Preliminary processing of the test results of the small belt hydrodynamic anchor

The paper presents the results of research conducted by the scientific team at the Siberian State University of Water Transport over several years, aimed at addressing one of the critical components of the search and rescue process in maritime transport incidents — enhancing the speed of detection of rescue vehicles (SS) from emergency vessels, which may carry crew members and passengers. The study investigates a small belt hydrodynamic anchor consisting of a metal frame covered with a metal mesh, to which narrow belt strips are sewn closely along the upper edge of the frame to establish its optimal design characteristics. The paper describes the construction of the anchor and illustrates its appearance. The primary goal of the tests was to obtain quantitative characteristics of the anchor during experimental trials on a bench setup capable of simulating the orbital circular motion of the anchor on waves of varying heights. Experiments were conducted in the university’s experimental pool using a crank stand that mimicked the orbital movement of a rescue vehicle on a wave. During testing, the orbital cycle period varied from 4 to 8 seconds, the angle of attack of the hydrodynamic anchor from 15° to 30°, and the deflection angle of the anchor flap from 35° to 50°, while recording the tension of the suspension cable. The results indicate that the optimal performance of the belt hydrodynamic anchor is achieved at an angle of attack of 25°, a flap deflection angle of 50°, and an orbital cycle period exceeding 7 seconds. These parameters are recommended for the design of fixed installation values for belt hydrodynamic anchors on rescue vehicles to minimize wind-wave drift. The study provides essential design guidelines for improving the operational efficiency and safety of rescue operations at sea.

1. Baalisampang, T., M. Dadashzadeh et al. “Review and analysis of fire and explosion accidents in maritime transportation.” Ocean Engineering 158 (2018): 350–366. DOI: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.04.022.

2. Volkova, N. A. “An integrated approach to reducing accidents on inland waterways in the arctic region of russia.” Proceedings of Petersburg Transport University 22.3 (2025): 761–775. DOI: 10.20295/1815–588X-2025–3–761–775.

3. Akyuz, E. and M. Celik. “Utilisation of cognitive map in modelling human error in marine accident analysis and prevention.” Safety Science 70 (2014): 19–28. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.05.004.

4. Zhang, J., Â. P. Teixeira, C. Guedes Soares and X. Yan. "Quantitative assessment of collision risk influence factors in the Tianjin port." Safety Science 110 (2018): 363–371. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.05.002.

5. Gil, M., K. Wróbel, J. Montewka and F. Goerlandt. "A bibliometric analysis and systematic review of shipboard Decision Support Systems for accident prevention." Safety Science 128 (2020): 104717. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104717.

6. Kodak, R., G. Kara, M. Yıldız and A. Şalcı. "İstanbul Boğazı’ nda deniz kazalarının seyir emniyeti perspektifinde incelenmesi." İSTANBULMAKS gemi tipi önerisi. Aquatic Research 5(1) (2022): 63–88. DOI: 10.3153/AR22007.

7. Luo, M. and S.-H. Shin. “Half-century research developments in maritime accidents: Future directions.” Accident Analysis & Prevention 123 (2019): 448–460. DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.04.010.

8. Wang, H., J. Wang et al. “An analysis of factors affecting the severity of marine accidents.” Reliability Engineering & System Safety 210 (2021): 107513. DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2021.107513.

9. Erol, S. and E. Başar. “The analysis of ship accident occurred in Turkish search and rescue area by using decision tree.” Maritime Policy & Management 42.4 (2015): 377–388. DOI: 10.1080/03088839.2013.870357.

10. Ece, N. J., V. Tok and I. Temiz. “Analysis of marine accidents in the strait of Çanakkale.” Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi 12 (2020): 1–26. DOI: 10.18613/deudfd.740152.

11. Sichkarev, V. I., A. S. Cherenovich and V. V. Kuz’min. RU 2 751 044 C1, B 63 H 19/02, F 03 B 13/12. Gidrodinamicheskiy yakor’. Russian Federation, assignee. Publ. July 7, 2021.

12. Sichkarev, V. I. and A. S. Cherenovich. RU 2 785 310 C1, B 63 H 19/02, F 03 B 13/12. Gidrodinamicheskiy yakor’. Russian Federation, assignee. Publ. December 6, 2022.

13. Sichkarev, V. I., A. S. Cherenovich, S. V. Titov et al. RU 2 792 851 C1, B 63 H 19/02, F 03 B 13/12. Gidrodinamicheskiy yakor’. Russian Federation, assignee. Publ. March 27, 2023.