaken,
ly in the middle, with 7% longer duration than the following conclusions were drawn:
Anderson, but 10% shorter than the most popular. • The greatest threat to an overboard person is that
A similar fact is seen in the distance comparison. of water temperature. In a temperature of 5°C, one
As far as final speed is concerned, the difference, in may survive 30 minutes on average, which makes
favour of the Williamson, stems from the fact that. the rescue operation a race against time. For this
on the longer trajectory, the ship had more space to reason, the fact of noticing that a person fell over-
accelerate after the loss of velocity due to the circu- board, rather than finding them missing, is of
lation ceasing. extreme importance; especially in polar regions,
it may be the deciding factor for the success of the
Table 1. Characteristics of turns recovery action.
Trait
Williamson Scharnov Anderson • Simulations executed for the purposes of this
turn turn turn paper aimed to provide a numerical overview of
Duration 732 s 648 s 604 s how the recovery manoeuvre should look in actu-
Length of trajectory 3584 m 3213 m 3221 m al situations. The simulation was proven credible,
Final velocity 6.42 m/s 5.57 m/s 6.13 m/s albeit it does not bear a close resemblance to the
usual theoretical description.
Regarding the trajectories themselves, it is hard • The results received in the experiment are compa-
to say that they bear great resemblance to the ones rable to those of different sources.
specified in the theory of manoeuvring. It is note- • Due to the numerical differences in length and
worthy that the hints specified in the literature are duration, the Anderson turn seems to be more
of general nature and cannot be applied directly to applicable than Williamson’s. That notwithstand-
every ship. The Panamax model used in the simula- ing, it is the latter that has gained most notice and
tion tends to be somewhat more manoeuvrable than is thus deemed most effective.
average. In the case of the Anderson turn, after com- • In case of a delay before the person overboard is
pleting most of the typical circulation, the rudder missed, the Scharnov turn should be applied, as
needed to be put into 0 degrees in order to cease the it naturally takes the distance offset into account.
radial velocity and keep on the course to the initial Further research undertaken by the authors will
position. focus on including several practical aspects of MOB
The Scharnov turn tends to differ, as it com- manoeuvres not covered in this paper, among which
mences 450 metres from the initial position P(0,0). are the search pattern, rescue coordination, deploy-
It makes the method superior in cases other than ment of mobile rescue units and collecting the
immediate action, but less effective in that case. survivor.
Transas has undertaken similar calculations for
the mathematical model of their simulator (Transas, References
2006). The duration of the MOB manoeuvre (Wil-
liamson Turn), according to them, is 13 minutes and 1. Baldauf, M., Benedict, K., Fischer, S. et al. (2011) e-Nav-
igation and situation-dependent manoeuvring assistance to
43 seconds. It makes the manoeuvre 12% longer in enhance maritime emergency response. WMU Journal of
time than was shown in this paper. Yet, the simula- Maritime Affairs 10, pp. 209–226.
tion executed for the Transas work did not include 2. Benedict, K., Fischer, S., Gluch, M. (2011) Fast Time
the effect of braking and stopping the vessel near the Simulation Technology for Investigation of Person over
commencing position. Board Manoeuvres for Improved Training and Support for
Application on Board. International Conference IMLA 19,
The duration of each manoeuvre is, in most cas- Opatija, Croatia, 2011, pp. 71–84.
es, much shorter than the body’s cooling time, even 3. Button, C., Croft, J.L., Cotter, J.D., Graham, M.J.
after taking into account the need to release before & Lucas, S.J. (2015) Integrative physiological and be-
dropping the lifeboat. The low efficiency of persons havioural responses to sudden cold-water immersion are
similar in skilled and less-skilled swimmers. Physiology &
overboard manoeuvres results from a long peri- Behavior 138, pp. 254–259. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
od between falling overboard and the beginning of pubmed/25447338 [Accessed: January 11, 2018].
a manoeuvre, as well as from losing the victim from 4. IMO (2010) Iamsar Volume III. Mobile Facilities.
the field of view during the action or not finding the 5. Kulbiej, E. (2017) Dokumentacja oprogramowania NOVI.
victim. Unpublished materials.

Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Morskiej w Szczecinie 54 (126) 125

 Eric Kulbiej, Jakub Rosik

6. Mukherjee, P. (2017) 3 important man overboard recovery 9. Stjepanovic, M., Nikolaidis, P. & Knechtle, B. (2017)
methods used at sea. [Online] Available from: https://www. Swimming Three Ice Miles within Fifteen Hours. Chinese
marineinsight.com/marine-safety/3-important-man-over- Journal of Physiology 60 (4), pp. 197–206.
board-recovery-methods-used-at-seas/ [Accessed: January 10. Szczeklik, A. (2017) Interna Szczeklika 2017. Medycyna
15, 2018]. Praktyczna.
7. Neale, T. (2012) Man overboard rescue for powerboats. 11. Transas (2006) Manoeuvring booklet. Mathematical model
BoatU.S. Magazine 10. of Bulk carrier 2 (Dis.76800t).
8. Neri, P., Piccinelli, M., Gubian P. & Neri, B. (2016) 12. TravelPage (2018) Cruise Travel – General Info. Man over-
A Ship Motion Short-Term Time Domain Simulator and its board List. [Online] Available from: www.cruiseserver.net/
Application to Costa Concordia Emergency Manoeuvres travelpage/other/man_overboard.asp [Accessed: January
Just Before the January 2012 Accident. In: Al-Begiela K., 21, 2018].
Bargiela A. (eds) Seminal Contributions to Modelling and 13. US Coast Guard (2012) Injuries and Fatalities on Sailboats
Simulation. Simulation Foundations, Methods and Applica- in the United States 2000–2011: An Analysis of US Coast
tions. Springer, Cham, pp. 57–71. Guard Data.
14. WHO (2007) International Medical Guide for Ships.

126 Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin 54 (126)