This application claims priority to PCT Appln. No. PCT/SG02/00104, filed May 24, 2002, and to Singapore application 200103167-3, filed May 25, 2001.
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a barge for use in the bulk transport of materials.
2. Description of the Related Art
One important use of marine barges is in the bulk transfer of materials used in land reclamation projects. Such projects require the transport of large volumes of aggregates (sand and the like) that are dredged at one location (e.g. from the seabed), loaded onto the barges and discharged at a site where land is being reclaimed. To date land reclamation projects have employed hopper barges and dump barges to move aggregates to a desired site.
Hopper barges comprise a large hulled vessel containing a number of hatch compartments with hopper gates mounted at the bottom of the hatch compartment. In use Hopper barges are anchored at a supply site, where material is loaded into the hatches of the hopper barge or drawn from the sea-bed or river bed and pumped (e.g. using a suction dredger) in semi-liquid form into the hatches of the hopper barge. Once the hatches are full the Hopper barge moves to the reclamation site to unload its cargo. Discharging is carried out by opening hopper gates located in the bottom of the hatches below the water line. It is crucial to ensure that the barge operates in water of sufficient depth. If the water is too shallow the barge may become grounded on the material released through the hoppers. Once the material has been discharged the hopper barge travels back to the supply site and the cycle repeats.
Hopper barges are able to quickly unload materials at the target site. However, it requires deep water for its hopper gate maneuver. Such barges therefore have the disadvantage that they are not able to operate in shallow waters.
The inability of hopper barges to operate in shallow waters is attributed to a number of factors including:
(1) The hatch compartment is located within the center core of the vessel, sandwiched and surrounded by its hull. This means the vessel must be designed such that the holding compartment only comprises about one third of the vessels volume in order that reasonable buoyancy and stability standards may be maintained. This required volume is a disadvantage in itself but also has the effect that the barge cannot operate in shallow waters.
A further disadvantage associated with hopper barges is that they are prone to mechanical failure. The mechanical system that operates the hopper gate often breaks down due to exposure to sea water as well as contact, wear and tear with gravel material. Accordingly hopper barges also suffer from high maintenance costs and the capital cost of a hopper barge is high, relative to a dump barge (see below) capable of transporting an equivalent cargo volume.
Dump Barges are large vessels with large capacity open decks that may be loaded with a cargo. In use the dump barge is anchored at a supply site where material is loaded onto the open deck of the dump barge or drawn from the sea-bed or river bed and pumped (e.g. using a suction dredger) in semi-liquid form onto the top open deck of the dump barge. Once the barge is loaded to capacity it is moved to the reclamation site and the cargo discharged. The material is discharged by opening up side fender gates surrounding the loaded deck and then pushing out the material directly from the deck side. Pushing activity may be carried out manually or by mechanical shovel (e.g. a bulldozer). Once unloaded the barge travels back to the supply site and the cycle repeats.
Dump barges have the advantage that they can operate in shallow water or may even be beached before the unloading process begins. The ability of a dump barge to operate in shallow waters is related to the fact that the vessel has a high buoyancy value. This is because its hull is empty right to the bottom (unlike hopper barges) and the vessel is also rectangular in cross-section.
Furthermore, the shape of dump barges offers a high holding capacity (generally superior to hopper barges) because the entire top, open deck is engineered to receive cargo. Loading capacity is determined during the registration of a vessel with an approved authority. Construction, engineering features, technical specifications and age are taken into consideration. Generally speaking dump barges are allocated greater loading capacities than hopper barges.
Despite the above mentioned advantages of dump barges, they have a major draw back in that the unloading process is very slow even with the aid of individual mechanical shovels, bulldozers and the like. This is because movement of mechanical shovels and the like is hampered by the sheer volume of a fully loaded cargo deck. Assigning additional or higher capacity stand-in equipment not only cannot resolve the problem, but also adds cost and also reduces the capacity of its holding area. Under such physical constraints land-fill material can only be pushed in to the sea, shovel by shovel, by a limited allowable number of on-board stand-in equipment. This is cumbersome and time consuming.
It will be appreciated from the above that it is desirable to provide a barge that is capable of operating in shallow waters and which can also be unloaded quickly. Accordingly it is an object of the present invention to provide a barge that fulfils this criteria and/or overcomes other disadvantages associated with prior art vessels.
According to a first aspect of the present invention there is provided a barge with an open top container for receiving a cargo mounted on the deck characterised in that the container is pivotally mounted on the deck such that cargo can be discharged from the barge by tilting of the container about the pivotal axis.
A barge according to the present invention has the advantage that it is capable of operating in shallow water yet can quickly discharge cargo. Accordingly the inventor has combined the advantages of a Hopper barge with that of a dump barge whilst avoiding the disadvantages associated with both.
Barges according to the invention also have the benefit that they do not require a large crew. Typically a barge according to the present invention will need approximately half the number of crew compared to that required on an equivalent capacity hopper barge.
Furthermore barges according to the present invention are easy to construct, operate and maintain. They therefore involve low capital cost. The barges are also durable, versatile and extremely efficient for targeted discharging of a cargo.
Barges according to the present invention are ideal for use in land reclamation projects. When this is the case the cargo is an aggregate such as soil, gravel, rocks, sand and the like. Preferably the cargo is marine sand. This use represents an important feature of the invention and according to a second aspect of the invention there is provided a method of reclaiming land comprising:
The barge may also be used for general transport purposes and accordingly the cargo may be chosen from a variety of goods. For instance, the cargo may also be coal, mineral or grains (e.g. maize).
It is preferred that the underside of one end of the container is hinged onto the deck of the barge and the other is hooked onto a mechanical underpinning system, activated by hydraulics in the deck. When the underpinning system is activated (e.g. remotely from the crew cabin), a pusher piston shaft may rise from the deck and push one edge of the container upwards, while the hinge at the other end acts as a pivot point. Therefore the container tilts and discharges the cargo from the barge. It is preferred that the containers are arranged such that the cargo may be discharged over the sides of the barge.
The underpinning system may comprise a main hydraulic pump which in turn distributes hydraulic energy to power the movements of the pusher piston mounted underneath the, or each, container.
Alternatively the underside of one end of the container may be hinged onto the deck of the barge and the other may be hooked onto a cranage lifting system.
Preferably the container tilts such that an angle of between about 0° to 60° is defined between the underside of the container and the deck. This angle of inclination has been found to be sufficient for discharging an aggregate cargo such as sand or earth from the barge.
The whole discharging process and container withdrawal is preferably performed within 30 seconds.
It is preferred that the barge comprises more than one container. More than one container may be tilted at a time to allow simultaneous discharge of cargo. Synchronisation of container discharging enables optimization of buoyancy of the barge helps to avoid the possibility of capsizing.
The barge preferably has a plurality of containers arranged on the deck in two rows from bow to stern. When the containers are arranged in this fashion the barge may be a dump barge or similar vessel with a flat top open deck. The deck of the barge may contain a large number of containers that break down the cargo area of the barge into relatively smaller holding units. The containers may be individually tilted to dispense the cargo. Such an arrangement divides and spreads the cargo into relatively light and manageable masses that may be discharged over the side of the vessel without unduly affecting the buoyancy of the barge. The containers preferably are pivotably hinged to the deck about an axis adjacent to the lateral edge of the container and parallel to a midline of the barge deck.
The present invention will be further illustrated in the example and accompanying drawings in which:
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2001031673 | May 2001 | SG | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/SG02/00104 | 5/24/2002 | WO | 00 | 11/24/2003 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO02/094651 | 11/28/2002 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
213387 | Church et al. | Mar 1879 | A |
227019 | Knuth | Apr 1880 | A |
273178 | Souther | Feb 1883 | A |
289498 | Brainard | Dec 1883 | A |
502142 | Ryan | Jul 1893 | A |
590594 | Scripture | Sep 1897 | A |
656509 | Bullis | Aug 1900 | A |
659239 | Lawson | Oct 1900 | A |
1917434 | Dade | Jul 1933 | A |
2938487 | Franke | May 1960 | A |
3111102 | Gorton, Jr. | Nov 1963 | A |
3556036 | Wells | Jan 1971 | A |
4898112 | McGlew et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
23122 67 | Dec 1968 | AU |
2334485 | Aug 1999 | GB |
54027119 | Mar 1979 | JP |
54104190 | Aug 1979 | JP |
54113187 | Sep 1979 | JP |
55036108 | Mar 1980 | JP |
57108334 | Jul 1982 | JP |
57116818 | Jul 1982 | JP |
58097586 | Jun 1983 | JP |
62137308 | Jun 1987 | JP |
62137309 | Jun 1987 | JP |
07101556 | Apr 1995 | JP |
11227681 | Aug 1999 | JP |
772917 | Oct 1980 | SU |
887353 | Dec 1981 | SU |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040165971 A1 | Aug 2004 | US |