Manoeuvrability analysis of double ended ferries

in preliminary design
M.Insel & I.H.Helvacioglu
Faculty of Naval Architecture & Ocean Engineering, Istanbul Technical
University, Maslak, 80626 Istanbul, Turkey
Email: insel @ sariyer.cc.itu.edu.tr , helvaci @ sariyer.cc.itu.edu.tr

Abstract

The choice of propulsion/manoeuvring system of ships operating in congested waters is mainly

governed by on manoeuvring capabilities of the available systems. A quantitative approach to
manoeuvring in the preliminary design of these ships is often requested by the operators. Such a
study has been conducted for the selection of propulsion/manoeuvring system of a double ended
passenger ferry to operate across the Bosphorus in Istanbul with the aim of reducing the journey
time in highly congested seaway traffic.
Four alternative types of propulsion/manoeuvring systems are considered in the current study,
namely, conventional propeller and rudder, propeller-high lift rudder, cycloidal propellers and Z
drives. An overall comparison based on the cost, marine engineering aspects, weight, speed and
manoeuvrability is presented for guiding the choice of propulsion/manoeuvrability device on
double ended passenger ferry. Environmental forces originated from wind, waves and current are
taken into account for the manoeuvrability analysis. Critical manoeuvres have been chosen as
position and track keeping in the Bosphorus in heavy traffic, especially among transit vessels,
and approach to Karakoy pier. The thrust and side force generated by each type of
propulsion/manoeuvring device has been compared with the required forces. Finally, example
cases with polar graphs of thrust-side force have been given to show the advantages or
disadvantages of each device.

1 Introduction

Complete manoeuvrability analysis of a proposed design is often not possible due to

unavailability of required detailed data such as hull, propellers, engine, rudders and appendages.
Steady state techniques have been deployed to fulfil the manoeuvrability requirements in the
preliminary design such as given by Asinovsky [1]. These techniques are based on
determination of disturbance forces and moments and investigation of required thruster forces
to balance disturbance forces and moments for a given station keeping or track keeping
analysis.
 Double ended passenger/vehicle ferries are often utilized for fast turn around in closed seas.
The passenger traffic in Istanbul has wide use of passenger ferries to cross the Bosphorus for
commuter traffic. A double ended, passenger only, ferry has been proposed to reduce the
journey time between Kadikoy and Karakoy which has a traffic of over 30,000 passenger a day.
Possible journey time reduction by the use of double ended ferry has been calculated, and a 20 %
time reduction has been found.
The choice of propulsion/manoeuvering system for the double ended ferries shows variation
and selection criteria are not well established [8]. A quantitative approach to manoeuvring by
steady state technique has been conducted for the selection of propulsion/manoeuvring system of
a double ended passenger ferry to operate in the Bosphorus in highly congested seaway traffic.
A cost-benefit analysis has revealed the potential use of four alternative systems:
a) Conventional propeller and rudder-2x2
b) Conventional propeller-high lift rudder-2x1 (Figure 3a)
c) Cycloidal propellers-2x1 (Figure 3b)
d) Z drives-2x2 (Figure 3c)
where 2x2 means two propulsion unit at both ends, 2x1 means one propulsion unit at both ends.
The linear manoeuvring theory has been applied to investigate the directional stability.
Environmental forces and manoeuvring forces have been calculated and compared with available
thruster forces for critical manoeuvres such as station and track keeping in the Bosphorus, and
Karakoy pier approach. Considered environmental force has included wind, wave and current
generated forces in extreme conditions on the route. Polar thrust-side force diagrams are used to
demonstrate the adequacy of the available systems.

2 Double ended ferry propulsion/manoeuvering systems

Four alternative types of propulsion/manoeuvring systems are compared in terms of marine

engineering and naval architectural aspects. The available data obtained from the various
companies and open literature have been investigated for an overall design study. The results are
summarised in Table 1. The manoeuvring aspects of the systems will be discussed in Section 3 to
7. The physical characteristics of the propulsion systems are considered first. Then the comfort,
safety and overall reliability properties of the propulsion systems are compared. Lastly, initial,
operating and maintenance costs of each type of device are compared.
This table shows that each type of device has some advantages and disadvantages. Reaching a
clear distinction among the alternative systems is highly dependent on the design synthesis of the
proposed ship. To do that may require the use of multi-objective decision making techniques.

3 Manoeuvering equations and directional stability

In the preliminary design stage, linear manoeuvering analysis can be utilized due to the lack of
data. Force equations of such analysis as given by Clarke [3] are :
Y = Yv v + Yv v + Yr r + Yr r (1)
N = N v v + N v v + N r r + N r r (2)
Coefficients of manoeuvering can be determined from model tests. However such tests are
obviously useless in the preliminary design, hence use of empirical equations such as given by
Clarke [3] are often utilized.
Table 1 Various Properties of Propulsion Systems ( A: Good, B: Average, C: Poor)
Propulsion/Manoeuvering System
Conventional Propeller & Cycloidal Z Drive
Propeller & High Lift Propeller
Rudder Rudder 2x1 2x2
2x2 2x1
Power requirement A A C B
Required ship geometry U-V shape U-V shape U shape U shape
Total propulsion weight Average Average Heavy Light
Required engine room Large Large Average Small
Vibration and noise B B A B
Mechanical safety A A C B
Additional training No Yes Yes Yes
Reliability A B B C
Redundancy B B C A
Fuel consumption A A C B
Handling and repair cost Low Low Low High
Initial cost Low Average High Average
Running cost Low Average High Average

Directional stability of the proposed ferry has been checked by using Nomoto’s [3] and
Norbin’s [3] P indices
T ′r′ + r ′ = K ′δ (3)
K′
P =1 2 (4)
T′
which gave a P value of -0.52 which does not satisfy Norbin’s suggested P value of above 0.3
[3]. Since this criteria is essentially given for single screw merchant ship forms a more
meaningful approach the following directional stability criteria was adopted:
Yv′( N r′ − m′xG′ ) − N v′ (Yr′− m′) > 0 (5)
According to this criteria (which gives the value of 0.00116) the ferry is directionally just
stable. Hence a skeg is found to be necessary for improved directional stability. Conventional
propeller arrangements have better hull shapes for the directional stability, and the worse are
the full forms for Z drive and cycloidal propeller systems. A comprehensive simulation of ship
manoeuver should be conducted when required data is available. Examples of such cases are
given by Wilson et al [9] and Korkut and Aldogan [6] including nonlinear effects.

4 Environmental forces and moments

Environmental forces originating from wind, waves and current are taken into account for the
manoeuvrability analysis.

4.1 Wind Forces

Wind generated force and moment can be important for the ships with large superstructures. As
the current case, double ended ferry, usually has a large longitudinal windage area, wind
generated forces above waterline have been calculated from Gould’s method [4,5]. The wind
speed in the Bosphorus is assumed to be as maximum of 24.5 knots from any direction relative
to the bow. The historical database statistics indicates that winds above this speed occurs only
during 3 % of the year.
A reference wind speed at the top of the deck is calculated by using a given wind speed
measured at 10 m above sea level :
UH H 1
=( ) n (6)
U10 10
and an effective wind speed for the superstructure is calculated as :
( )
U 2 = U H2 nn+ 2 (7)
by using this effective wind speed :
ρ
FLW = (C DW Cosβ − C LW Sinβ ) A S U 2 (8)
2
ρ
FTW = (C DW Sinβ + C LW Cosβ ) A S U 2 (9)
2
ρA
MW = C MW S L OA U 2 (10)
2
where C DW , C LW , C MW are drag, lift force and yaw moment coefficients respectively which
are given for various ship types.Ferry ship type coefficients are utilized for the current work.

4.2 Wave Loading

Wave effects are pronounced during the winter season in the Bosphorus. Max. significant wave
height is taken as approximately 2.1 m. The direction of the waves coincides with the wind
direction. Wave loading on the hull has been calculated from BSRA [2] which was derived
from experimental results on a cargo vessel by Wise and English. Wave drift forces and
moment are given by:
2
FLζ = C Lζ ρ g LPP (ζ W )1 3 (11)
2
FTζ = CTζ ρ g LPP (ζ W )1 3 (12)
2 2
Mζ = C Mζ ρ g LPP (ζ W )1 3 (13)
where C Lζ , CTζ , C Mζ are longitudinal, transverse force and yaw moment coefficients which
are given as functions of relative wave angle by the bow.

4.3 Current Effects

There is a strong current in the Bosphorus which can reach upto 6 knots. However such cases
are very rare and transit traffic is limited when current is above 4 knots. Hence a maximum of 4
knots from North-East is accepted for the Bosphorus. The current in Golden Horn is up to 2
knots from North-West which is taken as the limit in the calculations.
The effects of the current on the ship manoeuvers have been calculated by BSRA method
[2]. This method gives the longitudinal, transverse forces and yawing moment by
ρ C DC 2
FLC = LWLT VC Cosβ (14)
20.9
ρ C DC 2
FTC = LWL T VC Sinβ (15)
20.9
 ρ C MC 2 2
MC = LWL T VC (16)
20.9
where C DC , C MC are the total force and the yaw moment coefficients, β is the current force
angle which is given as functions of the angle of current by the bow. The relative angle is
calculated to take the ship speed into account. A correction due to shallow water was also
applied as given by BSRA method [2].

5 Sample case Karakoy-Kadikoy

An examination of manoeuvering feasibility of double ended passenger ferry, preliminary

details are given in Table 2 and Figure 2, was conducted as requested by Turkish Maritime
Corporation [7]. Proposed ferry would operate between Kadikoy, which is the main exchange
point from land based transportation into the sea transportation on the Asian side, and Karakoy
main pier to access business centers in the European side, crossing the Marmara side of the
Bosphorus as shown in Figure 1. The demand for passenger transport between Kadikoy and
Karakoy is over 30,000 people a day with peak times of 8:00 to 9:00 from Kadikoy to Karakoy
and 17:00 to 19:00 from Karakoy to Kadikoy. Haydarpasa is the railway connection in the
Asian side.

Table 2: Proposed double ended ferry preliminary characteristics

Length between perpendiculars 60.3 meters
Breadth 13.6 meters
Depth 4 meters
Block Coefficient 0.48
Displacement 1188 tons
Speed 14 knots

Conventional passenger ferries with two propeller-two rudder configuration currently

operate on the route with 15 minutes interval and 46 minutes journey time. Total time spent on
the full speed is about 28 minutes, and the rest is spent on manoeuvering. Specially Karakoy
end has busy traffic with other conventional passenger ferries, cruise liners, small motor boats.
The Bosphorus crossing of the route is also busy due to transit traffic. It is quite common
practice to stop or reduce the speed for allowing transit traffic passage.

A review of the manoeuver in Karakoy (Figure 4a) has shown that a considerable time is
spent on backing and turning. Proposed double ended ferry manoeuver, given in Figure 4b,
reduces the manoeuver time by the half. Same tendency is observed for Haydarpasa and
Kadikoy. Total time of the journey is given in Table 3 reveals that a reduction in the order of 9
minutes and 30 second can be achieved by a double ended ferry. The choice of
propulsion/manoeuvering device has not an important effect on this timings. Further reductions
can be achieved due to manoeuverability in heavy traffic in Golden Horn and the Bosphorus,
and by reducing waiting times in Haydarpasa.

6 Critical manoeuvers

Critical manoeuvres have been chosen as station and track keeping in the Bosphorus in heavy
traffic (especially among transit vessels), approach to Karakoy pier and other consideration of
manoeuvrability device. For each critical manoeuvre environmental forces and moments are
calculated by the methods given above.
X = FLW + FLC + FLζ + FL − INERTIA (17)
Y = FTW + FTC + FTζ + FT − INERTIA (18)
N = MW + MC + Mζ + M INERTIA (19)

Table 3: Estimated timings for the journey

Conventional Double Ended
Karakoy departure 3 min + 1 min 30 sec +
Karakoy-Haydarpasa 10 min + 10 min +
Haydarpasa arrival 2 min 15 sec + 45 sec +
Haydarpasa passenger unloading 30 sec 30 sec
Haydarpasa departure 30 sec 30 sec
Haydarpasa-Kadikoy 3 min 3 min
Kadikoy arrival 3 min 45 sec
Kadikoy departure 1 min 45 sec
Kadikoy-Haydarpasa 2 min 2 min
Haydarpasa arrival 2 min 45 sec + 45 sec +
Haydarpasa passenger loading 2 min 2 min
Haydarpasa departure 30 sec 30 sec
Haydarpasa-Karakoy 12 min + 12 min +
Karakoy arrival 4 min + 2 min +
Manoeuvering Time 17 min 7 min 30 sec
Total 46 min 30 sec 37 min

Then required thruster forces (Figure 5 and 6) and angles were derived as:

2*1 Thruster Arrangement

T1Cosα 1 + T2Cosα 2 = X (20)
T1Sinα 1 + T2 Sinα 2 = Y (21)
T1 Sinα 1 L − T2 Sinα 2 L = N (22)
In the solution of the thruster forces, longitudinal force of forward thruster is assumed to take
40 % of X force.

2*2 Thruster Arrangement

T1 pCosα 1 p + T2 pCosα 2 p + T1sCosα 1s + T2 sCosα 2 s = X (23)
T1 p Sinα 1 p + T2 p Sinα 2 p + T1s Sinα 1s + T2 s Sinα 2 s = Y (24)
T1 p Sinα 1 p L − T2 p Sinα 2 p L + T1s Sinα 1s L − T2 s Sinα 2 s L
(25)
−T1 pCosα 1 p b − T2 pCosα 2 p b + T1sCosα 1s b + T2 sCosα 2 s b = N
It is assumed that port-starboard thrusters has the same thrust and direction for both forward
and stern thrusters i.e. T1 p = T1s , T2 p = T2 s . Available thruster propulsion/manoeuvering thrust
and side force characteristics derived from available sources are given in Figure 8.
6.1 Approach/Leave Karakoy pier

The most congested part of the Bosphorus is the entrance of the Golden Horn. The current
conventional ferries has a backing and a turning manoeuver to leave the port (Figure 4a).
Arrival manoeuver is simpler, the ship goes along the pier, is moored at the stern then the ship
pulls itself to the pier. Proposed ship would go along the pier then approaches the pier by
crabbing manoeuver.
Environmental conditions in this manoeuver has been chosen as
• Winds up to 24.5 knots at any direction
• Current up to 2 knots from the West
• Waves up to 1.0 meters significant wave height at the same direction as wind.
Ship speed for arriving and leaving is 7 knots which is reduced to 2 knots during the
crabbing manoeuver. The forces and moments due to environmental conditions and manoeuver
were calculated at 7 stages of the manoeuver, such as Figure 9, then the thruster forces were
calculated as given above. Required thrust and side force were compared with available thruster
forces as shown in Figure 12 and 13 for arrival and departure. The required force for each
thruster is given in all the stages.
As the ship speed is at 7 knots X force and yaw moment is dominated by current-forward
motion force. Wind force has substantial effect on the Y force. Polar diagram indicates that all
the advanced propulsion systems can produce the required forces for this manoeuver. However
cycloidal propeller has the best manoeuvering characteristics.

6.2 Station keeping in the Bosphorus

Heavy traffic conditions are often observed in the Bosphorus. Transit traffic has the priority to
pass, hence ferry has to stop and wait for traffic and keep their position. A station keeping
steady state analysis was performed for the conditions of :
• Winds up to 24.5 knots at any direction
• Current up to 4 knots at any direction
• Waves up to 2.1 meters significant wave height at same direction as wind.
As the ship stationary, ship speed is zero, and inertial forces are neglected. Environmental
forces are calculated and an example is given in Figure 10. Required thruster forces are
calculated as given above and polar plots of required and available thrust and side force are
given as Figure 14. As the current direction is not known before hand, forces for 7 current angle
from 0 to 180 degrees have been calculated and plotted.
As the ship speed is zero, wind, wave and current has almost the same share on X force.
However Y force and moment is dominated by the current. As it was expected, the current has
the most substantial effect when ship heading is above 30 degrees to the current direction.
Required side force for current angles between 30 degrees and 150 degrees are very high, and
the ship can not be expected to perform position keeping without any drift. Again cycloidal
propeller has the edge to perform best manoeuvering (Figure 14).

6.3 Track keeping in the Bosphorus

It is also possible that the ship would keep a track and advance with a reduced speed in the bad
environmental conditions. This case is similar to station keeping as :
• Winds up to 24.5 knots at any direction
• Current up to 4 knots at any direction
• Waves up to 2.1 meters significant wave height at same direction as wind.
 However ship speed is reduced from 14 knots to 10 knots. Required thruster forces are
calculated as given above and polar plots of required and available thrust and side forces are
given as Figure 15.
Track keeping study is fully based on the current-forward motion forces as given in Figure
11. Forward thrust is substantially increased comparing to position keeping, meanwhile
sideforce requirement is similar. Forward thrust can be supplied by cycloidal or Z drive without
speed reduction. High lift rudders have the advantage to be able to keep track with higher
speed. Again current heading angles above 30 degrees can not be compensated without any
sway.

6.4 Other considerations

Other manoeuvering considerations are :

Station keeping in the case of forward propulsion unit break down: The thruster configurations
with 2x2 arrangement are beneficial as there will not be a manoeuverability loss. 2x1
configuration will have to sail with a yaw, hence reduce speed considerably.
Acceleration : Calculations indicates the ship would accelerate to 7 knots within 30 seconds
and less than 40 meters.
Deceleration: The ship could stop at 45 second in 100 meters from 7 knots.
It is possible to summarise the results of manoeuverability analysis as shown in Table 4:

Table 4:Summary manoeuvering characteristics of alternative systems

Manoeuver Propulsion/Manoeuvering System
Con.Prop + Prop+High Lift
Con.Rudder Rudder
2x2 2x1
Karakoy arrival and departure B A
Station keeping in Bosphorus C B
Crash Stopping B B
Acceleration A A
Break down of forward unit A B
Directional Stability A A
Turning Radius C B
(A: Good, B: Average, C: Poor.)
Cycloidal Z Drive
Propeller
2x1 2x2
A A
A B
A A
B B
B A
C C
A B

7 Conclusions and recommendations

It is quite apparent that use of double ended ferry for congested waters can result in substantial
journey time reductions. In the current case the time reduction is about 9 minutes 30 seconds
which is 20 % of the total journey time. However the choice of propulsion/manoeuvering
device has not have an apparent effect on this saving.
The steady state manoeuvering analysis has proved to be a useful preliminary design tool for
the selection of propulsion/manoeuvering system. It is also used for the determination of
current system capabilities.
The sample case has resulted in a detailed analysis of critical manoeuvers, both station and
track keeping analyses. Port approach can be handled easily by Z drive, cycloidal propeller and
high lift rudders. Cycloidal propeller has advantage for position keeping, meanwhile high lift
rudders are beneficial for both thrust and side force for track keeping manoeuver.
 Further consideration is necessary to include the different hull forms, such as skeg variations,
required for the accommodation of available systems and influence of these should be included
in the manoeuvering analysis. Thrust-side force polar diagrams can also be extended specially
on the reverse manoeuvers.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This study was partially funded by the Turkish Maritime Corporation, thanks are due to late
Mr. Nurettin Alptogan. The authors are also thankful to Prof. Dr. A.Yucel Odabasi for his
support and guidance on the subject.

REFERENCES

1. Asinovsky, V., Huang, K-N., Oakes, M.C., Ship Manoeuverability Analysis Using Steady-
State Techniques, Marine Technology, 1991, vol 28 (3), 163-180.
2. BSRA, Manoeuvering, Chapter VII, Ship Design Manual, BSRA, 1984.
3. Clarke, D., Gedling, P., Hine, G., The Application of Manoeuvering Criteria in Hull Design
Using Linear Theory. The Naval Architect, 1983, 45-68.
4. Gould, R.W.F., Measurements of the Wind Forces on a Series of Models of Merchant
Ships, National Physical Laboratory, NPL Aero Report 1233, April 1967.
5. Gould, R.W.F., The Estimation of Wind Loads on Ship Superstructures, Maritime
Technology Monograph No:8, RINA, 1982.
6. Korkut, E., Aldogan, A.I. The Solution of Equations of Ship Manoeuvers by the Computer,
Bulletin of the Istanbul Technical University, 1995, vol 46 (1), 71-86.
7. Odabasi, A.Y., Salci A., Insel M., Ozsoysal O.A., Choice of Propulsion System for a
Double Ended Ferry, ITU Foundation Report, 1992 (In Turkish)
8. Swaan, W.A., Hoorgerheide, T., Propulsion and Manoeuvring of a Double-Ended Ferry.
Transactions of RINA, 1993, vol 135, 61-76.
9. Wilson, P.A., Squire, M.A., Seakins, A.P. Enhanced Preliminary Design Ship
Manoeuvering Simulator Techniques in Modeling and Control of Marine Craft (ed M.M.A.
Pourzanjani and G.N. Roberts), pp.40-51, Proceedings of the International Conference on
Modelling and Control of Marine Craft, Exeter, UK, 1990.
Figure 1: Karakoy-Kadikoy Line

Figure 2: Proposed double ended ferry

Figure 3a: Conventional propeller Figure 3b: Cycloidal propeller Figure 3c: Z drive
and high lift rudder (2x1) (2x1) (2x2)
Figure 4a: Current manoeuvre Figure 4b:Proposed manoeuvre

Figure 5: 2x1 propulsion system Figure 6: 2x2 propulsion system

Figure 7: Forces acting on the hull Figure 8: Polar available thrust-sideforce
forces

Figure 9: Enviromental forces for Karakoy approach (X,Y forces, and N moment)
Figure 10: Enviromental forces for position keeping (X,Y forces, and N moment)

Figure 11: Enviromental forces for track keeping (X,Y forces, and N moment)
Figure 12: Polar plot of required and available thrust-side force (Karakoy arrival)

Figure 13 Polar plot of required and available thrust-side force (Karakoy departure)
Figure 14: Polar plot of required and available thrust-side force (Position keeping)

Figure 15: Polar plot of required and available thrust-side force (Track keeping)