Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Course stability of a ship towing system in wind

A. Fitriadhy a,n, H. Yasukawa b, K.K. Koh c
a
Department of Maritime Technology, Faculty of Maritime Studies and Marine Science, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia
b
Department of Transportation and Environmental Systems, Hiroshima University, Japan
c
Department of Marine Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o abstract

Article history: This paper proposes a numerical model for analyzing the course stability of a towed ship in uniform and
Received 7 June 2012 constant wind. The effects of an unstable towed ship and a stable towed ship were recorded using
Accepted 3 February 2013 numerical analysis at various angles and velocities of wind. The stability investigation of the ship towing
Available online 3 April 2013
system was discussed using the linear analysis, where a tugs motion was assumed to be given. When the
Keywords: tug and the towed ships motions were coupled through a towline as a proper model of the ship towing
Stable barge system, their dynamic interactions during towing was then captured using towing trajectories and
Unstable barge analyzed using nonlinear time-domain simulation. With increasing wind velocity, the simulation results
Course stability revealed that the towing instability of the unstable towed ship was recovered in the range of beam to
Wind angle
quartering winds; however, the towing stability of the stable towed ship in head and following winds
Wind velocity
gradually degraded. It should be noted that this towing instability might have resulted in the impulsive
Towline tension
towline tension and could led to serious towing accident e.g. towline breakage or collisions.
& 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Fitriadhy and Yasukawa (2011). In the nonlinear analysis, a

Course stability of a ship towing system is vital in still water and
still air conditions. In reality, tug and towed ship are always exposed
to some degrees of wind at different directions. A reliable investiga-
tion either using a theoretical or experimental approach is required to
obtain a deeper understanding of the course stability of the ship
towing system with such external disturbance.
In recent years, several studies regarding course stability of ship
towing systems in wind discussed investigating the motion char-
acteristics of a towed ship in various velocities and angles of wind.
Kijima and Varyani (1986) carried out a linear analysis and found
that when the wind angle changed from the head to the following
winds, the course stability of the two towed ships tended to become
unstable. In addition, Kijima and Wada (1983) presented that the
course stability of the towed barge would generally be unstable in
the range of beam to quartering wind conditions. Using an experi-
mental model in a towing tank, Yasukawa and Nakamura (2007a)
found that the course stability of an unstable towed barge was
recovered in the range of beam to quartering winds. In this work,
however, the towed barge was decoupled from the tug, i.e. the tugs
motion was assumed to be given.
This paper presents linear and nonlinear model analyses of
course stability for a ship towing system in uniform and constant
wind conditions as an extension study from the previous work by
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: 60 1 9155 590; fax: 60 9 668 3719.
E-mail addresses: naoe.at@gmail.com (A. Fitriadhy),
yasukawa@naoe.hiroshima-u.ac.jp (H. Yasukawa), koh@fkm.utm.my (K.K. Koh).
proper model of the ship towing system was modeled, where
the tug and towed barge are coupled by a towline. This is quite
reasonable given the fact that wind forces will be exerted on
windage areas both of the towed ship and also the tug. Thus, the
analytical model of predicting course stability of a ship towing
system is deemed more reliable. The effect of wind velocities (Uw)
and absolute wind angles (yw ) were taken into account in the
models. A 2D lumped mass method was applied to model towline
motion incorporated with dynamic towline tension; and an
autopilot system was employed to reduce heading and deviation
of the tug from its desired track. The presented numerical
approach is expected to reduce experimental costs, even though
the model test validation is still recommended.
2. Mathematical formulation
The mathematical model of maneuvering motions equations
for a tug and towed ship associated with dynamic towline tension
relates to nonlinear three degrees of freedom in the time-domain,
i.e. surge, sway and yaw motions.
2.1. Coordinate systems
In deriving the basic equations of motion of the tug and towed
ships, three coordinate systems are used, Fig. 1. One set of axes is
xed to the earths coordinate system that is used to specify
absolute wind velocity Uw and angle yw denoted as OXY, and

0029-8018/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2013.02.001
136 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

Fig. 1. Coordinate systems of tug and towed ships (left) and lumped mass model for towline (right).

two sets of axes G1 x1 y1 and G2 x2 y2 are xed relative to each X
N 2
I2 j B sin gMy2 cos yj Mx2 sin yj y j
z yN 2
ships moving coordinate system aligned with its origin at the j1
center of gravity. In the moving reference, the xi-axis points X
N 2
2
forward and the yi-axis to starboard. i 1 designates the tug, j B sin gMy2 sin yj Mx2 cos yj y_ j B sin g
i2 the towed ship. The heading angle ci refers to the direction of j1
the ships local longitudinal axis xi with respect to the xed x-axis. T V2 Mx2 X 0 M y2 Y 0 M 2 3
z
The instantaneous speed of ship Ui can be decomposed into a
forward velocity ui and a lateral velocity vi. The angle between Ui where
and the xi-axis is the drift angle bi  tan1 vi =ui . Here, yw 01 Mx1 M 2 2
x sin g cos c2 M y cos g sin c2
and yw 1801 are the head and following winds, respectively, and
My1 M2 2
x sin g sin c2 M y cos g cos c2
coincide with the earths xed system X; yw 901 is the beam
wind, which coincides with the earths xed system Y. Mx2 M 2 2
x cos g cos c2 M y sin g sin c2
The towline is composed of a nite number N of lumped My2 M2 2
x cos g sin c2 M y sin g cos c2
masses; the masses are connected by segments into the entire 2 2
T V 1 M x v2 sin g M y u2 cos gc _
_ F 2 M 2 v c
truss element. The lumped mass particulars describe the towline 2 x y 2 2 sin g

characteristics, such as the mass, the density and the drag. The 2 2 _
F M u c cos g
y x 2 2
coordinates of the ith lumped mass is labeled by X i ,Y i , where _ _
T V 2 M 2 2 2 2
x v2 cos g M y u2 sin gc2 F x M y v2 c 2 cos g
i 1,2,3, . . . ,N 2. The angle between the x-axis and the length
of ith segmented towline i is denoted as yi . Here, N 2 is the
2 2 _
F M u c sin g
y x 2 2
distance of the connection point at the towed ship with respect to g yN 1 c2
her center of gravity and yN 2 c2 is the heading angle of the
towed ship. Their connection points with respect to the earths
xed coordinate systems X 0 ,Y 0 and X N 1 ,Y N 1 , respectively, The notations of M2 2
x m2 mx2 and M y m2 my2 represent

have the coordinates T ,0 and B ,0 in the respective local ship the virtual mass components in the direction x2 and y2, respec-
coordinate systems. Then, the coordinates of lumped masses tively; and I2
z I2 J 2 is the virtual moment of inertia, which is

X i ,Y i through yi and i can be written as expressed as the sum of mass (moment of inertia) and added
mass (added moment of inertia) components. F 2 2 2
x , F y and M z are
the surge force, the sway force, and the yaw moment acting on
X
i X
i
Xi X0  j cos yj , Y i Y 0  j sin yj 1 the towed ship, respectively. The superscripts (1) and (2) denote
j1 j1 the tug and the towed ship, respectively.
Lagranges motion equations are applied to describe the
where yN 2 c2 and N 1 B . dynamic motion of the towline and are derived in Eq. (4). mi
and kFi are the mass and the added mass coefcients of the ith
lumped masses, respectively.
2.2. Motion equations of towed ship and towline 8 9
XN <X i =

msi sin yk sin yj mci cos yk cos yj k j y j
The motion equations of the towed ship are written in : ;
ik j1
Eqs. (2) and (3) as follows:
X
N 2
k sinyk yN 1 j Mx2 sin yj My2 cos yj y j
X
N 2
 j Mx1 sin yj My1 cos yj y j j1

j1 Q 0k Q 1k k T V 3 sinyk yN 1 k 1,2,3, . . . ,N 4

X
N 2
2 where
j Mx1 cos yj My1 sin yj y_ j T V1 Mx1 X 0 My1 Y 0 2
j1 msi mi 1 kFi sin2 yi
 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145 137

mci mi 1 kFi cos2 yi X

N 2
j Mx2 sin yj My2 cos yj yj cos yN 1 T 1
X 12
X
N 2
2 j1
T V3 j Mx2 cos yj My2 sin yj y_ j M x2 X 0 M y2 Y 0 T V 1 T V2
j1

X
N 0 1
Q 0k k sin yk RCi sin yi F Ci cos yi X
N X
i
TY  mci @ j cos yj yj A
ik
i1 j1
X
N
k cos yk RCi cos yi F Ci sin yi X
N 2
ik j Mx2 sin yj My2 cos yj yj sin yN 1 T 1
Y 13
0 1 j1
X
N X
i
2
Q 1k k sin yk @X 0 y_ j j cos yj Amsi where
ik j1
0 1 20 1
X
N X
i X
N X
i
2
k cos yk @Y 0 2
y_ j j
sin yj Amci T 1
X 4@X0 j cos yj y_j Amsi 2mi X_i kFi sin yi cos yi y_i
j1 i1 j1
ik

X
N RCi sin yi F Ci cos yi T V3 cos yN 1
2k X_ i sin yk Y_ i cos yk mi kFi y_ i sin yi cos yi 20 1
ik XN X i
2
2 2
1
TY  4@Y0 j sin yj y_j Amci 2mi Y_i kFi sin yi cos yi y_i
X_ k Y_ k mk kFk cos yk sin yk i1 j1

RCi cos yi F Ci sin yi T V 3 sin yN 1
Two different external forces experienced on the segmented
towline, Fig. 1 (right). These forces are decomposed into normal
and axial force components: The resultant towline tension at the tow point of the tug can
q
be expressed as T C T 2X T 2Y .
RCi 12 rSi C Di 9V Ci 9V Ci , F Ci 12 rSi C Fi 9U Ci 9U Ci 5

2.4. Forces and moments acting on the ships

where V Ci X_ i sin yi Y_ i cos yi and U Ci X_ i cos yi Y_ i sin yi . r is
the water density, Si the prole area of the segmented towline, CDi
The equation of external forces and moments on hull, propel-
the coefcient of the normal force, and CFi the coefcients of the
ler, rudder, and wind acting on the tug and towed ship are
axial force.
expressed in Eq. (14). The rst three of the aforementioned forces
and moments were described in the previous study (Fitriadhy and
Yasukawa, 2011).
2.3. Motion equation of tug 9
i i i i
F i
x X H X P X R X A
>
>
>
=
The equation of the tug motion was derived adequately as i i i
F y Y H Y R Y A i
14
follows: >
>
M i Ni N i Ni F i x >
z H R
;
A y Gi
M 1 _ 1 _ 1
x u1 M y v1 c 1 F x F Tx 6
Estimation of wind forces on exposed windage areas of the tug
M 1 _ M 1 _ F 1 and the towed ship are modeled in various velocities and angles
y v1 x u1 c 1 y F Ty 7
of wind. Based on Isherwood (1972), the equation of wind forces
and moments are
I1 1
z c 1 M z M Tz 8
9
i
X i i i2 i
A 1=2ra AX V A C XA yA
>
>
>
=
where M 1 1
x m1 mx1 and M y m1 my1 represent the vir-
i i i2 i
Y A 1=2ra AY V A C YA yA
i
15
>
tual mass components in the direction x1 and y1, respectively, i i i2 i i >
>
;
NA 1=2ra AY V A Li C NA yA
I1 1 1 1
z I1 J 1 the virtual moment of inertia. F x , F y and M z are
the surge force, the sway force and the yaw moment acting on the
where
tug, respectively. FTx, FTy and MTz denote the surge force, the sway
force, and the yaw moment due to the towline tension acting at yi 1 i
vA =ui
A tan A 16
the connection point of the tug, respectively, which can be
expressed as q
V i
A ui2
A vA
i2
17
F Tx T X cos c1 T Y sin c1 9

F Ty T X sin c1 T Y cos c1 10 ui
A ui U w cosyw ci 18

M Tz T T X sin c1 T Y cos c1 11 vi
A vi U w sinyw ci 19
The towline tension components TX and TY are expressed
The notations of and C i
XA , C i C i
are the force and moment
YA NA
following Yasukawa et al. (2006): i
0 1 coefcients as a function of yA (relative wind angle); ra is the
XN X
i density of air; Ai i
X and AY are the front and lateral projected areas.
TX msi @
j sin yj yj A Here, Uw and yw are the absolute velocity and angle of winds,
i1 j1
respectively.
138 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

3. Linearization of motion equations for course stability fU cos y0 U w cosyw y0 g

y2
Aq1
investigation in wind u22 22
A0 vA0
2

B uA0
Study on course stability of the ship towing system in wind y2
Ar  2
involves stronger nonlinearities than in calm water conditions. To uA0 v2
A0
2
understand the basic mechanism of the ship towing system in the yA0c 1
wind condition, a course stability model using piecewise linear
u2
A0 U cos c0 U w cosyw c0
system is utterly essential. This approach leads to provide a
threshold for identifying stable and unstable towing conditions v2
A0 U sin c0 U w sinyw c0
in the various angles and velocities of wind. Based on Fig. 2,
several simplications have been considered:
The square term of relative wind velocity V 2A in Eq. (17) can
be recast into the linearized form:
1. Motions are considered in the horizontal plane only (surge, V 2 2 2 _ 2 _
A V A0 V Aq Dy1 V Ar Dc2 23
sway, yaw).
2. The motion of the tug (X 0 ,Y 0 ) is assumed to be given with where
Y 0 0. 2
V 2
A0 U U w2 2UU w cos yw
3. The towline is treated as non-extensible catenary model
V 2
Aq 2 sin g0 fU w cosyw c0 U cos c0 g
(N 0).
4. This virtual tug moves in a straight-course with U X_0 , where cos g0 fU w sinyw c0 U sin c0 g
c1 , X0 , X_0 and Y0 are equal to zero, while y2 c2 . V 2
Ar 2 B U w sinyw c0 U sin c0 

Here, y1 and c2 are dened in steady and unsteady motions as

The equations of forces and yaw moment X 2 2 2
A ,Y A ,N A under
y1 y0 Dy1 , y_ 1 Dy_1 20 wind condition are denoted as F Ak (k1,2 and 3, respectively), as
follows:
c2 c0 Dc2 , c_ 2 Dc_ 2 21 _ _
F k k k k k
A F A0 F Aq Dy1 F Ar Dc2 F Ac Dc 24
2
where Dy1 and Dc2 are negligibly small (Oe); g0 c0 g0 and
Dg Dy1 Dc2 .
where

3.1. Linearized motion equation of forces and moments acting on a F k k k

A0 1=2ra A C A yA0 V A0
" #
towed ship @C k
A yA0
F k
Aq 1=2ra A k
C k
A yA0 V Aq yAq V A0
@yA
The basic linearization of external force under wind condition " #
2 @C k
A yA0
is based on the relative wind angle yA , which is exerted k
F Ar 1=2ra A k k
C A yA0 V Ar yAr V A0
forcefully on superstructure of the towed ship as written in @yA
Eq. (16). Using Taylor series expansion with respect to Dy_1 , @C k
A yA0
Dc_2 , Dc2 , then y2 F k 1=2ra Ak yAc V A0
A is solved as Ac @yA
y2
A tan
1 2
vA =u2
A

C yA0 yAq Dy_1 yAr Dc_2 yAc Dc2

2 2 2 2
22 and A1 A2
X , A
2
A2
Y and A
3
A2
Y L2 .
Then, the hydrodynamic forces and moment acting on the hull
where X 2 2 2 k
H ,Y H ,N H are denoted as F H (k1,2 and 3, respectively) and
expressed as
y2
A0 tan
1 2
vA0 =u2
A0

F k k k _ k _ k
H F H0 F Hq Dy1 F Hr Dc2 F Hc Dc2 25

where
2 2 2 2
F 1
H0 X 0 U cos c0 X vv U sin c0
F 1
Hq 2 UX vv sin c0 cos g0 X 0 cos c0 sin g0

F 1
Hr U sin c0 2 B X vv X vr

F 1
Hc
2U 2 sin c0 cos c0 X vv X 0
2
3 3
F 2
H0 Y v U sin c0 Y vvv U sin c0
2 2
F 2
Hq  cos g0 Y v 3Y vvv U sin c0
2 2 2 2
F 2
Hr Y r Y vvr U sin c0  B Y v 3Y vvv U sin c0

F 2
Hc
U cos c0 Y v 3Y vvv U 2 sin2 c0
2
3 3
F 3 2
H0 N v U sin c0 N vvv U sin c0 xG F H0
2 2
F 3 2
Hq  cos g0 N v 3N vvv U sin c0 xG F Hq
2 2 2 2
F 3 2
Hr N r N vvr U sin c0  B N v 3N vvv U sin c0 xG F Hr

Fig. 2. Coordinate systems for linear model of a towed ship in wind.

F 3
Hc
U cos c0 N v 3Nvvv U 2 sin2 c0 xG F 2
Hc
2 2
 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145 139

0 0 0 0
Referring to Eq. (14), the linearized equation of the total a2 Dy b2 Dc
c Dy_ d Dc
2 2
_ e Dy f Dc 0
2 2 32
external forces and moments F k k k
x ,F y ,M z is denoted as F
k

(k1,2 and 3, respectively) and take the following form: where

F k
F k k _ F k _ k
F c Dc2
0 F q Dy1 r Dc2 2
26 0
a1  M 0x0 sin y0 M 0y1 cos y0
b1 0B M 0x0 sin c0 M0y1 cos c0
where
c1 F 01 02
q sin g0 F q cos g0
F k
0 F k k
H0 F A0 , F k
q F k k
Hq F Aq d1 cos c0 cos g0 M 0y M 0x sin c0 sin g0 M 0y M 0x
F k
r F k k
Hr F Ar , F c F k
k
H c2
F k
A c2 F 02
r cos g0 F 01
r sin g0 
2

e1 F 01 02
0 cos g0 F 0 sin g0

The notation of F k
0 is the steady component of the lateral forces
f 1 F 01 01 02 01
0 F c cos g0 F 0 F c sin g0
k
and yaw moments; F k k
q , F r and F c2 are the unsteady derivative
0
a2 I0y0 cos y0 I0x0 sin y0
values of lateral forces and yaw moments with respect to Dy_1 ,
b2 I0z 0B I0y0
cos c0 I0x0 sin c0
Dc_2 and Dc2 , respectively.
c2 0B sin g0 F 01 02 03
q cos g0 F q sin g0 F q

d2 0B sin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M0x M 0y sin2 g0 cos c0 M 0y M 0x

3.2. Course stability of a towed ship
F 01
r sin g0 cos g0 F 02
r sin2 g0 F 03
r
Referring Eq. (2), the linearized equations of the towed ship e2 0B F 01 2 2 02
0 sin g0 cos g0 2F 0 sin g0 cos g0 
can be written in the following form:
f 2 0B sin g0 F 01 02 02
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0
M x0 sin y0 M y0 cos y0 Dy 1 B M x0 sin c0 M y0 cos c0 Dc
2 2
2
F 01 03
0 sin g0 cos g0 F c
1 2 _ 1
F sin g F cos gDy F cos g F sin g Dy 2
q 0 q 1 0 0 0 0 1

U cos c0 cos g0 My M x U sin c0 sin g0 My Mx

From Eqs. (29) and (30), the value for the variables of y0 and c0
_
F 2 cos g F 1 sin g Dc
r 0 r 0 2 is obtained. By substituting those values accordingly into Eqs. (31)
F 1
0 F c cos g
2
0 F 2
0 F 1
c2 sin g0 Dc2 and (32), the unsteady motion equations of the towed ship are
then solved. When the wind coefcient is equal to zero, this work
F 1
0 sin g 2
0 F 0 cos g0 27
follows essentially the approach of Peters (1950) and Shigehiro
Similarly, Eq. (3) becomes: et al. (1997).
The non-dimensional motion are
Iy0 cos y0 Ix0 sin y0 Dy1 Iz B Iy0 cos c0 Ix0 sin c0 Dc2
M x M y M x0 M y0
B F 1 2 2 3 _
q sin g0 cos g0 F q sin g0 F q = B Dy1
M0x M 0y M 0x0 M 0y0
1=2rL22 d2
1 2 2
B F 0 sin g0 cos g0 2F y0 sin g0 cos g0 Dy1 Ix0 ,Iy0
I0x0 ,I0y0
B U sin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M x M y U sin2 g0 cos c0 M y M x 1=2rL32 d2
Iz
F 3 1 2 2 _ I0z
r = B F r sin g0 cos g0 F r sin g0 Dc2 1=2rL42 d2
B sin g0 F 1 2 2
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0 F 1 2 1 2
0 ,F 0 ,F c ,F c
2 2 F 01 02 01 02
0 ,F 0 ,F c ,F c
F 1
0 sin g0 cos g0 F c2 =B Dc2 3
1=2rL2 d2 U 2
B sin g 1
0 F 0 cos g 2
0 F0 sin g0  M z0 28 F 1 2 1 2
q ,F q ,F r ,F r
F 01 02 01 02
q ,F q ,F r ,F r
1=2rL22 d2 U
where
F 3 3
0 ,F c
M x0 Mx sin g0 cos c0 M y cos g0 sin c0 F 03 03
0 ,F c
1=2 L22 d2 U 2
r
M y0 M x sin g0 sin c0 M y cos g0 cos c0
F 3 3
q ,F r
Ix0 B sin g0 M x cos g0 cos c0 M y sin g0 sin c0 F 03 03
q ,F r
Iy0 B sin g0 M x cos g0 sin c0 My sin g0 cos c0 1=2 L32 d2 U
r
0 0 , B
, B
L2
Eqs. (27) and (28) are non-dimensionalized with respect to Dy 1 , Dc 2
1=2rL2 d2 U 2 and 1=2rL22 d2 U 2 , respectively. L2, d2 and U denote Dy 01 , Dc 02
U=L2 2
the length and the draft of the towed ship and the tows speed,
respectively. Through separating these equations into the non- Dy_ , Dc_
Dy_ 01 , Dc_ 02 1 2

dimensional steady and unsteady motion terms, the following U=L2

equations are expressed:
Steady components: 0
where and 0B denote the ratios of towline length and tow point
0
to length of the towed ship, respectively, where =L2 and
F 01 02
0 sin g0 F 0 cos g0 0 29 0
B B =L2 (B 4 0.
0 01 02 0
sin g
B 0 F 0 cos g 0 F 0 sin g 0 M z0 0 30
3.3. Course stability criterion
Unsteady components:
0 0 0 0 Simultaneous solution of equations can be used for the
a1 Dy b1 Dc
c Dy_ d Dc
1 1
_ e Dy f Dc 0
1 1 31 assessment of the stability of the straight-line motion in steady
140 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

wind, i.e. motion with Y 00 Y_ 00 0. The values of Dy1 and Dc2 of square shape with both span and chord lengths of 2.0 m. The
are described by steering speed of the rudder was set to 2.0 1/s.

Dy1 C 1 elt , Dc2 C 2 elt 33 4.2. Hydrodynamic derivatives

By substituting Eq. (33) into Eqs. (31) and (32), a fourth-order Hydrodynamic derivatives for the tug and barges 2B and 2Bs,
characteristic equation with respect to l should satisfy the including their resistance coefcients, were obtained from captive
following conditions: model test in the towing tank (see Fig. 3), which are completely
4 3 2
summarized in Table 2. Based on the stability index C, barges 2B
D0 l D1 l D2 l D3 l D4 0 34 and 2Bs are considered respectively unstable and stable motions
in course-keeping. In addition, added mass coefcients m0x ,m0y ,J 0z
where the values of D0 ,D1 ,D2 ,D3 and D0 are obtained (see were calculated using singular distribution method under the
Appendix A). By applying the Hurwits method in Eq. (34), the rigid free-surface condition.
basic solution of stability criteria is written in Eqs. (35) and (36).
4.3. Wind coefcients
D0 ,D1 ,D2 ,D3 ,D4 4 0 35
Referring to Eq. (15), the wind coefcients for the tug and
D  D1 D2 D3 D21 D4 D0 D23 4 0 36
barges were obtained using the linear multiple regression tech-
nique, Fujiwara et al. (1998) and are shown in Fig. 4.
4. Simulation condition
4.4. Autopilot of the tug
4.1. Ships
During ship towing operation, the autopilot is often employed.
The principal dimensions of tug and barge including their The rudder of the tug as an actuator automatically adjusts the
lateral and longitudinal windage areas used in the simulation are backlash of the controller according to the heading angle and
presented in Table 1. The length of the tug and the barge are lateral position of the tug. The control law of the tug is given in
denoted as L1 and L2, respectively. The towing point at the tug is
denoted as T and non-dimensionalized as 0T T =L1 . Negative 0T Table 2
means that the tow point is located behind the center of gravity of Resistance coefcient, hydrodynamic derivatives on maneuvering and added mass
the tug. Two conditions of the barge, namely with and without coefcients.
attached skegs, are denoted as barge 2B and barge 2Bs,
Symbol Tug 2B 2Bs
respectively, hereafter named the stable and unstable barge. The
tug has twin CPP propellers and twin rudders. Each CPP Propeller X 0uu  0.0330  0.0635  0.0641
has a diameter of 1.8 m, revolution of 300 rpm and a total engine X 0vv  0.0491  0.0188  0.1152
power of 1050 kW, used in the simulations for maintaining a X 0vr  0.1201  0.0085  0.1086
constant speed of 7.0 knots on the tug alone. The rudder design is X 0rr  0.0509  0.0272  0.1311
Y 0v  0.3579  0.4027  0.4373
Y 0R 0.127 0.0568 0.1355
Y 0vvv  0.2509  0.2159  0.7265
Y 0vvr 0.1352 0.4840 0.3263
Table 1
Y 0vrr 0.000 0.495  0.2424
Principal dimensions of tug and barge.
Y 0rrr 0.000  0.8469  0.4167
N 0v  0.0698  0.1160  0.0491
Symbol Tug Barge
N 0R  0.0435  0.0237  0.0742
Ship length L (m) 40.0 60.96 N 0vvv  0.0588 0.0458  0.0067
Breadth B (m) 9.0 21.34 N 0vvr  0.0367  0.0578  0.2486
Draft d (m) 2.2 2.74 N 0vrr 0.000 0.2099 0.0360
Volume V (m3) 494.7 3292.4 N 0rrr 0.000  0.0982 0.000
Lateral wind area AX (m2) 57.35 77.5 Y 0d  0.05
Longitudinal wind area AY (m2) 28.91 250.5 N 0d 0.025
LCB position xG (m) 2.23  1.04 m0x 0.0187 0.0391 0.0391
Block coefcient Cb 0.63 0.92 m0y 0.1554 0.2180 0.2180
kyy =L 0.25 0.252 J 0z 0.0056 0.0124 0.0124
L/B 4.44 2.86 C 0.0509  0.251 0.023

Fig. 3. Model of tug (left) and barge (right).

 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145 141

Fig. 4. Wind coefcients for tug and barge 2B/s in various angles of wind.

Fig. 5. Course stability diagram of 2B in various velocities and angles of wind.

Fig. 6. Course stability diagram of 2Bs in various velocities and angles of wind.

the form of
d1 GP cT c1 GD c_ 1 GYP Y T Y 1 GYD Y_ 1 37
The notations of c1 and Y1 are the actual heading angle and lateral
motion, respectively; cT and YT are the targeted heading angle and
lateral motion, respectively, (cT ,Y T 0). GP and GD are the propor-
tional and derivative gains with respect to the heading angle; GYP
and GYD are the proportional and derivative gains with respect to the
lateral motion. Here, the constant controller gains of GP, GD, GYP and
GYD are applied, i.e. 9, 10, 10 and 3.5, respectively.
5. Results
Course stability of the towing system at different wind velocities
and wind angles are numerically simulated using linear and nonlinear
approaches. In these simulations, the authors employed the towing
0 0
parameters of 0T 0:44, 0B 0:5 and different from 1:0 to 5:0;
0
whereas 2:0 was only used for the nonlinear analysis.
5.1. Course stability of the ship towing system in wind: linear
analysis
Following the work of Yasukawa and Nakamura (2007a), the
stability conditions of the linearized system are determined by the
signs of the real part of its eigen values from Eq. (34): negative and
positive values represent stable and unstable motion responses,
respectively. The analysis was discussed in course diagram stability
designating stable (white color) and unstable (black color) zones, as
shown in Figs. 5 and 6. In this analysis, the tug motion was assumed
to be given as explained earlier in Section 3.
For barge 2B, the course stability diagrams of the ship towing
system using linear approach vs. the angle of wind are plotted in
Fig. 5. Based on the diagrams, the increase of U w =U from 0.0 (no
0
wind) to 4.0 took place in the unstable towing regions although
was lengthened from 1.0 to 5.0. Using the linear theory from
Fitriadhy and Yasukawa (2011), the towing stability was dom-
inantly determined by the inherent stability criterion of the
towed ship itself: therefore the increase of on the towing of
the unstable barge (negative course stability index) was
142 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

unnecessary and even prone to degrade the towing stability. and following winds as a further increase of U w =U up to 8.0. This
However, the stable region then appeared in the range of beam could possibly be explained by the wind forces exerted on the
exposed windage of barge 2B, which would increase of the yaw
damping on her hull and result in signicant reduction of
amplitude of the lateral motion. The results agreed well with
Table 3 model basin tests conducted by Yasukawa et al. (2007b), where
Case of 2B, effect of wind velocity on motion amplitude of ship towing system
barge 2B was towed in uniform and constant wind conditions.
with yw 01.
For barge 2Bs, the course stability analysis is plotted in Fig. 6.
U w =U u 1 (m/s) c1 (1) c2 (1) d1 (1) For the no wind case (U w =U 0:0), the towing of barge 2Bs was
absolutely stable. When U w =U increased up to 4.0, the towing
0 2.67 1.01 51.1 5.0 instability appeared in the range of 1541 r yw r 1801 at
4 2.34 1.19 50.3 5.3 0
8 1.91 1.24 51.6 6.4
0:4 r r5:0. The same tendencies showed that the towing
condition took place in the unstable region in the range of

Fig. 7. Time histories and trajectories of towing for 2B in various wind velocities with yw 01.

Fig. 8. Time histories and trajectories of towing for 2B in various wind velocities with yw 1201.
 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145
0
01 r yw r261 and 1671 r yw r 1801 at 0:4 r r2:65 and
0
0:2 r r 5:0, respectively, as U w =U increased from 4.0 to 8.0.
Similar to what is noted by Yasukawa et al. (2012), the instability
towing regions in the head and following winds occurred mainly
due to the effect of the positive sign for N 0Ac2 (the restoring
moment derivative with respect to yaw angle). As discussed in
Section 5.2, this towing instability was presented in the form of
increasing oscillation of the lateral motion for barge 2B (see
Figs. 9 and 10). However, the towing instability regions in the
head wind case with U w =U 8:0 vanished by lengthening the
0
towline ( 4 2:65). For this reason, the higher resistance of the
stable barge (positive stability index) associated with the longer
towline led to more stable towing conditions, similar to the
nding by Fitriadhy and Yasukawa (2011). In general, the
towing stability of barge 2Bs was found to be more stable than
barge 2B.
5.2. Course stability of the ship towing system in wind: Nonlinear
analysis
In the presence of wind, the ship towing model, composed of a
tug and towed ship coupled through a towline, has revealed the
enormous complexities involving two ships motions associated
with dynamic tension in a towline. Therefore, nonlinear analysis
is required to capture this phenomenon, which would be efcient
to obtain a more reliable prediction for the course stability of the
ship towing system.
Table 4
Case of 2B, effect of wind velocity on motion amplitude of ship towing system
with yw 1201.
U w =U u 1 (m/s) c1 (1) c2 (1)
0 2.6 3.2 52.0
4 2.8 8.4 53.7
8 3.2 21.5 35.5
Fig. 9. Time histories and trajectories of towing for 2Bs in various wind velocities with yw 01.
143
As seen, the entire towing performance of barge 2B at yw 01
with the various wind velocities was still directionally unstable as
indicated by the sufcient large lateral motions (Y2) and ampli-
tude of c2 (see Fig. 7). The results are presented in Table 3. In
head wind condition, u 1 decreased adequately by 28% as U w =U
increased from 0.0 to 8.0. This occurred since the quadratic
function of Uw was proportional to the total ships resistances.
Meanwhile, the yaw motion of barge 2B oscillated more fre-
quently by 65%; and the period of Y2 became faster by 41% with
respect to the horizontal trajectories (X2). However, the increase
of head wind velocity in general had a relatively small effect on
the mean magnitude of TC; and the motion performance of barge
2B as indicated by the insignicant inuence to the amplitude of
c2 , Y2, c1 and d1 . This can be explained as the behavior of the
towing independently correlates to the inherent course stability
index of the barge itself as well-noted in Table 2.
The changing of wind angle from beam to quartering remarkably
affects the course towing stability as illustrated in Fig. 8. These
towing trajectories were captured at yw 1201. With the subse-
quent increase of U w =U from 0.0 to 8.0, the simulation results
showed that the motion of barge 2B veered off to the starboard side
from the initial course and then settled then in relatively steady
course with c2 35:51, Table 4. This can be explained (Section 5.1 at
Paragraph 2) as the sway forces in the towing of barge 2B were more
dominant than her yaw moment induced by the wind forces, which
acted alongside the windage. In addition, the mean amplitude of c2
was reduced by 32%, which revealed less uctuating of TC and
implied a towing to speed up u 1 by 23%. At the same time, to
Table 5
Case of 2Bs, effect of wind velocity on motion amplitude of ship towing system
with yw 01.
d1 (1) U w =U u 1 (m/s) c1 (1) c2 (1) d1 (1)
5.1 0 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
3.7 4 3.1 0.6 8.8 1.8
25.0 8 2.2 1.4 35.6 6.0
144 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145
Fig. 10. Time histories and trajectories of towing for 2Bs in various wind velocities with yw 1801.
preserve the tug on the desired track inevitably resulted in a larger
deection of rudder angles d1 by 251 to port. However, the
subsequent increase of U w =U at yw 1201 had an insignicant
inuence on the mean magnitude of TC.
For barge 2Bs, the towing characteristics in the various head
wind velocities are illustrated in Fig. 9. By increasing U w =U from
0.0, 4.0 to 8.0, the motion of barge 2Bs is prone to be unstable as
indicated by the increase of c2 up to 35.61, Table 5. The lateral
motion of barge 2Bs increased almost 5.5 times as U w =U changed
from 4.0 to 8.0. Similar to what was explained in Section 4.1, the
restoring force of the aerodynamic derivative N 0Ac acting on barge
2
2Bs led to diverge her yaw motion. This vigorous manoeuvring
from barge 2Bs resulted in a considerable increase of maximum TC
from 7.3 t to 9.2 t. This condition might pose structural concerns
and become even worse when the snatching frequency of the
towline coincides the with motion frequencies of the tug, Varyani
et al. (2007). From the trajectories, the resistance of barge 2Bs
seemed to increase as indicated by a decrease in the tows speed
of u 1 by 14% and 39% as U w =U increased from 0.0 to 4.0 and 0.0 to
8.0, respectively. Even though the deection of d1 increased to
stabilize the towing, an unwieldy slewing motion of barge 2Bs at
U w =U 8:0 still occurred, which is absolutely unfavorable from
the towing stability point of view.
Fig. 10 shows the effect of the following wind conditions on
the course stability of barge 2Bs. In general, the towing char-
acteristics of barge 2Bs have been shown to bear qualitative
similarities to its characteristics in head wind condition. This
means that the increase of wind velocity gradually degrades the
entire towing performance as indicated by the excessive c2 up to
61.51 at U w =U 8:0, Table 6. Similar to the head wind case, the
diverging motion of barge 2Bs in following wind condition
occurred due to the aerodynamic derivative value of N 0Ac , which
2
was positive, Yasukawa et al. (2012). It was noted that Y2
increased at almost nine times as U w =U changed from 4.0 to
8.0. Because of the severity of barge 2Bss motion, this strongly
affects the tugs motions, where the tug experienced rigorous
motions indicated by the violent oscillation of c1 , d1 and u 1 .
However, the increase of following wind velocity up to
U w =U 8:0 is also detrimental to the tow by causing a very
Table 6
Case of 2Bs, effect of wind velocity on motion amplitude of ship towing system
with yw 1801.
U w =U u 1 (m/s) c1 (1) c2 (1) d1 (1)
0 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.25
4 3.7 0.8 18.4 2.6
8 3.9 9.2 61.5 18.5
impulsive towline tension with the maximum of TC of 18.7 t. This
amount was almost twice the maximum of TC in the head wind
case. The reason for this is that in the following seas the surge of
the tug increased the snatching of the towline due to rigorous
loosening and tightening of the towline with the violent motion
of barge 2Bs.
6. Conclusion
The course stability of the ship towing system in uniform and
constant wind conditions was solved by using theoretical
approaches. The agreement between linear and nonlinear analysis
was obtained. Using the linear analysis, the stability investigation
of the ship towing system showed that the course stability of the
unstable barge was recovered in the range of beam to following
winds as the wind velocity increased. In addition, the towing
performance of the stable barge was prone to be unstable in head
and following winds as indicated by the large amplitude of her
headings angle and lateral motion. Employing a longer towline
for the towing of the unstable barge was ineffective in stabilizing
the towing system; conversely, for the towing of the stable barge,
the longer towline led to more stable towing conditions. In the
nonlinear analysis, the results revealed that the towing instability
of the unstable barge 2B at yw 1201 and U w =U 8:0 was
recovered as indicated through attenuation in her shtailing
motions. In general, the towing of the stable barge associated
with the longer towline led to more stable towing conditions than
the towing of the unstable barge. The increase of following wind
 A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145 145

velocity resulted in a very impulsive towline tension, which is F 01 02

0 cos g0 F 0 sin g0
almost twice the maximum of TC in the head wind case.
F 01 01 02 01
0 F c cos g0 F 0 F c sin g0 

0B sin g0 F 01 02 03
q cos g0 F q sin g0 F q 
Appendix A
0B fsin g0 F 01 02 02
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0
2 2
F 01 03 01 02
0 sin g0 cos g0 gF c F q sin g0 F q cos g0

0
D4 F 01 01 02 01
0 F c cos g0 F 0 F c sin g0 
D0 0B M0x0 sin c0 M 0y0 cos c0 I0y0 cos y0 I0x0 sin y0
2 2
0 0B fF 01 02
0 sin g0 cos g0 2F 0 sin g0 cos g0 g
I0z 0B I0y0 cos c0 I0x0 sin c0  M 0x0 sin y0 M 0y0 cos y0 
0B fsin g0 F 01 02 02
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0
D1 0B M 0x0 sin c0 M0y0 cos c0 0B sin g0 F 01 02
q cos g0 F q sin g0
2 2
F 01 03 01 02
0 sin g0 cos g0 gF c F 0 cos g0 F 0 sin g0
F 03 0 0 0 0
q Iz B Iy0 cos c0 I x0 sin c0 

2F 01 02 0 0
q sin g0 F q cos g0 cos c0 cos g0 M y M x
References
sin c0 sin g0 M 0y M 0x F 02
r cos g0 F 01
r sin g0 
0
 I0y0 cos y0 I0x0 sin y0 0B sin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M 0x M0y Fitriadhy, A., Yasukawa, H., 2011. Course stability of a ship towing system. J. Ship
Technol. Res. 58, 424.
sin2 g0 cos c0 M0y M 0x  M 0x0 sin y0 M 0y0 cos y0 
0
Fujiwara, T., Ueno, M., Nimura, T., 1998. Estimation of wind forces and moments
2 2 acting on ship. Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 183,
D2 0B M 0x0 sin c0 M0y0 cos c0 0B fF 01
0 sin g0 cos g0 7790. (Japanese).
2F 02 0 0 0 0
0 sin g0 cos g0 gIz B I y0 cos c0 Ix0 sin c0 
Isherwood, R.M., 1972. Wind resistance of merchant ships. RINA Trans. 115,
327338.
F 01 02 0 0
0 cos g0 F 0 sin g0 cos c0 cos g0 M y M x Kijima, K., Wada, Y., 1983. Course stability of towed vessel with wind effect. Japan
Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 153, 117126. (Japanese).
sin c0 sin g0 M 0y M 0x F 02
r cos g0 F 01
r sin g0  Kijima, K., Varyani, K., 1986. Wind effect on course stability of two towed vessels.
Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 24, 103114.
0B sin g0 F 01 02 03
q cos g0 F q sin g0 F q  Peters, B.H., 1950. Discussion in the paper of Strandhagen, A.G. et al. Trans. Society
0B fsin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M0x M 0y sin2 g0 cos c0 M 0y M 0x of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers 58, 4652.
Shigehiro, R., Ueda, K., Arii, T., Nakayama, H., 1997. Course stability of the high-
F 01
r sin g0 cos g0 F 02
r sin2 g0 gF 03
r 
speed-towed sh preserve with wind effect. J. Kansai Soc. Nav. Archit. 224,
167174.
F 01 02
q sin g0 F q cos g0 Varyani, K.S., Barltrop, N., Clelland, D., Day, A.H., Pham, X., Van Essen, K., Doyle, R.,
Speller, L., 2007. Experimental investigation of the dynamics of a tug towing a
F 01 01 02 01
0 F c cos g0 F 0 F c sin g0  disabled tanker in emergency salvage operation. In: International Conference
0 on Towing and Salvage Disabled Tankers, pp. 117125.
 I0y0 cos y0 I0x0 sin y0 
Yasukawa, H., Hirata, N., Nakamura, N., Matsumoto, Y., 2006. Simulations of
0B fsin g0 F 01 02 02
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0
slewing motion of a towed ship. Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean
Engineers 4, 137146. (Japanese).
2 2 0
F 01 03 0 0
0 sin g0 cos g0 gF c  M x0 sin y0 M y0 cos y0 
Yasukawa, H., Hirata, N., Tanaka, K., Hashizume, Y., Yamada, R., 2007b. Circulation
water tunnel tests on slewing motion of a towed ship in wind. Japan Society of
D3 cos c0 cos g0 M 0y M0x sin c0 sin g0 M 0y M 0x F 02
r cos g0 Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 6, 323329. (Japanese).
Yasukawa, H., Hirono, T., Nakayama, Y. and Koh, K.K., 2012. Course Stability and
2 2
F 01
r sin g0 0B fF 01 02
0 sin g0 cos g0 2F 0 sin g0 cos g0 g
Yaw Motion of a Ship in Steady Wind, J.Marine Science and Technology.
Vol.17, No.3, 291304.
0B fsin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M0x M 0y sin2 g0 cos c0 M 0y M 0x Yasukawa, H., Nakamura, N., 2007a. Analysis of course stability of a towed ship in
wind. Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 6, 313322.
F 01
r sin g0 cos g0 F 02
r sin2 g0 gF 03
r  (Japanese).