Het onderwerp wordt door Nicolàs de Hilster, Starmountain Survey & Consultancy, belicht. Hoe is de aandacht voor kalibratie en scheepsgeometrie in de loop van de jaren gegroeid?

1. N. de Hilster
HSB Workshop Vessel Geometry and Calibrations
15 January 2014
Vessel Geometry and Calibrations:
a historical perspective
15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
1/17

2. 1980s
Positional accuracy ~ 1 metre
 2D Vessel Geometry
 MRU only for heave
 Tape measurements

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
2/17

3. February 1953: Watersnoodramp
Flooding large parts of ZuidHolland, Zeeland and Noord-Brabant
 Also affected Great Britain, Belgium
and Germany
 Some 2400 casualties around and on
the North Sea

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
3/17

4. Two major projects:
Great Britain: Thames Barrier
 The Netherlands: Delta Works

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
4/17

5. Surveying the Storm Surge Barrier
Tide reduction not possible
 First 3D dynamic positioning system:
the AGA/Minilir

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
5/17

6. Surveying survey vessels

First surveyed hydrographic vessels:
 mv. Scholekster
 mv. Houtvliet
15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
6/17

7. Surveying survey vessels

mv. Scholekster
15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
7/17

8. Surveying vessels

Delta works construction vessels
15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
8/17

9. Surveying survey vessels

1989: First multibeam vessel:
 mv. Christaan Brunings (EM100)
15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
9/17

10. Surveying vessels: equipment
1990s: Introduction of KART
 2000: Introduction of PHINS
 2001: Introduction of LRK

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
10/17

11. Surveying vessels: Literature
J.J. Knol, “Maatvoering aan onder helling
opgestelde objekten en op drijvende
platforms”, 1982
 A.C.D.O. de Wulf, G.J.K. Brouns,
“Geometrische kalibratie van een peilschip”,
parts I and II, 2002
 J.E. Hughes Clarke, “A reassessment of
vessel coordinate systems: what is it that we
are really aligning?”, 2003
 N. de Hilster, “The MRU and SRF aligned”,
parts I, II and III, 2008/2009
 J. Vint, “Dynamic Calibration of Navigation
Sensors Using GNSS Technology”, 2013

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
11/17

12. Surveying vessels: Early Names
Scholekster by F. Maas and H. van der
Marel, after 1988 by A.P.M. Pieters
 Houtvliet by H. Murre and an assistant,
after 1988 by A.P.M. Pieters
 Christaan Brunings by A.P.M. Pieters in
1989
 From 1989 on: A.P.M. Pieters and various
assistants
 1998: N. de Hilster and E.B. Wiegmann
take over from A.P.M. Pieters

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
12/17

13. Surveying floating objects: Firms
Passe Partout: J.J. Knol
(managing director)
 GeoW: H. Waanders
(former Delta Works surveyor)
 Geocon: M. van der Bosch
(tunneling)
 Simtech
 Delta Surveys

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
13/17

14. Surveying vessels: Instruments
Initially tape measures
 Delta works: Wild T2, tape measures
 1989: total station (AGA 140, TC1)
 2004: photogrammetry

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
14/17

15. Surveying vessels: Accuracy
Tape measures: 10-50 cm (only X/Y)
 Deltaworks (1980s): app. 1-2 cm
 1998: Move3 modified and
implemented: 2-3 mm
 2004: 1:20000 (1mm/20m)
 Now: 1:40000 (1mm/40m)

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
15/17

16. Do we need that accuracy?
Better comparison
 Project requirements
 Cost reduction
 Improves performance of LRK/INS
 Higher accuracy: better calibrations
 Aligning the MRU with the SRF
Pitch/roll alignment accuracy: 0.02°
 Aligning a PHINS (0.02xSEC(LAT)°)
3 axis alignment accuracy: <=0.03°

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
16/17

17. Conclusion
Started at the Delta Works
 Kept pace with project requirements
and sensor accuracies
 Job for specialists

15 January 2014
N. de Hilster, Vessel Geometry and Calibrations: a historical perspective
17/17