Chapter

Four
“ee“e
HOR
a

SHIP RESISTANCE
a a
frame «be ealeee

4.1. INTRODUCTION 4.1.2 the specific resistance of a ship (RispV7S) is

given as function of Froude numberF,, and some of
Theresistance of a ship at a given speed is the fluid
the possible components are marked. The compo-
force acting on the ship in such a Way as to oppos
e nents can be described briefly as follows, using the
its motion. The resistance will be equal to the com-
ITTC definitions where possible.
ponent of the fluid forces acting parallel to the axis
of motion of the ship. The term resistance is
the Frictional Resistance, Rr: The frictional resis-
preferred term in ship hydrodynamics, while
the tance is the component of resistance obtained by
term drag is generally used in aerodynamics and
for integrating the tangential stresses over the wet-
submerged bodies. In Fig. 4.1.1 some resistance
ted surface of the ship inthe direction of motion.
curves are given for bodies moving at the surface or
deeply submerged in a perfect fluid and a fluid with Residuary Resistance, Rpg: The residuary resis-
tance is a quantity obtained by subtracting from
viscosity. The abscissa is the Froude number
the total resistance of a hull, a calculated friction
resistance obtained by any specific formulation.
Vv In general, the greater part of the residuary resis-
F,=
Vel (4.1.1)
4.1.1
tance of merchant ships will be wavemaking re-
sistance.
and the ordinate is the resistance coefficient Viscous Resistance, Ry:
defined The viscous resistance
by is the component of resistance associated with
the energy expended due viscous effects.
R Pressure Resistance, K,: The pressure resis-
(4.1.2)
< sbeeertarmaee

c= 2p V7S tance is the component ofresistance obtained by

where is the speed, Z is the length of the body,
g
is the accelerationto gravity, p is the mass densit
y,
and S$ is the wetted surface of the body.
The total resistance, denoted by Ry, can be split
into a numberoff different components,
which are
due to a variety of causes and which interact
one
with the other in an extremely complicated way.
In order to deal with resistance in a practical
way, it Is necessary to consider the total resistance
in a practical way; it is necessary to consider the
total resistance as being made up of components
which can be combined in different ways. In Fig.
integrating the normal stresses over the surface
of a body in the direction of motion.
Viscous Pressure Resistance, Rpy: The viscous
pressure resistance is the component of resis-
tance obtained by integrating the components of
the normal stresses due to viscosity and turbu-
lence. This quantity cannot be directly measured
except for a fully submerged body, where it is
equal to the pressure resistance.
Wavemaking Resistance, Rw: The wavemaking
resistance is the component of resistance associ-
ated with the energy expended gencrating gravity
Waves.
 paige wry
44 _ SHIP RESISTANCae

© § PERFEET Fluo C+ FLUID WITH VISCOSITY

» BODY MOVING AT i BOY MOVING AT
R j R 7 neue
TOTAL RESISTANCE
inves| SURFACE yes| SURFACE ee

|i _ {4 -ty
= oan
|JS RESIDUARY RESISTANCE

‘tai
| oo
| WAVE i FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE

OR ian
RESISTANCE (FLAT PLATE}

TeGsTRE Ree
a ane a a

c PERFECT FLUID Cc FLUID WITH VISCOSITY

“oe
BODY DEEPLY SU8MERGED BODY DEEPLY SUBMERGED
aSR DB. ae
R :
7
rows ; — Teves a ‘
<x SKIN FRICTION
RESISTANCE
NO
RESISTANCE
7 a

Figure 4.1.1. Resistance coefficient curves.

i TOTAL RESISTANCE
(GRAND TOTAL)
3
10°C STEERING RESISTANCE
ao AIR RESISTANCE
5 “TOTAL RESISTANCE " SPRAY RESISTANCE
10°R WAVEBREAKING RESISTANCE
t+ev*s Z j
4 f—.— WAVE RESISTANCE

TREE SEPT
pi | | -~——~— WAVE PATTERN RESISTANCE
Da PRESSURE RESISTANCE
[tT ie RESIDUARY RESISTANCE

205 + VISCOUS PRESSURE 1 rs

i iig
—1 RESISTANCE ——————_-_;_ 1 a
TeS e | t _
ADDITIONAL FRICTIONAL | f
101 RESISTANCE DUE TO | ++ —— TOTAL VISCOUS RESISTANCE
CURVATURE OF BODY li]
| | 7 > FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE
1 ! |
L | | [= FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE
| i (FLAT PLATE)
| oo
Lo [oe AT L I 1 ! td Low
O15 0,20 0,25 030 oF
Figure 4.1.2. Components of specific resistance of ships.
 arr

FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE 45
Wave pattern Resistance, Rwe: The resis
he

tance in water areas of unlimited length, breadth, and

component deduced from measurements of wave
depth that are to be compared. Furthermore, when
=

elevations remote from the ship or model, wher

e the ship is in a seaway, the resistance will change,
it Is assumed that the subsurface velocity field
The changes canbe as follows:
and, hence, the momentum ofthe fluid can
be
che

related to the wave pattern by means of a

so- I. Added resistance due to wind onthe ship’s hull
called linearized theory. The resistance so de-
a,

and superstructure, R44.

duced does not include Wavebreaking resistance
. 2. Increase in resistance due to the motion of the
Wavebreaking Resistance, Rwg. The wave
- ship.
breaking resistance is a resistance component as-
3. Addedresistance due to wave reflection on the
sociated with the breakdown of the ship bow
wave, hull.
.
4. Increase in resistance due to drift angle caused
a

Spray Resistance, Rs: The spray resistance is

by both wind and waves as well as rudder
the component of resistance associated with the
rr

energy expended generating spray. movement.

Bythe mean increase in resistance in waves, Ray,

To these resistance components some additional re-
is understood the mean increase in resistance in
sistances, Ry, should be added-
wind and waves as compared with the still-water
resistance at the same meanspeed. In the following
ay

Appendage Resistance: This is the resistance

sections in this chapter the main component of the
of shaft bossing, shaft brackets, and shafts; bilge
aoa

ship resistance will be described further.

keels; rudders; etc. When using physical models
,
the appendages are often fitted to the models
and
the appendage resistances are then included in
eee

the measured resistance. Normaliy bilge keels 4,2. FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE

are not fitted. If the hull has no appendages fit-
Ie

ted, the resistance is called the bare hull resis- 4.2.1. Introduction
tance,
Roughness Resistance: This is the resistance As was mentioned previously, the frictional resis-
CE OS

due to the roughness, forinstance, owing to cor-
rosion and fouling on the ship hull.
Air Resistance: This is experienced by the
abovewater part of the main hull and the super-
structures owing to the motion of the ship
through theair,
EEE NE
tance is the componentof resistance obtained by
integrating the tangential stresses over the wetted
surface of the ship in the direction of motion. All
fluids have viscosity, which causes friction. The im-
portance ofthis friction in physical situations de-
pends on the typeoffluid and the physical configu-

ration or flow pattern. If the friction is negligible,

Steering Resistance: To maintain a straight-
the flowis called ideal. The viscosity is a measure of
line path it is in general necessary to use a rudder
the fluid’s resistance to shear when the fluid is in
for corrections. The use of the rudder results in
motion. Suppose a suitable quantity of viscous fluid
an extra resistance component called the stecring
is put between two parallel plates that are at a dis-
resistance.
tance A from each other (sce Fig. 4.2.1). The two
Er

plates of large size are assumed to be in a steady

Also the environment has a bearing on resistance.
relative motion without altering the distance h. The
When the ship ig running in restricted water, the
fluid between the plates has a linear velocity profile
boundary of the water body can be close enough to if no pressure gradient exists along the plates in the
affect the ship resistance. (Restricted applics here
direction of motion. Investigations show that the
to the proximity of the water boundaries in a hori-
viscous fluid adheres to both plates. The layers of
zontal direction.) The depth of water also has
an fluid immediately in contact with the plates have no
effect on the resistance, called the shallow water
velocity relative to them—there is no slip between
effect. When comparing the performance character-
the fluid and the plates. The fluid is displaced in
istics of the ships, it is generally the characteristics such a way that the various layers of fluid slide
40 SHIP RESISTANCE
V MOVING
WI rnerrr: STATIONARY
PLATE
Figure 4.2.1. Flow between parallel plates.
uniformly over one another. The velocity of the
layer at distance » from the stationary plate is given
by
V In laminar flow a fluid moves in laminas or layers.
U “=o
h V
where V is the velocity of the moving plate.
To maintain the motion, a force F has to act on
the moving plate. Experiments have shown that the
force is proportional to the area and the velocity of
the plate and inversely proportional to the distance
betweenthe plates. This can be written as
SV
F =p
where S§is the area of the plate and yp is the coeffi-
cient of dynamic viscosity. The force F is numeri-
cally equal to the resistance produced bythe dis-
placement of the plate and can be explained by
supposing that throughout the whole of the moving
viscous fluid, there are tangential stresses—shear-
ing forces—opposing alterations in shape. Consid-
ering a small element of the fluid in the condition of
sliding motion, Ea. (4.2.2) will be rewritten as
r=
T= BS
aU
where 7 is the shear stress and dU//dyis the rate of
change of velocity as a function of the distance ¥
from the stationary plate—the velocity gradient.
The coefficient of dynamic viscosity can then be
defined as shear stress per unit velocily gradient.
The dimension of the viscosity is ML~'T-!. The
rauio ofviscosity to mass density is called the coeffi-
cient of kinematic viscosity and may be written as
“al
with the dimension 171°! and units of ms |.
The viscosity of a liquid decreases with increas-
ing temperature. Viscosity also depends on pres-
sure, but this dependence is usually of no impor-
tance in resistance problems. The coefficient of
viscosity can be determinedin different ways, anda
set of values of kinematic viscosity for freshwater
and for salt water is given in ITTC (1963, pp. 291-
294). Some often used values for this coefficient are
reproduced in Appendix C.
4.2.2. Laminar and Turbulent Flow
4
(4.2.1)
The layers do not mix transversely but slide over
one anotherat relative speeds, which varies across
the flow.
In turbulent flow the fluid’s vclocity components
have random fluctuations. The flow is broken down
and the fluid is mixed transversely in eddying mo-
tion. The velocity of the flow has to be considered
as the mean value of velocities of the particles.
Figure 4.2.2 demonstrates laminar and turbulent
flow. The lines indicate the paths of particles.
(4.2.2)
Factors that determine whether a flow is laminar
or turbulent are the fluid, the velocity, the form and
size of the body placed in the flow, the depth of
water, and if the flow is in a channel, the channel
configuration and size. Both laminar and turbulent
flows occur in nature, but turbulent flowis the more
natural state. As the velocity increases, the flow
will change from laminar to turbulent, passing
through a transition regime. The transition takes
place at a Reynolds number RX, = 10°-10°. Thus
(4.2.3)
4.2.3
PATHLINES
el
TURBULENT FLOW
Figure 4.2.2. Laminar and turbulent flow.
 FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE 47

in model experiments the flow over an unknown tween 0 and x. 7») is the shearing stress on the wall
area of the model can be laminar, which means that
and ts equal to
the experiment’s accuracyis often not as good as is
wanted.
due .
The effects of viscosity are present in turbulent y= (ay J, (4.2.6)
flow, but they are usually masked by the dominant
turbulent shear stresses.
where subscript zero denotes the value at the wall,
that is, forv = 0. R is here equal to the frictional
Sade”

resistance Ry, which also can be expressed as

“eSye

4.2.3. Boundary Layer

By the boundary layer is meant- the region offluid Re = CHipVDS (4.2.7)

close to a solid body where, owing to viscosity, the
transverse gradients of velocity are large as com- where Cy = specificfrictional resistance or drag co-
pared with the longitudinal variations, and the shear efficient
stress is significant. The boundary layer may be p = mass density
laminar, turbulent, or transitional, and is sometimes VY = speed of the plate relatively to the flow
called the frictional belt. 5 = wetted surface ofthe plate.
eesEF

When there is a homogeneousflowalong a

plate, the velocity of the fluid just at the surface of general. Ce depends on
the plate will be zero owing to frictional forces.
ae

which retard the motion of the fluid in a thin layer
nearto the plate. In the boundarylayer the velocity
of the fluid U increases from zero at the plate to its
maximum value, which corresponds to the velocity
in the externalfrictionless flow Uz (Fig. 4.2.3). The
boundary layer thickness, 5, is the distance from
and normalto the surface of the body to the point at
which the speedattains its equivalent inviscid flow
value. For practical purposes this speed is some-
Sates 5
Nature of flow
Reynolds number
Form of surface
Character and condition of surface
The next questions which can arise are: What is the
thickness of the boundarylayer? Whatis the veloc-
ity distribution inside it? Prandtl and von Karman

times taken as 99% ofthe inviscid flow speed.
The application of the momentum law for a vol-
ume element just aft of the plate shows that the loss
of momentum perunit of time must be equal to the
resistance experienced by the plate. This gives the
following equation for the volume element consid-
ered:
[ puw. — Udy = [F rocx =F (4.2.5)
2.
where # is the resistance of the plate section be-
(Prandtl and Schlichting, 1934) have answered both
questions in apartly theoretical way, although only
for plane surfaces. In his work von Karmanstarts
with the following assumptions:
|. The distribution of velocity at the plane surface
is assumed to dependonly on the viscosity of
the fluid, the density of fluid, and the frictional
forces.
The frictional resistance is assumed to vary
with the velocity raised to a certain power 7,
which in his work was 1.75,

ulxy) BOUNDARY
LAYER
+ x
WALL

Figure 4.2.3. Boundary layer along a plane surface.

 wih
48, SHIP RESISTANCE

3. The distribution of the velocity is expressed by

wa

TAROTA OeRS 8 OT RefAGLRataaciniA4

1

oa | bet
us Un, (-\, | (4.2.8)

where wu is the velocity at a distance y» from

surface, and 6 is the thickness of the boundary
layer at a distance / from the front edge of the
surface.
6 =O37LG)%
Von Karman obtained the following expression for
200 m 75 a L 300
the frictional belt thickness for flow over plane sur-
faces: Figure 4.2.5. Thickness offriction belt determined by von Kar-
man’s formula for a ship in salt water.
p\'3
6 = 0.371( —
7) (4.2.9)
2

v is the coefficient of kinematic viscosity and U’is (4.2.10)

the velocity in the free stream.
f
For flat plates of different lengths and towed where Vis the velocity of the plate, the exponent
through water at different speeds Figs. 4.2.4 and will vary with the condition of the surface of plate.
4.2.5 show the friction belt: Fig. 4.2.4 shows the The variation can be as follows:
thickness for ‘‘models”’ in freshwater and Fig. 4.2.5
for “‘ships’’ in salt water. If the ratios 6/L are Varnished and polished steel surfaces

ToS
formed, it will be seen that at corresponding speeds
n=l Clean surfaces of merchant ships
the thickness of the frictional belt is relatively much
Smooth, polished surface of wax, plas-
rhe

thicker for the model than for the ship.

|

tic, or wood models to be used in experi-

For the velocity distribution in a turbuient flow
von Karman found that y/6 had to be raised to the
power nm = #. Since von Karman published his for-
mulas, a series of experiments have been carried
out, some of them confirming the formulas, others
disproving them.
In the formula for the velocity distribution in the
boundary layer
ments in towing tanks
a=i Surfaces covered with long grass
‘igure 4.2.6 shows the velocity variation with dif-
ferent values of n. The velocity is given as a func-
tion of the ratio between the distance from the sur-
face and the thickness of the belt.
Sometimes the flow over a flat plate 1s not fully
developed as shown in Fig. 4.2.3. The boundary
layer thickness is zero at the leading edge and in-

“esta Sm
0,20 | T T =
creases with distance along the plate surface. The
6 MODELS oy 7 early portion of the boundary layer can be laminar
ons
| i
4 a
| (v5)
—-7
i a
Lay and will then be followed by a transition region
| | ; t ae where the flow changes from laminar to turbulent t
m i
‘
21 _ a
Le é
(Fig. 4.2.7). This transition region consists of burst
aan of turbulence which spreads until they intermingle é
Cae 3 : to result in a fully turbulent region (see the plan }
view in Fig, 4.2.7). This turbulence burst docs not
|| | have fixed location, but moves continually. In the
| |
| B2O037LQ* | fully laminar region the flow will be steady and
nearly one dimensional, whereas the flow in the
6 4 m 19 L We
transition region and in the fully turbulent region
Feperen: RITScrnnneee

Figure 4.2.4. Thickness of friction helt determined by von Kar- will be unsteady and three dimensional. The transi-
mis formula for a model on freshwater. tion takes place ata Reynolds number #,, of aboun
 tt cet. aly, btn sli at, ed

FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE a9

1,00

ae

ok
075-1 0,75
thom

0.50}——_- —— i en —
th

0,25>-— —-—— o25———-—} --

2a
me

0
mom

020 uy 400
U
Figure 4.2.6. Velocity variation in boundary layers. Figure 4.2.8. Velocity distributions in the boundary iayer.
ed

3.2 x 10°. The velocity distribution in the laminar
and the turbulent boundary layer may be as shown
in Fig. 4.2.8. However, the drastic change in veloc-
ity gradient near the limit of the laminar boundary
layer, as shown in the figure, does not seem to be
realistic; however, it is still the best approximation
for the velocity distribution in a laminar boundary
layer. Within the turbulent boundary layer there
ines
fects can be significant for the resistance due to the
ship hull surface roughness. The laminar sublayer
represents only a small part of the turbulent bound-
arylayer.
A mathematical description of the flow in the
laminar boundary layer is difficult to establish, and
only a few simple problems can be treated easily.
Furthermore, there is no completely analytical solu-

must exist extremely close to the wall a portion that
is essentially laminar in nature. The reason for this
is that the velocity pulsations normal to the wall
must be dampedout veryclose to the wall. It means
that a laminar sublayer must exist and that its ef-
|
COLO PEEPEE
‘\
tion for the mean velocity distribution in turbulent
flows even for such a simplesituation as flow over a
flat plate. The so-called Navier-Stokes equations
are the general mathematical expression for the hy-
drodynamic phenomena involving the inertial and
viscous properties of the fluid. To obtain a solution
of the equations it is often necessary to omit certain
terms in the equations, which thus causes the math-
ematical model to depart fromreal situations. Fora
flow with pulsating disturbances of various frequen-
cies added to the mean flow velocity, the Navier—
Stokes equations have shownthatfor a flow along a
flat plate the pulsations will be amplified and, there-
POOP EL, fore, the laminar flow will be unstable at various

i Reynolds numbers.
TRANSITION! TURBULENT For the flow along the flat plate the pressure gra-
- dient is equal to zero. For the case of a flow where
{ rs
te.

pNP
= - the pressure gradient is negative, the laminar flow
| Mlaow
. J will be stabilized. On the other hand, a positive
pressure gradient can affect the stability of the
laminar boundarylayer and transition to turbulence
can take place. When performing model experi-
ments, all these phenomena can be of importance to
the result.
Wigure 4.2.7, Transition from laminar to turbulent flow, Before leaving this section it must be mentioned
SU) SHIP RESISTANCE
that instead of the boundary Jayer thickness, an-
other quantity, the displacement thickness 6*, is
sometimes used. It is defined by the equation
Us* = [ow u)dy
or
of ta
(4.2.11)
The displacement thickness is that distance by
which the external potential field of flow is dis-
placed outwards as a consequence of the decrease
in velocity in the boundary layer. In the case of a
plate in a parallel flow and at zero incidence, the
displacement thickness is about one-third of the
boundary layer thickness 6. Finally, it must be
pointed out that a much more detailed description
of the phenomenacan be found in the classic work
Boundary Layer Theory by Schlichting (1955).
4.2.4. Separation
By flow separation is understood the detachment of
the main flow from solid surface due to an adverse
longitudinal pressure gradient, sometimes caused
by a sudden changeof the direction of curvature of
the surface. The fluid in the separated flow contains
eddies, and may be nearly static or may contain a
region of reversed flow.
The boundary fayer remains thin relative to the
body dimensionsuntil the condition of separationis
reached. A typical picture of flow separation is
shown in Fig. 4.2.9, indicating streamlines and
boundarylayer velocities profiles. The slope du/dy
of the velocity profile at the wall will decrease when
the flow comes near to the point of separation. At
the point of separation the slope becomes zero and
BOUNDARY
LAYER
OY, PLP TOC PEP IPPEE FEED ey Soa PEELE ELE PLEE EE ELE EEE EAE
: POINT OF
SEPARATION
Figure 4.2.9, Flow with separation
BOUNDARY
LAYER EDGE
cd
TS eTAERE ney
SEPARATION
Figure 4.2.10. Flow around solid of revolution. External flow
effect of pressure gradient on boundary layer growth.
downstream of this point it is negative. Near the
wall in the downstream area the reversal of flowwill
occur and the boundary layer thickens rather
quickly, expanding outward away from the body.
For a solid of revolution with a contour as shown
in Fig. 4.2.10 the potential flow solution for the flow
TM se
past the solid predicts a decreasing pressure over
the front portion of the body and an increasing pres-
SSI
sure over the rear portion. This results in a rela-
tively thin and stable boundary layer over the front
portion and a thick and unstable boundarylayer and
possible separation over the rear portion. Separa-
tion can occur in laminar as well as in turbulent
flow. In Fig. 4.2.11 the flow around circular cylin-
der is shown. The character of the flow is deter-
mined by the Reynolds number R,. For very low
Terre 7
Reynolds numberthe flow is nearly a potential flow.
As the Reynolds number is increased, the flow will
tend to separate. The separation takes place in a
periodic way by shedding von Karman vorticies. A
Karman vortex street is formed.
A further increase in Reynolds number will result
in a fully separated flow. The laminar boundary
layer over the front portion of the cylinder is thin
because of the negative pressure gradient. An ad-
verse pressure gradient exists over the rear portion
Tee
and results in a rapid growth of the boundarylayer
and separation. At still higher Reynolds number
the boundary layer becomes turbulent.
The shedding of vortices in the Karman vortex
street forms a regular cyclic pattern as the vortices
are built up and detach at the back of the bodyfirst
on one side and then on the other side. Therefore,
the vortex field at the back at any instant oftime is
unsymmetrical, and a pulsating side force with the
frequency of eddy shedding will occur. Manytypes
of hydro- and acrodynamic excited vibrations are a
result of this phenomenon. The “‘singing”’ wire in a
windis an example,
tinta
mama
mek
a the boundary layer is laminarthan ifit is turbulent,
a drag after the stall. Also this increases the uncer-
(VON KARMAN VORTICES)
tthe
LAMINAR
BOUNDARY LAYER
jm.
a]
RL
POINT OF 5
SEPARATION Rn < 5*10
TURBULENT Ra > 5*105
BOUNDARY LAYER
POINTOF
SEPARATION TURBULENT FLOW
Figure 4.2.11. Flow aroundcircular cylinder.
Botha positive pressure gradient and a boundary
layer are necessary for separation to occur. Without
a boundary layer, a flow with positive pressure gra-
dient will not separate, and withouta positive pres-
sure gradient, a boundary layer will not separate.
By sucking away the fluid in the boundarylayer at
the point of separation, the separation can be de-
layed or prevented. The technique of boundary
layer suction is sometimes used in model experi-
ments.
Even though performing experiments with big
models, laminar separation can occur at the fore-
most shoulder. Further turbulent separation can oc-
cur at the shoulder of the stern. The separation
point tends to move aft with increasing Reynolds
number. Hence, the possibility exists that, since
model and ship have very different Reynolds num-
bers, when performing towing tests, separation on
the model, if it does occur, may be at a point further
forward of the geometrically similar point on the
ship.
Appendages such as shaft brackets can have a
local Reynolds number that is extremely low.
Therefore, the boundarylayeror a part of it can be
FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE 51
laminar making the results of the model tests unreli-
able. Since a propeller blade, rudder, and roll con-
trol fins are lift-producing devices whenat an angle
of attack to the flow, the large positive pressure
gradient just after the low-pressure peak on the
back of the blade can cause separation. This will
occur at an angle of attack much less if the flow in
This will produce premature stall and excessive
tainty of the model experiments.
4.2.5. Frictional Resistance Coefficient
As was mentionedin Section 4.1 the frictional resis-
tance Rp is the component of resistance obtained by
integrating the tangential stresses over the wetted
surface of the ship in the direction of motion.
The specific frictional resistance or drag coeffi-
cient Cr is then defined by
Rr
Cr = ipV2S (4.2.12)
where pis the mass density, V is the speed ofthe
ship, and S is the wetted surface of the ship.
On the other hand, if C; is known at the speed V
in question, the frictional resistance can be calcu-
lated by
Rr = Crap VS (4.2.13)
Much theoretical and cxperimental research
work has been devoted to determiningthe localfric-
tional resistance coefficient C; as well as the total
frictional resistance coefficient Cr for a body. For a
two-dimensional flow the relation between C,and
Cy is as follows:
Cr=5 | Gad (4.2.14)
! being the length of the body.
With regard to the theoretical treatment of the
problem, then, it is in general very difficult to arrive
at a useful result. Only simple problems can be
solved.
By studying the mean velocity distribution for
the fiow in a turbulent boundarylayer on a flat plate
with zero pressure gradient and, among other
things, by use of the Navier-Stokes equations and

§2 SHIP RESISTANCE
by introducing some constants determined empiri-
cally, it is possible to come to an implicit equation
for the local frictional drag coefficient Cy. The total
drag coefficient Cr defined by Eq. (4.2.14) can be
determined from a similar equation, and this is the
basis for Schoenherr’s flat plate frictional drag for-
mula (Schoenherr, 1932)
I
= 1.79 log(R,Cp) = 4.13 logio (RaCr)
VCr
(4.2.15)
Here K, is the Reynolds number and is equal to
VLiv,
The lower limit of validity of this formula for Cr
is between R, = 2 x 10° and 2 x 10° wheretransi-
tion from laminar flow occurs. Experimental data
for the constants exist only up to a Reynolds num-
ber of about 4.5 x 108, which perhaps gives the
upper limit of validity of the formula. A more ex-
haustive treatment of the theoretical works within
the field can as an example be found in Newman
(1977, Chapter 3).
The classic experimental determination of the
frictional resistance was made by William Froude
many years ago in the first ship model basin in Tor-
quay and is recorded in Froude (1872; 1874), both
papers are reprinted in INA (1955).
Froude used boards 19 in. x 3% in. of various
lengths up to 50 ft and coated with various sub-
stances, which were towed at different speeds in 4
300-ft-long basin containing freshwater; their resis-
tance was measured. The results can be found in the
papers mentioned above but also in many old stan-
dard works regarding the speed and powerof ships
(Taylor, 1910, pp. 30-31) and someare given in a
modified form in Fig. 4.2.12. Furthermore. it ap-
pears from these experiments that the frictional re-
sistance of a plane surface could be represented by
the formula
Re = fSV" (4.2.16)
where S$ 1s the total surface of the plane, / is its
coefficient of friction, V is its speed, and n is an
index giving the power of V according to which Rr
is increasing. R. E. Froude (1888) has supplemented
the papers of his father by data of coefficient and
constants used by him. The resistance formula used
Was
Ry — fSVESs (4.2.17)
a|
Froude’s frictional constants for paraffin or smooth
hard surfaces in salt water can be found in Taylor
(1910, p. 31). R. E. Froude states also that, as re-
gards the paraffin used in the models, it appeared
iia a
identical in frictional quality to a smooth painted or
varnished surface.
Later the formula for the frictional resistance in
kilograms (force) had been represented by
x
(4.2.18)
where y = specific weight of water in kg/m?
d = frictional resistance coefficient
S = wetted area in m? :
i
V = speed in m/sec
Le Besnerais expressed the frictional coefficient >
at a temperature of 15°C by the following formula:
y= 0.1392 + 8 (4.2.19)
a 2.68 + L
where L is the model or ship length in meters.
If the friction coefficient is to be used for a tem-
perature ¢ other than 15°C, the following correction
formula maybe used:
hk, = ACL + 0.0043An (4.2.20)
where Ar = 15°C — 1 (hence it is negative if ¢ >
15°C),
The preceding formulas were recommended by
Contrés International des Directeurs de Bassins,
Paris 1935 (JTTC, 1935, p. 201) and were used by
most of the ship model tanks until about 1960.
By combining Eqs. (4.2.12) and (4.2.18), the fol-
lowing relation is obtained:
Re. (yg1000)SV""
Pe apv7s ipV7S
Cr == 2 * 10 AAgV~et® (4.2.21)
Here g is the acceleration of gravity; it must be
included in the formula owing to the definition ofA
and the units used. In Fig. 4.2.12 Froude’s skin fric-
tion coefficients from the plank experiments are
given as Cy,coefficients and plots on a Reynolds
number base. In the same diagram the ©;line from
 FRICTIONAL. RESISTANCE 33
| .
titty

| | i |
4. | i{—
| LMARNISHED SURFACE |
eee ao
| ---- [Pararriwcn SURFACE | |

ft LU |
|
| i

2 — + bp
|
Mek —|
TT

| | | Por Ty tdy |
- i |
10°* | ig
ita iT, rs HL
ii |
10° é 3 6 5 10° 2 3 43 10’
| : ane
2 3 4 5 108 RA.
Figure 4.2.12, Results from Froude’s resistance tests with boards.

Eq. (4.2.15) is also inserted. Figure 4.2.13 gives the

lying physical law which may be unproven and
Froude’s Cr values for Reynolds number betwe
en which may, in fact, be untrue.’ A type of formula
10° and 10!9 corresponding to the ship region. \
here that appears to have a limited physical foundation
has been calculated by use of Eq. (4.2.19).
can be expressed as
Since Froude many experiments have been car-
ried out. Some of the results have been collected
by Cr = a(b + log R,)* (4.2.22)
Schoenherr (1932) and compared with the result
s
from his own experiments and his flat plate
fric- where a, 6, and ¢ are constants and R, is the Rey-
tional drag formula given in Eq. (4.2.15).
Figure nolds number. Hughes found that by taking
4.2.14 shows the situXtion in 1932.
Hughes (1952: 1954) has presentedthe
results of Cr = 0.066 (—2.03 + log R,)~? (4.2.23)
humerous measurements offriction forces actin
g on
regular plane surfaces. Some of these surfaces
were it was possible to obtain almost an exact fit over the
thin submerged sheets, and the rest were ponto whole of the experimentalrange.
ons
of shallowdraft. On the basis of the results a
formu- The Hughes formula is often given as
lation was propos¢d for use in model and ship
corre-
lation regarding friction and form resistance in
tur- 0.067
bulent flow. Hughes wrote about the skin fricti
formulation for plane rectangular surfaces: ‘‘A for-
on 1=
TogiR, = 2) Se
4.2.24

mula for the basic friction line is not essential

but Here Cris the specific frictional resistance coecffi-
probablydesirable. It makes for precision and
con- cient of smooth plane surfaces havinginfinite aspect
venience in use and provides basis for extrapola-
ratio in turbulent flow. In other words the formula
tion. It has the disadvantage of suggesting an under
- gives a base line for a two-dimensional flow without
 aa
4
A” OR
54 SHIP RESISTANCE

Ah
i
SCHOENHERR: |
0,242
= logig (R,Ce)
JG; ples
200

10° 10'° R 2
n
Figure 4.2.13. Froude’s friction resistance coefficient for Reynolds number in the ship region.

edge effects. The lines for other values of the
length—breadth ratio are at constant percentages
above the basic line.
In spite of the fact that a flow along a flat plate of
infinite length is the most simple turbulent flow a
final stage has not yet been reached. In Fig. 4.2.15
some formulas for the resistance coefficient Cfor
such a flow are stated. The Cp values correspond-
ing to R, = 108 and 10° have been calculated and
have been inserted in the diagram versus the year
when the formula was proposed. The figure shows
the confusion with regard to the real value of Cp.
The question is further discussed in Gadd (1967).
Towing tanks all over the world have considered
the establishment of a uniform practice for the cal-
culation of skin friction and the expansion of model

=F
10° i i|

a: ~ a :

——t—-
woe te ———

-- fp |
_ Lg
i | | | | |
4 ——_—_—i—__—_{—__+— -+.-1- i-
| TURBULENT, FLOW, | |
MEAN LINE: = | /
1 Ei top ad

2- jo
| Std |
—_|_
| LAMINAR F
'( BLASIUS )

; | 4
i ; |
| |
ott | ]
10° 7 es
Figure 4.2.14. Spectlic frictional resistance coettigwent for flat plate. lariunmar. and turbulent vs USchoenherr, Pus.
 FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE

aN
“Fl
1927 @ PRANDTL: Cro = 0,074/R,,°
1927 O TELFER: Cry = 0,0012 + 0.34/R,"
25 932 @ PRANDTL - SCHLICHTING: C,> = 0,455/(log R,,) 228 —
1932 O SCHOENHERR: 0,262/VCe2 = log(R,C-z)

poate
1940 SCHULTZ - GRUNOW: C,, = 0,427/(tog R, - 0,407)?" _
10°C, 1952 LAP - TROOST: 0,2545/VCr> = 0.9526 + log(R,¥Cr, )
|. 1954 HUGHES: C,, = 0067/(logR, - 2)?
11967 GADD: Cry = 0,0113/( logR, - 3,7)"9
aan bee
a
AoHRn= 10%
2,0

1,5: R —_ R, =10° P\
a
i
59 {1920 1930 1940 [1950 1960 1970 1980
ji |] |
Figure 4.2.15. Formulas for the specific frictional resistance coefficient and a comparison of the coefficients at different Reynolds
number.

data to full size. The International Towing Tank
Conference (ITTC) studied many proposals and in
1957 agreed on the following formula:
0.075
> TogeR, = oP
The Conference adopted this as the “ITTC 1957
model—ship correlation line,’ and was careful to
label “‘only an interim solution to this problem for
practical engineering purposes’? (ITTC, 1959, p.
324). The line is called a model—ship correlation line
and not a frictional resistance line representing the
frictional resistance of plane or curved surfaces. In
association with his two-dimensional line, Hughes
proposed a system oflines giving the Cy for sur-
faces that are not plane. Hughes defines a form fac-
tor r by the expression
i Cy
r=(1+ ==
so that
viscous resistance coefficient for the body in ques-
tion. It is assumedthat r is independent of Reynolds
number and is the same for all similar models and
ships.
In Fig. 4.2.16 the frictional resistance coefficient
ae Cr according to Hughes (Eq. (4.2.24)] and Cy for
different values of the form factor r are shown as
functions of Reynolds number #,. In the same dia-
gram the “‘ITYTC 1957 model-ship correlation line”’
is inserted. It will be observed that the ITTC corre-
lation line is merging with the Hughes line r = 1.12.
From Fig. 4.2.14 it will be seen that at low Rey-
nolds numbers the vanation in the experimental
results is very large. Furthermore, it will be seen
that there are only few results for high Reynolds
numbers and that the maximum Reynolds number
where experimental data exist is about 4.5 « 108,
The area of Reynolds numbers for most ofthe ships
is in the two decades from 10° to 10. Owing to
these facts, it is clear that the subject of friction
eee) resistance coefficients of ships for the present is far
from a final solution.

,=
ov ~&n
4.2.6. Turbulence Stimulation

Cro is the two-dimensional flat plate resistance coef- Model experiments are carried out at relatively low
ficient given by Eq. (4.2.23) or (4.2.24) and Cy is the Reynolds number. Therefore, the flow can be
 anh. By,
Pa
56 SHIP RESISTANCE

7 as os a s AN ;
orc.| NEA | | | 9242 |
\ ot {al .

it
FL NIN AMAN FE SCHOENHERR : We = (09(RaCe)

A mm om Bo ak
° \A XY | | | _
J SSDS TS Cope henB
Sy bh HUGHES: Ce = toa

SAN ITTC-57: Ce = 7107

zi N _ 5|pS0 Re 2
3 =

Mm
2 -

aot Rom
it

BS
1082
of 7 T

5 496 2 5 wy 2 5 498 2 5 499 2 5 10!

em
n

Figure 4.2.16. The frictional resistance coefficient C; (according to Hughes) and rCy (r being the form factor) as a function of
Reynolds number &,. The “ITTC 1957 model-ship correlation line’? and the Schoenherrt line are also shown.

laminar as well as turbulent (compare with Fig.
4.2.14). In general, the procedure of conducting a
ship model test and predicting from the results the
resistance of the full-sized ship involves the as-
BR
FMS
tend to destabilize the laminar flow at the fore part
of the model. Unfortunately, the stimulator has also
given the water a forward velocity so that the mea-
sured speed over the ground orof the carriage is no

ww
sumption that the model is in full turbulent flow; longer the speed ofthe modelrelative to the water.
therefore, every attempt should be made to ensure Furthermore, it must be mentioned that owing to

F
that turbulent flow exists. At the bow of the ship the dimensions of the rods or the wires the separa-

¥
model the local Reynolds numberis low andthereis tion for a given speed is probably in the laminar
a negative pressure gradient, so the chances for state resulting in the disturbances being predomi-

FF
laminar or partly laminar flow is very high. nantly of one frequency. Instead of rods or screens,

££
The techniques to simulate turbulence can be di-
vided into two categories:

FS
MODEL
1, Artificial creation of a high turbulence level in

wT
the area of water in which the model moves.
Artificial creation of turbulent disturbances in
th

we
u
the boundary layer of the model.
mn
er

Some of the turbulence stimulating techniques of VERTICAL

type | are illustrated in Fig. 4.2.17. The stimulator RODS,
Te OS Tr Sr

is placed a distance in front of the model and can be oT — — f SCREENS

a comb with evenly spaced circular rods of small f oR
diameter or a screen with a wire network. Because
WATER JETS
of the separation of the flow on the circular rods or
the wires, an eddying and turbulent wake is created,
into which the model runs. The turbulent wake will Figure 4.2.17. Artificial creation of turbulence.
“NST
“er
Spe “er er

a line of water jets can be used. The water jets shoot
waler perpendicularly into the water surface just
forward of the model and thereby create a turbulent
area. The turbulence generated is probably distrib-
uted over many frequencies, but the spray creates
a
forward wake and a vertical motion of the water. It
is possible to eliminate the forward wake by having
the water jets arranged below the water surface in
such a manner that they shoot the water upwar
d,
but an unwanted circulation of the waterin the tank
can occur.
Instead of having vertical turbulence screens it is
possible to have screensparallel to the plane of the
water surface. The screens are then moved quickly
upward and downward through the water surface
just before the test creating turbulence and only
very little vertical current. One of the drawbacks
with this technique is that the turbulence dies down
in time causing successive parts of the model run to
be in a gradual lowering turbulence level.
When towing ship models, the turbulence stimu-
lating techniques of type 2 are used most. In Fig.
4.2.18 four types of stimulators are shown. When
performing towing experiments with small models,
sand strips are often used (stimulator type a). Strips
of rather rough grain’ sand are attached to the bow
of the model. The many-sized particles cause sepa-
ration of the flowat the particles and a turbulent
flow with some range of frequencies develops in the
Wakejust aft of the strip. Experiments have shown
that the large negative pressure gradient at the bow
sometimes will cause the turbulence stimulated to
be damped out andthe flow will again be laminar. A
sandstrip placed 5% aft of the stematstation 19 will
be moreeffective (stimulator type 5), The sand has
a drag of its own and increases the resistance. At
the area forwardof the strip the flow is probably
laminargiving less resistance than a turbulent flow.
The twoeffects are counteracting and perhaps can-
cel each other in some cases. For small models the
roughness of the sand has much moreof an effect
than the area of laminar flow.
Instead of sand strips a small diameter wire—a
trip wire—can be laid along the side ofthe hull and
close to the surface along station 19, which is 5% aft
of the stem (stimulator type c). The diameter of the
wire is about 1 mm. Thetrip wire causes separation
and the boundarylayer is expected to be turbulent
afl of the wire. Again, as with the sand strips at
station 19, it is assumed that the effect of the small
area forward of the trip wire cancels the effect of
the wire on the model resistance.
FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE 57
a J SAND STRIPS
b
5
iV SAND STRIPS
STATION
19
Cc
Hy J tRiP wire
STATION
19
d
= Jj stups or
Pe
4 PINS
Figure 4.2.18. Artificial creation of turbulence in boundary
layer of ship models.
Studs orpins (stimulator type d) formedbycircu-
lar cylinders of small diameter (about 3 mm) and
small height (about 3 mm) areset with their cylindri-
cal axis perpendicular to the hull surface and are
regular spaced forming a line parallel to the stem,
just aft of the stem. The distance between the studs
is about 25 mm. The individual laboratory can have
its own standard for the distance between the stem
and the row of studs, but manyfollow the proposal
outlined by Hughes and Allan (1951, p. 296). The
cylinders cause separation as the water flows over
them and produce a turbulent wake. Some users
correct for extra drag of the studs through the drag
information on cylinders, and others balance it with
an area of laminar flow forward of the pins by ad-
justing the position of the pins. Using the method
does not imply that all the problems of turbulence
stimulation are solved completely, but it apparently
has the fewest drawbacks of the many methods con-
templated. Stimulator types a to d use a type of
roughness to produce a turbulent wake. In special
cases when a strong negative pressure gradient ex-
ists over an area abaft the stimulator, the turbulence
generated may not have sufficient amplitude to
maintain itself, and the flow may revert to the
laminar state over an area. Aft this area the turbu-
lence will be created anew, in general, without use
of turbulence stimulator.

58 SHIP RESISTANCE
Sometimes the use of other forms of stunulators
have been discussed. For example, the bowof the
model could be vibrated from the inside at a fre-
quency that destabilizes the laminar boundarylayer
on the bow. Another example of special stimulators
is the use of alternating electrical polarity. Small
metal tabs can be mounted flush with the hull in an
array a small distance from the stem. A pulsating
electrical polarity creates discreet frequency distur-
bances and possible laminar instability in the
boundary layer. Extremely high voltages have to be
used if the methodis to be effective, but it is danger-
ous and not practical.
4.2.7. Roughness
In the previous sections only the frictional resis-
tance along smooth surfaces has been treated. The
surfaces have been hydraulically smooth. The sur-
faces of ships are not smooth but have various de-
grees of roughness depending on the structural fab-
Tication and design, the character of the paint
applied to the surface of the hull, and the accumula-
tion of marine growth or fouling on the hull. Froude
(1874) performed experiments regarding: ‘‘The na-
ture of the variation of the resistance, in terms of
the variation in the quality of the surface.’’ The
materials used by Froude in forming the surface
were varnish; tinfoil; hard paraffin, laid on thin and
scraped perfectly smooth; unbleached calico; and
three varieties of sand, differing from one another in
the coarseness of grain.
Nikuradse (1933) carried out a series of very sys-
tematic, extensive, and careful measurements on
rough pipes. The circular pipes used were covered
on the inside as completely as possible with a defi-
nite grain size glued onto the wall. By choosing
pipes of varying diameters and by changingthe size
of grain it was possible to vary the relative rough-
ness K,/R from about 0.002 to 0.065. K, is the grain
size or the height of the protrusion and R is the
radius, or if it is not a circular pipe, the hydraulic
radius, of the cross section.
Later Prandtl and Schlichting by calculations
have applied the results for pipes to the case of
rough plates. In addition to the local skin friction
fraction, the total skin friction fraction was calcu-
lated. In Fig. 4.2.19 the resistance is given in the
form of a coefficient of total skin friction. The coeffi-
cient has been plotted against the Reynolds number
R= U, hfe with the relative roughness L/K, as a
Pe a ee EY
parameter. £ is the characteristic length of the
plate. It is assumed that the turbulent boundary
laycr begins right at the leading edge. The relative
roughness L/K, is a function of the magnitude of K,
relative to the dimension of the boundary layer. If
the roughness height & is smal] compared to the
height of the viscous sublayer, the plate is effec-
tively smooth and the frictional drag is independent
of k. In the other extreme, if 4 is large compared to
&, the form drag resulting from the roughness ele-
ments will be important, which means that the drag
will be essentially independent of the Reynolds
number. Furthermore, Fig. 4.2.19 showsthat if the
relative roughness or the K,/L is the same for the
ship model as for the full-scale ship hull, then the
smoothness of the full-scale ship hull will be much
more important than the smoothness of the model,
owing to the fact that the effects of the roughness
will increase with Reynolds number.
If the length of the plate is changed, the Reynolds
number based on the roughness scale U..K,/v re-
mains constant, and the coefficient of skin friction
varies along a curve U..K,/v = const. In the figure a
family of such curves is shown. The curves are ap-
proximately parallel to the curve for the smooth
surface. These curves are more representative for
the ship roughness than the L/K, curves, insofar as
the roughness scale of ship hulls of different lengths
is independent of the length of the ship. Therefore,
in practice, when estimating the resistance of a
given ship, a roughness allowance can be approxi-
mated by a constant additive resistance coefficient.
The additive resistance coefficient will vary from
ship type to ship type, with the length of the ship,
and with the character of the paint applied.
The problem is discussed further in Chapter 5.
The roughness used in Nikuradse’s experimentsis
obtained with the grains of sand glued to the wall as
closely to each other as possible, with the density a
maximum. In many practical applications the
roughness density is considerably smaller and can
no longer be described by the height of protrusion,
k. A scale of standard roughness has to be intro-
duced. It is convenient to correlate any given
roughness with its equivalent sand roughness and to
define it as that value of L/K, that gives the actual
coefficient of resistance. Schlichting experimentally
determined the equivalent sand roughness for a
large numberof surfaces. The results are published
in Schlichting (1936; 1955, p. 424). Also Kempf
(1937a; 1937b) and Todd (195i) have studied the
problemof equivalent sand roughness. Results from
 “SSBUGGNOI ay) pu “y Jo uoNUN] B SE salRd pauayFnos-puvs Jo] 49 JudTAYJE209 MONIUNAS [RIO], “EET p angry

z gl z ,0l

_ ae
PONE AP AP NAP NINN AN
__ — . JAepp gObT Oleh OS
— an — aaona | wees nese oa OZ]
Obl] OS! OLE -OlKZ Ole U
So |-———~2

“yen

rr ‘te — ay — a ery ‘om ae Wat Laity — bh eer mate — — LL — he “what on oe at ower a eae
G0 SHIP RESISTANCE
towing tests of ship tnals with ships in service and
from towing tests of pontoons have been plotted in
diagrams such as Fig. 4.2.19, and from this, the
equivalent roughness has been estimated. Some of
the results were based on the measurements of the
local resistance of a certain small piece of the shell
in the parallel middle body of the ship, and provide
a direct measure of pure local frictional resistance.
The measuredlocal resistances were transferred by
theoretical considerations into total resistance. As
examples it can be mentioned that the equivalent
sand roughness of surfaces coated in different ways
at a Reynolds number of about 2 x 10? are as
follows:
Zinc chromate LIK, = 3 x 106
Cold plastic 2.5 x 108
Anticorrosive 2 x 10°
Hotplastic 1 x 106
The uncertainty in fixing the equivalent sand rough-
ness is large and this measure to describe the rough-
ness of a surface is therefore not often used.
An effective roughness-measuring instrument
(wall gauge profileometer) is needed if the relation-
ship between the roughness and resistance of a
point is to be investigated. Some instruments are
capable of drawing the profile of the surface along
any desired line and of dealing with roughness
heights perhaps up to about 5000 wm. Records of
the surfaces are then drawn on continuous rolls of
paper. Other instruments comprise measuring
heads and analyzer units, which house signal condi-
tioner and printer. Flexible multicore cables con-
nect measuring heads with condition units and bat-
tery packs. As the measuring headIs traversed over
the surface, the printer automatically prints out the
maximum peak to trough height for alternate 50 mm
sample lengths. The measuring head can be a hand-
propelled trolley carrying a ball-ended measunng
probe, which contacts the surface under examina-
tion. The movements of the probe are registered by
a transducer. A timing wheel can be arranged to
supply a pulse signal every 50 mm of measuring
head travel. If all the roughness lies within the
laminarsublayer, it has no effect on drag. A critical
sand grain diameter can be given as (Hoerner,
1965):
Keri 7 100 = (4.2.27)
where v is the kinematic viscosity of water and Vis
the speed of the ship. If the speed is 9 m/s, then the
Kea Will be 13 wm. By way of comparison it can be
mentioned that roughness of bare stecl plate, ofdip
galvanized plate, and of plate poorly sprayed
painted will be 50, 150, and 200 wm, respectively.
When uniform sand grains are not tightly packed,
the resistance due to the roughness is atits greatest
when the roughness density is about 75-80%. At
25% density the resistance increment due to rough-
ness is still about 75% of the maximum value.
It is very difficult to characterize the ship hull
roughness numerically owing to the fact that hull
roughness arises from many causes and therefore
usually has a mixture of characteristics. The rough-
ness can be divided into the following dypes:
Structural roughness, that is, chine plate wavi-
ness, welds, changes in plate thickness
Local damage
Corrosion pitting
Corrosion products, that is, rust.
Paint system failures, that is, poorly applicd
paint, stripped off paint
Blistered paint
Roughened surface of exhausted antifouling
Fouling residues
Any of the above after they have been painted
over
The resistance increment will vary with type of
roughness, and the same roughness height can have
different effects. The combination of the above-
mentioned types of roughness will vary from ship to
ship and will vary during the lifetime of the ship.
Ifin spite of everything one wants to describe the
hull roughness, it can be done in the following man-
ner, as suggested byBritish Ship Research Associa-
tion (BSRA):
With a wall gauge profileometer, a cross section
through the rough surface is taken, amplified, and
recorded. When analyzing. the records can be di-
vided in 50 mm lengths and envelope curves can be
drawn on top and bottom byeye to touch only one
peak in each 50 mmlength (see Fig. 4.2.20A). The
mean separation between the two envelope curves
can be taken as the apparent amplitude of the rec-
ord. In this way long wavelengths are climinated
BSRA proposes that a hull survey has to be com-
posed of 80-150 such records, each having about 15
 A carattit tien: actatataite

PRICTIONAL RESISTANCE ol

Figure 4.2.20. Rough surface record with the two envelope curves sketch
in.

sections of 50 mm length. The meanof all the appar-

to be done before a usable, practical method is
ent amplitudes will then give a single roughn
ess available. Until then the method using a roughness
number, in micrometers, for the hull. Instead
of allowance has to be applied. This allowance will
drawing envelopes, parallel straight lines can be
me

depend on the length of the ship, perhaps on the

used, as shownin Fig. 4.2.20B. This peak to valley
type of ship, and of the hull surface. For a cargoship
definition makes it possible to analyze the results
with a length of about 150 m, the increasesin fric-
when the measurements are taken.
tional resistance coefficient due to paint roughness
The roughnesses for new ships can be less than
can be as follows:
100 wm. For the average new ship the roughness is
about 130 4m. Old, rough ships can have rough-
nesses of about 1000 um. Zinc chromate Cy ~ 0.4 x 103
The roughness records can be further analyzed Cold plastic 0.4 x 1073
by using spectral techniques, which means that the Anticorrosive 0.25 x 10-3
distribution of amplitude amongthe frequency com- Hotplastic 0.9 x 1073
ponents is determined bythe analyzer of the pro-
fileometer.
After leaving the dock of the shipyard the hull may
It is of interest to correlate the measured rough-
become rougher due to paint system failures and
néss profile with the drag, but much work remain
s fouling. Thefrictional resistance may increase by

15 [—

107AC,]
A : Lo
A
erp

1,0
7 A |

/ 0,5 7 cae
er

| a °

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 $00 1000
PEAK TO VALLEY HEIGHT im
Figure 4.2.21, Increase in friction resistance coefficient Cy due to roughness
.
vee

62 SHIP RESISTANCE
about 4 x 10 ® per day out of dock because ofdete-
rioration of the bottom, but for some ships the in-
crease can be greater. Figure 4.2.21 shows the in-
crease in friction resistance coefficient Cr or in the
incremental resistance coefficient C, due to rough-
ness. In other words it also shows the savings in
power and fuel oil that a better treatment of the
surface of the ship hull will give. The diagram is
based on the results given in Karlsson (1978) and
Todd (1951).
4.3. WAVE RESISTANCE
4.3.1. Introduction
As was mentioned in Section 4.1 the wavemaking
resistance Ry is the component of resistance associ-
ated with the expenditure of energy in generating
gravity waves. This component can be split up in
two parts: the wave pattern resistance Rywp and the
wavebreaking resistance Rywg. Generally, wave re-
sistance means the wavemaking resistance ignoring
the wavebreaking resistance. Before beginning the
discussion of the problems regarding wave resis-
tance, a few comments on the nature of deep-water
waves will be given.
4.3.2. Deep-Water Waves
When making a study of the movements of waves, it
will be observed that the particles of water in a
wave have verylittle translatory movement, which
leads to the conclusion that their motion may be
either a linear vertical oscillation or a closed path
such as a circle or an ellipse. The first hypothesis is
DIRECTION OF WAVE ADVANCE
—
SE ae wr wow wow ow ow ow wow wo& a w i e be Sarsy
not realistic because it would involve the formation
of Jow- and high-pressure areas below the wave
crests and the wave hollows, respectively. It ap-
pears probable that the particles rotate in circles or
ellipses, the plane of which is vertical and perpen-
dicular to the line of wave crests. Here it must also
be mentioned that the water particles do not follow
an exactly circular path, but will show a displace-
ment in the direction of propagation during each
revolution. This displacement is small and amounts
to approximately
%
wey
Displacement = (4.3.1)
Ly
on the surface during each period. Lf is the wave-
length and éy is the height of a wave. Exact defini-
tions of these two terms will be given in the fol-
lowing.
Until recently it was customary in the field of
naval architecture to use the trochoidal wave theory
as developed by Gerstner[for a short description of
the method see SNAME(1967, p. 611)J.
A schematic of the trochoid wave motion is given
in Fig. 4.3.1. The water particles, which in the origi-
nal still water were on some horizontal line, lic on
undulating surfaces, while.those originally in the
same vertical line lie along lines that sway from side
to side, converging under the crests and diverging
under the hollows.
A schematic of the geometry of a part of a tro-
choid is given in Fig. 4.3.2. The curve joining a
series of particles originally in the same horizontal
plane is the same as that which is generated by a
point on the radius r of a circle with the radius R as
the circle rolls along a horizontal straight line. In
Fig. 4.3.2 the parametric equations of the trochoid
are also given.
--- —=-
CORRE SPONDING
STILL WATTER LEVELS
 WAVE RESISTANCE 63
th eth

o (%,0) (%,,0) TRACK OF ROLLING CIRCLE

x

ROLLING
ak

CIRCLE
ee
ee

= -R6-f sind
ziR+rcos 6
6=ut
a

Figure 4.3.2. “Geometry of a trochoid.

ee

The trochoid is a convenient form from a geo- w is circular frequency = 27/T.

metrical point of view, but it fails to meet certain
The steepness ratio is the ratio of wave height to
requirements of hydrodynamics. It is more correct
wavelength.
to work with the simplest wave form, the sine or
cosine wave, and then assume that other wave The slope of surface is the surface slope of a
forms are built up ofsine waves by superposition. wave profile perpendicular to the crest in space
coordinates. Maximum wave slope of a regular
For a description of wave phenomenait is neces-
sary to give the definitions of a few terms. For a harmonic or trochoidal wave is (w/2)(steepness
ratio).
simple wave moving along the x axis, the following
can be stated (see Fig. 4.3.3):
The surface elevation of the sine wave ¢ can be
represented by
Lyis the wavelength, which is the horizontaldis-
tance between two successive wave crests or
wave troughs in the direction of advance. € = C4 cos (kx — wt) (4.3.2)
T is the wave period, which is the time between
where « is the wave number
the passage of two successive wave crests past 4
fixed point.
27
cw is the wave speedorcelerity of a wave, which K=F (4.3.3)
is the phase velocity of a surface gravity wave in
deep water.
xis the position on the x axis and / is the time. The
fw is wave height, which is the vertical distance equation (4.3.2) represents a wave which travels in
from wave crest to wave trough, or twice the the direction of the positive x axis.
wave amplitude of a harmonic wave. The following relations exist among the terms
¢4 is the wave amplitude, which is the radius of (see Fig. 4.3.4):
orbital motion of a surface wave particle, equal
2
to one-half of the wave height. Cw
Ly = 2a ve 0.64ley (4.3.4)
fis the frequency, which is the reciprocal of
wave period = I/T.
where Lyis in meters, g is the acceleration duc to
gravity (9.81 m/s*), and cy1s in m/s. Furthermore,
for the trochoidal wave

| 26,5 ow |
oe She x, Ly = 27R (4.3.5)

where & is the radius of the rolling circle.

For the wave speed the following relation exists:

Figure 4.3.3. Definition of wavelength and wave height for a lw eee ~ 125 VLy
simple wave. (4.3.6)
 ow ew ee wow
cs] SHIP RESISTANCE

— i

A T Cw w “

2 z
WAVELENGTH Ly=X cyT Se ea oR ec
27 g uy? H

SB,
WAVE PERIOD 1] ~A j2E , 2Mew) 2 21
Cw g g Ww gu *

if
rawweewr ee
WAVE SPEED cy| —~ fg} st 1 ee
T 21 2 W %

CIRCULAR a 1g 27
sf" 3g
fg
FREQUENCY Kew x T Cw '
f
2 2 ‘
WAVE NUMBER x| & ag <r 3 wo 1
cw r gT? cw g
Figure 4.3.4. Relations among wave terms.

For the wave period . 2 rs

E = ipLwlw (1 — aR? (4.3.12)
£ 27h
T= Haag He 43.7) Since r,/R is a quantity of the order 0.10, 4/2R? can
w g 2
be neglected without appreciable error, so that
For the frequency
E ~ ioLwCiy per unit breadth (4.3.13)
2a g
OT Aa (4.3.8)
p is the density of water. A derivation of Eqs.
(4.3.11) and (4.3.12) can be found in Principles of
(f= VT). Naval Architecture, Volume II (1962), p. 4—6.
The relations between Ly and cw and between
The speed of the particle (trochoidal wave): Ly and T can be established in the following way.
Figure 4.3.5 shows a diagram of the forces on a

c= ry =
rg (4.3.9)
Cw

wherer is the orbit radius or the radius in the gener-

alor circle. At the still water surface the orbit radius
is r, and

f= Cy or 2ry = ly (4.3.10)

Ata depth z below the surface, for trochoidal waves

the orbil radius will be

r= rectly
;
= pie -zicw
2
(4.3.11)
The energy £ in the trochoidal wave can be ex-
pressed by Figure 4.3.5.0 Forces on water murticie on drachondal wows
 WAVE RESISTANCE 65
water particle in a trochoidal wave. The gravit
y tions that are set up will manifest themselves by
force mg and a centrifugal force mre? are acting on
changes in the fluid level. These changes in level
a particle at point P; m is the mass of the particle.
will travel at the same velocity as the body itself,
The resultant force is normal to the trochoidal wave
About 1900 Lord Kelvin was working on the
and the two triangles OCP and F’FP are similar.
problem of wavemaking. He considered a single
‘Then
pressure point traveling In a straight line over the
surface of the water, sending out waves that com-
mg mira? bine to form a characteristic pattern. The pattern
Roo (4.3.14)
Tt

consists of a system oftransverse waves and a sys-

tem of divergent waves radiating from the point.
From this equation and from Figure 4.3.6 shows such a wave pattern. The whole
pattern is contained within the twostraight lines
2a starting from the pressure point and making angles
wo =F, Lw=2nR, cw = Ro,
of 19.5° on cach side of the line of motion. The
eT

distance between the successive transverse waves

> & 4 pra
o-=- >. = — depends on the speed of the traveling point.
R’ 7 Ly
The Kelvin wave pattern illustrates and explains
ee

many of the features of the ship-wave system. In

gives
i

front of the ship there is a high-pressure area and

therefore a noticeable bow wave is formed as a part
QL
T= VS
Vj—— (4.3.15)
4.3.15 of the transverse and diverging wave system. The
i

crest lines of the transverse waves wil! be normal to

the direction of motion near the hull, bending back
Cw=
a =
Vf gL
a as they approach the divergent system of waves to
(4.3.16)
finally disappear in the divergent system. Also at
the shoulders of the hull and at the stern wave sys-
ai iiIi a eeaeie

in accordance with Eqs. (4.3.6) and (4.3.7).

If a large numberof regular sine wavesof differ-
ent wavelengths are superposed upon one another,
an irregular wave form can be obtained. The surface
elevation can then be represented by
k
£ =D Lan COS (eX — Wal + &) (4.3.17)
A=
where each componentalso has a given phaseangle
&,. The phase angle e, represents the phase differ-
ence betweenthe different component waves atthe
time tf = 0 and the position x = 0.
4.3.3. Wave System
When a body iy moved through an ideal fluid, the
potential and thereby the speed of the particles in
the fluid will change from point to point. This means
that in accordance with Bernoulli’s cquation {see
Eq. (2.8.28)] the pressure will change from point
to point. A body moving horizontally in the
neighbourhood ofa free surface will therefore cause
a disturbance of this surface. The pressure varia-
tems are formed. In Fig. 4.3.7 a wave pattern for a
ship is sketched. Often the stern wave system will
not appear clearly because of disturbances already
present from the bow system. As was previously
mentioned the wave pattern as a whole moves with
the ship, which means that the profile of the trans-
verse wave system along the ship or the ship model
at a fixed speed will not change with the time. For
the models 266 and 266a (for body plan, profile of
stern, and stem see Fig. 4.3.8) the transverse wave
systems have been determined by recording the
Waves during runs in the towing tank. The models
as well as a vertical plate fitted abaft the model have
been marked with identification lines for photo-
graphic and visual wave recording. The fore and aft
parts of the two models are identical but in model
266a a parallel middle body of a length of 0.2Lpp has
been inserted amidships at Section 5. Figures 4.3.9
and Fig. 4.3.10 show the two wave systems at dif-
ferent speeds. By inserting the parallel middle body
the distance between the bow wave system and the
stern wave system has been changed but there is
only a very small difference in the systems’ char-
acter.
In manycases it is possible to consider the resul-
tant wave systemto be built up of four components:
 TES ie: sa resendaeem
66 SHIP RESISTANCE

Ke. “DIVERGENT f
| \ YsWAVE ~~ ‘
mE es ~
| oe Py
j \ ee
- TRANSVERSE = a
| WAVE — a

Figure 4.3.6. Crests of a Kelvin wave group caused by atraveling disturbance at P.

1. The bow wave system, owing to high-pressure the predominating influence of the high-pressure
area in the vicinity of the bow. peaks at bow and stern.
The forward shoulder wave system, owing to The four components of the ship’s wave system
bea

the low-pressure area around the shoulder.
3. The aft shoulder wave system, owing to the
low-pressure area around the aft shoulder.
4. The stern wave system, owing to the high-pres-
sure area at the stern.
It can be difficult to predict the exact place for
the wave crest in the bow and the stern wave sys-
tems, and it is very difficult to predict the place of
the troughs of the shoulder wave systems owing to
will be capable of interfering with one another more
or less favorably. An example of interfering wave
systems is given in Fig. 4.3.11. It is based on the
work of Wigley (1930-1931). For a wedge-shaped
body of infinitely great draught and waterlines as
shown in the figure, the wave systems have been
calculated. The body consists of a parallel middle
part and of wedge-shaped fore and aft bodies, each
of length /. The symmetrical surface disturbance
caused in accordance with Bernoulli's equation is
sometimes called the primary wave system, and the
Pre

Figure 4.3.7. Schematic diagram of bow and stern wave aveters

[littersaesiran racerran
a e ee aae ee

WAVE RESISTANCE 67

— + SCALE / :
. 20 £00 ~ 800 80d Tcomm

Model 266 266a

Parallel middle body
(0.2 Lep) inserted

lope 5,666 m 6.793 m

B 0.893 m 0.893 m
T 0.382 m 0.382 m
6 0.642 0.697
Figure 4.3.8. Bodyplan. profile of stem, and stem for models 266 and 266a.

— —

266
WD
AP
J
FP
_ 5660
-4 2-3) -2 +1 Gt 2S UG UT lB
rT] {4 as || haa
\ | i
aa pao { 71,30

— || | boi | | Lis
Ta pe = rr

|__| |_| } | |_-77 11, 60)

ft i Ts

[ojfp -
= |}. —| letL"| 1,90

f perT a md
= 7 <T20g
nn
| —~
|— ego.
ee | a| =HPt i | _laz0 E
So
_ o
|| L$;+_| [i 235] |
s+ — |

} im
I | yt J
Figure 4.3.9. Wave system for model 266.
Os SHIP RESISTANCE

266a :
ne 6793 afi
-4 -3. -2——- i) 1 2 3 4 5 x 5 6 7. 8 9 10
ry 4 ] | Ti
! |
i ot i |
i | pet 30 a8
t r inoGeeeee ——
a
|
eS
|_| wo feefet

| || 7
pea
|te
f - a

Poa |

_ f
| |
t

| if

ol
oo
|
E
|i i
Cy
as
5I
wt ftbet p~
i ! i |
Lit bo L | ! 7 ! ft
Figure 4.3.10. Wave system for model 266x.

bow, shoulder, and stern waves systems are called resulting from each of the wavetrains yields:
the secondary wave system. Superposing the five
wave systems gives the resultant wave system. x =r, sin(wt + e)) + r2 sin(wt + e€)
+r; sin(wt + €;) + rs sin(wt + 4) (4.3.19)

4.3.4. Interference r, cos(wf + €&,) + rz cos(wt + &>)

li
a

+ r; cos(wt + €3) + ry cos(wr + &4)

The four components of the secondary wave system
wil be capable of interfering with one another more
For the resulting transverse wave, the following Is
or less favorably. The position of a particle in a
obtained:
wave can be described with
Part rt rit rit 2ryr2 cose; — £7)
Xp 7 Fn SIN(_l + Ep)
+ Oris cos(e, — £3) + 2ryry cos(e, — &4)
Zn = Fp COS(Gi,f + &,) (4.3.18)
+ Dror; COS(e2 — €3) + 2rers COS(E2 — £4)
r, is the orbit radius, w, is the circular frequency, #
+ OPsls cosle; — £4) (4.3.20)
is the time, and «, indicates the phase angle at f = 0.
Wave trains having the same velocity also have In addition,
equal wavelengths and wave periods.
The four wave systems following the ship can an I ~ Ey = atti
ln, A
and Cwn = ar, (4.3.21)
therefore onlydiffer in height and phase. The phase 27 Ley

difference is equal for all particles and is indepen-

dent of ime. Addition ofthe ordinates of a particle where /, ;,,18 the distance from a crest of the wave
 WAVE RESISTANCE 69

STERN AFTER SHOULDER FORWARD SHOULDER |_-BOW

TEP EOE
peer.
enna
lab : LTTDre
eeES ae - Vv

RC RIMETRICAL SURFACE
DIST URBANCE

Y
—
VE, systeuY

IPT
pau WA
> =

FORWARD SHOULDER WAVE SYSTEM

ZL
UY
N77 | NT
¢ AFTER SHOULDER WAVE SYSTEM

pO
/\~ STERN WAVE SYSTEM
: |
7

DN
TOTAL WAVE SYSTEM (CALCUL ATED) JW

SS
-

Figure 4.3.11. Interfering wave systems.

in the transverse system n — | to the nearest crest

In of the wave, to the square ofthe wave height, and to
ote

the system n. Equation (4.3.20) can then be writte

n the wavelength, which means
as:
E= C'bGjLy (4.3.23)
P=04+86+8+2
Furthermore, it can be assumed that the breadth of
+ 2005 cos
2a. 271, the wave is approximately proportional to the
z + 2015 cos =
wavelength Ly, which is in turn proportional to
the
2a 4 2a square of the wave velocity. When the ship is
+ 20:04 cos a + 2k; cos 23 moved the distance x, the amount of energy re-
“Ww oe
quired to maintain the wave system can be ex-
+ Wl, cos al
4 + 26,0, cos 2al
=7
4
(4.3.22)
pressed by

ii
Ryx = C'bGiekw
4 ae

giving the wave height in the resulling wave. Ww

To obtain a relation between the wavemaking re-
sistance and the speed some approximations have
= C’bUyx = CV2Cipx (4.3.24)
to be made. As a first approximation it may be as-
or
sumed that the energy Fin a transverse wavein the
Kelvin wave system is proportional to the breadth
Ry = CV2G, eee
WW SHIP RESISTANCE

By inserting Iq. (4.3.22), an expression for the 4.3.5. Calculation of Wave Resistance
wave resistance is obtained:
Much research has been devoted to the theoreucal
methods of calculating the wave resistance. The
Ry —. gcvurkl
CV x?
{cn 2
+ Che ye
+1 aa 2
+ Gia
methods can be divided into two groups:
1.2 2th 3
The flow around the hull is deter-
Qal

+ Wwiwe COS | W + 2fwilws cos Method A:

Ly
mined and hence the normal pressure distribu-
2 al tion. Then the fore- and aft components of these
7- + 2Cwalws Cos
. Pals 3
+ 2lwilwa COS pressures over the hull surface are integrated.
2a1t.4 2arly.4
Method B: The wave pattern generated by the
+ 2wolwa COS + 2lwilwa COS ship a great distance astern is calculated. The
Ly Lw
wave resistance is then determined from the flow
(4.3.26) of energy necessary to maintain the wave
system.
t
a
It is now assumed that the wave heights are propor-
Method A was developed by Michell (1898). The
tional to the pressure differences in the flow around
object of Michell’s work using his own words was
the body and thereby portional to V*. Then
“to give a general solution of the problem of the
waves produced by a ship of given form moving
2t0lmn
Rw = CV8(1 + SS Can cos“)
Lw
(4.3.27) with uniform velocity in an inviscid liquid, and to
determine the consequent wave-resistance to the
motion of the ship. The only assumption made to
The term CV® indicates the magnitude of the wave- the form of the ship is that the inclination of the
making resistance if the individual wave systems tangent plane at any point of its surface to the verti-
did not influence one another. The last part of the cal median plane is small.’’ In his paper Michell
equation gives the interference components. When gives the waveresistance in the form ofan integral,
this part has a low value, there is a favorable inter- now called the Michell’s integral.
ference. At the speed in question there is a hollow Michell’s integral has been used many times to
on the resistance curve (see Fig. 4.3.12). When the calculate the wave resistance, but it must be pointed
value is high, there is a resistance hump. For a mer- out that these theoretical methods are based on the
chant ship the humps and hollowsare in general not thin ship theory of wave resistance. The methods
very pronounced. However, there is a hump at a can therefore be unacceptable from a practical point
Froude numberof 0.30-0.35, which corresponds to of view and, in many cases, they yield estimates
a very high speed for a merchant ship. wrong by as much as 100%.
The improving of method A as well as method B
has elucidated many wave-resistance problems.
0,20 | The wave-pattern analyses have led to the discov-
R HUMP 7 ery of the additional drag component associated
with wavebreaking and to a better understanding of
0,15 the effect of the bulbous bowof full large ships at
low Froude number. For such ships the bulbous
MN bowis effective in reducing the magnitude of the
0,10 , bow wave andtherebyin avoiding wavebreaking. In
high-speed vessels a bulbous bow promotes benefi-
HUMP HOLLOW cial interference between waves generated at differ-
0,05 “y — ent points along the length of the hull. Thus the bulb
reduces the wave resistance, and this reduction can
al
LK ow_——— often be predicted by use of one of the theoretical
Ok ] methods.
5 7,5 10 12, 5 15
M/s V It is very difficult to establish a theoretical
Figure 4.4.12. Resistance curve with humps and hollows. method that can include nonlinear effects and ef
 ee
ee ee ae

AIR RESISTANCE. 71
fects of viscosity in the calculation of the
wave re- Wind resistance of the ship's above-water parts
sistance,
Wind-induced resistance on the ship’s underwa-
ter hull
4.4. RESIDUARY RESISTANCE
The wind acts on the above-water parts of the ship
causing a reduction in speed, a heeling of the ship,
As mentioned in Section 4.1 the residuary
resis- and a change in the course of the ship if the rudder
tance 1s defined as the quantityofthe resistance that
is obtained by subtracting from the total resist is not used. Owing to the heeling andthe action of
ance the rudder, the resistance ofthe ship is changed, or,
of the hull a calculated friction resistance obtai
ned in other words, an induced resistance is introduced.
by any specific formulation. The residuary
resis- In most cases the wind is not steady but fluctu-
tance (compare with Fig. 4.1.2).includes the wave
resistance, the viscous pressure resistance, and ates both in magnitude and in direction, and further-
the more, the wind causes waves that in turn cause
additional frictional resistance due to the curva
ture added resistance. In this survey the effect of the
of body. With regard to the last mentioned compo
- wind will only be treated for the case of a steady
nentit must be noted that some ship laboratories
do wind on a calm water surface.
not include this component in the residuary
resis- The wind forces for the ship’s above-water parts,
tance.
omtoomeommoa

that is, axial forces, transverse forces, and yawing

moments, are in general calculated from wind tun-
nel tests with scale models. Some experiments are
4.5. AIR RESISTANCE
carried out at a uniform wind speed and others in a
boundarylayer that corresponds to the natural wind
By air resistance is meant the resistance that is
ex- profile. In the wind tunnel there will be a natural
perienced bythe above-water part of the main
hull boundary layer at the tunnel wall. Theprofile ofthis
and the superstructures owing to the motion of
the layer will often be an average between the natural
ship through the air. This resistance depends
on the wind profile and the uniform wind with no boundary
ship’s speed and on the area and shape of the upper
Jayer and will often be a good compromise for prac-
works. When a wind is blowing, the resistance
also tical purposessince the real wind field around the
depends on the wind speed andits relative direc-
full-scale ship is in fact composed of the natural
tion.
boundary layer wind and the uniform speed wind
om

The superstructures are in general not built

(Fig. 4.5.1). When making comparisons between
streamlined duc to the manyfunctions they
have to
ome

forces on different bodies, it will in genera] be most

serve. In anycase it is only possible to make
the correct to compare the forces when the bodies are
wr

above-water part ofthe hull and the superstructu

res placed in a homogencous field.
streamlined for winds from nearly dead ahead.
ower

The The following quantities can be used to describe

reduction in resistance that can be realized by
mak- the wind resistance phenomena (see also Fig.
ing the superstructure streamlinedis therefore rela-
tively small. Similar to the water resistance, the
4.5.2):
wer

air
resistance could be divided into two parts, namely,
V = speed of ship
CRETe RY Oy ORY ey

the frictional resistance and the pressure resistance.

The influence of gravity on air resistance is negligi
- Ve relative wind velocity (velocity in a free
ble. In general, when working with the stream)
air resis-
tance, the resistance is not divided into parts.
The V; = true wind velocity
air resistance is determined by tests in wind tunnel
s
(see Figs. 3.4.] of 3.4.2) where models of the
above- b heading angle
water parts of the main hull and the superstructu
res yr = relative wind direction of bow
can be placed in an air stream at various angles
of
attack, yr = true wind direction
When dealing with air resistance, it can be con-
X = longitudinal wind force
venient to take air and wind resistance together.
The wind resistance that must be addedto the total Y = transverse wind force
waterresistance can be divided into two parts: N = yawing wind moment
 72 SHIP RESISTANCE

Py = resultant wind force (c) The yawing wind moment coefficient

ee
Ay = area exposed to the wind N
Cy — —— (4.5.3)

at
Ayr = projected front area of ship above the water- Spa VA videos

2
line (transverse area)
These coefficients will be used in this section. For

.
Ay = projected side area of ship above the water- the sake of completeness some of the other coeffi-
line (lateral area) cients and definitions of the coefficients used are

5
Aye = lateral projected area of superstructure Xwind
(d) Cy(y) = ——=
Loa = length overall of ship boaLoaVR

i;
S = wetted surface Cry) = wing (4.5.4)
/ bpL24VR
pa = mass density of air
Nyind
Pw = Mass density of water Only) = pos
wy bo,LigVR

given in the following. (ITTC, 19%, Volume 3, p.

With the aid of these quantities the following
653)
nondimensional coefficient can be formed to de-
(e) The resultant wind force coefficient (Lap,
scribe the wind-resistance phenomena:
1956, p. 510):

ee
(a) The axial wind force coefficient Fw
Cup = 5p, Vi(A VT COS*yp + Avi sin*yp)
xX
Cy = (4.5.1) (4.5.5)
2paVpAyr
the wind resistance coefficient:
(b) The transverse wind force coefficient
Cur = Coup COSY — ¥R — YW)
Y
Cy = > (4.5.2)
2paVRAvL These formulas are in accordance with the formulas
(4.5.1) and (4.5.2) for wind coming from dead ahead
and coming across the ship obliquely.
400 (f) Hughes (1932) used the following resistance
ALTITUDE ABOVE coefficient:
SEA - LEVEL h

A
R cos(a — @)
OR 300 K=Vidsn+ Coase “4°

meg i .
DISTANCE FROM) =o)
TUNNEL WALL
MULTIPLIED BY 200 -— _ I
SCALE RATIO /

a .
NATURAL BOUNDARY LAYER i

199}pi" OVER OPEN SEA

BOUNDARY LAYER AT
4 \/
/|

:
TUNNEL WALL LZ
ape -

o
0 O2 G4 06 o8 io

Vi
LL

Figure 4.3.1 Velocity profiles: wis local wind velocity and Vpis
pe pee

wind velocity in the free stream.

“Ineo ermae

Figure 4.5.2. Coordinate systems and definitions.

Legere
 AIR RESISTANCE 73
. aa

Hughes's symbols represent the following:

Results from model tests in wind tunnels can be
me

found in the technical literature, see, for example,

R = resultant wind force
y-
relative wind velocity
& = direction ofrelative wind to middle line
of
model, measured from bowor stern as
convenient
« = direction of resultant wind force to the
middle line of model, measured from bow
or stern as convenient
A = Longitudinal (or broadside) projected
area of model or structure
B = transverse (or ahead or astern) projected
area of model or structure
C = transverse equivalent projected area of
model or structure
om,
Aage (1971), Aertssen and Colin (1973), Berlekon et
al. (1975), Hughes (1930; 1932), Shearer (1959—
1960), Wagner (1967).
Since the data are given in many different ways it
is necessary to transform the data into the same
standard, when comparisons are made. In Fig. 4.5.3
a comparison of the axial wind force coeflicients for
some general cargo ship is given.
It will be observed that the curves within this
group differ a great deal, intersecting each other and
undulating. An attempt to find reasons for this by
comparing the test circumstances, such as the
model sizes, and the amounts of detail on the
models will give a relatively poor results, and few
conclusions can be drawn. Relatively small models
have often been usedin the tests and therefore only

A/¥*(ahead or astern) small forces had to be measured, giving a relatively

7 /V*(broadside) aa
se,

large uncertainty in the results. In performing ex-

periments with models at different scales, the wind
J

p = density of the medium of the experiment. force coefficients of the small-scale models will be
The forward resistance ¥ will then be
2

greater than the coefficients of the large scale

A = R cosa. (4.5.8)
oo

(g) When determining the effective power of pre- is I I i I

=

liminary designs and when not knowing the C, | GENERAL CARGO SHIPS Ava
x
/
a

windage of the ship designs, the following air

resistance coefficient is often used:
a

x
Cas (4.5.9)
7

~ 3p,,.V25

Vis the speed of the ship and S is the wetted

surface of the ship’s hull.

Knowledge about Cy, Cy, and Cy is valuable in con-

nection withtrial trip analysis as well as with inves-
tigations of steering and maneuvering qualities and,
of course, stability of surface vessels. The knowl
-
edge can be obtained through model experiments in
wind tunnels. Where special model tests with the
ship in questiomhave not been performed, the coeffi-
cients can either be estimated by use of the general
formulas [see, for example, Isherwood (1973) and
Saunders (1957, Vol. II, p. 274)] proposed by some o 30°60"80" 120"150°, 180"
authors or by use of the results from a specific - YR
model test with a modelas similar as possible to the Figure 4.5.3. Axial wind force coefticients as functions of the
relative wind direction off the bowfor models of general cargo
ship in question. ships.
74 SHIP RESISTANCE
models. This fact may be among the reasons for the
poor correlation.
If the model is equipped with many details, the
wind force coefficients will be relatively high. Be-
hind many of the details eddies will be formed at
particular wind directions and wind speeds resulting
in changes in the wind force coefficients.
Isherwood (1973) has analyzed about 100 wind-
resistance experiments carried out at several differ-
ent test centers on models covering a wide range of
merchant ships. He has given equations for estimat-
ing the components of wind force and wind-induced
yawing moment, respectively, in the following
form:
C = flyr, L, B, Avr, Avi, Ave, etc.) (4.5.10)
In his paper the constants in the equations are tabu-
lated along with the residual standard errors as
functions of the angle of the relative wind off the
bow yz. For yg = 0 the standard error of Cy is given
as 0.09. The standard error of Cy is 0.05 at yz = 90°.
Furthermore, the standard error of Cy is 0.017 at
yr = 130°. The standard error on the coefficients
will not be essentially bigger when a diagram as
given in Fig. 4.5.4 is used for estimating the wind
force coefficients.
The wind force coefficient must depend on the
number, the relative size, and the form of the super-
structures, and on the amount and type of equip-
ment on the weather deck of the ship. Therefore,
the following grouping can be regarded as suitable:
Group [: General cargo ships, bulk carmers,
tankers, fishing boats, and tugs
Group 2: Container ships
Group 3: Passenger ships andferries
The average curves for Cy, Cy, and Cxfor the three
groups are given in Fig. 4.5.4. All the curves are for
models placed in a natural boundary layer wind.
The velocity profile is as shownin Fig. 4.5.1, where
itis marked with *‘Boundarylayer at tunnel wall.”
Also, in the same figure a velocity profile is given
for a natural boundary layer over open sea. Natu-
rally this boundary layer will depend on the envi-
ronment, the sea state, and the weatherconditions.
If the wind force coefficients for the model in a
homogeneous field are wanted. the following cor-
rections generally have to be made:
(20% (general cargo ships)
—~ Cy + 10% (container ships)
Cx HOM
(30% (ferries)
35% (general cargo ships)
Cynom = Cr + 10% (container ships)
40% (ferries)
40% (general cargo ships)
10% (container ships)
Cynom = Cy +
45% (ferries)
(4.5.11)
The corrections are based on the results from a rela-
tively few measurements. The uncertainty is there-
fore large. /
All the curves in Fig. 4.5.4 are given for models
corresponding to the fully loaded conditions of the
ships. If wind coefficients are wanted for other con-
ditions, the coefficients must be corrected. In light
or ballast condition the Cy is 5-20% less than in
loaded condition in a head wind. However, in a
stern wind the difference is relatively smaller. The
value of Cy in light or ballast condition 1s 5—10%
higher than that in loaded condition. Cy in light or
LE RT
ballast condition is 10-70% higher than in loaded
condition. However, in a stern wind the differences
are smaller.
In still air, the relative wind velocity 1s caused by
the motion of the ship itself through the water. The
magnitude of this resistance will be from about 2 to
4% of the water resistance. The air resistance can
be diminished in different ways but not by much. By
stepping the bridge back, by rounding the bridge
front, or by making the bridge moderately stream-
lined the air resistance can be reduced by about 10%
{compare Shipbuilding Research Association of Ja-
pan (1954)}. By removing one floor of the bridge,
the reduction can be 4-8%. Removing derrick
posts, masts, ventilators, winches, and windlasses
can give a reduction of about 3% of the air resis-
tance. The most effective means of diminishing the
wind resistance will therefore be to keep the bridge
superstructure as low as possible, to round and
streamline the superstructures, or to use a stepped
back construction where possible, and to combine a
number of smaller superstructures to one more or
RET
less streamlined form. It can also be of advantage to
place minor parts in the shadow of bigger parts. It
must be considered, however, how important such
improvements are in relation among other things to
 ry

“sdiy§ JURYSIAW JO SfOPOW JO] SJUSIOYJIOD BIO} PULA, “psp aandyy

oOE Oo ., ,08t
eA,OSl Oz 6 09 OE
oA
Oo | Oat el 6 09 ,O€ O,
\s'o= Ott 0 ae “}st'0= TG 1'0-
{ | | PS
— —0'0- Lf a oo -
| | MaKNYL BOUY ABBA
- apa GOO- Lf). —— STR Pgawnyi|900-
“4Og0 KO | SYBIWsyo wind
SYSNIVLNOD ON SdIHS.dinv | \ \
0 | + ; 0
oo Q en S00 35004 ao, . | .—f//I60'0
“330 NO -
SUSNIVLNODD 40 Saal ed |
| _ mtnpn | pe | N 1 S1V08 ONIHs
a) 2 SdlHS osu WHN | /| N9
— — sro si'0 | | ! f_Ievo
| 06 Oy 08 06 0h
=a oo —+}- {20 ra
| ON

i Wvinod 70 SUSYNYL f 70
<SU3NIVINOD 0 go BOUT AN3A Suannvt| 919
q-— : vo Wing
A ee we| tA PN Oe Z|
' | 2 WOO ho i 2 [six Soni
| or oouyS 2)
' SuaNivLNoo | . SivO8 OKIHSI4 “WHANZO|
ol : ol A ol

206 Py. 081 208 | Feo 06 gig -

I vee + ete ee orn «rs ae _ te, yy oo

70
|_| yo30 ONS SFr
SESNIVINOD wo . y -
FQ nn Tt Tt
| i * Sugai € i . | 4
; oe Woad NO { j
6 | seo 0 0
| wm
QO a WoO Lb. to |SON L |e,
LS | 7 [Sivoe Susi 70
°
Xx coef x
ro Sjgggg|"9 | I 2 S&<>
—_ | SOSANWL
suaiguva wing *O
| SdiHS YBONSSS¥d |oQ | _SdIHS_YBNIVINOI |p |___SdIHS 0089WeaN30 | 80

‘ls Cy = ee an a Co ae a te ib, a ae aie, ed ra aa ie em aia ts ee ate, cia A nt tl

 |
716 SHIP RESISTANCE

the costs, to an efficient use of floor space, and to
capacily of the decks and of the superstructures.
When determining the effective power for prelimi-
nary designs and when not knowing windage ofthe
ship designs, the following still air resistance coeffi-
cient is often used:
xX
(4.5.12)
Caa > TWAS
problems in connection with the resistance of ships
moving In shallow water will be discussed.
One of the first experimental investigators in this
field was Captain A. Rasmussen (1899). His first
expenments were performed in 1882 with some
Danish torpedo boats. The experiments with the
torpedo boats Makrelen and S#bjgrnen took place
in 1894 and 1898, respectively. Some of the results

ee
from the experiments with the S@bjdérnen are repro-
Vis the speed of the ship and S§ is the wetted sur- duced in Fig. 4.6.]. The abscissa is the speed ofthe
face. boat and the ordinate is the indicated power P,,
The relation between C4, and Cy for yg = 0 is as which is the effective power Pe = RV (resistance
follows: multiplied by speed) divided by the total propulsive
efficiency 7. The configuration of the resistance
Pa Ayr Ayr curves will be nearly the same as the power curves.
Cas = Cy
Po S- ~ Cy
soos 49-13) The ratios of water depth to draught at amidships
(A/T) were 2.6, 6.6, 8.5, and 21 for the four condi-
From the results of the wind tunnel tests the follow- tions for which curves are given in the diagram.
ing average values of the wind resistance cocffi- When the water shoals, the resistance of the ship
cients C4, were obtained: moving through it will become greater. The three-
dimensional motion of the water will approach a
General cargo ships Cy, = 0.1 x 1073 two-dimensional character. The pressure set up by
Bulk carriers Ca, = 0.08 x 1073
the ship’s motion will be greater and this extra
pressure in shallow water causes waves larger than
Tankers Caa = 0.08 x 1073
those in deep water. In shallow water the lengths of
Very large tankers Ca, = 0.04 x 1073 waves accompanying the ship, at a given speed, are
Fishing boats Ca, = 0.13 * 1073 greater than for the same speed in deep water. Fur-
Container ships Cas = 0.08 X 10° (4.5.14) thermore, the change in stream velocities past the
(no containers surface of the ship when in shallow water will in-
on deck) crease the resistance somewhat.
Container ships Ca, = 0.1 x 1073 For a new ship proposal, the increase in resis-
(containers tance due to the shallow water effect can be esti-
on deck) mated by performing experiments or by the method
Passenger ships Cag = 0.09 x 1073

i
1800 T
Ferries Ca, = 0.1 x 1073
PI | TORPEDOBOAT S@BIGRNEN c DA
1806 ,-——_ -
kW | T= 2,38m, Tp 013m B

a i
1409 K-—— Seis
CISPLACEMENT 132 t ai i
td
4.6. RESISTANCE AT RESTRICTED AND / CURVE A 45m DEPTH OF WATER | |
i B ti4m “ . 5 H '
SHALLOW WATER 1200 -—T C 14,6m ”
| | CURVE 0 36,6m DEPTH OF waTER
woop +—+—-44 “| fanff _
The term “‘restricted water’’ is used to describe a 1} 4 Pot df |
body of water in which the boundaries are close goo} —f my | i od
enough to the ship to affect its resistance, speed,
00h + ——
id
ee
attitude, maneuvering, and other performance char-
acteristics, as compared with its corresponding |
éoo{—.. i
i
jug i
characteristics in an open, unlimited, body of wa- fot |
ter. Principally, ‘‘restricted’’ applies to the proxim- 200}—__——_. ! pt
| ' ! | i i i
ity of the water boundaries in a horizontaldirection. i | pote |
0 Jott | | pi ti ff
The term ‘“‘shallow water’? is used to describe a 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 F 8B 9 WW Wo 1 47 BH 1
ms y
body of water in which the boundaries are close to
Figure 4.6.1. Power curves for torpedo boat moving in shallow
the ship onlyin the vertical direction. In this section Waller.
Ragpeesenopesenpeenee ners
Peere
EBs

RESISTANCE AT RESTRICTED AND SHALLOW WATER 77

developed by Schlichting (1934). Schlichting’
s The speed of the wave will then be independent of
method will be discussedlater in this section.
In Section 4.3.1 it was stated that the speed cy of
deep water waves [Eq. (4.3.6)] could be expressed
as
oly
Cw \ = (4.6.1)
471
This relation between length (Ly) and speed of pro-
gation ofgravitational waves was derived using the
trochoidal wave theory. In the case of shallow wa-
ter the wave theoryyields the following relation,
which will not be derived here [for derivation see
Lamb (1895, Chapter IX):
loLy Qah
Cws = 5 tanh Le (4.6.2)
where fhis the depth of water. The waterparticles
describe elliptical paths insteadof circles; the prin-
cipal axes being 6 (vertical) and a (horizontal),
where a is greater than 6. Then the speed of the
Waves can also be given by:
the wavelength and will only depend on the depth of
the water. Ship speeds below and above V = Vgh
are referred to as subcritical and supercritical, re-
spectively. Nearly all displacement ships operate in
the subcritical zone, the exceptions being de-
stroyers, fast ferry boats, and similar ship types.
Ananalysis of shallow water effect was made by
Schlichting (1934). His analysis covered the in-
crease in resistance in shallow water of unlimited
lateral extent for ships running at subcritical
speeds. The analysis was based on theoretical con-
siderations and on model experiments. Schlichting
assumed that the wavemaking resistance of a ship
or a ship model is only dependent on the wave-
length of the transverse waves of the wave system
generated by the ship or the ship model. However,
the speed at which a certain wavelength is gener-
ated and therefore at which a certain wavemaking
resistance is set up, is dependent on the water
depth. In order to generate a transverse wave with
wavelength Ly(see Fig. 4.6.2), the ship is required
to have a speed of

Ly
v= Se = ow (4.6.8)
co _
leLy |b lp .
Cws = Ve Vz = Cy Vs (4.6.3)

for unrestricted water depth and a speed of

For a large value of 2ih/Ly the value ofthe hyper-
bolic tangent of the formula approaches unity as-
ymptotically (or b — a) which means that el 2h
Vss = — tanh Ly 7 ows (4.6.9)

Cws > Cw (4.6.4) for restricted water depth. Elimination of Ly from

If the water depth is equalto half the wavelength, it these two equations yiclds the relation between the
is found that speeds for restricted and unrestricted depth at

oTLy/!?
=

“Tl tanh 7 = 0.996 (4.6.5) ao abe

WAVES Cy = i/stv ca jie tanh =e
This means that a depth of Ly/2 can be safely as-
ir lw
sumed unrestricted.
Another extreme case is that of very shallow wa-
ter. Lowvalues of 27h/Lygive
t

27h 2ih
SHIP o¥ Ve
Ly Ly Ry Rw
Vsg = V- Ac
and
R, = C, bpVv’s Regs Ce > pV'S
Ve 2 Vo57 AV,
»Low ark
Cws = (eet rm = Veh (4.6.7) Ry, = Rp + Ry Rig = Res + Ry
Figure 4.6.2. Resistance of ship in shallow water.
[ed
4
78 SHIP RESISTANCE

which the ship will expcrience the same wavemak-

R
'
ing resistance:
AY Ry i

ews
— vetanh aah \/aytanh ane,
zee — \ltatanh 2S
Vv i

Le Zz Ve Av, Ac ‘Re
rc pedne f
(4.6.10) ssbe rr
/

ee
! pat 4
V — Vss = Cw — Cws = Ac Or Vss = V — Ac. / =| |
7 jal t |
v E——

The reduced velocity leads to a reduction of the Ris’ 4 s

en
4
tole
on
frictional resistance Rr. AS an approximation
| {

ee
Schlichting assumed that the frictional resistance “
a x, | |

varied as the square of the speed. This approxima-

tion is used in the diagram Fig. 4.6.3.
aa 1
There is a further loss in the speed of the ship Figure 4.6.4. Schematic representation of Schlichting’s

a
because of the increase in potential or displacement method. f
flow around the hull owing to the restriction of area

by the proximity of the bottom. The potential flow
acquires a more two-dimensional character and as a
consequence the flow velocities along the ship be-
come higher than in the three-dimensional case. In
other words the frictional resistance mentioned
above will appear at a lower speed. Schlichting in-
vestigated this reduction in speed by model tests in
a
area of the hull. The results of the work of Schlicht-
ing are reproduced in Fig. 4.6.3, which gives a chart
for calculating reduction in speed in shallow water.
Arrows illustrate how to use the diagram. Figure
4.6.4 gives a schematic representation of Schlicht-
ing’s method.

3
deep and shallow water, using geometrically similar A summary of the method can be as follows:
models. He found that the principal factor control-
ling the reduction in speed AV, was the ratio 1. A curve giving total resistance at infinite depth

SS
VA,/h, where A, is the maximum cross sectional of water as function of speed is drawn.

=
; X 0,7 AR,

. + 0,6 Re

» 6.4
Ly
Ke
Lo.

oe
0.6 \ \ N 03

or
O14 \ \ \ 0,2
Fr
FF

0,2 * ‘ 6,1

0 | | a
YY

vi
03 2,5

gh
Figure 4.6.3. Diagram for determining the effect of shallow water on reststunee according to Sehfielitiung,
 RESISTANC E AT RESTRICTED AND SHALLOW WATER 79

iW _
| | | be estimated point by point as shown schemati-
wo/—_— __|- _ cally in Fig. 4.6.4.
NO SHALLOW —
,| WATEREFFECT
: i po
It should be noted that the method can only be con-
Ae _ | _ sidered as a good engineering solution of a compli-
cated problem, not as a theoretically correct
method. The limit of the shallow water effect on the
SHALLOW | resistance depends on the type, the size, and the
i au WAIER EFFECT
speed of the ship. A rough idea of the area without
a |

es to lo —
shallow water effect can be obtained through Fig.
° Po tmm) FY 4.6.5.
(m'} Yh When large, medium-speed ships or very high-
Figure 4.6.5. Area with and without shallow water effect. speed ships have to run trial tps, it is desirable to
have a location where the water is deep enough to
2. A curve giving the frictional resistance is ensure that the effect on resistance and speed will
drawn. This curve is not needed if Schlichting’s be negligible or within stated limits. If the trials are
approximation 1s used (Fig. 4.6.3). carried out at a place where the necessary deep
Reduction AV in speed is estimated by use of water is not available, it will be desirable to be able
Fig. 4.6.3 and by use of the parameters VA,/hA to correct the trial results to obtain the probable
and V7/gh. performance in deep water. These corrections can
V,=V-AV be performed by use of Schlichting’s chart.
IDM

Owing to the change in pressure distribution

Reduction AV,is taken from Fig. 4.6.3.
around a ship at different speeds, it will rise or sink
Ac = AV — AVou bodily and also trim. Figure 4.6.6 shows the change
By use of the above-estimated data the curve of of level from the at-rest position for a ship in unre-
total resistance for a ship in shallow water can stricted water. For ship in the buoyancy lift region
AT

a
~~]
RISE ——
war

BOW
(Te)
ff
me

AMIDSHIPS
(T) pNP
fe
oof

cg LEVEL OF CRAFT AT REST

So a
FF

~— DROP

ea
=

STERN
ee (T,)
7

|
Ll

; BUOYANCY INTERMEDIATE PLANING REGION

“=

LIFT REGION
=

0 0,20 0,40 0,60 0.80 1,00 1,20

J
La

Figure 4.6.6. Change of level and trim of ship.

™=
 50 SHIP RESISTANCE

0 ~ _ — |

AL 5 I
T

098|——7, a
Thy / ASTERN ;
i; —~——--—
!
T,
010}-———-_-- oa ~ —

MODEL 73089 -10

h/t mo Om i :

015
te = 1,50
= 1,25 7

-02 -O) .0) 02 03

F, = V.
* Vgb i

Figure 4.6.7. Change in draught aft (7) and draught forward (T7;-), bulk carrier, 6 = 0.80.

the sinkage of the stern as well as the sinkage of the
bow will increase when the depth of water de-
creases. An exampleis given in Fig. 4.6.7. A model
of a bulk carrier of about 60 000 t deadweight(Fig.
4.6.8) has been tested in shallow water at a model
tank andat these tests also the sinkages at several
different speeds, both ahead and astern, have been
registered (Harvald, 1977). It will be seen that when
running in shallow water there is a real dangerofthe
ship striking the bottom if the speed is high and,
therefore, it is necessary to go at very low speeds
when passing an area of shallow water. If the ship is
running in restricted water, which here means shal-
With regard to the wave resistance for a ship
moving in a channelit is reasonable to assume that
Schlichting’s method ofcorrection can be used. The
speed correction for the displacement flow has to be
modified to take into account the additional restric-
tion introduced by the channel walls. The change in
resistance and speed will depend on the form and
dimension of the ship and on the form and dimen-
sions of the channel and especially of the form of
the cross section of the channel. It is possible to
distinguish between three speed ranges for a ship
navigating a channel: a subcritical range, a cnitical
range, and a supercritical range. In the critical range

ra
low water, restricted laterally as esturaries, rivers,

LL
a Stationary condition is impossible. It is not possi-
or Canals, the increase in resistance or the loss of ble for all the water to flowpast the side ofthe ship;

LR
speed will be further enhanced. only a certain portion can pass, the remainder being

‘,

ly VAX
A

Ee
SECT.O SECT.
aef

AIP
SECT.9ue SECT.10
FP
= 7368 - . |

SOLALE
a — aT ee
o 200 ett AO 600 Tee Wok] Tm

Figure 4.6.8. Body plan, profile of stern, und stem of model 73089.
paper
 BLOCKAGE AND BLOCKAGE CORRECTION 81
dammedup in front of the ship. A wave is cause
d have frequently been discussed during the Interna-
and will run ahead ofthe ship while constantly
in- tional Towing Tank Conferences [sec, e.g., ITTC
creasing in size. The resistance in the critical
speed (1975, Vol. 3 pp. 13 and 62)]. In many cases when
range will be an explicit function of the ship form,
performing resistance tests in the model basin a cor-
the speed, and the cross section of the channel and
rection based on semiemperical or emperical analy-
will be large owing to the fact that the ship has
to ses can be used.
accelerate the mass of water that cannot flow The general blockage corrector given by Scott
throughthe channel past the sides ofthe ship and of
(1976) can be described as
the channel. The resistance increases very rapidl
y
whenthe critical velocity zone is reached and de-
ACy ad {nypCrbhVA- ae
creases again to a lower value after the critical
+ KL + kN Cul — ee! (4.7.1)
speed range has beentraversed in the direction of
the supercritical speed range [for a more-detailed
where ACyis the reduction of total resistance coeffi-
description see Lap (1957)],
cient Cyin unrestricted water at constant speed. ay
Owing to the many parameters much research
is the power to which speed has to be raised to
work has not been done in the field, and it
is not produce 4 quantity proportional to actual resistance
possible to give a good method for determining the
in the vicinity of the speed concerned:
increase of resistance.

ny = 24 ales
(FN id
(4.7.2)
4.7. BLOCKAGE AND BLOCKAGE
CORRECTION
where F, = the Froude number.
Byblockage is meant theeffect of the boundaries of V = model volume displacement
a channel or tunnel on the fiowaround a body. The A = tank cross sectional area
blockage correction is the correction to the results J = model-tank function
i

of hydrodynamic experiments made in a channel or

tunnel of one cross section in order to estimate the a LAB) SA a1 254-2 (4.7.3)
equivalent results for another cross section. Specifi-
cally, the blockage correction is the correction where L, 8, and T are model length, beam, and
made to the results of a resistance experiment in a draught, respectively, and A is the water depth.
towing tank in order to estimate the equivalent F;, is Froude depth number
results in unrestricted water.
The resistance of a model in therestricted water y
of a towing tank differs from that in unrestricted B= (4.7.4)
' Veoh
water for three reasons. First, the ow speeds over
the model surface are increased, causing an in- Cw is a wavemakingresistance coefficient estimated
crease in the tangential friction stresses. Second, by subtracting from C; the estimate of viscous resis-
owing to the viscous wake, there is a tendency for tance coefficient given by
the flow speeds over the stern region of the modelin
a towing tank to be increased more than over the
, 7 (log Ra(F,=0.) — 22°
bowregion. This decreases the pressures over the
stern relative to those over the bow, causing a pres- Co = Creen=0.0 GogRe Dp (4.7.5)

sure drag. Third, the wavemakingresistanceis af-

in which F,, = 0.1 indicates Cy; and R,, are for this
Tr

fected by the fank boundaries, especially the bot- Froude number. R, is Reynolds number.
tom. The first two effects are thus partly viscous
=

5 is a function of R, and the form factor

effects, and the third is an inviscid flow effect.
LV!" &-!, in which 6 is block coefficient. Figure
=_

The viscous flow effects as well as the inviscid 4.7.1 illustrates the variation of 6 with R,, and the
tiow effects on blockage have been considered ana-
a.

lytically many times but often the results have not
been readily deducible to simple formulas. The ana-
lytical methods for estimating the block corrections
form factor.
& is a function of Froude number only and is a
parameter used in the wavemaking correction. Fig-
ure 4.7.2 illustrates the variation of k with F,.
 82 SHIP RESISTANCE

0,6 ——

02 oo fp

0
0,32 0,36 0,40 Ode O48 052 0,56 060
Fy
? é 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Figure 4.7.3. Waniation of c with Froude number.
22

10-5R,
-6

Figure 4.7.1. Variation of b with Reynolds number and form

factor. tween the dimensionof the cross sectionofthe ship
model and the cross section of the model tank are as
follows: /é
cis a function of Froude numberonly andis used
Bay << HB
in the Bernoulli term. Figure 4.7.3 illustrates the ps feet (4.7.8)
variation of c with F,,. Ty < dolty
For the case where the term in Cy is close to
zero, the Bernoulli term is usually negligible differ- in which Byis the breadth and Ty is the draught of
ent from unity and Eq. (4.7.1) can be rewritten the model. Bris the breadth of the tank at the water
surtace and fir is the water depth in the towing tank.
Av
av bVA -3i2 (4.7.6)
4.8. HULL FORMS
in which Av is the effective back flow due to water
restriction. For many merchant ship model expeni- In this section the relation of ship dimensions and
ments 6 is not far from unity and the speed correc- hull form to resistance will be discussed.
tion for low wavemaking models can therefore be The resistance of a ship depends on the size of
the ship, the form of the hull, and the speed wanted.
given as
For the designer of a newship it is not enough to
make sure that the resistance of the ship at the de-
Av Vv
sired speed is low. Ship, machinery, and propeller
Vo A¥ (4.7.7)
ind

have to be considered as a system, where the best

possible balance has to be found. A changein one of
This equation gives a quick estimate of the magni-
the parts of the system will usually mean changes in
tude of any blockage effect.
the two other system parts. For instance, if the ship
Furthermore, it can be stated that the boundary
is made larger, bigger machinery is needed if the
correction will be nearly zero if the relations be-
same speed is wanted. In order to get sufficient
power transferred from machinery to the water
010 -~-— + 1 | 4
around the ship, the propeller also has to be
k | [ :
a,.0a+-— | ; i
4 k2Q18F,-0.036 fy.
changed. The ship-machinery—propeller interaction
will be discussed further in Chapter 7.
0,06F-- . +4 —_+—§
The designer will primarily choose the principal
0,04!
dimensions of a new ship according to the functions
which the ship will perform. Also, the choice of the
0,02}. - most essential form parameters of the ship hull is
governed by this demand. The type of machinery,
0,24 0.28 0,32 036 O40 022 0.45 052 056 060 O64 068 propeller arrangement, manufacturing schedules,
fn and methods in the workshop are among the things
Figure 4.7.2. Varianon of & with Froude number. that will be determined at an early time. The ship’s
 HULL FORMS 83
hydromechanical questions do not get serio
us alten- B = breadth on waterline
tion before this time. Then it must be verif
ied that
the combinations of principal dimensions and T,4 = draught aft
form
parameters are reasonable, if the spced wante
d is to Ty = draught fore
be obtained.
The examination of the combination of the prin- T = draught mean
cipal dimensions and form parameters in relat
ion to A, = immersed midship section area
the speed is often very primitive. Perhaps it is
only
the constant in Alexander’s formula that will Agr = section area of bulbous bow (measured at
be ex-
amined to be ‘‘suitable’’: FP)
S = wetted surface (L = mean girth)
8=C-O0.5SVVL (4.8.1)
S; = wetted surface as § but including append-
where 6 is the block coefficient, V is the speed ages
(in
knots), and Lis the length of the ship (in feet), The
V = volumetric displacement
formula(in SI units) is depicted in Fig. 4.8.1. The
shaded area marks the region, where C achie LCB = the distance of center of buoyancy abaft
ves
suitable values, amidships
Whenperforming resistance analyses or predic-
tions the following dimensions, dimensionless
coef- Coefficients and ratios
ficients, and ratios can be used for describing the
hull of the ship:

E
§ = TBT block coefficient
Ship dimensions
B= a midship section coefficient
L = length on waterline BI :
Lp» = length between perpendiculars V . . .
= AT ™ Prismatic coefficient
Los = length overall submerged
L/B = length-breadthratio
B/T = breadth-draught ratio
LW'S = length-displacementratio
st

080 Ly —__
LCB/L,, = distance of center of buoyancy abaft
amidships ratio
=

It is very difficult to consider all these dimens

ions,
0,70 LE,4 coefficients, and ratios in the resistance analyses
and predictions. Some of these parametersare de-
pendent on each other and some could therefore be
omitted, but in generalall of them will be stated in
the reports on the model tests from the towing
060 tanks.
The length ofa ship can be up to about 400 m, the
: | Gy i breadth up to about 80 m, and the depth up to about
30 m. This means that the difference in dimensions
from the models to real ships is very large even if
0,15 020 O25
large models (Z = [2 m) are used and that the trans-
O30 035
formation of the results of the model tests to reality
= Wot
F -V will be very unreliable. One of the lengths—L,
lene
Figure 4.8.1. Area (shaded) for suitable combinations of or L,,—Is in general usedto characterize the size of
ship
length L, block coefficient 6, and speed V,
the ship, and all other dimensions with the excep-

2B
BS SHIP RESISTANCE

lion of the wetted surface are omitted. The coeffi-

cients 6, 8B, and y are not independent but are cou-
pled together by
ep = dip
The ratios L/B, B/T, and L/V!are coupled together
and to 6 by
V = 6LBT
That the block coefficient § is independent of the
length—displacementratio L/V"is illustrated in Fig.
4.8.2. In this figure (6, L/V'?) has beenplotted for a
series of ships and ship types. It will be seen that
there is no correlation between the two parameters.
The prismatic coefficient ¢ is in general prefera-
ble to the block coefficient § owingto the fact that ¢
better than 6 gives an indication of the fullness of
the bow. In addition to » and L/V", the breadth-—
draught ratio B/T and the position of center of buoy-
ancy (LBC as a percentageofL) are suitable param-
eters. These parameters do not describe the formof
the hull fully. To do this a line drawing is needed,
Within the limits of the principal dimensions and the
main parameters itis possible lo design many types
of lines for the ship hull. There are additional re-
quirements for the form ofthe lines, such as that the
(4.8.2) areas of the ship surface should be single curved or
plane.
The question can then be: Is it possible for the
naval architect to design some very bad lines or
some very good lines, and how muchpoorerare the
(4.8.3) bad lines in comparison with the best lines? In the
following some examples of line design will be
given.
The first example is given in Fig. 4.8.3. It is the
bodyplan and the profile of stern and stem of a 6500
t dw dry cargo ship with a service speed of about 20
knots (V/VgL = 0.285). Experiments have been
carried out with the parent model and two models
equipped with a small bulb (J) and a bigger(II) one
(Harvald and Hee, 1978). Some ofthe experiments
were carried out with a 1.05 m model and some with
a 6.4 m model (for data see Table 4.8.1). The results
from the towing tests are given in Fig. 4.8.4. It will
be seen that except for a small velocity range there
is a big difference between the results from the tests

807 i ] | - T
a
| to | |
CHANNEL BOATS
a i |
__! po
ya | t |
| | 1 j
: of al 2 | BARGES i
7.0 . nk - |
os |PASSENGER SHIPS |
a] of k ;

| poais| fe | eo) =. s 8 {* -
= io € | GR. LAKE SHIPS
° oo jo ° ° ® |
6.0 .
L FERRIES |e sb
oO os a
_ .
a

u E ° "
Bote a -4 me ~ _—
: “Se ef Te
5.0;/~-—tsi ee
i oe Fj
“e
# COASTERS
oe:
CUTTERS 2 (CE BREAKERS ©° | B .
| dc fel tRawErs : ;
Pe Rp I
—— } |re TUG Jo a _ ee Se_
| A” o o j
4oj—— | +
% i i i | i

‘ i
pe | Hl po | |
to i| 4
ly ° o | | i
|
| |
|
|
| |
pape fptp | \ :
— i
—
. |
| | | | | |
| | | | I |
3,0 L to | | | | | |
030 0.40 0,50 0.60 070 0.80 0.90 § 1,00
Migure 4.8.2. Correlation between block coefficient & and length-displucement ratio £/¥
loom
oe
ces

Figure 4.8.3. Body plan and profile of

stern and stem of Af/S
Michigan (built without bulbin 1966) ror od 84 ~S a io
STEM WITH BULB Il

TABLE 4.8.1. DATA FOR MODELS with the big and the small models. Furthermore, it
OF THE M/S MICHIGAN can be seen that even with many test runs with the
small models it is not possible to determineif there
_ Model MIS Michigan Units is any powering advantage to fitting a bulb to the
L=Ly 1.054 6.402
parent ship.
m
Lop 1.020 6.195 m The next example is also about cargo ships with
B 0.150 0.911 m deadweights of about 7000 t (Freimanis and Lind-
T 0.0583 0.355 m gren, 1957). In Figs. 4.8.5 and 4.8.6 are shown the
Vv 0.00543 1.288 mm body plan for two ships with a very distinctly V-
Ss 0.196 7,263 m?
Son 0.608 0.614 shaped and a very distinctly U-shaped form, re-
a 0.589 0.594 spectively. The two ships have the same principal
B 0.983 0.982 dimensions (120 m X 17 m x 7.083 m) and the same
ge 0.399 0.605 displacement (9750 m3), Tests have been made with
LNs $.999 5.978 models of these ships and with models where the U-
LIB 727 7.027
BIT 2.573
shaped bow has been combined with the V-shaped
2.566
LCBIL,, 0.008 0.008 stern and vice versa. The resistance for the combi-
nation V-form aft with U-formfore at a speed of 8.5
 ere
5O SHIP RESISTANCE

tree
20 .
més is about 18% less than the resistance tor the
i

EEE Se
ICe Mis “MICHIGAN” i — | combination U-form aft with V-form fore. Propul-
105m MODEL | sion tests with the models showedthat the ship with
1976.04 SERIES , | U-form aft as well as fore ut the same speed was

ES yee nan
20h -- 7 | ; a J
about 12%better with regard to power consumption
1 | |
A | than the ship with V-formed sections, which was
“ . the poorest one. (See Fig. 4.8.7.) At a speed of
N. about 9 m/s the difference in power consumptionfor
™~ t 4
ws | 1
Lo— “. EF - +" — - +
the four ships was negligible. However, the results
| {\
9
Fa a, PARENT FORM —— @ | showthat it is possible to alter the lines in such a
. Whe BULB I ---- @| way that the necessary power for propulsion in
a i BULB 0 —— A calm weather is a minimum.
OL. | | | The third example is as follows: In order to eluci-
ols 020
date some of the problems concerning tests with big
models, some results from a series of tests with
3.0
models of bulk carriers (Harvald and Hee, 1978)
3 will be given. The lines have been constructed in
such a way that nearly all areas of the ship surfaces
are single curved or plane. For simplification
20}. -— knuckle lines are placed in the fore ship just above
the load water line and in the after ship at the same
height as the top of the stern frame. Figure 4.8.8
shows the lines and stem and stern contours for one
Loe _ wt of the models, A, and the data are given in Table
4.8.2. This model represents in scale 1:26 a bulk
carrier of a deadweight of approximately 50 000 t.
| ! The two other models incorporated in the test series
a J a i had the same main dimension and form, but were
O15 0.20 0,25 0,30 Vi gc 0.35
¥ L fuller, as stated in Table 4.8.2 (model B and C).
Figure 4.8.4, Results of towing tests with models of M/S Michi- Figure 4.8.9 shows the residuary resistance coeffi-
gan. cient Cg obtained from resistance tests using the

7 ———-+
| : 710
yp ey,

10 a ~— : — oe ee — ae au 10

| 120 000 :

too
LL TOT TUL TL a a)
o 5000 20000 mm

Figure 4.8.5. Body plan and profile of stern and stem of ship with V-farmed sections
 HULL FORMS 87

120.000

SCALE .
i[TET . 17a
o 5000 10.000 15. OO 20000 mm
Figure 4.8.6. Body plan and profile of stern and stem of ship with U-formed sections.

ITTC-57 line for frictional resistance. Even though In Fig. 4.8.9 Cx is also shown for model D, which
the three models have the same form and main di- has the same form as A, B, and C except that it has
mensions it can be seen that Ce is not changing in a some more cutaway at the stem (see Fig. 4.8.8).
systematic way with the fullness. Using the ship There is a small difference in the main dimensions
resistance diagrams (see Section 5.5.4) one should (see Table 4.8.2), but it should be of no significance.
expect changes in Cz in the same way as those for It is seen that the Cg curve of this model corre-
the curves marked ¢ = 0.76, » = 0.78, and g = 0.82 sponds to the A, B, and C curves. The figure indi-
(Fig. 4.8.10). The deviations of the shape of the cates that it should not be expected that a single set
experimental curves from the expected shape can of tests always can help to decide if some form is
be due only to the uncertainty of thetests. better than another. It must be inferred that a Sys-
tematic change in a model parameterwill result in a
systematic change in the Cr curves. In Fig. 4.8.9
7.000 -—— the uncertainty ofthe test results has concealed this
PP
= | | | i;| | fact.
Two other model test results are represented in
6 000 | - ~
|
Fig. 4.8.9. Model E has the same main dimensions
kW i | P ay) and hull form as A, B, and C, but the stem is of the
5 000} _. 4 cylindrical type (see Fig. 4.8.8 and Table 4.8.2).
Model E has been run twice, in 1974 and in 1975.
4 000,—- 4_ The 1974 test results fit quite well the set of Cr
curves, but the 1975 test results lie much higher.
Why this is the case cannot be explained on the
3 000 _
basis of the standard material forwarded from the
towing tank to the customer.
2000 Apt The residuary resistance coefficient of model F,
| voV
as Tepresented in Fig. 4.8.9, was determined in an-
i —+- 713) u Vv
1000 | i
|
- - other laboratory. It is of the same form as the other
i ! = 722; VU
models, althoughit has beenfitted with a small bulb
| — 725 UU
ee | | | (sce Fig. 4.8.8 and Table 4.8.2). It could be ex-
7 8 My 9 V 10 pected that the results were closer to those of model
Figure 4.8.7. Power curves for four ships with the same main B, which haspractically the same block coefficient.
dimensions and displacement (#, = effective power; Py = brake It is quite normal that tank test results in different
power). laboratories are not fully compatible, although the
 <

MODEL A,B an. C

7366

oo: I SCALE
: i]
a 200 <a 600 so0 woo 1200
Figure 4.8.8. Body plan andprofile of stern and stem of model A. The stems for models
B, C, D, E, and F/are indicated,

powering requirements can nevertheless be the
i same because of the empirical coefficients adopted
by the different laboratories for the prediction tech-
nique.
Some ships have been built with hull forms con-
sisting offlat plates on straight line frames Gag Dev,
1968; Gallin, 1977-1978). All plates and profiles are
produced without rollers or bending presses. Figure
4.8.11 shows the form ofthe ship hull. Many model
tests have been carried out to ensure that the
knuckles are placed in such a way that they are
lying nearly in direction of the flow. It has been
determined that through careful arrangement of the
edges in the streamlines and limitation of angular
values between two adjacent flat surfaces, resis-
tance values close to those of equivalent round form
were obtained. For a ship like that shown in Fig.
4.8.11 at service speed, the speed can be 0.1 m/s
less or the resistance 6% higher than for the round
ship. Full scale trials with ships with flat-sided hulls
have also given satisfactory results. From this it can
be seen that there are many possibilities for the vari-
ation of the lines of a ship.
When designing lines for new ship, Lindblad’s
(1961) On the Design of Lines for Merchant Ships
and Guldhammer’s (1962) Formdata can be very
useful to the naval architect, but neither gives the
resistance as a function of form. In general, it can

TABLE 4.8.2. DATA FOR MODELS 4-F

Model A B Cc D E F Units
L= Lug 7.534 7.534 7.534
bey 7.360 7.360 7.360
754? 7.235 m
B 1.115
7.368 7.069 m
1.115 1.115
T L115 1.052 m
0.432 0.432 0.432 0.432 0.432 0.399
Vv 2.742 2.846 m
2.972 2.905 2.927
Ss 12.087
2.378 m
12.375 12.690 12.526 12.653 11.12 mm
Bop O.773 0.802 0.837 0.818 0.824
é 0.802
O.755 0.783 0.818 0.799 U.805 O.784
B 0.996 0.996 0.996 0.996 0.996
eo 0.997
0.758 0.786 0.821 0.802 0.808 0.786
Lea SAR? 5.316 5.240) 5.2B5 5.272
LIB 5.42
6.755 6.755 6.755 6.762 6,762 6.88
BIT 2.579 2.579 2.579 2.579
LCBIL,, — 0.0182 0.0191 0.0294 - 0.0197
2.579 2.64
-0.0233 ~0.0202
PSP,AARP co STHcy AO AARa. AA,II

4,0;

do MODEL /C |

R MODEL EXPERIMENTS
30

2,

10
re,
PR

0 |
AERP

0,10 015 0,20 Wet 0.25

mest,

Figure 4.8.9. Residual resistance coefficient versus speed length ratio.

40: | ; -
Cr
‘°c FROM
tPA

Ro “SHIP RESISTANCE”
3,0 ee
em,
vem
ART,

2,0;——---
cee

Oo _ ;
010 015 020 Wer 9.28
Figure 4.8.10. Residual resistance coefficient from Figs. 8.5.7 and 5.5.8,

RY
 wy SHIP RESISTANCE

PIONEER |
PARENT FORM |

A\P 151450
— —— - _ oS
F|P
SCALE
0 10000. 20000mm
Figure 4.8.11. Bodyplan and profile of stern and stem of hull form with straight-line frames.

be said that if the ship does not have very eXagger-
ated lines and if the hull form looks nice and attrac-
tive, the resistance of the ship will be low.
4.9. DEPENDENCE ON SHIP CONDITION
When performingtrial tests it will not normally be
possible for the shipyard to ballast the vessel to full
load, except perhaps for tankers. Also, in service
the vessel is often not fully loaded. For different
TABLE 4.9.1, PRINCIPAL DIMENSIONS AND
COEFFICIENTS OF MODEL 76091-54
reasons it can be partly loaded or it can be in a
ballast condition. Therefore it is of interest for the
designer to know howthe resistance changes with
the condition of the ship.
For a model of a multipurpose ship, model
76091-54 (see Fig. 6.4.36), experiments have been
carried out underfour conditions. The principal di-
mensions and coefficients for the model in the four
conditions are given in Table 4.9.1 and the results of
the towing experiments are given in Fig. 4.9.1.
From the position and formof the contours in this
figure it will be seen thatit is very difficult to estab-
lish simple rules for the resistance change versus
the speed change.

Laboratory Numbers ae
| SHIP MODEL
Condition Units 1 2 3 4 10°C —76091- 54
40>
L= Ly m 6.451 6.670 6.228 6.316
cop m 6.246 6.246 6.246 6.246
B m 1.046 1.046 1.046 1.046 I,
ry 30! 468
™m 0.464 0.464 0.314 0.514 30, O64
Tig m 0.464 0,389 0.314 i Ogi
0.239
Tre m 0.464 f 0.374
0.314 0.314 0.164 0.306
A mi} 2.232 1.823 1.414 1.071 oe t
5 m 10.322) Q 141 7.RS0 6.806
6 O.712 0.672 0.691 0.646
yg OFl6 0.664 0.694 0.635 1} -- :
By 0.995 0.979 0.993 0.967
LA 4.937 5.460 5.5500 6.373
LIB 6.167 6.375 5.953 6.037 o1_ i -_
BIT 2.253) 2.689 3.332 4.377 aos 25 030
LCB mn 0.106 0.024 0.2703 0.021 En Weg
{aft of amidship) Figure 4.9.1. Results of towing experiments with model under
different conditions.
 a4 _ 0.06
AVERAGE we
6 = 0,852 0.025
4 . of |
OK = . O43
: _ VB/¥ = 0,57 0.78

O4 \ \ a : ~ Tp/T = 060 bo
— os
103 \ a
SS (Ta-TeY_ = 0018 398

.
a

ou | 5 = 0,65 + 383° \. \ -TRIAL SPEED

0 —-——__. ___ —_—___- | eS ESSSS
——

-04
nt, LAIN. amet.

OL_
010 015
.
020 025 0.30
v_
aaNet,

¥gl
Figure 4.9.2. The difference between resistance coefficient of partly loaded
or ballasted ship Ces and of fully loaded ship Cy versus
speed—length ratig.
;

91
92 SHIP RESISTANCE

To get some general lines the following investi- 5 LowSpeed Service Speed Trial Speed
gation has been carried out. Resistance curves
have been collected and arrangedin groups accord- 0.85 0.05 0.08 0
ing to the block coefficient for the fully loaded 0.80 | 0.2 0.2 0.3
ship. The differences between the resistance coeffi-
0.75 0.2 0.2 0.15
cient of the partly loaded or ballasted ship Cry and
0.70 0.1 0.05 0
of the fully loaded ship Cp have been calculated.
Contours of these differences versus the speed— 0.65 0.1 0 -0.1
length ratio are given in Fig. 4.9.2. At first it seems These corrections can be used to predict the resis-
difficult to draw conclusions. The scattering is tance for a ship not fully loaded or in ballast.
large and the contours have different forms. A For ships with bulbous bows the correction will
Closer inspection will show that the scattering is depend on the form of the bow and on the position
large, in general, only outside the normal working of the ballast water line in relation to the location of
region. Average lines can be drawn and from such the maximal thickness of the bulb. If the maximal
lines the following corrections on 10°C; can be thickness is just at the waterline, the resistancewill
found: be relatively high. /

DETERMINATION OF
SHIP RESISTANCE
5.1. INTRODUCTION
When making preliminary proposals for new ships
or transportation studies, the vital question facing
the shipowner, naval architect, politician, econo-
mist, or student is often how much poweris neces-
sary. The answer can be found in different ways.
Just as in preliminary ship design there are three
groups to choose among:
Type ship methods
Statistical methods
Piecewise methods
When the first-mentioned method is used, a type
ship has to be chosen. The type ship must be of the
same type as in the proposal. Furthermore, the
main dimensions of the type ship and the velocity
must be nearly the same as expected for the pro-
posal. An admiralty coefficient A, for the type ship
is calculated:
é
ABY3
A, = P (5.1.1)
where ? is the power necessary for propulsion of
the ship at a displacement equal to A and a speed
equal to V. The power P, for the proposal can then
be calculated by
Chapter
Five
AB y3
P, = = c
(5.1.2)
where A, and V, are the displacement and the de-
sired speed for the proposedship, respectively. The
powerneededis here assumed to be proportional to
the total resistance of the ship.
When the second-mentioned method is used,
propulsion data for a set of ships are collected and
examinedstatistically. The results can be given as
programs for a calculator or as a set of diagrams
giving. the poweras a function of perhaps block co-
efficient, displacement, and length—displacement
ratio. A set of such diagrams can be found in Chap-
ter 9,
With the third method, contrary to the twofirst,
it is necessary to know the resistance of the ship.
This can be estimated in different ways. The idea of
towing models in water for the purposes of estimat-
ing the resistance of full-sized ships as mentionedin
Chapter 3 is a very old one, dating from about 1500
(Tursini, 1953), but until 1868 no usable method for
transforming the model data to reality was available
(Stoot, 1959). Then William Froude proposed his
law of comparison, and showed how it could be
used in practice to predict ship resistance from
model results. Froude’s methods together with a
more recent method for determination of the ship
resistance will be described and discussed in this
chapter.
 94 DETERMINATION OF SHIP RESISTANCE
§.2. MODEL EXPERIMENTS
5.2.1. Introduction
Whenperforming towing experiments for determin-
ing the resistance of the ship model, the model is
free to surge, to heave, to roll, and to pitch. The
surge is limited due to the dynamometer or balance
put between the model and the towing carriage. In
general, the roll, owing to the symmetry, will be
nearly equal to zero. The heave and the pitch can be
registered at the trim guides or by the trim meters
(see Fig. 3.5.1). The model ofthe hull of the ship is
made in a scale suitable for the towing tank con-
cerned. In order to get a finish on the model surface
that can be achievedin all model tanks, the surface
of the paraffin and wooden ship models are as
highly polished as possible.
The towing forces are registered by the resis-
tance dynamometer over a range of speeds, cover-
ing all speeds ofinterest for the ship in question. By
plotting all resistance points in a diagram on a base
of speed, a fair curve can be drawn through these
points, representing the model resistance curve.
Then this curve has to be transformed to the ship
resistance curve. In order to do that some assump-
tions have to be made. As is shown in Section 3.6
regarding laws of comparison, it is impossible to
make a model dynamically similar to the prototype
when, in addition to inertia forces, both gravita-
tional and viscous forces are present. Only the con-
ditions regarding kinematical and geometrical simi-
larity can then be satisfied. The assumptions can be
different giving different methods of transforma-
tion.
5.2.2. Froude’s Method.
In 1868 Wiliam Froude sent a memorandum on
“Observations and suggestions on the subject of de-
termining by experiment the resistance of ships”’ to
the Chief Constructorof the British Navy (Froude,
1955). Froude stated:
We may regard the resistance experienced by uny
given model as consisting of two parts: (1) that due
fo what may be termed ordinary conditionsof resis-
fance, proper to the motion of the form through the
fluid, irrespective of wave genesis: a force which rea-
son and experience alike prove to varv as the square
of the velocity, and for models of similar form, as the
square of the ruling dimension, ar as if is comunen’.
and equivalently expressed, as the area of the im-
mersed midship section: (2) an ‘excess’ due ta wave
Benesis, varying according to some unknown law,
but a function of both the velocity and the dimen.
sion,
So that in dealing with models of similar form we
may express the resistance as
R = KI?v? + fd,v) (5.2.4)
where R is the resistance, K is a quantitative coeffi-
cient depending on the “‘specific resisting quality” of
the model's form, is the length of the model taken
Weer
as the “ruling dimension,’ and f is a function the
nature of which we seek to discover, Which, takenin
conjunction with dimension and velocity, expresses
the force along the line of motion, exerted by the
ee eee eee
model in wave genesis.
In other words Froude assumed that ship or model
resistance could be split up into two parts: (1) the
frictional resistance and (2) the residuary resis-
tance. The latter was due to the influence of gravita-
tional and inertia forces, the former due to the influ-
ence of viscous and inertia forces. Thus a
eee
sophisticated splitting up of the resistance, in many
parts as sketch in Fig. 4.1.2, had not taken place.
SEE
If the residuaryresistance is assumed to be inde-
pendent of the frictional resistance, model experi-
ments can be carried out in the following manner.
Froude’s model law is obeyed, which means that
(5.2.2)
where Vy and Vs are the specd of the model and the
ship, respectively, andA is the scale ratio. The grav-
itational forces are then reduced in a definite pro-
portion and the viscous forces in another propor-
tion. This latter fact need not cause any problems if
the viscous forces can be calculated for both the
model and the ship.
The total model resistance Rypy is measured at a
number of specds Vy. The resistance is then split
into two parts
Rrar = Rear + Rras (5.7.3)
where Reqis the frictional resistance and Ray is the
residuary resistance of the model. If Rey is calcu-
lated, the value of the residuary resistance Rey can
 MODEI. EXPERIMENTS 95

be found with Eq. (5.2.3). The latter model resis-

tance component can be converted into the corre-
sponding ship resistance component by multiplying Ri MODEL
the force scale by SCALE RATIO A

hi = Av, = Avy = ApALAg (5.2.4) MEASURED RESIDUARY RESISTANCE

TOTAL Rem
RESISTANCE
This equationis identical to Eq. (3.6.14). Here
Row
CALCULATED
Vee RESISTANCE
(5.2. )

Lary
’ Rew
a t a
because the experimentis carried out in accordance Vy -= Vo A“12
with Froude’s law.
If A, is equal to 1, then the residuaryresistance
for the ship will be

Rrs = ApATR eas (5.2.6) rorISTANCE CONVERTED

-
RS . RESIDUARY RESISTANCE
Using the same principles for calculating the fric- Ras = Ram ApAL
tional resistance of the ship Res as used when cal- 4 CALCULATED
culating Rpy, the total resistance of the ship can be L/FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE
calculated by 1 Res

Vs
Rrs = Res + Res = Res + Aph?Rew Figure 5.2.1. Sketch showing Froude’s conversion methou.

= Rrs + dpdi(Rrae — Rew) (5.2.7)

The wetted surface S used in the calculatic::
For most merchant ships Rrs is much larger than generally includes the area of the appendages that
Rrs. Therefore, it has been morelogical to use the give an appreciable contribution tothe friction drag.
experiments for estimating the largest part of the such asbilge keels, propeller bossings, and rudders.
resistance, viz. the frictional resistance. However, On the basis of Froude’s assumption, the plate fric-
there exists no simple methods for calculation of the tion coefficients can be applied directly to ship
wave resistance whichis the biggest part ofthe re- forms.
siduary resistance. Therefore it is most convenient As was mentioned in section 4.2.5 Froude calcu-
to use the model experiments for estimating Rp. lated the frictronal resistance by the formula
Froude’s conversion methodis illustrated in the
sketch Fig. 5.2.1, Rp = fSV" (5.2.8)
With regard to the mannerin which the frictional
resistance has to be calculated, the opinions often which was changed by his son R. E. Froude ta
differ. Froude assumed that a ship form hasa fric-
tional resistance equal to that of flat rectangular Ry = fSV185 (5.2.9)
plate having the same wetted area and the same
length as the ship. This means that the wetted sur- Later the formula again was changed to
face S of the ship is calculated as the length of the
ship multiplied by the mean girth. Furthermore, this
means that $ is not a real surface area of the under- Re—= he
1000 SV 1.825 2
(5.2.10)
water body of the ship but the so-called reduced
wetted area. Sinceit is the resistance component in where
the direction of motionthatis of interest, it is more
correct to use the area of the reduced wetted sur- 0.258
Ay = (0.1392 + ee + 0.0043(15 — 1]
face than the real surface [shown by Gutsche in
1933 (Lap, 1956)].
(5.2.11)
 06 DETERMINATION OF SHIP RESISTANCE
Here £ is the length of the model or of the ship in
meters, fis the temperature in degree Celsius. § is
the wetted area in m? and Vis the speed in m/sec. ¥
is the specific weight of the water in kg/m).
The models are given smooth surfaces and the
frictional coefficients for smooth surfaces are used,
whereas for the ship, frictional coefficients for
rough surfaces may be applied. The formula given
above for A, takes this into account. It should also
be mentioned that Froude’s skin friction coeff-
cients for long lengths and high speeds are found by
extrapolation to lengths and speeds very much ex-
ceeding those at which the experiments were car-
ried out. Furthermore, the pressure resistance is
included in the residuary resistance in spite of the
fact that the occurrence of pressure resistance is
exclusively dependent on the viscous properties of
the fluid. Using Froude’s assumptions, the follow-
ing have also been ignored:
1. That the fluid particles describe rather compli-
cated paths along the hull owing to the wave
formed when the ship is moving ahead or
astern.
2, That the speed of the fluid over some parts of
the hull can exceed the speed of ship, and that
on otherparts the opposite is true.
3. That separations can occur.
4. That the boundary layer can be thinner at some
places of the hull surface and thicker at others
than for the corresponding flat plate.
In spite of these drawbacks Froude’s principle of
splitting up the resistance into two parts is still the
most used principle at towing tanks all over the
world. The frictional formulas and coefficients
given by R. E. Froude are, however, only used at a
few towing tanks today.
5.2.3, Telfer’sMethod
In 1927 E. V. Telfer (1927) published a paper deal-
ing with the problem of ship and model resistance
and describing one of the author’s methods for com-
bining Froude’s and Reynolds’ laws ofresistance
similarity. Furthermore, the author suggested a
practical means of extrapolating model resistance
results to full scale. Telfer (1929) has pointed out
“that as specific total resistance was a simultaneous
function of Froude number and Revnolds number,
that is, that
R ¢ f ¥ V )
pave “S\Sepe WE. (5.2.12)
ney
The variation of specific resistance throughout a
“8
family of geometrically similar models could thus be
investigated by studying the variations in specific
resistance at constant speed—length ratios over the
range of Reynolds number covered by the model
family. Similarly, at constant-length Reynolds num-
ber the variation could be studied over the range of
speed—length ratio; and since when Reynolds num-
ber is constant the specific frictional resistance is
constant, the only change with speed—length ratio
will be that due to wavemaking, or more generally,
inertia resistance. Fromthis it follows that all con-
tours of constant speed—length ratio will be mutu-
ally parallel in the first presentation to a base of
Reynolds number; and in the second presentation to
a base of speed-length ratio, all contours of Reyn-
olds number will be parallel.”’ This principle of
parallelism was the main feature brought out in
Telfer’s 1927 paper. To make use of this principle as
a practical means of extrapolating model specific
resistance, it Was essential to determine the lawof
variation of the constant speed—length ratio con-
tours with Reynolds number. Telfer proposed that
“the function adopted take the form
R po \t3
DAV? = at+b (=) (5.2.13)
where a, for total specific resistance, depends upon
the speed—length ratio and is constant for constant
speed—length ratio: and b depends upon the amount
of total resistance subject to scale-effect. The value
of 6 was found, for veryfine forms, to be practically
the same as that derived from plank tests.”’
The ship extrapolators will have a slightly greater
slope than that of the plank and in general every
form of model will have a different extrapolator.
The extrapolator for any form can be determined
when a number of geometrically similar models are
tested and analyzed by the methods of this section,
In Fig. 5.2.2 a schematical representation of
Telfer's method is given for afine form. Byusing
Wa I a
p
vz) = He Re
log (
as abscissa, the extrapolator will be a straight line.
For the majority of vessels of fine form. Telfer
SPRTareas

MODEL EXPERIMENTS 97

8
10°C,
7 ne Vv.
¥Vgol
6 L- - eS |
jt
pfSs MODELS
Se ee 0
| 1 p77] eo —T -+

oe =
& pe SHIP 7] — a — 3, oT —-- vA

poPO
er jt4-F —— |_t _—
ye
ee
Ke
3h Lt ———— _—- Cy]

Po |
pT |__—EXTRAPOL ATOR
aeen

1 ~ —_ eee ee nef

a Ss 2 5 2 5 2 5 rye y'/3
101° 108 108 R, 107 BASE oF (==
Figure 5.2.2. Schematic representation of Telfer’s method.

felt that the plank extrapolator could be used with
safety; and since as far as can be scenall ship ex-
trapolators must have a greater slope than that of
the plank, it follows that the gencral use of this
latter would always tend somewhat to overestimate
the ship resistance.
The first condition that an extrapolation method
has to fulfill is that it should enable the experimental
results obtained with models of the same ship to
various scales to be derived from one another.
Therefore by using the results obtained from experi-
ments with a number of geometrically similar
models, a so-called model family, this condition is
automatically fulfilled.
So far Telfer’s method seems to be a veryattrac-
tive one. The slope of the extrapolator has been
well determined in the region covered by the experi-
ments carried out with the model family. However,
even with reliable results from experiments with a
large model family at one’s disposal, extrapolation
outside the experimental region of Reynolds num-
ber remains a risky affair. In Fig. 5.2.3 the results
from experiments with a model family are given.
The total resistance coefficient
Cy = Cr + Cr = a (5.2.14)
ko VS
is given as a function of Reynolds number R, for the
different models and for the ship. Ry is the total
resistance, V is the speed of the models or the ship,
and § is the wetted surface of models or ship.
Equation (5.2.14) gives the total resistance coeffi-
cient for the underwater part of the hull of the
smooth ship. If the coefficient Crs for the rough ship
is wanted, a roughness allowance C, (in general
called the incremental resistance coefficient for
model—ship correlation) has to be added. Anair re-
sistance coefficient can also be addedif this correc-
tion is not included in Cy.
The curves for constant Froude numbers are
nearly parallel to the line described by
0.242
= logio(R.Cr) (3.2.15)
VCy
which is the Schoenhert’s flat plate frictional drag
formula [see Eq. (4.2.15)]. This line can therefore
be used as an extrapolator. The resistance of the
ship is then determined by
Rs = Crs(bpV3S5) (5.2.16)
where Crs is the total resistance coefficient of the
ship. Furthermore, Fig. 5.2.3 shows some of the
 O8 DET ERMINA’ 7 ues OFSHIP RESISTANCE —

o°Cy xe | | | TELFER'S METHOD |

6 j— f—tASgMopens| Lp

Ka
| [* > JM TANK WALL | |
“INAS ‘ oN)
I. Sepep tite
OR _
a, [|
|
P “ |

41. SSSk GAL

ee
“LAMINARS PS|
FLOW ! a | ~SS as

er
3 “>= !

ee
| 0,262 |_
l | Ver= l0Gi9 (Re Ce) | |
a ed {SCHOENHERR) I

|1 || i| yoaat
rr ee —— |
——_.__ { | | | i

| : | | |
| | | | | || |
0-1 tL | po
P08? > 107? > 108? "1 * pS
Figure 5.2.3. Telfer’s prediction method.

problems with using Telfer’s method:
lL. Even whenusing a large model family the dis-
tance from the modelregion to the ship region
is very large. A minor inaccuracy on the extrap-
olator can imply largeiinaccuracy on the re-
sistance forecasted.
One of the conditions to be met for obtaining
satisfactory results from expenments with a
model family is complete similarity. This means
that the ship modelsaswell as the surroundings
have to be similar. When performing experi-
ments with the big models in the family, the
towing tank boundary will often be at a distance
that it can give rise to interfering influence.
Usually the wall results in increased model re-
sistance.
When testing the small models in the family, the
flow over a large part of the models can be
laminar. If laminar flow occurs along part ofthe
model, the result will be that a resistance is
measured which is low compared with those in
turbulent flow.
To perform experiments with a model family is ex-
pensive and time-consuming. Therefore, only a few
experiments in this field have been carried out.
Some of the largest families have been the Simon
Bolivar model family (Lammeren, 1938) and the se-
ries in the so-called Victor ship research program
(Lammeren et al., 1955). In this last family a 21-m-
long model boat was also included,
§.2.4. TVETC 1957 Method
The main question discussed at nearly all the Inter-
national Towing Tank Conferences (ITTC) has been
how to transform the model test result from model
scale to full scale. It is very difficult, perhaps nearly
impossible, to give a correct reply to this question.
The method here, called the TUTC 1957 method, is
 MODEL EXPERIMENTS 99

based on Froude’s principle and on the “‘ITTC 1957 where Aryis the model resistance, V is the sp
model—ship correlation line’? (also mentioned in the model, Say is the wetted surface of the mode!,
Section 4.2.5). In 1957 the ITTC (1959) decided that and py is the density of the water in the towing
the line given by the formula tank.
The residuary resistance coefficient for the
Ce = 5 model is then calculated by
(5.2.17)
* (logiRa — 2)
Cra = Cra > Cem (5.2.19)
be adopted as correlation line, and it will here again
be pointed out that it was understood that the deci-
where the frictional resistance coefficient is calcu-
sion was to be regarded only as aninterim solution
lated using Eq. (5.2.17).
to this problem for practical enginecring purposes.
Cr is friction resistance coefficient for the ship Now it is supposed that the residuary resistance
form. coefficient for the ship at the same Froude number
as for the model and at a corresponding Reynolds
Figure 5.2.4 illustrates the ITTC 1957 method.
number is
The total resistance coefficients for the model are
determined by the towing tests and from the for-
mula Crs = Cra (5.2.20)

C Rr 5.2.18 Using the ITTC 1957 model-ship correlation line as

m™ tPMVisSa (6.2.18) an extrapolator the total resistance coefficient for a

a | | i
10°C, ITTC 1957 METHOD

\ MODEL | !
_ ° SHIP |
F fn [ _ |
a) | \ ~

Fre

STR: sigs
4 |i 7 Eom
a, |1 = anes a
|

MY i '
“> lil | Fad
3-7 : 1.
™
| ~ | | Cr
2 i | —_—_____| ot = ——}—
9.075 ah EL |
, Cem (log.gRayn 2) | pi [Te
' : {| | fo |
i | | ic __ _0075
| | | FS” (logy Rag 2)’
| | | |
oT
> 08? ° 10? ee 108 th 109 ee
Re
Figure 5.2.4. Schematic representation of the [TTC 1937 method.
 100 DETERMINATION OF SHIP RESISTANCE

smooth ship cun be determined by Furthermore, Hughes proposed to regard the

hull resistance as being the sum ofthree parts:
Crss = Ces t Cray (5.2.21)
1. The friction resistance in two-dimensional flow
And, furthermore, the total resistance coefficient (i.c., without edge effect) of a plane surface of
for the ship is the same surface area and the same mean length
as the hull.
Crs =a Crs + Cra + C4 (5.2.22) 2. The form resistance, being the excess above (1)
that would be experienced by the hull if deeply
where Cy, is the incremental resistance coefficient
submerged as part of a double model.
for model-ship correlation taking into account also
3. The free-surface resistance, being the excess of
the effect of the roughness of the surface of the
the total resistance of the surface model above
ship.
that of the deeply submerged hull when part of
Some model tanks use the same C, coefficient
a double model.
for all type of ships, for example, Cy, = 0.0004.
Other tanks assume that C, has to vary with the ¢
It is important to note that this divisionts for analyt-
type and size of the ship. If the size is used as a
ical purposes only; these three resistances cannot
parameter, the variation of the incremental resis-
be separately measured. On the other hand, the di-
tance coefficient can be as follows:
vision is a logical one, since (1), the sum of (1) + (2),
and the total of (1) + (2) + (3) can all exist indepen-
Displacement C4
dently.
Moreover, Hughes meant that there must be a
1 000 t 0.6 x 1073 universal law governing the resistance in turbulent
10 000 t 0.4 «x 1077 flowofall smooth streamlined bodies of symmetri-
100 000 t 0 cal form when towed at zero incidence submerged
1 000 000 t —0.6 x 107-7 in a fluid without boundary interference. Streamlin-
ing implies that there is no separation offlow at any
The extrapolator used can call for negative C, coef- point. Symmetryabout two planes at right angles is
ficients in order to get a meaningful forecast. essential to ensure no “‘lift”’ in any direction when
The resistance of the ship is then calculated by the bodyis towed in the direction ofits axis. The
law proposed by Hughes was

Rs = CrspsV355)
For a given body the mean specific resistance is a
where Vsis the speed and Ssis the wetted surface constant ratio of the specific resistance of a plane
of
the ship. psis the density of the sea water. surface ofinfinite aspect ratio at the same Reynolds
number. The ratio is independent of Reynolds num-
ber and depends onlyon the form of the body.
5.2.5. Hughes’ Method
As mentioned above, the resistance equation could
In 1954 G. Hughes proposed a formulation for be written as
use
in model and ship correlation (Hughes, 1954). In the
same paper the results were given for many experi Total resistance = Basic friction resistance (1)
-
ments on friction resistance of smooth plane + Formresistance (2)
sur-
faces in turbulent flow. For the friction resist + Free surface resistance (3)
ance
coefficient, the following formula was proposed: (5.2.25)
c= 1.066 5304 Using the law, this now becomes:
F (og, R, = 2.03% ene Total resistance = (Basic friction resistance) «
There was a good agreement of this formu
la with + Free surface resistance
the experiment curve.
iS 9 26)
 MODEL EXPERIMENTS 101

where r is the resistance ratio and is a constant

factor for a given hull form, orr = 1 + k, where k is
the form factor. For basic friction resistance cocffi-
cient one can use the coefficient C, from Eq.
(5.2.24) or from a similar expression. The curve of
Cr together with curves of C,;({1 + &) for different
values of & can then be drawn as functions of Rey-
nolds number in a diagram as shown in Fig. 5.2.5.
The value of r or of & can be determined from the
low-speed test.
The specific resistance from this test is then plot-
ted in the diagram, a resistance curve Cy is drawn,
and the curve Cx{1 + &) having tangent common
with the Cr curve is found (the ‘‘run-in point’’).
Thereby k is determined and the C(I + k) curve
can be used as an extrapolator.
The free-surface resistance can be found from
the model test as the excess of the total resistance
above the friction plus form resistance. It will be
assumed that this scales up according to Froude’s
law.
A correction (C,) taking into account the rough-
ness of the hull surface can be undertaken and the
total resistance for the ship can be calculated by
Rrs = CrpV5S5) (5.2.27)
Hughes method was very much discussed during
the Eighth International Towing Tank Conference
(1957) in Madrid. With regard to the decisions
made, most delegates were in favor of adopting a
single line (the ITTC 1957 model-ship correlation
line) owing to the fact that it seemedto be difficult
to estimate the value of the formfactor k. The con-
ference recommended that work should continue on
the problems to improve the model and ship corre-
lation and to explain the effect of form. Manytow-
ing tanks have up to now used the Hughes method
with relatively good results. Often the method is
combined with Prohaska’s method (see Section
5.2.6). An investigation of the | + & factor variation
with some of the form parameters has been carried
out at National Physical Laboratory (Hughes and
Cutland, 1973, Fig. 144). Figure 5.2.6 shows how,

7x
10°C \\ r=14k
HUGHES’ METHOD
6 NX \ 15

Cw
(FREE SURFACE RESISTANCE }

EXTRAPOLATOR|

2
/ Cee
F
—0
(logo
i _ (BASIC FRICTION RESISTANCE}
i
i

> 108 107 108 10° Rr

Figure 5.2.5. Schematic representation of the Hughes method,

od
 102 DETERMINATION OF SHIP RESISTANCE

135 -— ner

1+k |
4,30 i __|

| |
Lé5 ~ 7 —— ;
j TT ——+ en -—

1,20|}--—-- |4-——_}- aaa

|
115 j= :
ao fb
{
1,10 - :
“6 __t tt
8 |
10S} - i =a
i | olo7s i
1,00 i we aot (log| Ra 2);

0.50 060 070 0,80 § 0.90 ;

Figure 5.2.6. The | + & variation with 6 and L/V¥!*,

according to this investigation, 1 + & may vary with This means that the form drag coefficient is as-
the block coefficient and with the length-displace- sumed to be the same in model and full scale.
ment ratio L/V',
Sometimes for ships with lengths below 100 m it
can be very difficult to estimate the form factor & 5.2.6. Prohaska’s Method
correctly. Many of these small ships have sharp
shoulders and shapes leading to strong separation Prohaska’s method builds on the principles of
and high pressure drag. Owing to the procedure Hughes. In 1966 Prohaska proposed in the discus-
normally used in the experiments and the calcula- sion of a paper by Hughes (1966) a method for an
tions, the high resistance measured at the model experimental determination of the form effect on
tests will result in very high values of the form fac- the viscous resistance or, in other words, a method
tor k. Minsaas (1979) gives values for 1 + & between for determining the three-dimensional form factor
1.2 and 2.1, the highest being for full forms. It is on flat plate friction
unrealistic to assume that the highest of these form
factors are real formfactors. Cy ~ Cr
The main components of the drag in these cases
ka (5.2.28)
Cro
are probably pressure and base drag. In his book
Fluid Dynamic Drag Hoerner (1965) gives the fol- where Cy is the specific total viscous resistance co-
lowing definition of base drag: ‘‘At the base ofpro- efficient and Cre is the frictional resistance coeffi-
jectiles, there originates a pressure drag which is cient In two-dimensional flow. |
consequently termed ‘base drag.’’’ The drag com- When no separation is present, |
ponents follow different scaling laws and are diffi-
cult to separate from each other with the existing Cr = Cy + (1 + BCro (5.2.29) {
model techniques, especially when only the total
resistance is measured. Furthermore, verylittle is where Cy is the specific wavemaking coefficient.
known about how the vortex resistance scales. This is assumed to be: t
In cases where strong vortices are created owing
to sharp shoulders and where the model] tests have .
Cw 7 yF4
; (5.2.30)
(
given a form factor that is much higher than that t
of a conventional ship of similar dimensions, then where yis a coefficient and /’, is the Froude num- é
some towing tanks (Lindgren and Dyne, 1979) dis- ber. Then, t
card the form factor assumption and instead treat
the form drag in the same way as the wave drag, CriCra — Ct A) at ve Cpe (8.2.30) i
i

&
Pom
 MODEL EXPERIMENTS 103

eT 1,35

Foya0H
7
TTT
—
i
an
>
Cy is the residual resistance calculated from the
total and frictional coefficients of the model in
the resistance tests:
| a
! o

1254 i 4
Cr a Cry —_ Cl + WCerny (5.2.33)
i o

1204+ Lt
opt Le | Cy; is the frictional coefficient of the model ac-
ph
1.15 Gt “Hy
\ cording to the ITTC 1957 ship-model correlation
line.
b |
119 Ln ®! pFae 0.2 C, is a roughness allowance:
0 01 02 03 O04 O05 O06 OF GB Os 1.9
ky
C4 [ 105(
&
Fn
Ly
yr 0.64| x 10-3 (5.2.34)
Ce
Figure 3.2.7. Prohaska’s method for determining the form fac-
tor.
where &, is the mean apparent amplitude of the sur-
face roughness over a 50 mm wavelength (see Fig.
4.2.20 in Section 4.2.7). Ifa &, value is not available,
a standard amplitude of 150 x 107* m can be em-
Values of C7/Cry therefore will plot on a straight ployed.
line with slope y and intercepting 1 + & on the ordi-
nate axis when F7/Ceois used as abscissa (see Fig. Ew, = length of the waterline
5.2.7). Cy is estimated by performing perhaps 10
low-speed towing tests corresponding to 0.1 < F, < Ca4 = air resistance
0.22. Here it must be mentioned that the uncer-
tainty of measuring resistance at very low speed is Cu -= 0.001( Ayr’
<7)
relatively large, which also means thatit is difficult
to determine the ‘‘run-in point’? exactly. For full where Ayris the transverse area (or projected front
forms, say 5 about 0.80, the points may plot on area of ship above the waterline) and S is the wetted
concave curvesindicating that either 1 + & or y, or surface of the hull.
both, are speed dependent(see Fig, 5.2.8). Perhaps If the ship is fitted with bilge keels, the total resis-
it can be more appropriate for full ships to use a tance is as follows:
power of F, between 4 and 6 instead of 4.
+ Sex
Crs =—S FEL + Crs + Cy]
5.2.7 1978 ITTC Performance Prediction Method + Cr+ Cara (5.2.35)
for Single-Screw Ships

In 1978 the LTTC member organizations were ad-

vised to use, as a tentative standard, a method Cy 7
called “1978 ITTC Performance Prediction Method Cr ; t 4
for Single Screw Ships’? (see Fig. 5.2.9) (ITTC,
1.8 i ; Po
I |
1978). The total resistance coefficient of a ship with- 1,65 ~4 _

out bilge keels is | |!

14h ALe |! a
1
Crs = (i+ k)Crs + Cy + Cy + Cag (5.2.32) 1,2 le
t
al
7%
- = ——
I | f
where 1 [Fn= 0,1 pFn=0,2

“0 Of O2 O03 O4 OS 068 O87 08 089 12

k is the form factor determined from the resis- 4
tance test. Fae
Cr
Crs 1s the frictional coefficient of the ship accord-
Figure 5.2.8. Prohaska’s method for determining the formfac-
ing to the ITTC 1957 ship—model correlation line. tor for full forms.
104 DETERMINATION OF SHIP RESISTANCE

_ ITTC 1978 METHOD

TTC 19877-~

I ! i

j f : | =—9,075
CeM= Tingk we 2P !|
|
Jobee “4 —_ —ts=—F |
| | ; | Cece - 01078
! | | | PE osPns2
|¢ |
__! fo Hoe po — fo | _—L
° 5 6 2 5 7 2 5 ae 5 9 : 5
10 10 10 10 R.
Figure 3.2.9, The ITTC 1978 prediction method.

where Spr is the surface area of the bilge keels. Cr FR

: — : L =—=(1+h4+c (5.2.37)
An ITTC test program regarding trial prediction en Cr
has shownthat the introduction of the form factor
philosophy leads to a better ship-mode! correlation where the exponent n of F, has to be evaluated in
than the 1957 method. For practical purposes and order to obtain the best approximation of the mea-
conventional ship shapes a form factor determined sured data points. The parameters n, c, and & are to
on an experimental basis similar to Prohaska’s be determined bya least-squares approximation.

mee
method (see Section 5.2.6) but using the most suit- The method is built on Froude’s law, but there
able exponent for F,, was recommended. Owing to can be doubts about the validity of this law. Perhaps
the uncertainty of measuring resistance at very low a scale effect on the wave resistance should be
speeds, it was recommendedthat one use resistance added in the future.
results of 0.12 < F, < 0.20. With regard to a ship
with partly submerged bulbous bowsand theeffects
of wavebreaking resistance for blunt bow, therestill 5.2.8. Evaluation of the Methods
exist problems. In both of these cases it is probably
advisible to lower the above speedlimits. Instead of Some of the institutions taking part in the ITTC
OS

work have made comparative calculations with a

determining k on the basis of Prohaska’s proposal
trial prediction test program proposed by ITTC
C ie (1972-1975). The result of the calculations is given
= -(l+k) + +t,
C; y (5.2.36)
5.2.36 in Volume 3 of the ITTC 75 proceedings (LTTC,
1975) and is the basis for the ‘1978 ITTC Perfor-
the (TC recommends mance Prediction Methodfor Single Screw Ships”,
yaoe
inne EP rE
 STANDARD SERIES OF EXPERIMENTS 105

5,0 7 j
° C, = Cite) Cp 1 f

10?¢ SHIP &

MODEL ft Fienoge wel SHIP | | |

Lol FOR Cy
| 7 Ft |
wo! [oo |
a

{ Cpe Ce kde Che Cy

107R_| 1R ‘ |
tpveS | ||
rpV'S + Cp (Lek)
39 4 _ —__}| ao:
Ht

2 ol ee

-| 9067
© =| logy Rok
wohjo

OL — ee d
O15 2
O20 O25 Fy 030
3

Figure 5.2.10. Confidence intervals for C; and Cy. This model is 6 mlong and ship is 180 m long.

In Fig. 5.2.10 is given an example on the predic-
tion of the resistance coefficient for a ship with a
displacement of about 30 000 m3 and a length of 180
m. If the model scale ratio is 30, this will give a
length of the model of 6 m. The physical model (the
model experiment) gives the Cr for the model. Cr
has to be estimated from the experimentally mea-
sured Cy by combining these results with the results
from the mathematical model giving C-(1 + 4). In
this way all the experimental uncertainty will be for
Cr and will be directly transferred to the total resis-
tance coefficient for the real ship. As a result the
confidential interval for Cy will be relatively larger
for the ship than for the ship model. This method
represents the best of the methods presented above,
but the method has to be lookedatonly as a tenta-
tive ITTC standard. Also, Telfer’s method can be
considered a good method, but this method is too
expensive for practical engineering purposes.
Pp
5.3. STANDARD SERIES OF EXPERIMENTS
i
Over the years, a large number of merchant ship
models have been tested in the model basins of all
the maritime nations. In most cases these have been
isolated models, applicable only to a specific de-
sign. In other cases they were a small series in
which only one or two parameters have been var-
ied. Very fewseries of larger extent have been car-
ried out with the results published in a form applica-
ble for the designer of new ships.
Among the earliest and most complcte series of
model tests carried out to investigate ship propor-
tions and form are those made by Taylor (1933) and
Kent (1919). The forms used in the Taylor series are
based on the form ofthe lines of the British armored
cruiser of about the year 1900. Body plan and stem
and stern profiles for the parent form of Taylor stan-
dard series are given in Fig. 5.3.1. Figure 5.3.2 gives
the relative curves of sectional areas for this stan-
dard series. The Kentseries is based on a merchant
ship form of twin-screwdesign (sce Fig. 5.3.3). All
the models were obtained by geometric variation of
the parent set of lines. The Taylor series covered a
large variation in prismatic coefficient (p = 0.48-
0.86), length-displacement ratio (L/V'!3 = 5.2-10),
and beam to draft ratio (B/T = 2.25, 3.00, and 3.75),
but there was no variation in the longitudinal posi-
tion of the center of buoyancy. All the models had a
very low midship section coefficient (6 = 0.923).
The series consisted of a total of 158 models, which
were tested during the years 1907, 1908, 1913, and
1918. Some of the results were published in Speed
and Power of Ships (Taylor, 1910) in the form of
contours of residuary resistance in pounds perton
displacement as function of the displacement length
ratio A/(L/100)? (in English units), the longitudinal
coefficient ¢ for B/T equal to 2.25 and 3.75 and with
the following speed-length coefficients V/VL (Vin
 106 DETERMINATION OFSHIP RESISTAN
CE

+— —. an —r- —

|! i TAYLOR
| PARENT FORM

eine a
g 1/2 10
AP
| FP
6200

SCALE
Cc™ I I I I I I I I I
o 300 1000 mm
Figure 5.3.1. Body plan and stern and stem profiles for the parent form
of the ‘Taylor standard series.
f
knots and ZL in feet): 0.60, 0.65, 0.70,. .., 1.30,
Series 60, and data for the new parent models were
1.35, 1.40, 1.50, 1.60, 1.80, and 2.00.
given by Todd (1953) together with the results of the
The Taylor data were later reanalyzed, and new
towing tests. The block coefficients were the same as
contours based on the Schoenherr frictional
resis- for the models in series 57. Body plan and stem and
tance coefficients [0.242/VC, = logio(®,,Cp)]
were stern profiles for one ofthe parent forms (6 = 0.70)
published by Gertler (1954). Gertler gave chart
s of are given in Fig. 5.3.4. The longitudinalpositions of
the residual resistance coefficient Cr to a
base of the center of buoyancy (LCB) chosen for these
Froude number V/VgLy,. The design charts give
models were from a position 1.5% of Lpp aft of mid-
contours of Cr against F, for various values of V/
ships for the 0.60 block coefficient to 2.5% of Lipp
Livt, each chart being fora particular value of » and
forward of midships for 0.80 block coefficient. In
BIT.
order to investigate the effect of the change in LCB
The Kent series from 1919 consisted
of 20 position, three other models were designed at each
models each having been tested at three draug
hts. block coefficient, making, with the parent, four
Body plan and stem and stern profiles for
parent models in each set. The results of the towing tests
form are given in Fig. 5.3.3. The fullness was
varied are given in Todd and Pien (1956). Based on these
by the addition of a parallel body.
experiments the five series 60 models having the
In 1948 the Society of Naval Architects and
Ma- near-optimumlocation of LCB and covering thefull
rine Engineers agreed to sponsor the prepa
ration of range ofblock coefficient then had their lines varied
parent lines for a series of single-screw
merchant geometrically to cover L/B values from 5.5 to 8.5
ship forms. The primary purpose of this stand
ard and B/H values from 2.5 to 3.5 (Todd et al., 1957).
series was to provide guidance to the indus
try on In all, this new set consisted of 45 models, which
the choice of proportions and coefficients
for new means that there were 60 models in the series 60.
designs. The work was planned in such a
waythat The resistance results are given as contours of re-
individual parts of it could be published
and made siduaryresistance perton of displacement, as in the
available and be useful to the industry as
they were Taylor standard series charts. The contours of con-
completed. The first results were publi
shed by Todd Stant Cp are given versus the block coefficient and
and Forest (1951) giving a discussion
of the neces- the L/B, each chart being for a particular value
sary range of proportions for a metho of
dical series BIT and VIV'L. Also contours of
and a discussion of the derivation of the
basic lines,
Furthermore, the main dimensions, the
tables of
: Pe
offsets, and lines of the five parent model
s were ©= 427.1 AMyA (5.3.1)
given. The block coefficient for the five
parent
models, called series 57, were 0.60, 0.65,
0.70, 0.75, were given. Pr is the effective power (RV), A is the
and 0.80. The resistance results of this series
were displacement, and Vis the speed, all in English
somewhat disappointing and therefore new
parent units.
forms were drawn out. The new series
Was called later the British Ship Research Association
 107
“SAMS WUIY] ayy JO WO] juouRd |] Joj sayyord wojs puv ways pue ued Apog
"ees aunty
‘= OOO DE coo? 000 Ot 0
L T I I L |
B1V3S
ee
OZB1ZL

art

S3ld3S LN3Y
WeOd iN3uVd | |

Sulpucdsatioo ay] Ww uo psyou sey oauno Yue ‘Seas puvpuey “‘Walayyeas yeulpnyrauoy
s Jo]AR], ay} JO sare yeuonsas Jo saaino PANELOY 'ZWe'g
andy
dai
Ol 6

TS
SS

i
 ae _DE ule STEulosOF SHIP RESISTANCE

AP
\<_——_
WwW
ed LL
121920
121 —
aa

a
F

SCALE
COC
0 5000 10000 15 000 20000 mm i
Figure 5.3.4. Body plan and stern and stem profiles for the 0.70 C, form from series 60. e

(BSRA) (Lackenby and Milton, 1972) gave a new

wee
(b) Stern variation (Dawson and Thomson,
presentation of the resistance data of series 60. The 1969)
resistance is presented there in the form of design-
(c) Variation in parallel middle body (BSRA,
ers’ charts generally similar to those adopted in the

“ara
1969)
overall analyses of the BSRA Methodical Series.
5. Series of 0.85 Block Coefficient Forms
Over the years many experiments have been car-
ried out for BSRA and the results published. The (a) Variation in LCB (Clements and Thom-
following series had to be mentioned: son, 1962)
6. Trawler Series

ET
1. Series of 0.65 Block Coefficient Forms (a) Variation in beam-draught ratio and

mee
(a) Variation in LCB position and bilge radius length-displacement ratio (Pattullo and
{Almy and Hughes, 1954) Thomson, 1965)

ae
(b) Variation in breadth-draught ratio and (b) Variation in Block Coefficient and LCB
length-displacement ratio (Ferguson and (Pattullo, 1968)
Meek, 1954)
(c) Stern variations (Thomson and White, From time to time overall presentations of geomet-
rical particulars and experimental results for the
1969)
models of BSRA Mcthodical Series have been given
(d) Variation in parallel middle body (BSRA,
(e.g.. Moor et al. (1961), Lackenby and Parker
197 1a}
(1966), Thomson and Bowden (1977)]. For standard
2. Series of 0.70 Block Coefficient Forms draughts curves of ©) [for definition see Eq.
(a) Vanation in LCB position (Blackwell and (5.3.1)], each for a numberof speeds, are given ona
Goodrich, 1957) base of block coefficient. A basic position of LCB
(b) Variation in breadth-draught ratio and has been chosen dependent on the fullness. For
length-displacement ratio (Blackwell and each condition of draughts and trim, a correction
Doust, 1957) factor can be appliedto the basic © for deviations
(c) Variation in parallel middle body (BSRA, in longitudinal position of center of buoyancy from
1971) the unique basic position appropriate to the block
3. Series of 0.75 Block Coefficient Forms (Fergu- coefficient. Also, correction factors to be applied to
son and Parker, 1956) the basic resistance for breadth—draught ratios and
for length—-displacement ratios, other than the par-
4. Series of 0.80 Block Coefficient Forms
ent values, are given in the form of such diagrams.
(a) Variation in LCB (Clements and Thom- Each diagram refers to one speed and is plotted ona
son, 1962} base of block coefficient for the designed load con-

dition. Further contours of corrections to the basic
resistance values, for changes in parallel middle
body are given in one ofthe presentations (Thom-
son and Bowden, 1977). Finally the results of the
BSRA Methodical Series often have been discussed
partly referring to Thomson and Bowden (1977) and
partly to individual papers [e.g., Moor (1975)].
The last largerseries that will be referred to is the
SSPA Cargo Liner Series from the Swedish State
Shipbuilding Experimental Tank. Many towing
tests with systematically varied ship forms have
been performed at the Swedish tank. The following
is a list of some of the series:
1. Ships with Spe = 0.525 (Edstrand and Lind-
gren, 1956)
2. Ships with 6pp = 0.675 (Freimanis and Lind-
gren, 1958}
3. Ships with S22 = 0.600-0.750 (Freimanis and
Lindgren, 1959)
4. Tankers (I-V) (Edstrand et al., 1953a, 1953b,
1954, 1956: Lindgren, 1956)
5. Coasters (Warholm, 1953)
In an overall presentation of some of the results
(Williams, 1969) the nondimensional presentation
follows the recommendations of the International
Towing Tank Conference 1957, thatis, all frictional
data are given on basis of Reynolds number. For
different values of Spp, curves of Ce each for a
length-displacement ratio, are given on a base of
the Froude number. In the same paper contours of
effective power are also given.
escheat cee
Other experimenters have run relatively small
series within the scope of their ownfields of interest
and financial resources. A few of theseseries will be
mentioned here. Results from towing tests with
models of
1. High-speed cargo ships have been published in
Lindblad (1946, 1949, 1950)
2. Coasters in Todd and Weedon (1941-1942)
where other references in the field can be found
3. Fishing bgats and trawlers in Doust (1960),
Doust et al. (1967), Gillmer (1960), Lackenby
(1960), Otsu (1960), Thomson and Pattullo
(1969), Traung (1955, 1960), and Traune et al.
(1967)
4. Stern trawlers in Pattullo (1974)
Tugs in Argyriadis (1957), Parker and Dawson
Lon
(1962), and Roach (1954)
ee
let
USE OF STATISTICAL METHODS 109
When making an estimate of the power necessary
for propulsion of new ships, data from the series
can be used when the new ships are within the
sphere ofthe series. It has to be noted that some of
the old series have been carried out without use of
turbulence stimulation, and the flow may then have
been laminar over a great part of the model making
the results uncertain. Furthermore, some models
have been equipped with trip wire and others with
studs (compare Section 4.2.6), which perhaps may
result in differences in the resistance measured dur-
ing the experiments.
5.4. USE OF STATISTICAL METHODS
5.4.1. Introduction
Doust (1962, 1964) was one of the first to demon-
strate howstatistical theory could be applied in ship
design and powerestimating. Using a computer, the
method yields a regression equation that expresses
ship resistance for a particular ship type in terms of
certain basic form parameters at any required
Froude number. Evaluation of this regression equa-
tion for specific combinations of form parameters
provides corresponding estimates of resistance for
the vessel under consideration, while minimization
of the equation within the practical ranges of the
form parameters gives an indication of where im-
provements in ship resistance can be made in spe-
cific cases.
5.4.2. Regression Analysis
In this section a statistical method to evaluate a
series of results from towing tests with ship models
of one particular ship type is given.
The procedure in a regression analysis can be as
follows:
I. A series of model test results is established for
the ship type in question. The number ofexper-
iments ts called x.
2. The variation of the residuary resistance cocffi-
cient Cr as function of the ship form is wanted:
y= Cy = f(Xi, 42,43, - - -) (5.4.1)
3. The parameters x that can have an influence on
Cer are studied. If there is a correlation between
twoof the parameters, one of them is rejected.
 Lig DETERMINATION OFSHIP RESISTAN
CE

In Fig. 4.8.2 is given the relation betwe

en the products of combinations and powers of the
block coefficient § and the length—-displac
ement variables a; to x,,. In the Ieq. (5.4.3) e is the
ratio L/V"3 for someships. It will be seen that a
residual error in cach observation and b, to bp
single curve cannot be drawn showing that
are the regression coefficients to be deter-
there is no correlation between these
two pa- mined.
ramcters. For other parameters an analogous
6. The equations from the individual experiments
procedure can be used.
{Eq. (5.4.3)] are then collected in a system
For a constant value of Froude numb of
er F,, equations (a mathematical model):
the parameters in the analysis may be

L/B = length-breadth ratio

yO = by! + bys) + byl? 1

! bax? fee et b,x" + eith

BIT = breadth-draught ratio

8 = maximum sectional area coefficient yO) = Bix? + boxy) + bys?

yp = horizontal prismatic coefficient
+ bax +--+ 4 byxs” + ¢)
(g =
3/8, where 6 is the block coefficient yO = byxy) + bx? + by? F
and 8 the midship section coefficient)
+ byxP) tb byxh) +
LCB = longitudinalposition of center of
buoy- y= byxY + boxh + byx\!)
ancy (or the distance of CB abaft amid-
ships and expressed as a percentage of t bax tee + bx + ef)
L)
7a, = half-angle of entrance measured on
the nt ia i int
floating waterline forward Ve = Bue = Bax + baxyin)
tab, :
7a, = maximumangle of run ata station one- Tr baxy Tort tp baXp
(nl,
+ el)

half of the underwater form (5.4.4)

@gs = maximum buttock slope at B/4 of
the The model has to be such that the differences
underwater form measured relative be-
to tween the model and the results from the
floating waterline experi-
ments are as small as possible. This means that
Ne?
4.
has to be as small as possible: De? is equal to
All the basic parameters and the resistance
co-
efficient have to be transformed into
new vari-
ables, which range from —1 to +1. Le? = Sly — (bx, + boxy + bx, +--+ + box)P
In this way
the terms are all of the same order
of magni- (5.4.5)
tude, thus avoiding any problem
with varving
decimalpoints, while the relative importan The summation in Eq. (5.4.5) and in the follow
ce of -
the various terms can be more easil ing equations is taken fromi = 1 toi= n, where
y assessed. nis
The relation between the parameters the number ofindividual experiments. By differ
and the en-
newvariables will then be uation with respect to 4, br, b3,. . ., by
and equat-
ing to Zero a series of simultaneous equat
ions is
x = K\(parameter — K3) obtained:
(5.4.2)

The result from each individual expe 13 he

riment is by>xj + bi Dxyxs 7 bidxypxy
arranged in an equation of the form:
v ba2xy xs + + byExyX, = Vay
y= byx, + bix) + bax, b I DX Xsa + bo2 Sas2

+ bax, 4 Bay Foo byXp te + bghxoxy +... 4 bp 2x2x, = Lray

5 , > ae
(5.4.3) by Dxpxy + babxixy + O34 25

where x; to x,, are the variables and Xney re

LOA,
are mew independent variables composed
of
Popes enarersees
 USE OF STATISTICAL METHODS i
By using vector notation, the following is
intro- Since ¢ is a number
duced:
xy (fy é= é (e transposed) (5.4.15)
A Therefore,
wa]: (5.4.7) e= 6-8 =(y- bly ~ #5
re| (5.4.16)
=(y — #'b)G" - 8D)
which is a (p X 1) column vector:
because (%)' = ¥. Performing the multiplication and
by
Ls.

remembering that every term in Eq. (5.4.16) is a

b> (1 x 1) matrix, the following equation is obtained:
eae

e? = yy’ — 2b'éy +b’ te’ b (5.4.17)

ra

_
a)

oO
met
lI

be
by Foreachi= 1,2,.. .,n,yis a number that can be
placed in front or back whenperforming the mullti-
which is a(p X 1) column vector;
plications. By summing from i = | toi = # and
combining with Eqs. (5.4.11) and (5.4.12), the fol-
yO = [y]® (5.4.9) lowing is obtained:
which is a (1 X 1) matrix.
For simplification the indices (i) will be omitted LE = Tyy’ — 2b'B + b’Ab (5.4.18)
in the following equations: ¥’ is the transpose of £ = Yyy’ — 4B (5.4.19)
and is a (1 X p) row vector. <%’ will then be a qua-
dratic matrix (p x p). (@ - ¥") - b will be a (p X 1) = Syy’ — (6'B)'
column vector [(p X p) -(p x 1) = (p X ])]. Also = Syy' — B’b
x+y will be a (p X 1) column vector, which in
matrix notation means that

(t8b = %-y (b'B) isa(1 X 1) matrix andis therefore equalto its

(5.4.10) transpose. Furthermore, (')’ =h.
where 6 are the regressioncoefficients that have to If C stands for Syy' and n — p is the numberof
be estimated. Then a summation fromi=Itoi=n degrees of freedom, then the standard deviation o
has to be carried out. The new system of equations will be
will be similar to Eq. (5.4.10), which means:
= Vye VC - B(A~!B)
V2e _ BAB) (5.4.20)
A-b=B (px pp X 1) =(p x I) n—p nA-p

(5.4.11)
Or To get good results or a good mathematical model
the number ofresults from the experiments has to
6 = AB (5.4.12) be essentially larger than the number of regression
coefficients.
- ’ -
where A = xand B = S&y. For each roworfor The calculations of the regression coefficients 4,
each i from I to nin the system of equations (5.4.4) bs, by, 2, 6, and the standard deviation have to
the following notation can be used: be carried out by computer, perhaps by using a
standard program. The regression equation estab-
y=2'-b+é (5.4.13) lished can then be used for optimization of the de-
sign with regard to the demand for power.
OF An example of the establishment and the use of a
regression equation can be found in the papers ‘‘A
(5.4.14) Statistical Analyses of FAO Resistance Data for
 112 DETE R ee OF SHIP RESSIST.ANC E

Fishing Cratt’’ (Daust et al., 1967) and “SNewPassi- By - a speed correction

bilities for Improvement in the Design of Fishing
n= the slope of the resistance speed
Vessels”’ (Traung et al., 1967). The final regression
curve giving the effect of tank block-
equation is here expressed in the following way:
age on the measured resistance of
Cri = Go + aX) + aXy + ayXz 4 aX: the models
t+ asX5 + agX + a7Xz + ugXg + agXg _ 0, if there is no woodenkeel
é
1, if there is a wooden keel
+ aygXF + ayXF + ayX} + ayX}
+ ayaX§ + aysX2 + ayyX3 + ay7X§ Q, if turbulence stimulators are fit-
+ aygX7 + aX} + aX} + aX} ted.
+ QX3 + ayXi + 74X94 + 5X3 “11, if turbulence stimulators are not
fitted.
FagXT + ayXZ + aagX3 + ayyX4
dy, Gy, a2, - ,» Ags are constants deter-
+ aXe + ayXrXy + ayX3Xy + €33XXF4
mined by the least-squares fitting, a
+ @3gX3X3 + a55X3X3 + ayX>X3 different set for each value of V/WL.
+ AXXe + aygXiX6 + ayXiX2 f
r

+ ayXjX— + ay XTXE + XXb Again it must be pointed out that to make a mean-
+ AX\Xq + aggXiXq + AysX,X?2 ingful regression analysis the number of eXperi-
ments has to be considerably larger than the number
t aygX 1X4 + QyXTXG + aygX1X3
of constants.
+ aagX2X4 + asgX 3X, + as\X2X3
+ asaX4X5 4 a53XUXs + s4X4Xz
+ assXGX6 + a5¢XX6 + as7XqXh 5.4.3, 2%-Factor Tests
+ asgXgXq + asgXZX3 + aggX4X3
+ ig X4Xg + agXiXy + ggX4X3 In the towing tank, statistical methods can also be
b
Aga XX3 + agsXTXy + 115g.XXG used in ways other than those describedin Section
+ ag XX6+ aggX3X, + ieneae 5.4.2. The statistical methods deal with the uncer-
tainty caused by experimental errors, instrument
+ aXXo + ay XX + a7XsX? errors, Variations in the environments, etc, Fre-
+ a3X{Xg + ayXiX + aX\XF quently, in an investigation to compare two meth-
t+ A7gX2Xg + anX5Xg + ayyXsXi ods or models, say, or to estimate some physical
+ A79XsXg + agyXiXy + ag)X3X2 quantity ee as resistance or propeller thrust, one
+ Gg2(Bin) + ag3(Byn)? + agsd; + A538: experiment is not enough. Too many would be
asteful, b ut too few would mean too great a risk of
where Cry) = RL/AV?, a resistance criterion that at drawing the wrong conclusions. Statistical methods
constant Froude number enables help to determine the right number of experiments
comparison of performance to be to perform, and to assess the precision of the
made in terms ofresistance per ton results. It often happens that the results will depend
displacement on several factors. If these factors were indepen-
Cr, = the resistance criterion when L = dent of one another, it would be possible to deter-
16 ft (4.9 m) mine first the optimum of the first factor, then the
X, = L/B optimum ofthe second factor, and so on. Unfortu-
nately, the problem is often complicated by interac-
Xy = BIT
lions between the various factors. Frequently the
X,= p factors are so numerous and can be variedin so
Xg=o@ Many ways that it is impossible or uneconomical to
Xs = LCB test every possible combination of them. It is neces-
X, = 4a° sary then to design a limited number of experiments
in such a way as to extract the maximum amount of
X= laf
information at a minimum cost in time and money.
Xs = abs Suchfactorial experiments can be designed and the
Xy = trim results analvzed bythe aid ofstatistical methods.
 USE OF DIAGRAMS 113
Here only the so-called 2*-factor tests
will be peared over the years. Among the first were the
mentioned. The experiments concern K
factors, diagrams published in Speed and Power of Ships by
eachat twolevels. By performing blocksof exper
i- Taylor (1933), where residual resistance per ton of
ments each Consisting of 2* experiments, the displacement is given as a function of specd—length
inter-
action betWeen the K factors can be investigat
ed. ratio. Later Taylor's test data were reanalyzed by
The factoria] design permits the calcu Gertler (1954). Furthermore, it should be mentioned
lation of the
effect of each factor singly and in all combinations
, that on the basis of tests carried out at the Nether-
and every individual result Is based onthe total
data lands Ship Model Basin at Wageningen Lap (1956)
of the expetiments. If Kis 4, the four single facto prepared diagrams giving the variation of a resid-
rs
can be A, B,C, and D. The factor A could have two ual resistance coefficient with a speed-length ratio
different Values, a high value called A and a for ship forms with various prismatic coefficients
low
value called @. The other factors could likewise and with varying position of the center of
have two values (two levels) B and b, C and c,
and buovancy.
D and d. As shownin the following diag
ram the In the publications Ship Resistance by Guldham-
blocks of experiments can be subdivided into mer and Harvald (1965, 1974) attempts were made
16
parts each, and each part have
tobe allotted a par- to coordinate a great part of the published test data
ticular treatment at random. The basic design is withinthe area that is of importance in the design of
on
the following pattern:
merchant ships. In the following sections somefur-
ther comments on the different methods will be
A a given,
Dd Dd When constructing diagrams to be used for deter-
mination of the powerpreliminary designs, it is es-
B C ABCD ABCd aBCD aBCd sential that the right parameters are chosen. In
the paper “On the Presentation of Ship-Resis-
© ABcD ABed aBcD tance Data’’ Lackenby (1954) has stated that the
aBed
desirable characteristics of a suitable system for
P C AbCD AbCd abCD abCd the general presentation of resistance data appear
to be:
C AbeD Abcd abcD abcd
1. The resistance performance should be mea-
sured by the resistance per unit of displace-
The factor A, BC, and D can as an example be 8, ment, and, at a given speed, the resistance coef-
LN", BIT, and LCBifa series of towing tests have ficient should reflect variations in this quantity.
to be carned out. Sometimes only one block ofex-
2. The ship-size characteristics included in the re-
periments 1§ carried out, but then it is not possible
sistance and speed coefficients should be con-
to getinformation regarding the uncertainty on the
experiments,
fined to the primary variables commonlyused
in ship design.
The efficiency with which limited resources can
be applied is capable of relatively enormous in- 3. In order to reduce the number ofvariables as
creases by Careful planning of the experimental pro- much as possible the effect of absolute size
gram. Information about statistical methods in in- should be eliminated, that is, the coefficients of
dustri al Pesearch and especially about resistance and speed should be dimensionless.
factorial
designs can be found in standard works on practical 4. The presentation should bring into relief the ef-
statistics. fects of changes of proportions, fineness, and
/ other geometrical features.
5. For practical use the resistance and speed coef-
5.5. USE OF DIAGRAMS ficients should lend themselves to simple nu-
merical calculation.
5.5.1. Introduction

These desires can be fulfilled in different ways as

Many diagrams and formulas for determination of will appear from the description in the following
the effective power of preliminary designs have ap- sections.
 {iq DETERMINATION OFSHIP RESISTANCE
5.5.2. Taylor’s and Gertler’s Diagrams
The Taylor diagrams (J933) are built on the results
from mode] experiments with a series of models
whose lines all are based on the form of the lines of
a British Cruiser (see Section 5.3). Contours of re-
siduary resistance are given in pounds per ton of
displacement for B/H(= B/T) equal to 2.25 and 3.75
for different values of the speed length coefficient
V/V L (V in knots and L in feet). The abscissa is a
scale for longitudinal coefficient / (= ¢) and the or-
dinate is a scale for displacement length ratio A/(L/
100) where A is the displacement in tons and L is
the length in feet. Gertler (1954) reanalyzed the
results of the experiments (see Section 5.3) and
gave curves of the residual resistance coefficient Cr
versus speed—length ratio V/V and Froude num-
ber F,, for standard series vessels having beam—
draft ratios B/T of 2.25, 3.00, and 3.75 and having
longitudinal prismatic coefficient Cp (= ¢) of 0.48,
0.49, ... , 0.85, and 0.86. Furthermore, Gertler
gave tables of the Schoenherr frictional resistance
coefficients Ce versus Reynolds numbersR,, and ta-
bles of density p and kinematic viscosity of water v.
In order to get an idea of the accuracy of the
diagrams, the Netherlands Ship Model Basin took
115 randomly selected single-screw models all
tested in the towing tank in Wageningen and com-
pared the ship resistances at the service speed de-
rived from the model tests with the ship resistance
calculated from the diagrams (Lap, 1956). The per-
centage differences were determined, and the distr-
bution is given in Fig. 5.5.1. The diagram gives an
insight into the accuracy that may be expected from
this and other similar methods (see also Fig. 5.5.3),
20
NUMBER OF
MODELS
154
| sistance have to be made. The following allowances
haa
bef HELE
-10 -§
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCES:
Figure $.5.1. Frequency distribution oferrors in Taylor's stan-
dard series method of approximating the resistance.
5.5.3. Lap’s Diagrams
With the aid of the results of a large number of
model experiments that have been carried out by
the Netherlands Ship Model Basin (NSMB) from
1935 to 1955, an attempt was made to devise a
method to determine ship resistance without model
experiments (Lap, 1956). Another object of this at-
tempt wasto find out in howfar Taylor’s standard
series method was valid for the ship forms of the
1950s.
The residuary resistances Rpg of the models in-
vestigated were taken as the total resistance Ry mi-
nus the frictional resistance Rycalculated using the
Schoenherr expression for the frictional resistance
coefficient. A residuary resistance coefficient was
then defined as:
Rr
© = aA (5.5.1)
here A, was the area of the maximum transverse
section. This coefficient was given in a set ofdia-
grams as function of a special speed—length ratio
ViVeL, where Vis in m/s and Lis in m. The results
from the experiments were subdivided into five
groups called A, B, C, D, and E, all the models of
each group satisfying a certain relation between the
position of the longitudinal center of buoyancy
(LCB) and the prismatic coefficient ¢. The effects
of L/V'°, 8, and w were not considered. The average
value of B/T was 2.40. All the results were cross-
faired and the results for the single-screw ships
were given in five diagrams of which one (for group
C)is reproducedin Fig. 5.5.2. The resistance of the
smooth ship in the tank condition can then be calcu-
lated by
R= (C+ ©) Gov2s) 6.5.2)
where S§is the wetted area. In the case of the rough
ship underideal conditions, an allowancefor rough-
ness has to be made. In addition, corrections for
sleering resistance, air resistance, and bilge keel re-
are stated:
For roughness all welded hull Cy = 0.35 x 1073
For stecring resistance Cy = 0.04 « 10-4
For bilge-keel resistance Cr = 0.04 x 1073
For air resistance Cay = 108 ®& Tor?
 USE OF DIAGRAMS is

40 :
0 oof, 3S fos
30 a V7, -

20 EZ 7

=a
[ee
10

als 0,6 0,7 0,8 09 1,0 WW 12 y 13

ee
L
Figure 5.5.2. NSMB diagram for residuary resistance for models in group C (B/T = 2.40),

The resistance under trial conditions is then

with the ship resistance calculated from Gertler’s
diagrams. Also Lap’s diagrams have been tested on
= (Crs
(c +: this material, and the distribution of the percentage
R= OS
Ars + XC,)G
y pv3s) 6.5.3)
tpV-
differences are given in Fig. 5.5.3. As it could be
expected the Lap-method is somewhat better than
where =C,, is the sum ofthe allowances. the Gertler-method perhaps due to the fact that a
For service conditions additional allowances NSMB test material had been employed in the de-
have to be made, depending on the sailing route. veloyz-ment of the method.
The values of these allowances can be given as per-
centages of the total resistance under trial condi-
tions. For the main routes the additional allowance 5.5.4. Guldhammer’s and Harvald’s Diagrams
percentages (p) for the service condition can be as
follows: In the publication Ship Resistance (Guldhammer
and Harvald, 1965, 1974) an assembly of published
North Atlantic route, eastward 25-30%
North Atlantic route, westward 30-40% 20
Pacific route 25-40% NUMBER OF
MODELS
Australian route 22~—28% 15 4 i.
East Asiatic route 25-30%

Finally, the total resistance for the ship in servic 10 i

e
condition can Ye expressed by
I
ff
A,
R = (Crs +©>
° | 1] |
+ 2C,) (1 + p)pV2S) (5.5.4)
oO if]

-10
}

-5
UH
| | i

0
i | J

a
[ [

16
In Section 5.5.2 it was mentioned that for 115 sin-
PERCENTAGE DIFFERNCES
gle-screw models the ship resistance at the service
Figure 5.5.3. Frequency distribution of errors in the NSMB
speed derived from the model tests was compared method of approximating the resistance.
 116 DETERMINATION OF SHIP RESISTANCE

results Trom towing tests have been coordinated. . 0.075

The analysis of the collected basis material has been Cr = (logyk,—2)
carried oul in the following way: a .
where &, is the Reynolds Number (Viv,
I. All data have been referred to the model area, where v is coefficient of kinematic viscosity and
and the model resistance (Rz,) has been deter- Lis the length on waterline). In Fig. 5.5.4 con-
mined as a function of speed, tours of Cr are given for different values of V
2. The specific total resistance coefficient of the and F,. The abscissa is the length Z of the
model (C;,,) has been determined: model. The diagram corresponds to v = 1.139 x
10- ms! p = 1.000 tm’, and T = 15°C. The
R diagram may therefore be used at other condi-
Cim = a (5.5.5) uons, that is, other densities and temperatures,
2) VinSm only if the length is altered before entering the
diagram to
where p is the mass density, V,, is velocity of
model, 5,, is wetted surface of model (= mean _ 1.139 I i (5.5.8)
girth x length on waterline). 1 10% ~
3. The specific residual resistance coefficient has
been determined from 4. Cp has been expressed as a function of Froude
number

Cr = Crm — Cran (3.5.6) 7 V —

nS
Vel ( 5.5. )
where Cry, is the specific frictional resistance
coefficient. The “ITTC 1957 model-ship corre- (the speed—length ratio V/V L, where V is mea-
lation Iine’’ has been used to determine the fric- sured in knots and Lis in feet, is found as a
tional resistance coefficient subscale on the Cx diagrams).

. 8 [
a C7 Tt

7 \ \\ V +ITTC-57: c, =
(log,ews
Rn- 2)
yes t+}
(NCS ro
6 \ X03 FRESHWATER 15°C

i ii Xo '

Wess
5 \ Se |
1 _ |

So tS = —— T ~0s +| iV

SSS
4 N KS SSS =~ SSeee _C i _ 1s

—
he SEEt-
an Soa
Sa
oo
CC
=
:
ES
3-1. _

2 | _ i | i | . ttt
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 m_ 10 pou
Figure 5.8.4. (Che frictional resistance coefficient Cp taccording to PPE 1957) as a function ol ship-model length and speed V.

3. The results have been arranged in groups ac-
cording to length-displacementratio L/V" and
the prismatic coefficient ¢ of the model. Here
V abscissa is the length 1. of the ship. The diagram
is the volumetric displacement and
_ Vv
¢ ~ LBTB (5.5.10)
where B is breadth, is draught, and £ is mid-
ship section area coefficient.
6. The main diagrams have been drawn giving the
mean curves of Cg for the breadth-draughtratio
BIT = 2.5. The diagrams are shown in Figs.
5.5.5-5.5.13.
In some places in the diagram the curves are dotted
in order to indicate that they have been based either
on veryfewtest results or determined byextrapola-
tion. The uncertainty is therefore comparatively
great in these areas. Furthermore, it should
be
noted that the uncertainty is also great in and near
the areas where the curves have pronounced
humps, especially where the slope becomes nega-
tive. Small alterations in the hull form in these areas
can considerablyinfluence the Cp value.
It must also be mentioned that the resistance
curves correspond to vessels with a standard
form,
that is, a standard position of the center of buoy-
ancy, Standard B/T, normally shaped sections, mod-
erate cruiser stern, and raked stem.
The resistance R and the effective power P- fora
new ship can then be calculated by
R= Cr@pV’S) (N) (5.5.11)
Pe = RV (kW) (5.5.12)
where the total ship resistance coefficientis
Cr = Ce + Cr+ Cy (5.5.13)
where
Cr = residual resistance coefficient, which for
the ‘‘standard”’ ship form can be taken from the
diagrams (Figs. 5.5.5—5.5.13)
Cr = frictional resistance coefficient, which can
be calculated by
c= 2.075 osu:
* GognR, - 22 (5.5.14)
USE OF DIAGRAMS 117
or can be taken from Fig. 5.5.14 where contours
of Cy are given from different values of V. The
corresponds tov = 1.188 x 10°°ms7!, p = 1.025
tim?, and ¢ = 15°C. The diagram maytherefore be
used at other conditions, that is, other densities
and temperatures, only if the length is altered
before entering the diagram to:
1.188
Ly = Tox & (5.5.15)
C, = incremental resistance coefficient, whichis
a coefficient correcting for roughness of the sur-
face and scale effect on the results from the
model experiments. In this way C4 will depend
on the way in which Cp and Cr are fixed.
If the ship has to tow, R must be replaced by R + F,
where Fis the two-rope pull.
As ships are generally different from the stan-
dard to a greater or lesser extent, the following cor-
rections should be taken into account, when the
ship resistance of the ship and the environments
had to be taken into account.
BIT
As the diagrams have been prepared for a breadth—
draught ratio corresponding to
BIT = 2.5 (5.5.16)
a correction must be made if Cx is desired for a ship
with a larger or smaller breadth-draught ratio.
Examination of the present test material has
shownthat the following correcting formula can be
recommended:
10Cp = 10°Crrpire2.5) + 0.16 (B/T _ 2.5) (5.517)
The correction may be positive as well as negative.
LCB
The Cr curves are intended to correspond to ves-
sels with a longitudinal position of center of buoy-
ancy (I.CB) near to what is today considered the
best possible position. The optimum LCB isa quan-
tity that is in some doubt, and the available litera-
ture shows differences of opinion that make the pic-
ture rather confused. The dependence of ship
 2

10°C,

7
f

roam eee wr tr ewe

6

\ int 5

ee
4

; 15 0,20 30 3 0 Fn=ge
-
Fy=-. 045
7
028 03 035 O40
aoe 1 1 — 77
ass O6 TT
oF Un
08 !
os rm
1,0 :T 3M
Fe 14
= 15
[knots
Wi ie

Figure 5.5.5. Residuary resistance coefficient versus speed lenuth ratio for different values of longitudinal prismatic coefficient.
LIV? = 4.0),

11k
Pia
ee
Eas:
 ja?
ee.se—i_naemtemner,
A,
ene,
em

0 Wit
O15 0,20 0,25 030 035 040 Fn= 45
a
as 06 07 a8 as Lo i 12 BY 1K [sexe 1S
WL ft
Figure 5.5.6. Residuary resistance coefficient versus speed-length ratio for different values
of longitudinal prismatic coefficient.
LAB = 45,

119
 0
Qs 020 025 030 Q35 Q40 Fr=- % o45
Vogl
F TE a T T T
Os 06 a7 O18 a3
T
10
T
u
T T T T T T a a
12 13 oY te [sets 1S
¥L Vit
Figure §.5.7, Residuary resistance coefficient versus speed-leneth
LY ~ 5.9 ratio for different values of longitudinal prismatic
coefficient

120
 10

0 | jy
0,15 Q20 025 Q30 035 040 Fn= 7 0.45
i T T : T : T : T Y T 7 T 7 T : Tr dl
as 06 07 as ag 10 i 12 13 i7 1 I"cnot
ng a 18¢
Figure 5.5.8. Residuary resistance coefficient versus speed—length ratio for different values
of longitudinal prismatic coefficient.
LAM = 55.
 ors 0,20
: Q 25 03
130 Q35 eat=
040 Fr=—_ 045
rr 7 T r T : T r T T
a5 O06 a7 08 ag 10 7
T T
2
T
3
T 7
oO
T 7T
og ca 1s
VL Vi
Figure 5.5.9, Residuary resistance coefficient versus speed-length ratio for different
values of longitudinal prismatic coefficient
LIVE! = 6.0.

a
 10°C,

Qs Q20 0,25 Q30 035 040 FR=— a45

Co T
Vgt
: T r T o T : T :
os 06 07 08 a3 1,0
T
u
: T
12
: T Fi 7 : T
woX ou [se 18
VL vit
Figure 5.5.10. Residuary resistance coefficient versus speed—length ratio for different
values of longitudinal prismatic coefficient.
Le = 6.5.
 oe
is

Q1s 0,20 q25 0,30 0,35 040 Fyp=— 045

VoL
J li T T T ¥ ] T T T T T
! : T T TH T
as 0.6 07 08 ag 10 10 1 2 14] knots) ts
¥E Vit
neue 5.5.11. Residuary resistance coefficient versus speed—length ratio for different values of longitudinal
prismatic coefficient
LIV = 7.9, : .
 103

3 - -

ais 0,20 0.25 030 Q35 Q40 Faz 7 045

g
a
05 O6 a7 0B os 1,0 WW 1,2 130 VE 4a Ve fs
Figure 5.5.12. Residuary resistance coefficient versus speed—length ratio for different values of longitudinal prismatic coefficient.
LIV= 7.5,
 10

so
0
“| - .
Qis 020 Q25 030 035 Q40 Fyr=—-— 045
7 T T
Vou
T T - 1 ; T T T | r
05 06 a7 o8 og 1,0
T y T ienote)
i 12 13 Ve 14 [*s2] 15
Vigure 5.5.13, Residuary resistance coefficient versus spced-length ratio
for different values of longitudinal prismatic coefficient.
LVS = eg

126
SR ame cer Sige Nem teemee? me
.
 2 Fore Verfeat,
As the standard position of LCBis, as mentioned
carlicr, assumed togive the smallest possible resis-
tance, all other positions must in principle give re-
sistances that are larger. The increase in resistance
LCB
is to be found by multiplying the deviation of LCB
from standard

ALCB = LCB — LCBtandara(LCB in % of L)

(5.5.18)
|

|
LU han 2
}

by a factor 410°Cg/dLCB. The values of the factor

may be obtained from the Fig. 5.5.16, which is valid

L.
rr
S

S
Ke
So

04 05 O6
Figure 5.5.15. Standard LCB. The longitudinal position ofthe
center of buoyancythat is considered the best possible.
resistance on LCB is, however, evident at higher
speeds. In an attempt to make someorder out of the
confusion, the available information has been col-
lected and condensedin the Fig. 5.5.15, which must
be regarded as the standard LCB of the method.
The standard LCB has in this way been defined
as a linear function on the Froude number F,.
AS no
safe dependency on other parameters have been re-
corded, the standard LCB is represented in the dia-
gram by a single line, and the shaded area around
this lineillustrates the spread of the examined mate-
rial.
a10°Ce
ace { |
05 oA
/ 080
Faz You
for the case where LCB is forward of LCB gandard:
a7 os og FF When LCB is aft of the LCBetandara, the Sources are
very contradictory, and as the tendencies are very
slight, no serious error will be introduced by ne-
glecting the correction in such cases.
The corrected residual resistance coefficient for
a ship with LCB forward of standard is conse-
quently determined by:
10°C, = 10? Cristandard) + at |ALCB] (5.5.19)
The hull form dealt with in Ship Resistance is the
hull form that was commonfor merchant ship types
around 1960, that is, up to the time of publication of
Guldhammer and Harvald (1974). This hull form has
the aft perpendicularly placedin the axis of the rud-
der stock and the fore perpendicular in the fore end
point of the design waterline. Since 1960 the hull
J forms have been developed further, and they have
|
also become more varied, for instance, various bul-
; bous bows have become widely used. The formulas
07s J)
given here for resistance calculation can be used for

7
A r co yo

r
VEZ a 7
the modern and more varied bulb forms as well as
for the traditional forms, provided the following
/| more suitable definitions of L and LCB are used.
TA
A J a . ss
The calculation length L is defined as the length
between the fore and aft limits of the displacement,
»
od /
vaAtt
Pf
that is, the ultimate length of the submerged part of
: the hull, Los according to ITTC standard. For ships
of traditional form with no bulb this length is exactly
oxo 020 Fr = Fat
030 0 the waterline length.
Tt a
O4 Qs Os 07
LCB defines the longitudinal position of the cen-
O86 Oo se 10
Figure 5.5.16. ‘The correction of the residua ter of buoyancyas the distance from this point to
l resistance coeffi-
cient for LCB 19%forward of standard. the midship section, positive aft of this section. The
The correction is thus
(H1OCe/dLCBALCBI, where ALCRis the longitu
dinal distance
midship section is defined as the section at a dis-
between actual and standard LCB in percen tance of 48.5% of L from the fore limit of the dis-
t of /.. There is no
correction for LCB aft of standard. The
correction is alwiuys placement. L is the calculation length described
positive
above. The midship section thus defined is there-
 USE OF DIAGRAMS 129

fore the midpoint between the auxiliary perpendicu-

lars AP; — FP); compare Fig. 5.5.17. AP; — FP, for
anormal formwill coincide with the perpendiculars
defined in the usual way AP — FP.

Hutt. Form (SHAPE OF SECTIONS AND Bow)

As previously stated it is assumed that the resis-

tance curve (deduced from Figs. 5.5.5—5.5.13) ap-
plics to a ship having a ‘“‘standard”’ form, that is, the
sections are neither distinctly U shaped nor V
shaped. Therefore, in calculating the effective
power of a preliminary ship design it should not
normally be necessary to make a correction for
shapeof hull sections. Ifthe sections are extremely
U or V shaped, the 10°C values may be corrected
as follows: Corrections to 10'Cpg for shape of sec-
tions

Fore Body Extreme U Extreme V

—0.1 +0.1
After Body Extreme U Extreme V
+0. —0.1
(5.5.20)
These corrections cover the speed range V/VgL =
0.20-0.25. Furthermore, it must be considered that
the “‘standard’’ form is a form with well-designed
lines. If it is necessary to alter the lines duc to the
operating requirements ofthe ship, or allowance to
the power must be made, it is recommended that Cr
be increased by 10% and perhaps 20% or more for
nonoptumallines.
Concerning the bow, the standard form must be
regarded as having an orthodox nonbulbous bow.
For a vessel with bulbous bow having Agr/Ay = 0.10
(Agr is the sectional area of the bulbous bow at the
fore perpendicular and Ay is the areaof the midship
section) the following corrections to 10°Cz are sug-
gested:
- FPy
Alp FP
Figure 3.5.17. Definition of L and LCB. (a) Normal form.
Length of the ster in the waterline is normally approximately
3% of L. (b) Hull with no sternpost. AP often placed in the
endpoint of DWL. For LCE correction AP, 3% of L before the
endpoint of the waterline is used. (c) Hull with stern of extreme
length. For the LCB correction AP; 3% before the endpoint of
the waterline is used. (d) Hull with bulbous bow. FP,is the fore
limit of the displacement.
With Ag7/Ay = 0.10 the bulbous bow is rather pro-
nounced. For 0 < Ag7/Ay < 0.10 the corrections are
assumed to be proportional with size of bulb.
These corrections are valid for loaded conditions
only. At ballast conditions the corrections due to
bulbous bows will give an opposite picture. Full
forms (¢ > 0.70) will show a remarkable decrease in
resistance, the corrections having two to three
times these values, whereas the resistance for fine
forms (~ < 0.60) generally will tend to increase.

F,=015 4 0.18 0.21 0.24 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.36 ©

+0.2 0 -0.2 —().4 0.4 -0.4 0.50
+0.2 0 -0.2 -0.3 -~0.3 0.60
0.2 0 -0.2 -0.3 —0.3 0.70
$0.1 0 ~0.2 0.80
a . . a (5.5.21)
 130 DETERMINATION OF SHIP RESISTANCE

APPLNDAGES APPENDAGES
Rudders No correction. The The correction of Cr for appendages is made by
standard form is in- simply increasing Cr proportionally to the wetted
tended to include a surfaces of the appendages. Thus
rudder.
Bilge keel No correction. (6-5,22) Fiscal 5] ce
Bossings For full ships add 3-5% BAS
to Cp.
Shaft brackets Forfine ships add 5-8% where § is the wetted surface of the hull and 5; is
and shafts to Cp. the wetted surface of the hull and appendages.

INCREMENTAL RESISTANCE AIR RESISTANCE AND STEERING RESISTANCE

For many yearsit has been general practice to apply
a correction to the Crs for the ship, in order to
include the effect of the roughness of the surface of
the ship, which will never be ‘‘model-smooth”’ even
when brand-new and freshly painted. This incre-
mental resistance coefficient for model—ship corre-
lation has very often been fixed at Cy = 0.0004.
More recent experience has shown that this cannot
be true in all cases. Therefore, the following correc-
tion for roughness and scale effect is proposed for
the trial condition:
The air resistance may be determined by use of data
for the abovewater structure and the air. The mag-
nitude ofthe air resistance is, however, very often
of minor importance and the expenditureofeffort in
making an accurate calculation may not be justified.
Therefore, in the absence of knowledge of the wind-
age of a ship design it is suggested that 10°Cp be
corrected by
10°Ca4 = 0.07 (5.5.26)
The correctionfor steering resistunce may be about

For vessels with L = 100m, 10°C,= 0.4

1°Cas = 0.04 (5.5.27)
= 150m = (0.2
but may for course stable ships under favorable
= 200 m = 9g
conditions be negligible.
= 250m = —0.2
it can be seen that both corrections are small and
= 300 m = —0.3 that for a preliminary design they may be assumed
(5.5.23) to be included in the incremental resistance.

Some find the corrections given in Section 5.2.4

more suitable, that is, THE SERVICE CONDITION

The resistance and the effective power calculated

by use of the diagrams given here correspond to the
Displacement
values for a ship in the trial condition. that is. for
1 000 1 Ca = 0.6 x 104 ideal conditions as regards winds and waves, deep
10 000 t sheltered water, and smooth hull. For the mean
0.4 * 10% (5.5.24)
service condition an extra allowance has to be made
100 000 | 0 for the resistance andthe effective power because
1 000 000 t —0.6 * 104 of wind, sea, erosion, and fouling of the hull. This
extra allowance is dependent on the shipping route,
The following average service allowances (some-
It must be mentioned that these corrections of the
times called sea margin or service margin) on the
frictional resistance coefficients are still rather un-
Say aTeE
calculated resistance or effective power are pro-
Cerin
posed:
Pie

North Atlantic route, eastward, [5—
20% in summer and winter, respec-
tively
North Atlantic route, westward, 20-
30% in summer and winter, respec-
tively
Pacific route, 15-30%
South Atlantic and Australian routes.
12-18%
Fast Asiatic route, [5-20%
The total resistance has to be calculated from
Rr = Cr(ipV7S) (5.5.29)
lar
where S is the wetted surface of the hull.
Numerous methods for approximate determina-
tion of S exist. Use of one of the following two
methods is recommended:
1. The publications FORMDATAI-V (Guldham-
mer, 1962, 1963, 1967, 1969, 1973) contain hy-
drostatic data for a comprehensive series of
systematically varied ship forms. The wetted
surface of these forms are mapped (volumes
III—¥) using the coefficient
cS)
“TB 25T 6.5.30)
If the actual form for the preliminary ship de-
sign largely coincides with one of the FORM-
DATAforms, an error of less than 1% in the
determination of S will be obtained.
2. FKornormal merchant ship forms the wetted sur-
face can be obtained fromthe following formula
(a version of Mumford’s formula):
S = 1.025Lpp(SppB + 1.77) (5.5.31)
The FORMDATA diagrams and the preceding
formula correspond to ship forms having a vertical
stern and stem at the perpendiculars. Most ships
will have a watted surface corresponding to this as-
sumption as the plus and minus areas will balance
each other. For ships with a large underwater over-
USE OF DIAGRAMS 131
hang or with large cutouts, these conditions ought
to be allowed forin the calculations.
The calculations of the resistance and the effec-
tive powercan be carried out as shownin Sample
Form for the Calculation of Effective Power (see p.
132). The calculations can be performed using mini-
computers. Many naval architects now have com-
puter programs for such calculations.
In the design stage the main question to be set-
tled is the type and size of the engine (e.g., number
and dimensions of cylinders if diesel machinery).
The determination ofthe resistance must be suffi-
ciently exact so that, onthe basis of effective power
Pr, it ts possible to determine the shaft poweraccu-
rately enough toarrive at a safe solution tothis vital
question.
On the other hand, trying to attain greater accu-
racy than needed to solve this problem makes little
sense. The uncertainty of the factors involved is
considerable. and readers are warned against wast-
ing time in attempting to squeeze the last ounce of
accuracy out of a calculation that can only be an
estimation.
In diesel-engined ships a change in the number of
cylinders from, say, 6 to 7 or from I] to 12 means
that the power is changing by about 17% or 8%,
respectively. By modifying the mean effective pres-
sure and number of revolutions it is possible to vary
the continuous output by about 10%.
Turbine manufacturers have corresponding steps
between types.
On the basis of these considerations perhaps the
required accuracyin the determination of P; for a
preliminary ship design can be fixed at 1 up to 5%.
This accuracy will be easily obtained in many cases
by using the diagrams and the calculation forms in
this section.
The diagrams and the formulas can also be used
in the following manner. Every time the naval archi-
tect has a result fromhis or her own towing experi-
ments the results are pricked in on the diagrams.
Then when making an estimation of the resistance
for a proposal for a new ship, the naval architect
uses his or her own data as basis material and uses
the diagrams and the formulasin this section to cor-
rect the data. Often the results will be very good
whenusing such a procedure.
 a
132 ION OF SHIP RESISTANCE

Sample Porm for the Calculation of Effective Power

Dimensions
Coefficients, etc,

Length between perpendiculars Upp am Breadth-draught ratio —__

Length on waterline oe mm Block coefficient 6 —_—
Velmis Midship-section coefficient B —
Breadth B —_m Longitudinal prismatic
Draught a mm coefficient a —
Displacement er Length-displacement ratio LIN -
(1000 kg) Liv s/m
Volume Vv m3 Longitudinal position of Center of buoyancy
Vi —__m . — percent of L aft of i (Lpp/2)
Wetted surface Ss m ALCB = LCBaemat — LCByandtans = percent
208 N 34/m? Shape ofsections: Aft: Forward:
Wetted surface (appendages included) 5 — m? Lines:
SiS Shape of bow: t

Column ] 2 3 4 5 6 7
| a |
| 8 9 10 | tt | 12 13 14

|
10C, Corrections to 10°C, for
F
- LN!
“7 T
Vel Speed __. , Sections Append-
Vv V2 boSV? BIT LCB | lines Bow ages

Diagrams
Figs. Figs
Source 5.5.5- $.5.15-
(Formula) 5.5.13 (5.5.17) 3.5.16 (8.5.20) (8.9.21) (5.5.22)

N
Unit — mis {knots m/s? (or KN)| — — || — |f _ — eee
{ _ —_
1 L
Note! The figures in parentheses indicate formula numbers
in the text.
Columns 20~22 are intended to be used for supplementary
resistance calculations for air, steering, etc,
In a preliminary estimate the calculations in columns 9-14
and 20-22 may be wholly or partly omitted.

-
| 2 15 16 17 18 19 20 ; 21 22 23
i a
f 24 25 26

| Resul-
i
' lant IPC,
|
[oF 1U'CR 10R, ITTC57 10°C, 10°C, Cr R; P,
(849410
| +12 0, VE] Fig. 5.5.14 Si a7
Pt 13 4 14 Is + 18 +19 | _ 25]|
vy or (5.5.14) § (5.5.24) 20 + 21 + 22 | 10-45] x [23] {12} x (241

r_
&p

Powe
i i
| ! =

| ms | — —j-- J] | (or EN) {or KW) (metric)

735.5 1
for force measured in |
0.7355 [kN