Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

Journal of Shipping and Ocean Engineering 2 (2012) 201-210 D DAVID PUBLISHING

A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of


Conventional Cargo Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s
Method and Its Limitation

Yuki Kawahara, Kazuya Maekawa and Yoshiho Ikeda


Department of Marine System Engineering, Osaka Prefecture University, Sakai 599-8531, Japan

Abstract: Since the roll damping of ships has significant effects of viscosity, it is difficult to calculate it theoretically. Therefore,
experimental results or some prediction methods are used to get the roll damping in design stage of ships. Among some prediction
methods, Ikeda’s one is widely used in many ship motion computer programs. Using the method, the roll damping of various ship hulls
with various bilge keels can be calculated to investigate its characteristics. To calculate the roll damping of each ship, detailed data of
the ship are needed to input. Therefore, a simpler prediction method is expected in primary design stage. Such a simple method must
be useful to validate the results obtained by a computer code to predict it on the basis of Ikeda’s method, too. On the basis of the
predicted roll damping by Ikeda’s method for various ships, a very simple prediction formula of the roll damping of ships is deduced in
the present paper. Ship hull forms are systematically changed by changing length, beam, draft, mid-ship sectional coefficient and
prismatic coefficient. It is found, however, that this simple formula can not be used for ships that have high position of the center of
gravity. A modified method to improve accuracy for such ships is proposed.

Key words: Roll damping, simple prediction formula, wave component, eddy component, bilge keel component.

1. Introduction hydrodynamic forces acting on strips, or cross sections


of a ship [1-5]. The review of the prediction method
In 1970s, strip methods for predicting ship motions
was made by Himeno [5] and Ikeda [6, 7] with the
in 5-degree of freedoms in waves have been established.
computer program.
The methods are based on potential flow theories
The prediction method, which is now called Ikeda’s
(Ursell-Tasai method, source distribution method and
method, divides the roll damping into the frictional
so on), and can predict pitch, heave, sway and yaw
(BF), the wave (BW), the eddy (BE) and the bilge keel
motions of ships in waves in fairly good accuracy. In
(BBK) components at zero forward speed, and at
roll motion, however, the strip methods do not work
forward speed, the lift (BL) is added. Increases of wave
well because of significant viscous effects on the roll
and friction components due to advance speed are also
damping. Therefore, some empirical formulas or
corrected on the basis of experimental results. Then the
experimental data are used to predict the roll damping
roll damping coefficient B44 (= roll damping moment
in the strip methods.
(kgfm)/roll angular velocity (rad/sec)) can be
To improve the prediction of roll motions by these
expressed as follows:
strip methods, one of the authors carried out a research
B44  BF  BW  BE  BL  BBK (1)
project to develop a roll damping prediction method
At zero forward speed, each component except the
which has the same concept and the same order of
friction and lift components are predicted for each cross
accuracy as the strip methods which are based on
section with unit length and the predicted values are
Corresponding author: Yoshiho Ikeda, Dr., professor, summed up along the ship length. The friction
research fields: naval architecture and ocean engineering. component is predicted by Kato’s formula for a
E-mail: ikeda@marine.osakafu-u.ac.jp.
202 A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation
B 44
three-dimensional ship shape. Modification functions for 0.02
Prediction Method. Total

predicting the forward speed effects on the roll damping Prediction Method. Eddy Component
Prediction Method. Wave Component
Prediction Method. Bilge Keel Component
components are developed for the friction, wave and 0.015
Ikeda's Method. Total
Ikeda's Method. Eddy Component
eddy components. The computer program of the method Potential Theory. Wave Component
Ikeda's Method. Bilge Keel Component
0.01
was published, and the method has been widely used.
For these 30 years, the original Ikeda’s method 0.005

developed for conventional cargo ships has been


improved to apply many kinds of ships, for examples, 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
more slender and round ships, fishing boats, barges, ω
(a) OG/d = -0.2
ships with skegs and so on. The original method is also B 44

widely used. However, sometimes, different Prediction Method. Total


Prediction Method. Eddy Component
0.06
conclusions of roll motions were derived even though Prediction Method. Wave Component
Prediction Method. Bilge Keel Component
Ikeda's Method. Total
the same Ikeda’s method was used in the calculations. Ikeda's Method. Eddy Component
Potential Theory. Wave Component
Then, to check the accuracy of the computer programs 0.04
Ikeda's Method. Bilge Keel Component

of the same Ikeda’s method, a more simple prediction


method with the almost same accuracy as the Ikeda’s 0.02

original one has been expected to be developed. It is


said that in design stages of ships, Ikeda’s method is 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
too complicated to use. To meet these needs, a simple ω
(b) OG/d = -1.5
roll damping prediction method was deduced by using Fig. 1 Comparison between Ikeda’s method and proposed
regression analysis [8]. one of roll damping at L/B = 6.0, B/d = 4.0, Cb = 0.65, Cm =
0.98, φa = 10°, bBK/B = 0.025 and lBK/L = 0.2 (OG denotes the
2. Previous Prediction Formula distance between water surface and center of gravity, and is
defined as plus when the center of gravity is below water
The simple prediction formula proposed in previous
surface. L, B and d denote length, breadth and draft, bBK
paper can not be used for modern ships that have high and lBK denote depth and length of bilge keels).
position of center of gravity or long natural roll period
such as large passenger ships with relatively flat hull 3. Methodical Series Ships
shape. In order to investigate its limitation, the authors Modified prediction formula will be developed on
compared the result of this prediction method with the basis of the predicted results by Ikeda’s method
original Ikeda’s one while out of its calculating using the methodical series ships. This series ships are
limitation. Fig. 1 shows the result of the comparison constructed based on the Taylor Standard Series and its
with their method of roll damping. The upper one is on hull shapes are methodically changed by changing
the condition that the center of gravity is low and the length, beam, draft, midship sectional coefficient and
lower one on the condition that the center of gravity is longitudinal prismatic coefficient. The geometries of
high. the series ships are given by the following equations:
From this figure, the roll damping estimated by this t  113.64C P2  149.68C P  50.221 (2)
prediction formula is in good agreement with the roll n  5.7035CP  30.16C P  33.471CP  10.606
3 2
(3)
damping calculated by the Ikeda’s method for low where,
position of center of gravity, but the error margin grows Q ( x )  30 x 2  100 x 3  105 x 4  36 x 5 (4)
for the high position of center of gravity. The results P ( x )  60 x  180 x  180 x  60 x
2 3 4 5
(5)
suggest that the previous prediction formula is T ( x )  x  6 x 2  12 x 3  10 x 4  3 x 5 (6)
necessary to be revised. N ( x)  0.5 x 2  2 x 3  2.5 x 4  x 5 (7)
A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo 203
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation

F ( x)  26.562 x 6  105.74 x 5  162.71x 4 example, if maximum of y1 exceeds 1.0, it is adjusted to


(8)
 116.58 x  34.532 x  0.6998 x  0.7923
3 2 1.0.
t  3969.7C P6  16664.6C P5  28230C P4 Figs. 2 and 3 show the sectional area curves obtained
(9)
 24951C P3  12205C P2  3147.7C P  335.67 from Eq. (2) and a body plan of a ship with Cb = 0.84
at stern side and CP < 0.73, (Cb: block coefficient) and Cm = 0.98 (Cm: midship
t  113.64C P2  149.68C P  50.221 (10) section coefficient), respectively. Since the hull shapes
at stern side and CP ≥ 0.73, used here are conventional ones as shown in Fig. 3, an
t  96.339C P5  173.59C P4  159.75C P3 application of the deduced prediction method to
(11)
 113.4C P2  54.123C P  10.686 modern unconventional hull shapes, for example
at bow side and CP < 0.72, buttock-flow hull, should be careful.
t  41.667C P2  49.167C P  14.9 (12)
at bow side and CP ≥ 0.72, 4. Proposal of New Prediction Method of
n  5.7035C P3  30.16C P2  33.471C P  10.606 (13) Roll Damping
at stern side and CP < 0.74, In this chapter, the characteristics of each component
n  10.417C P2  13.458C P  4.305 (14)
of the roll damping, the frictional, the wave, the eddy
at stern side and CP ≥ 0.74,
and the bilge keel components at zero advanced speed,
n  1664.6C P5  5596.7C P4  7413.2C P3
(15) are discussed, and a simple prediction formula of each
 4815 .6C P2  1525 .3C P  186.79
component is developed.
at bow side and CP < 0.73,
n  0.625C P  0.4312 (16) The roll damping coefficient (B44) and circular
at bow side and CP ≥ 0.73, frequency (ω = 2π/Tw) are defined as follows:
where, B B
Bˆ 44  44 2 (17)
y1 is the non-dimensional value obtained by ∇B 2g
sectional-immersed-area divided by B
ˆ   (18)
maximum-immersed-area; 2g
y2 is the non-dimensional value obtained by where, ρ denotes water density, ▽ denotes
sectional-water-line-breadth divided by displacement volume, B denotes beam and g is gravity
maximum-water-line-breadth; acceleration, respectively.
x is the non-dimensional value of longitudinal 1
0.9
position when x is measured from the extremity of 0.8
Ratio to maximum area

0.7
either the bow or stern; 0.6
CP=0.65 CP=0.85
0.5
CP=0.80
CP is the longitudinal prismatic coefficient; 0.4
CP=0.60
B

CP=0.55
B
B

B
B

CP=0.75
B

0.3
B B

CP=0.70
CW is the water-plane coefficient; 0.2
CP=0.50
B B B B

0.1

f11 is constant and equal to 0.6 for the stern and 1.0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Stations
for the bow; Fig. 2 Sectional-area curves of series model used in
f12 is constant and equal to 0.05; calculation.
f21 is constant and equal to 2.0 for the stern and 1.0
for the bow;
f22 is constant and equal to 0.15 for the stern and 0.1
for the bow.
However, occasionally, corrections of the results Fig. 3 An example of body plan of ship with Cb = 0.84 and
obtained from the Eqs. (2) and (3) are required. For Cm = 0.98.
204 A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation

The relationship between B44 and N coefficient 4.2.1 Characteristics of the Wave Component
(Bertin) is as follows: The reason why viscous effects are significant in
Bˆ (φ in Eq. (19) is in deg). (19) only roll damping can be explained as follows. Fig. 4
N  Bˆ 44 a
GM a shows the wave component of the roll damping for 2-D
sections calculated by a potential flow theory. We can
4.1 Frictional Component (BF)
see that the component is very small for sections with
In Ikeda’s method, the friction damping at Fn = 0 is half breadth/draft ratio, H0 = 0.5-1.5, particularly when
given by Kato’s formula as follows: area coefficient σ is large. Usually, conventional ships
4 have such H0 at parallel middle body part. Then ships
BF  s f rf3 ac f (20)
3 have relatively small wave roll damping, and viscous
where cf is frictional coefficient, rf is average radius effects play an important role in the roll damping.
from the axis of rolling and sf is wetted surface area. In Figs. 5 and 6, calculated distributions of the wave
These parameters in the equation are given by the component of the roll damping are shown. The results
following equations: for a full ship (Cb = 0.8) shown in Fig. 5 demonstrate
1
 3.22r 
2 2
 2 that the damping created by the mid-ship body is very
c f  1.328  (21)
f a
 T  small, and that created by the stern body is large. The
 
results for a slender ship (Cb = 0.5) show two peaks at
rf 
0.887  0.145Cb 1.7d  Cb B   2OG (22) the cross sections of SS = 3 and SS = 7. The reason why

the peaks appear on bow and stern parts can be easily
s f  LPP 1.75d  Cb B  (23) understood from the calculated results shown in Fig. 4.
BW

where φa denotes roll amplitude, T denotes roll period, 0.5 σ = 0.9

ν denotes dynamic coefficient of viscosity, OG denotes


σ = 0.7
0.4
σ = 0.5
0.3 σ = 0.3

distance from calm water surface to the axis of rolling 0.2

(downward direction is positive) and d denotes draft, 0.1

respectively. 0 0.5 1 1.5


H0
2 2.5 3

In the present study, since the frictional component Fig. 4 Characteristics of roll damping coefficient of wave
component for two-dimensional section at OG/d = 0 and
of roll damping is already given for a whole ship as Eqs.
̂ = 1.25.
(20)-(23), the formula is used without any modification
2
in the simple prediction method developed in the σ
H
H0
1.5 0

present study. It should be noted that, however, the


1

frictional component is negligible for a full-scale ship 0.5

although it takes about 5%-10% of the total roll 0

damping for a small scale model.


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Stations
BW
-3
(×10 )

4.2 Wave Component (BW) 0.4

0.3

As well known, the wave component of the roll 0.2

damping for a two-dimensional cross section can be 0.1

calculated by potential flow theories in fairly good 0


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

accuracy. In Ikeda’s method, the wave damping of a strip Stations

Fig. 5 Longitudinal distribution of σ, H0 and roll damping


section is not calculated and the calculated values by any coefficient of wave component for a ship with L/B = 5, B/d =
potential flow theories are used as the wave damping. 3.5, Cm = 0.94, Cb = 0.8, OG/d = 0 and ̂ = 1.25.
A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo 205
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation

Dependencies of the wave component on location of 2


σ
roll axis or center of gravity are shown in Fig. 7. 1.5 H
H00

4.2.2 Proposed Formula of the Wave Roll Damping 1

By fitting these predicted wave components, a 0.5

simple prediction formula is deduced as follows:


0
x1  B d , x2  Cb , x3  Cm , x4  1  OG d , x5  ωˆ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

BˆW  A1 x5  exp (-A2(LOG(x5 )-A3 )2 / 1.44 )


Stations
BW
-3
(×10 )
2
A1=(A11x 4 +A12 x4+A13 )AA1 0.4
3 2
A2=-1.402x4 +7.189x4 -10.993x4+9.45 0.3
6 5 4 3 2
A3=A31 x4 +A32 x4 +A33 x4 +A34 x4 +A35 x4 +A36 x 4+A37+AA3 0.2
x6=x4-AA32
0.1
AA1  ( AA11x3  AA12 )  (1  x4 )  1.0
9 8 7 0
AA3=AA31(-1.05584x6 +12.688x6 -63.70534x6 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
6 5 4 3 Stations
172.84571x6 -274.05701x6 +257.68705x6 -141.40915x6
2 2
Fig. 6 Longitudinal distribution of σ, H0 and roll damping
+44.13177x6 -7.1654x6-0.0495x1 +0.4518x1-0.61655 ) coefficient of wave component for a ship with L/B = 5, B/d =
3.5, Cm = 0.94, Cb = 0.5, OG/d = 0 and ̂ = 1.25.
3 2
AA31=(-0.3767x1 +3.39 x1 -10.356x1+11.588 )  AA311
2
AA32=-0.0727x1 +0.7 x1-1.2818
BW
3 2
AA311=(-17.102x2 +41.495x2 -33.234x2+8.8007 )  x4+ OG/d = 0.2
0.015
3 2
36.566x2 -89.203x2 +71.8 x2-18.108 OG/d = 0.0
OG/d = -0.2
6 5 4
A31=-7686.0287x2 +30131.5678x2 -49048.9664x2  0.01 OG/d = -0.4

3 2
42480.7709x2 -20665.147 x2 +5355.2035x2-577.8827
6 5 4 0.005
A32=61639.9103x2 -241201.0598x2 +392579.5937x2 
3 2
340629.4699x2 +166348.6917x2 -43358.7938x2+4714.7918 0
6 5 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A33=-130677.4903x2 +507996.2604x2 -826728.7127x2 ω
3 2
 722677.104x2 -358360.7392x2 Fig. 7 Characteristics of roll damping coefficient of wave
+95501.4948x2-10682.8619 component for a whole ship at L/B = 5, B/d = 3.5, Cm = 0.94,
6
A34=-110034.6584x2 +446051.22x2 -724186.4643x2
5 4 Cb = 0.8.
3 2
 599411.9264x2 -264294.7189x2 et al. [9] that the viscous forces created by such small
+58039.7328x2-4774.6414
6 5 4
separation bubbles or small shedding vortices do not
A35=709672.0656x2  2803850.2395x2 +4553780.5017x2
3 2
significantly depend on Kc. In Ikeda’s prediction
 3888378.9905x2 +1839829.259x2
 457313.6939x2+46600.823
method, the distribution of the pressure created on a
(24)
6
A36=-822735.9289x2 +3238899.7308x2 -5256636.5472x2
5 4 hull surface by such separation bubble is assumed as a
3
 4500543.147 x2  2143487.3508x2
2 simple shape for each shape of cross sections on the
+538548.1194x2  55751.1528 basis of experimental results of pressure distribution on
hull surfaces. The pressure value was determined as the
4.3 Eddy Component (BE)
calculated eddy components of the roll damping for
The eddy component of the roll damping is created various cross sections are in good agreement with
by small separation bubbles or small shedding vortices measured ones. Then, the eddy damping of a strip
generated at the bilge part of midship section and large section is calculated by following formulas:
vortices generated at the relatively sharp bottom of bow  R  OG R 
1  f1 d 1  d  f1 d 
and stern sections. Although vortex shedding flow 4    (25)
BE  LPP d 2 rmax
2
a  CP 0
from oscillating bluff bodies is usually governed by 3  f  H  f R 
2

 2  0 1 d  
Keulegan-Carpenter number, Kc, it was found by Ikeda
206 A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation
1
f1  1  tanh20  0.7  (26) BE1  ( 0.2 x1  1.6)  (3.98 x2  5.1525 )  x4
2  2
 (0.9717 x2  1.55 x2  0.723)  x4  (0.04567 x2  0.9408 ) 
f 2  1  cos    1.51  e 51  sin 2 
1 (27)
BE 2  (0.25 x4  0.95)  x4
2
C P 0  0.87 e   4e 0.1877  3
1 (28)
3 2
 219 .2 x2  443 .7 x2  283 .3 x2  59.6
2 BE 3  ( 46.5  15 x1 )  x2  11.2 x1  28.6
B (29)
H0   0.5  Cb  0.85, 2.5  B / d  4.5  (31)
2d  
S   1. 5  OG / d  0 .2, 0.9  C  0.99 
  (30) m

Bd
where, rmax is maximum distance from center of gravity 4.4 Bilge Keel Component (BBK)
(roll axis) to hull surface, R is bilge radius and σ is The bilge keel component is usually the largest one
sectional area coefficient. 2

The eddy roll damping of a whole ship is calculated σ


1.5 H
H0
by integrating B’E to longitudinal direction.
0

4.3.1 Characteristics of Eddy Component 1

In Figs. 8 and 9, the longitudinal distribution of the 0.5

predicted eddy component of the roll damping are 0

shown for a slender ship (Cb = 0.5) and a full ship (Cb = 0 1 2 3 4 5
Stations
6 7 8 9 10

0.8). The eddy component of a slender ship is large at (×10-3)


0.04
BE

bow and stern parts, and has a small peak at mid-ship,


0.03
as shown in Fig. 8. For a full ship, however, the eddy
0.02
damping at parallel middle body part becomes larger
and longer as shown in Fig. 9. The component at stern 0.01

is large as a slender ship, but becomes small at bow part. 0


0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
These may be caused by that both ships has similar V Stations
Fig. 8 Longitudinal distribution of σ, H0 and roll damping
shape stern but the full ship has U shape bow section
coefficient of eddy component for a ship with L/B = 5, B/d =
which is not thin and flat shape as a slender ship. 3.5, Cm = 0.94, Cb = 0.5, OG/d = 0 and ̂ = 1.25.
Fig. 10 shows the effect of midship-section
2
coefficient (Cm) on the eddy damping. The results σ
H00
H
1.5
demonstrate that the eddy component of the roll
damping of parallel body parts of ships is significantly 1

sensitive to Cm. This is because larger flow separation 0.5

occurs at bilge corners of ships with large 0

midship-section coefficient. 0 1 2 3 4 5
Stations
6 7 8 9 10

4.3.2 Proposed Formula of the Eddy Roll Damping


-3
(×10 ) BE
0.04

By fitting these predicted eddy components, a simple 0.03

prediction formula is deduced as follows:


0.02
x1  B d , x2  Cb , x3  Cm , x4  OG d
4 L pp d 4ˆ  a 4 ˆ  a
0.01

Bˆ E  CR  CR
3  B 2
3  x2  x1
3
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
BE 3
C R  AE  exp( BE1  BE 2  x3 ) Stations

4
Fig. 9 Longitudinal distribution of σ, H0 and roll damping
AE  ( 0.0182 x2  0.0155)  ( x1  1.8) 3  79.414 x2 coefficient of eddy component for a ship with L/B = 5, B/d =
3.5, Cm = 0.94, Cb = 0.8, OG/d = 0 and ̂ = 1.25.
3 2
 215.695 x2  215.883 x2  93.894 x2  14.848
A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo 207
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation
(×10-3) BE
1
d2 
0.06
Cb=0.5
C , Cm=0.98
b = 0.5, Cm = 0.98 I C P1l BK ds (35)
Cb=0.5
C , Cm=0.9
b = 0.5, Cm = 0.9
Cb=0.8 , Cm=0.9
0.04
C
C
b = 0.8,

Cb=0.8
Cm = 0.9
, Cm=0.98
b = 0.8, Cm = 0.98
where CP1 is pressure coefficient on hull surface. The
positive pressure coefficient (CP1+) of face of a bilge
0.02 keel and the negative pressure coefficient (CP1-) of back
side of a bilge keel are given by following formulas:
0 CP1  1.2 (36)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Stations 22.5bBK
Fig. 10 Effects of midship-section coefficient, Cm on eddy C P1    1.2 . (37)
rf a
component of roll damping for slender ships (Cb = 0.5) and
full ships (Cb = 0.8). 4.4.1 Characteristics of the Bilge Keel Component
Calculated bilge keel components of the roll damping
in the roll damping. The component creates 50%-80%
by Ikeda’s method are shown in Figs. 11-13 to
of the total roll damping. The component is created by
demonstrate the characteristics. In Fig. 11 bilge keel
shedding vortices from the sharp edges of bilge keels
component of the roll damping of slender ships (Cb =
due to roll motion. The component can be divided into
0.58) and full ships (Cb = 0.81) with different
two components: the normal force component (BN) and midship-section coefficients are shown. In the
the hull pressure component (BS). Both components are prediction the area of bilge keels is systematically
created by the same vortices from the edge of bilge changed. The results show that the roll damping
keels. The former one is created by the force acting on component increases with increasing area of bilge keels.
bilge keels, and the latter by the pressure over the hull For full ships the increase of the component is almost
surfaces in front and back sides of the bilge keel. linear, but for slender ships it shows non-linearly
In Ikeda’s method, the pressure distributions in front increases. The magnitude of the component
and back of a bilge keel are assumed on the basis of the significantly depends on midship-section coefficients,
measured ones, and are integrated over the hull surface. but not so sensitive on block coefficient Cb.
This means that the method may be available for any In Fig. 12, effects of location of center of gravity on
shape of cross section. Ikeda et al. experimentally found bilge keel component of roll damping are shown for
that the magnitude and distribution of the pressure slender and full ships. As height of center of gravity
created by a bilge keel significantly depends on Kc. decreases, or OG/d increases, the bilge keel component
The roll damping due to the normal force acting on decreases. This is because relative flow speed at bilge
bilge keels is given by following expressions: corner decreases and flow separation at the edge of
bilge keels weakens.
8  b 
BN  r 3l BK bBK  af 2  22.5 BK  2.4  (32) In Fig. 13, effects of aspect ratio (= length/breadth of
3  rf a 
a bilge keel) on the roll damping of ships with the same
f  1  0.3 exp 1601    (33) area bilge keels are shown. It can be seen that the
where, r is distance from the axis of rolling to bilge component is not so sensitive with aspect ratio, but
keel, bBK is width of bilge keel, lBK is length of bilge increases with increasing aspect ratio, or more slender
keel and f is the correction factor on bilge radius to bilge keels for full ships with large midship-section
increase the velocity into account. coefficients.
The roll damping due to the hull pressure created by 4.4.2 Proposed Formula of the Bilge Keel Roll
bilge keels is calculated by following equations: Damping
4 By fitting these predicted bilge keel components, a
BS  r 2 d 2 a f 2 I (34)
3 simple prediction formula is deduced as follows
208 A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation
B BK (×109) B BK (kgf ・ m ・ s/rad)
0.04 1
C b = 0.58,, C
Cb=0.58 Cm=0.94
m = 0.94 b BK /B=0.03 φ a =20° ω=1.1 S BK =86.4m 2 L PP =300m B=60m d=20m
C b = 0.58,, C
Cb=0.58 m = 0.99
Cm=0.99
0.03 C b = 0.81, C m = 0.94
Cb=0.81 , Cm=0.94 0.75
Cb = 0.81, Cm = 0.99
Cb=0.81 , Cm=0.99

0.02 0.5

0.01 0.25 Cb=0.58 , Cm=0.92 Cb=0.58 , Cm=0.96


Cb = 0.58, Cm = 0.92 Cb = 0.58, Cm = 0.96
Cb=0.58 , Cm=0.98 Cb=0.81 , Cm=0.92
Cb = 0.58, Cm = 0.98 Cb = 0.81, Cm = 0.92
Cb=0.81
C = 0.81,, C
Cm=0.96 Cb=0.81 , Cm=0.98
0 b m = 0.96 Cb = 0.81, Cm = 0.98
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
l BK /L PP l BK /L PP

Fig. 11 Bilge keel component of roll damping of slender Fig. 13 Bilge keel component of roll damping of slender
and full ships for various bilge keel lengths and constant and full ships with bilge keels of the same area (SBK) but
breadth (bBK). different lengths.

B BK
These results indicate that the calculated values of
Cb = 0.58,
Cb=0.58 Cm = 0.94
, Cm=0.94
Cb = 0.58,
Cb=0.58 Cm = 0.99
, Cm=0.99
Cb = 0.81, Cm = 0.94
0.02 roll damping by the proposed formulas are in good
Cb=0.81 , Cm=0.94
Cb = 0.81, Cm = 0.99
Cb=0.81 , Cm=0.99
agreement with the roll damping calculated by the
0.01 Ikeda’s method, although the estimated values by using
the proposed method have some errors about 10%
0 when ̂ becomes larger for the ship with OG/d =
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0
OG/d (downward direction is positive) -0.2 as shown in Fig. 14. However, the error margin
Fig. 12 Effect of location of center of gravity, or roll axis on becomes small in the low-frequency range because the
bilge keel component of roll damping.
bilge keel component is predominant.
x1  B d , x2  Cb , x3  Cm , x4  OG d , x5  ωˆ The results in Fig. 14 suggest that the errors come
x6   a (deg) , x7  bBK B , x8  l BK LPP from the discrepancy of the wave component between
Bˆ BK  ABK  exp( BBK 1  BBK 2  x3 BK 3 )  x5
B
the proposed method and the potential theory.
ABK  f1 ( x1 , x2 )  f 2 ( x6 )  f 3 ( x7 , x8 ) Especially, this discrepancy grows larger on condition
f1  (0.3651x2  0.3907)  ( x1  2.83) 2  2.21x2  2.632 of B/d = 4.5 and OG/d = -0.2~-0.5, so it should be
2
f 2  0.00255 x6  0.122 x6  0.4794 noted for the use of the proposed method on this
2 2
f 3  (0.8913 x7  0.0733 x7 )  x8 condition. This may be because the wave component of
2
 (5.2857 x7  0.01185 x7  0.00189)  x8 the roll damping intricately depends on frequency and
BBK 1  {5 x7  0.3 x1  0.2 x8 locations of roll axis. Therefore, if more accurate
2
 0.00125 x6  0.0425 x6  1.86}  x4 prediction is needed, the calculated wave damping by
BBK 2  15 x7  1.2 x2  0.1x1 any potential theory should be used.
2
 0.0657 x4  0.0586 x4  1.6164
6. Limitation of Ikeda’s Method
BBK 3  2.5 x4  15.75
 0.5  Cb  0.85, 2.5  B / d  4.5  In recent years, the number of ships that have
 . (38)
  1.5  OG / d  0.2, 0.9  Cm  0.99  buttock flow stern, such as large passenger ship or pure
 
 0.01  bBK / B  0.06, 0.05  l BK / L pp  0.4  car carrier, has been increasing. In such a type of ships,
however, prediction accuracy of roll damping
5. Validation of Proposed Method
calculated by Ikeda’s method might decrease
To verify the validity of the proposed method, the remarkably. In order to investigate its limitation, free
values of the roll damping calculated by the original roll decay tests are carried out by using three types of
Ikeda’s method and the proposed method are compared model ships: LPS (large passenger ship), modern PCC
on two kinds of ships. The results of these comparisons (pure car carrier) and WSPCC (wide breadth and
are shown in Fig. 14. shallow draft car carrier). The principal particulars of
A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo 209
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation
B 44
0.02
Prediction Method. Total
Table 1 Principal particulars of the ships.
Prediction Method. Eddy Component
Prediction Method. Wave Component LPS PCC WSPCC
Prediction Method. Bilge Keel Component
0.015
Ikeda's Method. Total Scale 1/125 1/96 1/96
Ikeda's Method. Eddy Component
Potential Theory. Wave Component LOA (m) 2.200 2.083 2.083
Ikeda's Method. Bilge Keel Component
0.01 LPP (m) 1.933 2.00 2.00
Breadth (m) 0.287 0.336 0.378
0.005 Draft (m) 0.067 0.0938 0.0772
Displacement (kg) 26.98 33.43 28.05
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
GM (m) 0.0126 0.0194 0.063
ω Tnr (sec) 1.88 2.06 1.05
(a) OG/d = -0.2
B 44
OG/d -1.13 -0.071 -1.35
Prediction Method. Total bBK/Breadth - 0.0217 0.0217
Prediction Method. Eddy Component
0.06 Prediction Method. Wave Component lBK/LPP - 0.225 0.225
Prediction Method. Bilge Keel Component
Ikeda's Method. Total
Ikeda's Method. Eddy Component
0.04 Potential Theory. Wave Component
Ikeda's Method. Bilge Keel Component

0.02

0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
ω
(b) OG/d =-1.5 Fig. 15 Body plan of large passenger ship.
Fig. 14 Comparison between Ikeda’s method and proposed
N coefficient
one of roll damping at L/B = 6.0, B/d = 4.0, Cb = 0.65, Cm = 0.1
measured
0.98, φa = 10°, bBK/B = 0.025 and lBK/Lpp = 0.2. Simple prediction formula (B F +B W + B E )
Ikeda's Prediction Method (B F +B W +B E )
Ikeda's Prediction Method (B F +B W )
these ships and the body plan of the large passenger 0.05

ship are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 15, respectively. As


shown in Fig. 15, the ship has shallow stern-bottom
with something like a skeg.
0
0 5 10 15 20
roll angle
In Fig. 16, the obtained results of the extinction (a) Large passenger ship
N coefficient
coefficient N are shown. The results demonstrate that Measured.
Simple prediction formula (B F +B W +B E +B BK )
the accuracy of Ikeda’s prediction method decreases 0.1
Ikeda's Prediction Method (B F +B W +B E +B BK )

remarkably when the roll angle is small. However, the Ikeda's Prediction Method (B F +B W +B E )
Ikeda's Prediction Method (B F +B W )

error of roll damping becomes smaller for large 0.05

passenger ship and pure car carrier in condition of large


roll angle. For wide breadth and shallow draft car 0
0 5 10 15 20

carrier, however, the roll damping calculated by roll angle

(b) Pure car carrier


Ikeda’s prediction method is overestimated from the 0.15
N coefficient

Measured.

experimental result for whole roll angle. This is pointed Simple prediction formula (B F +B W +B E +B BK )
Ikeda's Prediction Method (B F +B W +B E +B BK )
out by Tanaka et al. [10] that the effect of the bilge keel 0.1
Ikeda's Prediction Method (B F +B W +B E )
Ikeda's Prediction Method (B F +B W )
component on the roll damping significantly decreases
0.05

for the wide breadth and shallow draft ships. Also, the
discrepancies between the simple prediction formula 0
0 5 10 15 20
and Ikeda’s method are attributed to differences roll angle
(c) Wide breadth and shallow draft car carrier
between methodical series model and real model ship Fig. 16 Comparison of roll damping between Ikeda’s
and to using out of its possible calculating condition. method and experimental result.
210 A Simple Prediction Formula of Roll Damping of Conventional Cargo
Ships on the Basis of Ikeda’s Method and Its Limitation

Then, the extinction coefficient N of a large passenger References


ship is relatively large even for naked hull because of [1] Y. Ikeda, Y. Himeno, N. Tanaka, On roll damping force of
relatively small bilge radius. Thus, Ikeda’s prediction ship—Effects of friction of hull and normal force of bilge
method is valid only in large roll angle for modern keels, Journal of the Kansai Society of Naval Architects
161 (1976) 41-49. (in Japanese)
type of ships with buttock flow stern, and
[2] Y. Ikeda, K. Komatsu, Y. Himeno, N. Tanaka, On roll
overestimates the roll damping for a very flat ship damping force of ship—Effects of hull surface pressure
with large bilge keels. created by bilge keels, Journal of the Kansai Society of
Naval Architects 165 (1977) 31-40. (in Japanese)
7. Conclusions [3] Y. Ikeda, Y. Himeno, N. Tanaka, On eddy making
component of roll damping force on naked hull, Journal of the
A simple prediction method of the roll damping of Society of Naval Architects 142 (1977) 59-69. (in Japanese)
ships is developed on the basis of the Ikeda’s original [4] Y. Ikeda, Y. Himeno, N. Tanaka, Components of roll
prediction method which was developed in the same damping of ship at forward speed, Journal of the Society
of Naval Architects 143 (1978) 121-133. (in Japanese)
concept as a strip method for calculating ship motions
[5] Y. Himeno, Prediction of Ship Roll Damping—State of
in waves. Using the data of a ship, B/d, Cb, Cm, OG/d, the Art, Report of Department of Naval Architecture &
̂ , bBK/B, lBK/LPP, φa, the roll damping of a ship can Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, No. 239,
1981.
be approximately predicted. Moreover, the limit of
[6] Y. Ikeda, Prediction Method of Roll Damping, Report of
application of Ikeda’s prediction method to modern Department of Naval Architecture, University of Osaka
ships that have buttock flow stern is demonstrated by Prefecture, 1982.
the model experiment. The computer program of the [7] Y. Ikeda, Roll damping, in: Proceedings of 1st
Symposium of Marine Dynamics Research Group, Japan,
method can be downloaded from the Home Page of
1984, pp. 241-250. (in Japanese)
Ikeda’s Labo (http://www.marine.osakafu-u.ac.jp/ [8] Y. Kawahara, Characteristics of roll damping of various
~lab15/roll_damping.html). ship types and a simple prediction formula of roll damping
on the basis of Ikeda’s method, in: Proceedings of the 4th
Acknowledgments Asia-Pacific Workshop on Marine Hydrodymics, Taipei,
China, 2008, pp. 79-86.
This work was supported by the Grant-in Aid for [9] Y. Ikeda, T. Fujiwara, Y. Himeno, N. Tanaka, Velocity
Scientific Research of the Japan Society for Promotion field around ship hull in roll motion, Journal of the Kansai
Society of Naval Architects 171 (1978) 33-45. (in Japanese)
of Science (No. 18360415).
[10] N. Tanaka, Y. Himeno, Y. Ikeda, K. Isomura,
The authors wish to express sincere appreciation to Experimental study on bilge keel effect for shallow draft
Prof. N. Umeda of Osaka University for valuable ship, Journal of the Kansai Society of Naval Architects
suggestions to this study. 180 (1981) 69-75. (in Japanese)

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen