This problem is well understood in naval architecture. Some good engineering articles:<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_surface_effect" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_surface_effect</a><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacentric_height" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacentric_height</a><p>tl;dr version as I recall: keep holds either mostly full or mostly empty, make assymetric holds and tanks, and use baffles if you have no other options.
Reposted by the BBC from The Conversation:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/mystery-of-the-cargo-ships-that-sink-when-their-cargo-suddenly-liquefies-101158" rel="nofollow">https://theconversation.com/mystery-of-the-cargo-ships-that-...</a><p>Discussion of the original article:
<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17884382" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17884382</a>
> about the possible liquefaction of the relatively new solid bulk cargo bauxite (an aluminium ore).<p>Is bauxite really new cargo? Or do they mean ship-operators need to be careful when switching to bauxite cargo?<p>And any particular reason for loading these cargoes with water? Why not dry?
video demonstrates this <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdyrQSypPBQ" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdyrQSypPBQ</a>
Why not pump the 'water' out of the bulk into a separate containment vessel. This way the ship's crew could neutralise the risk without reducing the weight of their cargo. When unloading they can give back the 'water' component of the cargo separately. So the weight of the cargo is basically unchanged.
Interesting article, but the sporadic bolding of a few words is killing me:<p>>The International Maritime Organisation <i></i>has codes<i></i> governing...
Add rice to the hold. Problem solved.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Midshipman_Hornblower" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Midshipman_Hornblower</a><p>"Hornblower and the Cargo of Rice"