TU Delft Delft Universiy of Techeology Developments in the Velocity Prediction based on the Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series Dr.ir. J.A. Keuning Ing U.B. Sonnenberg Report 1132-P March 1998 Published in: International Conference on The Modern Yacht, Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Portsmouth, March 18 & 19, 1998 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Marine Technology Ship Hydromechanics LaboratoryPAPER NO. 7 DEVELOPMENTS IN THE VELOCITY PREDICTION BASED ON THE DELFT SYSTEMATIC YACHT HULL SERIES by Dr ir J A Keuning and Ing U B Sonnenberg, Netherlands Paper presented at the Intemational Conference on THE MODERN YACHT 18 19 MARCH 1998 PORTSMOUTHDEVELOPMENTS IN THE VELOCITY PREDICTION BASED ON THE DELFT SYSTEMATIC YACHT HULL SERIES Dr ir J.A. Keuning, Ing U.B. Sonnenberg SUMMARY In the past few years new techniques used for prediction of the performance of sailing yachts (in waves) have been developed. In this paper two aspects will be deait with in more detail: First the calm water resistance of sailing yachts has been further developed in order to be able to predict the performance of a wider variety of sailing yacht designs with an improved accuracy. New extensions to the well known Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series (DSYHS) have been tested in the towing tank of the Delft Shiphydromechanics Laboratory. These tests have been performed with the bare hull models as well as with the models with keel and rudder. The resutts of these experiments yielded new expressions which will be used to formulate new polynomial approximations in the Velocity Prediction Program as developed a/o. by the Detft Shiphydromechanics Laboratory. Secondly in this paper the results of large number of towing tank experiments carried out with a series of five models of the DSYHS in waves and their analyses will be presented. The results of these experiments will be compared with the previously obtained approximations based on the results of systematic 2-D strip theory calculations of the added resistance of sailing yachts in waves in order to be able to validate these results. AUTHOR'S BIOGRAPHY Dr. Jan A Keuning is Associate Professor in the Delft Shiphydramechanics Laboratory at the Delft University of Technology. He previously worked in the Delft Hydraulic Laboratory 1 INTRODUCTION Since the first publication of the original results of the Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series (DSYHS) by Gerritsma e a. in 1981, which have been used by many authors to develop their Velocity Prediction (VPP) methods for sailing yachts, much has been changed in the design, the geometry and the appendages of sailing yachts. The present day designs differ sometimes considerably from the lines of the Stancfast 43 designed by Frans Maas which was used as the parent model of the original Series 1 This has led in 1983 to the introduction of a new parent model designed by Van Der Stadt Design in Wormerveer more closely following the lines of that era Recently a third additional parent model has been introduced in the Series according to the fines given by ‘Sparkman and Stephens of New York. The tests carried ‘out with the derivatives of these three different parent models within the framework ofthe Deift Systematic Yacht Hull Series and the expressions derived from these results are believed to be covering a conveniently wide range of possible yacht hull shapes at the moment. However new developments in yacht design may make additions in the future inevitable. In order to be able to evaluate the performance of yachts with a large variety of appendage designs, such as seen on the water nowadays, it was already decided in 1992 to split the experiments carried out in the framework of the OSYHS in two parts: i.e. one part with the unappended (bare) hulls only and one part with the appended hull (hull with keel and rudder). Obviously tests with the heeled and yawed yacht models are meaningless without the addition of a keel and rudder and for the sake of consistency throughout the Series it was decided from the beginning of the DSYHS to carry out all tests with the DSYHS models equipped with physically the same keel and rudder. In addition all models, i.e. the new models from 1992 onwards but also almost all models tested previously within the DSYHS, have been (rejtested in the upright condition without keel and rudder to be able to derive expressions for the resistance’s etc. of the canoe bodies only. Until 1992 this was not a regular procedure, which implied that all the upright resistance data included the resistance of the standard appendages and it was not possible to subtract these from the results. Up to 1985 this was not too big a problem, but after that quite different appendages started to appear, in particular smaller, thinner and with higher aspect ratios than the DSYHS standard keel and on the other side of the scale, when the results were used for the handicapping purposes, the introduc ‘of the International Measurement System (IMS) led also to the application of the formulations on much ‘older’ yachts with very large (and thick) keels. The prediction of the bare hull resistance however implied that for the ‘rea’ yacht the resistance of the keel (and rudder) has to be added to these bare hullresistances in order to obtain the total resistance of the actual yacht fitted with an arbitrary keel. Separate systematic tanktests with appendages of various shapes under different hulls have been carried out in order to derive appropriate expressions for this appendage drag. In conjunction with this change in approach a new method for assessing the resistance of the yachts under heel and leeway has been developed. In this paper only the results of the research on the heeled resistance without sideforce production will be presented because the results on the induced resistance due to sideforce are still being elaborated. in this new approach the effects of the resistance increase due to heel and yaw are being separated in order to obtain a physically more correct expression for the induced resistance when compared with the previously presented ones. This is due to the fact that the ‘heeled and induced’ resistance ‘of a yacht is no longer considered as the difference between the total resistance in the heeled and yawed condition with sideforce compared with the total resistance in the upright condition. Now the change in the viscous part of the resistance due to change in Wetted area and asymmetry of the hull is taken off first and the induced resistance is only related to the additional resistance due to sideforce. This change in approach of the heeled and yawed conditions was necessitated by the introduction of yachts with much higher beam to draft ratio's than tested in the original Series No. 1 of the DSYHS. Finally some information had to be gained on the dependency of the added resistance of the yachts in waves, because considerable discrepancy between different methods of approach based on different calculation methods did exist. Therefore it was decided to test a small ‘sub’ series of models belonging to the DSYHS in regular waves to measure the dependency of the heave and pitch motions and the added resistance in head waves on some principal design parameters. The attention of the analysis was focused on the resistance aspects of the yacht in waves and the dependency of the added resistance on the Length to Beam ratio, the Beam to Draft ratio, the Length Displacement ratio and the Pitch Gyradius. The results of these tests were compared with results of the approximation method as presented previously by Gerritsma et al, which lends itself very well for implementation in a VPP. 2 CALM WATER RESISTANCE 2.1 CANOEBODY RESISTANCE Based on the results of the DSYHS as they were originally presented (Gerritsma et al, Ref. [11]) al polynomial approximations of the upright Residuary Resistance (Rr) included the presence of the keel and the rudder, because all the models were only tested with these appendages. The change in appendage design over the years since the introduction of the DSYHS made a change in approach with respect to this necessary. The influence and contribution of the appendage volume and wetted surface on the overall values is presented by Kouning et al, Ref. 12]. Based on the experiments with a large number of the bare hulls of the models in the DSYHS belonging to the Sub-Series No. 1, No. 2, No. 3 and No. 4 a new polynomial expression for assessing the Residuary Resistance of the canoe body has been developed, The difference between the different Sub-Series is originating from the difference in the shape of the parent hull form from which the systematic variations have been derived, i.e. Standfast 43 for Sub-Series No. 1, Van Der Stadt Design 40 for both Sub-Series No. 2 and No. 3 and Sparkman and Stephens IMS-40 for ‘Sub-Series No. 4. ‘An impression of the linesplans of the three models together with their particulars are presented for each of the parents in Fig. 1, Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, PARENTFORM Fig. 1: Bodyplan Parent Sub-Series 1 ‘An additional improvement over the results of the DSYHS as originally presented was accomplished by testing all the bare hull models to speeds as high as = 0.70 at least. By doing so a single polynomial expression for the calculation of the Residuary Resistance covering the whole speed range from Fn = 0.10 to Fn = 0.70 could be derived for all models and the split in the previous ‘high speed! and ‘low speed’ expression at Fn = 0.45 be avoided.TAP pe PARENTFORM 2 PARENTFORM 3 Fig. 2: Bodyplan Parent Sub-Series 2 and 3 Fig. 3: Bodyplan Parent Sub-Series 4 The polynomial expression for the Residuary Residuary Resistance (Rr), for one particular Froude Resistance per ton of Displacement, i.e. the Specific number now reads: oe vas ta, °C, +a; ieB,, (‘= } +a,-—+a,- +a, C2 | 7 LCF Lu Lay in which R Residuary resistance of cance body N La Length on waterline m Bu Beam on wateriine m CG Prismatic coefficient - ve Volume of displacement of canoe bocy m LCBép Longitudinal center of buoyancy measured from fore perpendicular m LCFigp Longitudinal center ot floatation measured from fore perpendicular m Ae Area of waterline surface Ls S. Area of wetted surface of canoe body m g gravitation constant 9.81 mst p density of water kg/m? and the cootticients 20 10 a8 are presented tor 8 different Froude numbers in the range from Fn = 0.10 to Fn = 0.60:az a3 ad a | a6 | a7 a8 0.0546 | -0.0226 | -0.0101 | 0.0162 | -0.0083 | -0.0037 | -0.0605 0.2708 | -0.0052 | 0.0108| 0.0356 0047 | 0.2882 0.1738 | -0.0021 | 0.0153] 0.0389 | 0.0015| 0.2399 0.0810 | -0.0024 | 0.0263] 0.0248 | 0.0122] 0.1841 0.8451 0023 | 0.0491] 0.0560 | 0.0310] 1.1359 0.0034 | -0.0745 | 0.0327] -0.0293 | 0.0717] 0.1627 4961 | 0.0563 | -0.0691 | -0.3757 | 0.1865 | -2.2030 5509 | 0.3024 | -0.1403 | -0.6665 | 0.3066] -2.9032 5973 | 0.5120 | 0.1598] -0.1730 | 0.5165 | -6.2597 4.0591 | 0.7613 | 1.1479 | 2.0372 | 0.9483 | -0.0103 0.3355 | 0.8627 | 1.6084[ 3.0899 | 0.8388] 5.7329 Although the use of the polynomial is intended for design purposes mainly still some attention has been paid in making the term of the expression ‘robust’ with Tespect to possible exploitation. This has led a/o. to the introduction of a term such as the Displacement to Wetted Surface ratio instead of the Beam to Dratt ratio. The Frictional Resistance (Rf) of the hull is determined using the same procedure as the one used in analysing the model test data in order to obtain the Rr of the model: ‘The Wetted Area is determined using the waterline at zero speed as a reference. The well known ‘ITTC-57" extrapolation line is used for the determination of the friction coefficient as function of the Reynolds number, ie. 0.075 o, = * (logRe-2)° in which the Reynolds number Re: V-L Re=—— v where: Vv Velocity ms L Characteristic Length m vy __ Kinematic Viscosity mils For the determination of the Reynolds number 70% of the stil water waterline length is used as the characteristic length L. Due to the absence of a proven ‘or generally accepted formulation for the form factor 'k’ as function of the main parameters of the hull geometry no tormfactor’ is used in the calculation of the frictional resistance. It is possible to the determine the ‘Yormfactor for each model within the DSYHS and this was done. In general it appeared that the formfactor found during the experiments using Prohaska's method ranged from 2% to 6%. Some results of the determination of the residuary resistance for the bare hull using the above given calculation procedure are presented in the Figs. 4, 5 and 6 for few of the more extreme models belonging to Sub-Series No. 1, few from Sub-Series No. 4 and a model along the lines of the IACC not belonging to the DSYHS. From these results it may be concluded that the correlation between the calculated and measured results is quite satistactory in general. 2.2 APPENDAGE RESISTANCE. The respective resistance components of the appendages are added to the bare hull resistance in the upright condition separately, i.e. the viscous resistance of the appendage, composed by the frictional resistance and the form drag, as well as the rasiduary resistance of the appendage, due to any wave making phenomena. To be able to formulate expressions for the resistance of the appendages an extensive study has been carried out by Keuning and Kapsenberg Ref. [17] and Keuning and Binkhorst Ref. [18]. In these studies experiments have been carried out with appendages underneath two different hulls which were instrumented separately in order to be able to measure the lift and the drag of the appendages separate from the forces on the hulls. Four different appendages have been used and the measured results have been compared with CFD calculations. First of all a- reliable approximation method for the viscous resistance of the appendage was found by using the well known ITTC-57 formulations for the fictional resistance based on the ‘local’ Reynolds ‘number using the ‘local chord length of the appendage. For the assessment of the viscous drag the use of the well known formfactor as presented a.o. by Hoemer Ref, [13] proved sutficiently reliable, , (i+k)= 12-teo0(2) cleMeasured & Calculated Rr’ ee Lee +e Fig. 4: Bare Hull Residuary Resistance of 4 models of Series No. 1 Calculated: Measured & Calculated Rr’ Fig, 5: Bare Hull Residuary Resistance of 3 models of Series No. 4 5Calculated Measured & Calculated Rr’ Fig. 6: Residuary Resistance of IACC model No. 328 Calcuited! ‘Measured & Calculated Rrhkr’ Fig. 7: Residuary resistance appended hull using original polynome model No, 329where: t Thickness of section m ¢ Chord length of section m The residuary resistance of the appendages in the upright resistance proved to be small when related to the overall resistance, i.e. circa 6-7%, and although not a very robust formulation has been found until now the following formulation proved to yield reliable resutts for the keels and hulls investigated: R T T:4+Zou ee ey eee e4+Zcx) Vis Bu Y, where: ¥, Volume of displacement of keel om’ Total draft of hull plus keel m Vertical centre of buoyancy of m keel and with the coefficients A, A, and A, as function of the Froude number (related to the hull): Fn | 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.50 0.60 A. 0.00185] 0.00385 | 0.00663 0.01160 | 0.02510 . 1.10400 | 0.42500 ‘A, | -0.00556| -0.00025 | -0.00192| 0.01030 | 0.02820 | 0.01740 | -0.04410| -0.09150 | -0.13900 A 0.00026] 0.00032 | 0.00050] 0.00080 | 0.00137] 0.00237 | 0.00358] 0.00434 | 0.00485 RESISTANCE OF THE BARE HULL DUE TO HEEL 23 The resistance increment of the bare hull due to heel can be assessed at different ways. In the The frictional resistance of the bare hull under the given heeling angle is calculated using the known lines of the hull i in the stage of the design process where the VPP is being used the lines of the hull are not yet drawn the wetted surface of the hull may be approximated by the present paper the following approach will be use of a polynomial expression valid for the hulls within used: the DSYHS and ‘look alikes’. This expression reads: Buy. B "| +5,-—45,-C, Te T. in which: ie Max. cross sectional area coefficient of the unappended hull and for s, through s, 2 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 s, “4412 4.522 “3.291 1.850 6.510 14,648 8. -0.087 -0.077 0.148 -0.409 -0.066 0.102 a 0.054 0.132 0.389 -1.200 2.305 “5.182 3 6.329 8.738 8.949 5.364 3.443, 4.767 [3.497 When analysing the results of the measurements with the bare hull models of the DSYHS under heel special attention has been paid to the possible systematic change of the form factor k with heel. The induced asymmetry of the heeled hull is believed to influence the viscous resistance which might be dependent on the hull form parameters. Such an analysis is critical however, because fift generation all be it small, along the length of the hull may contribute to a small induced resistance component. Such an analysis however did not reveal a systematic change in the form tactor due to heel and was therefore not further taken into account. Using the results of the DSYHS the residuary resistance of the bare hulls when heeled (without leeway) has been analysed using the same polynomial expression as for the upright hulls but with 2 new regression to derive a new set of coefficients for the speeds investigated. The geometrical properties of the models had not been adjusted to account for the possible change due to the heel, i.e. length, beam, draft etc. are unchanged with respect to the upright condition. This yields coefficients for the three different healing angles. Only one set of the new set of coefficients is given here for the case of 20° of heel and then reads (see Table below]:Measured and Calculated Wetted Surface | o 5 10 15 20 3 30 35 Heeling Angle PHI. [DEG] Fig. 8(a): Measured and calouiated wetted surface of three models En ao] at az a3 ad a5 az, a8 0.10 | -0.0010 | 0.1892 | -0.098 | 0.0237 | -0.0071 | 0.0293 0.1580 _| 0.0746 0.15 | 0.0002 |_ 0.2125 | -0.1717 | -0.0012 | 0.0103 | “0.0116 ~0.1861 [0.1475 0.20 | 0.0010 | 0.0407 | -0.0238 | -0.0078 | 0.0161 | 0.0305 | -0.0153 | -0.0335 | 0.0141 0.25 | 0.0030 | _-0.0914 | 0.0011 | 0.0069 | 0.0321 | 0.0087 | 0.0008 | 0.0778 | 0.0095 0.30_| 0.0080 |_-1.1546 | 0.6868 | 0.0284 | 0.0629 | 0.0313 | 0.0471 [1.0328 | -0.5212 035 | 0.0110 | _-0.0362 | -0.5497 |_0.0365 | 0.0987 | -0.1237 | 0.1460 | -0.1408 | 0.5957 0.40 | 0.0290 | 3.0739 | -3.7531 | 0.9505 | 0.2250 | -0.2615 | 0.2292 | 3.2648 | 3.2784 0.45 | 0.0402 | 6.2062 | -7.1807 | 0.9689 | 0.3433 | -0.8963 | 0.4205 | -6.4137 | 6.1788 050 | 0.0599 | 0.5707 | -3.5819 | 0.8972 | 0.7345] 0.3677 | o.s3a1 | -1.3154 | 2.7915 In general it may be stated that the change in residuary resistance due to the heel of the bare hull only is quite small, leaving a few exemptions in particular with the high beam to draft ratio hulls. Some resutts will be shown later in this paper. Another approach to the same phenomenon is under investigation at present where the change of residuary resistance due to heel of the bare hull is being addressed. Such an expression is believed to be more robust in particular at smaller angles of heel and is more easily incorporated in a VPP environment. 2.4 APPENDAGE RESISTANCE UNDER HEEL The resistance increase due to the presence of the appendages when the yacht heels over and so brings the appendage volume closer to the free surface has been analysed, It should be noted that it refers to the situation without sideforce and therefor it should not be contused with induced resistance. This induced resistance is treated in a separate way and related to the sideforce produced and the efficiency of the hull-kee! combination. When analysing the results of the DSYHS for the barehull and the appended hull condition it was found that the following formulation for the resistance increase due to the appendages under heel correlated reasonably well: aR a, —O) 0, Fp V.-p-gResistance Measured vs. Calculated | 20 dag hee! | | Fig. &(b): Measured and calculated wetted surface of three models Rosistance Measured vs. Calculated Fig. 9: Measured and calculated resistance of heeled Sysser 24 with zero side forcef Resistance Measured vs. Calculated | 3000 Fig. 10: Measured and calculated resistance of heeled Sysser 43 with zero side force in which aim Ba Basn T bay “We the coefficients ‘H’ have been determined using a regression technique and are presented in the following table Hi [He H3 Ha oiie2 | 0.0436 0.1165 0.0059 3 ADDED RESISTANCE OF THE HULL IN WAVES Another important component of the total resistance of a sailing yacht which may become quite significant dependent on the prevailing conditions, is the added resistance due to the motions of the yacht in the wind generated waves. The incorporation of this added resistance component into the VPP may be of interest to the designer because it influences the way a design may be optimised, The infivence of some design parameters on the added resistance is opposite to their influence on the calmwater condition and therefor an additional optimisation procedure with respect to a given design may arise. 10 For the approximation of the added resistance ot sailing yacht in waves which may be used in a VPP environment Gerritsma and Keuning Ret. [11] presented a method jn 1993. In their approach they used the well known Geritsma/Beukaiman method forthe assessment of the added resistance as described in Ret. [8]. In this method the added resistance of a ship in regular waves is approximated by the calculation of the radiated energy of the damping waves of the sections of the ship, according to in which A Wave length t Time b’ Cross sectional damping coetticient, corrected for the forward speed Vz Relative vertical velocity of the considered ‘ross section with respect to the water Ts Period of wave encounter s x, Length ordinate of the hull m The vertical relative velocity Vz depends on the vertical motions heave and pitch and the vertical component of the incident wave velocity. In this approach Vz is calculated using the well known and relatively simple 2D striptheory without three dimensional effects.In irragular waves for a known wave spectrum the mean value of the added resistance may be calculated using the linear superposition principle yielding FR =2. (A " tle S(@, do, in which % wave amplitude R,, added resistance Ss, spectral density @ — encounter frequency of the waves In general tha added resistance operator depends on the hull geometry, the longitudinal pitch gyradius the wave period and the angle of incidence of the incoming waves, Gorritsma et al, carried out these calculations for a large number of wide varying models belonging to the DSYHS to determine this added resistance RAO fer three diferent speeds ( i.e. corresponding to Froude numbers Fn = 0.35, Fn = 0.45 and Fn = 0.60) , 5 different headings ranging from 140° (bow quartering waves) to 90" (beam seas). To obtain the mean values in a realistic seaway these RAO’s were applied to a large number of realistic wavespectra for fully developed sea conditions. in these calculations the Brettschneider formulation for the energy distribution of the waves over the frequency range was used, according to: s wo 19-7" in which 691 A= and: S_ wave energy spectral density @, encounter frequency of the wave H,, Significant wave height 7)” average period By analysing the results obtained from these calculations it appeared that for constant Froude number and constant average period of the spectrum non-dimensionlised by the shiplength a significant relation between: + the product of the displacement-length ratio and the longitudinal radius of gyration : v4 k La ba 4 ‘+ the mean added resistance non-dimensionlised by division through the waterline length and the significant waveheight squared: Ray “10? 10? v4 k PB Ly Hy La be could be found which yielded a high correlation between calculated and approximated results. A typical example of such a relation is given in the Figs. 11 and 12 for two diferent conditions with respect to the non-dimensional average period of the spectrum. In their original approach Gerritsma and Keuning Ret [7] carried out model tests with two different models belonging to the DSYHS which covered each a compietely different end of the spectrum of boats avallable, Le. one narrow, deep and heavy and the other beamy, shallow and light. In their experiments it was shown that there was no real influence of a possible leeway the hull and sideforce production on the appendages on the added resistance of both hulls. There was some influence on the added resistance due to heel but only for the narrow and deep dratt hull. To further validate these results it was decided to carry out additional towing tank tests with a series of models from the systematic Sub-Series No. 4 of the OSYHS in order to investigate further the applicability of both the strip theory calculations used and the approximation method derived theratrom. The work and the analysis, have been carried out by M Levadou as part of his Masters Thesis at the Shiphydromechanics Department of the Dattt University of Technology. The main parameters of influence on ihe added resistance in waves were considered to be + the length - displacement ratio + the length to beam ratio + the longitudinal radius of gyration: So five models from Sub-Series 4 of the OSYHS were selected to be tested in regular waves, i.e. the models IMS-40-1 to IMS-40-5. Of these models IMS-40-3 is the parent models of the DSYHS Sub-Series 4. Based on the experience gained from the previous experiments the models wera not equipped with a keel or rudder. The main particulars of the models and the variations in the parameters investigated are presented inthe Table on page 14. The experiments have been carried out in the large (No. 1) towing tank of the Delft Shiphydromechanics Laboratory. This tank is 145m long, 4.5m wide and has a waterdepth of 2.5m. A hydraulic actuator type of wave generator is installed at one side of the tank The maximum speed of the towing carriage is 7.5m per second,i Wino ee | WANA LETT TA Conan WA IX NN TTA TTT Wath V Ah Cara WINS TILT WUT TT FT AW See | 1) LLMY | a VTL Zh % 7 IMS-40-4 | ; (7V7eTii i = TATATATIIT = WAANS if PIV UTA WN AP PAY LAP APTI = eee ELE ; LL | [IMS-40-2 IMS-40-3 yeoan Fig. 11: Mean added wave resistance for Fn ae 718 unt 2.475 0.35 and T, = a TH Rhy =44 0.35 and T, Fig. 12(a): Mean added wave resistance for Fn 13Model Hull Variations Variation I Model No. I UB I (aad kyviL Base Hull | iMS-40-3 331 123 0.25 UB ratio IMS-40-2 277 IMS-40-4 4.16 DWV ratio IMS-40- : 104 IMS~40-5 156 kyv/L_ ratio IMS-40-3 I [ 0.30 Main Dimensions Models L_IMs-40-1 IMS-40-2 IMS-40-3_ | _IMS-40-3_ | IMS-40-4 IMS-40-5 Limi 174 i774 1.71 174 171 UL, [my 2.09 2.16 211 211 2.08 2.16 Bim] 0.52 0.62 0.52 0.52 Oat 0.52 T{m 0.14 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.09 Kevile 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.30 0.25 0.25 Mass [ka] 48.13 40.53 40.53 40.53 40.53 32.07 tests have been carried out at two different forward | speeds of the model corresponding to Fn = 0.265 and Fn = 0.325. For each model a calm water resistance fe has been measured both in the upright condition a8 well as with 20° of heel (without leeway). Heave: and pitcn-motions as well as the added resistance in waves has been measured with all models in at least & citferent wavelengths and in each wavelength with at least two different wave steepnesses. All tests have been carried out in nead waves only. The resutts of these measurements are presented in the Figs, 12(b) to 4 together with computational results. In the present paper the results for the added resistance in waves are presented only. In Fig. 12(b) the influence of the length-displacement ratio. on the added resistance is presented, both as found from the measurements as obtained through calculation. Fram these resutts i is obvious that the added resistance decreases. with increasing Gisplacement when the waves are shorter than the resonance wavelength, but increases with increasing displacement for the longer waves. The corralation between the measurements and the caloulations is good, both quantitatively as qualitatively. Seaway. F, © 0325,0= 150" er bal SEAWAY In Fig, 19 the dependency of the added resistance on the length to beam ratio is depicted. From comparison between the measured and calculated results it may be seen that the resonance wavelength is rather good predicted by the calculations. There is some ciscrepancy however in the value of Raw: the calculations show hardly any influence on L/B and the measurements considerably less resistance for the 4 Fig. 12(b): Dependency of added resistance on length displacement ratio narrow model. For waves shorter than the resonance wavelength the calculations and the measurements show the same trend: decreasing resistance with decreasing beam. In waves longer than the resonance wavelength the measurements show considerable lower resistance for the narrow model when compared with the calculations.HM Haat Fig. 13: Dependency of the added resistance on the Length to Beam ratio Ot particular interest are the results as presented in Fig. 14, in which the dependency of the added resistance on an increase of the longitudinal radius of gyration is presented for the parent model of Sub-Series 4. Here it is obvious that both the experiments and the calculations predict a considerable increase in the added resistance with waves longer than the resonance wavelength. For the shorter waves there is hardly any difference. The calculated results show in general a somewhat higher added resistance than the measured results although the trends are fully identical. Agded resistance, Fy = 0.525, 9 = 0" Experiments SEAWAY Fig. 1 In general it may be concluded that the 2-D strip theory caloulations together with the Gerritsma/Beukelman approximation for the added resistance of a ship in regular waves yields quite satistactory results when compared with the actual towing tank measurements for a wide variety of yacht hulls. Based on these results the added resistance of the 5 yachts in irregular waves has also been calculated using the method as described earlier. The results of these calculations have been compared with the Dependency of the added resistance on the pitch gyradius of the parent model approximation method as given by the same authors in Ref. [11]. These results have been found to fit fairy well within the accuracy bandwidth of the presented method. However an extension of this approximation method to take into account the more pronounced effect on the added resistance of the Length to Beam ratio is been considered at the moment. This appears to be quite possibie within the framework of the presented method, 154 CONCLUSIONS From the results presented above it may be concluded that he original method to pradict the resistance of a sailing yacht hull (without sidetorca) as presented in Ref, [11] has been extended considerably. The present method makes it possible to calculate this resistance of 2 wider variety of designs in calm water and in waves with an improved accuracy. REFERENCES: [1] GERRITSMA, J., and KEUNING, JA. ‘Pertormanse of light, and heavy displacement sailing yacnts in waves, The Second Tampa Bay Sailing Yacht Symposium, St. Petersburg, Fiorida 1988. [2] MONHAUPT, A. polynomial formulations for the resistance of the Systematic Delft Mode! t to 28", ITC. ‘Comparative study of different residuary Series [3] REUMER, J.G.: ‘Een ontwerp voor een zenvoudige polynoombenadering van de toegevoegde weerstand ban zeiljachten in golven', Technische Universiteit Delft Atstudeerwerk, Rapport No. 874-S, 1991 [4] GERRITSMA, J., and MOEYES, G.: ‘The seakeeping performance and steering properties of saling yachts’, 3rd HISWA Symposium, 1973 Amsterdam GERRITSMA, J., MOEYES, G., and ONNINK, R Test results of a systematic yacht hull series Sth HISWA Symposium, 1977, Amsterdam. GERRITSMA, J., ONNINK, R, and VERSLUIS, A’ Geometry, resistance and stability of the Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series’, 7th HISWA Symposium, 1981, Amsterdam. GERRITSMA, J., KEUNING, J.A., and ONNINK, R... ‘The Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series 11 experiments’, 10th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, 1981, Annapolis [8] GERRITSMA, J.. and BEUKELMAN, W.: ‘Analysis of the resistance increase in waves of a fast cargo ship’, International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 19, No. 217, 1972. [9] GERRITSMA, J, ONNINK, R, and VERSLUIS, A. Geometry, resistance and stability of the Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series’, International ‘Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 28, No. 328, 1981 16 (10) i) 112] 119) (14) (15) 116] 07 18] (13) [20] GERRITSMA, J., and KEUNING JA: "Performance of light and heavy displacement sailing yachts in waves’, Marine Technology, Vol. 26, No. 1, 1989. KEUNING, JA, and VERSLUIS, A. ‘Sailing yacht performance in calm water and waves’, 11th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, SNAME, 1999. GERRITSMA, J. KEUNING, J.A., ONNINK, R., VERSLUIS, A. and VAN GULIK, A.: ‘The bare hull resistance of the Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series’, International HISWA Symposium on Yacht Design and Construction, Amsterdam RAl, 1996. HOERNER: ‘Fluid-Dynamic Drag’, 1965, TALLOTE, C.: ‘Adaption de procedures experimentales au cas de voiliers en gite et derive, comparaison des resultats experimentaux et numeriques’, Doctors thesis Ecole Doctorale Sciences pour L'Ingenieur de Nantes, 1994. TEETERS, J.R.: ‘Refinements in the techniques of tank testing salling yachts and the processing of test data’, 11th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, SNAME, 1993 ABBOTT, |.H., and VON DOENHOFF, AE "Theory of wing sections’ KEUNING, J.A., and KAPSENBERG, G. body interaction on a sailing yacht’ 1019-P, 1995. ‘Wing - Report KEUNING, JA, and BINKHORST. Bu. ‘Appendage resistance of sailing yacht nul 13th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, 1997, SCLAVOUNOS, P.D., and NAKOS, D.E. '‘Seakeeping and added resistance of IACC yachts by a three-dimensional panel method’, 11th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, SNAME, 1993. KEUNING, J.A, GERRITSMA, J., and TERWISGA, P.F.: ‘Resistance tests of a series planing hull forms with 30° deadrise angle, and a calculation model based on this and similar systematic series’.