24 views

Uploaded by poker12345

trim conclusions

trim conclusions

© All Rights Reserved

- Bridge-045-Taking Over the Watch Checklist
- Squat Calculation
- Naca Report 775
- Five Months on a German RaiderBeing the Adventures of an Englishman Captured by the 'Wolf' by Trayes, Frederic George
- Optimized Design of the Prestress in Continuous Bridge Decks
- Bio Data Format
- DESIGN OF VEHICLES USED FOR AMPHIBIOUS OPERATIONS.ppt
- The CRP Azipod Propulsion Concept
- DC Motor -Propeller Characterization spl3.pdf
- Hovercraft Project Report
- Design, Development & Optimization of a Quad-Copter for Agricultural Applications
- The Design Hexacopter
- mid-sem question papers
- A Rising Horde
- Flight Performance and Stability Propeller Calculations
- Young_et_al_(2010)_composite_reliability,_JCS.pdf
- Corporate Presentation
- ConstructiiNave.doc
- 1-s2.0-095183399290014G-main
- Cost & Revenue

You are on page 1of 6

eu

Volume 8

on Marine Navigation

Number 3

September 2014

DOI:10.12716/1001.08.03.09

M.Reichel,A.Minchev&N.L.Larsen

FORCETechnology,Kgs.Lyngby,Denmark

ABSTRACT: Force Technology has been working intensively with trim optimisation tests for almost last 10

years. Focus has primarily been put on the possible power savings and exhaust gases reduction. This paper

describesthetrimoptimisationprocessforalargecargovessel.Thephysicsbehindchangedpropulsivepower

is described and the analyses in order to elaborate the optimum trimmed conditions are presented. Different

methods for prediction of required power in trimmed conditions are presented and results are compared

againsteachother.Themethodswiththeiradvantagesanddisadvantagesarediscussed.Onthebasisofpower

prediction,atrimguidancewithdedicatedSeaTrimsoftwareforshipmasterismadeandpresented.

1 INTRODUCTION

Trim optimisation is one of the easiest and cheapest

methods for ship performance optimisation and fuel

consumption reduction. It does not require any hull

shape modification or engine upgrade. The

optimisation can be done by proper ballasting or

choosingofproperloadingplan.

Although trim optimisation tests are considered

less important than standard power performance

modelteststheycanprovidesubstantialsavings and

a return on investment between one and six months,

depending on vessel type, operation and number of

vesselsintheseries.Theenergysavingsasaresultof

trim optimisation have been proven also by Hansen

and Freund (2010), where the influence of water

depthonpossiblegainshasalsobeendescribed.

The trim optimisation can be made by means of

model tests or by means of computational fluid

dynamics (CFD). Some results of possible power

gainsprovenbyCFDmethodshavebeenreportedby

HansenandHochkirch(2013)andabriefcomparison

scale have been presented by Hochkirch and Mallol

(2013). These studies showed that generally both

methods agreed well with each other concerning the

trendsinpowerrequirementwithrespecttotrim.

FORCE Technology is a leading consultant in the

trim optimisation, where trim tests have been

performed for almost 300 vessels including tankers,

containervessels,LNGcarriers,RoRovessels,ferries

with the majority being however container vessels.

Testingmadesofarshowspossiblefuelsavingsofup

to 15% at specific conditions compared to even keel.

In overall fleet operations, typical savings can be as

highas2to3%.

Extensive R&D campaign has been made at

FORCETechnologytounderstandthephysicaleffects

thatreducethepropulsivepower.LembLarsenetal.

(2012) presented a comprehensive analysis of

resistance and propulsive origin factors and their

influence on power requirement. It has been

concludedthatthepowergainismainlyofresistance

387

alsoapartofperformancechange.

CT C R 1 k C F0 C A

ThetrimoptimisationguidelinesmadebyFORCE

Technologyandproceduredescribedinthispaperdo

not take into account operational constraints which

havetobeconsideredduringshipping,i.e.slamming

andgreenwaterondeck,crewcomfortzone,strength

andstability,manoeuvrabilityandoverallsafety.

however kept constant unless for vessels with large

variation in the draught, e.g. a VLCC in

loaded/unloadedcondition.

2 TRIMOPTIMISATIONINTHEORY

according to the ITTC standards, with the Reynolds

number(Re)fortheflowalongthehull:

CF0

Trimisdefinedasthedifferencebetweenthedraught

atAP TA andthedraughtatFP TF .

Trim TA TF

(1)

Thisresultsinpositivetrimtotheaft.Furthermore

when a vessel is trimmed, the displacement and

speed are kept constant, i.e. no extra ballast added

andthepowerconsumptionvariesiftheresistanceis

changedwhentrimmed.

Thetrimoptimisationobjectiveis to minimise the

required power at vessel specific displacement and

specific speed. The physical effects that reduce the

propulsivepower PD whenashipistrimmedcan

relate primarily to the hull resistance RT and to

the total propulsive efficiency D as shown in the

formulabelow:

R V

PD T

(2)

constant,soitisobviousthattheaimistoreducethe

resistanceand/orincreasethetotalefficiencyinorder

togainfromtrimming.

2.1 Resistancereduction

The still water ship resistance is, according to ITTC

standards,describedbythefollowingformula:

R T V 2 S CT

(3)

function of the wetted surface area S and/or the

totalresistancecoefficient( CT ),andbothparameters

havetobereducedinordertogainfromthetrim.

Thewettedsurfaceareaiscalculatedforthevessel

at rest, i.e. without dynamic sinkage and trim. The

variationinwettedsurfaceareaduetotrimrelatesin

mostcasestothelargeflatsternareaandisrelatively

small.Itcanreachupto0.5%oftheevenkeelwetted

surface and therefore the total resistance varies the

sameduetolinearproportionality.

Thereductionofthetotalresistancecoefficient,see

eq. (4) below, can be achieved by reducing all its

components.

388

(4)

0.075

log Re 2

(5)

10

whereReistheReynoldsnumberdefinedby:

Re

V Lwl

(6)

frictional resistance coefficient is a function of the

water line length ( Lwl ), and that they are inversely

proportional.

Although the water line length in most cases can

vary 5% from the even keel condition, the inverse

proportionality results in an increase/decrease in the

propulsivepowerofonly0.5%.Theeffectcompared

totheoverallpossiblesavingsisminimal.

Theformfactor(1+k)isoftenkeptconstantateach

draught in order to optimise the cost of the

experimental program in the towing tank. So in

practice this factor does not influence on the

resistance changes for different trimmed conditions.

Thisassumption,willbeinvestigatedinthepresented

case study below, where the form factor has been

calculatedseparatelyforeachtrimmedcondition.

The residual resistance coefficient ( CR ) is often

claimed to be the parameter most affected by trim.

Frompreviouslyanalysedcasesitcanbeseenthatthe

residual resistance coefficient at trimmed conditions

may vary up to 150% from the even keel condition

values. That can reflect in changes of power

requirementupto20%.

Itcanbethenconcludedthatthemajorpartofthe

reduction in propulsive power, from resistance

reduction point of view, is caused by changes in the

residualresistancecoefficient.

2.2 Increaseoftotalpropulsiveefficiency

The propulsive efficiency is a product of the hull

efficiency H , the open water propeller efficiency

O andtherelativerotativeefficiency rr .

T H O rr

(7)

constantwhenthevesselistrimmed.

The hull efficiency is a function of the thrust

deduction t andtheeffectivewakefraction w .

1 t

1 w

(8)

decrease and the effective wake fraction increase in

ordertogainfromtrimming.Thethrustdeductionis

a function of the propeller thrust T and the hull

resistance.

T RT

t

T

(9)

when the vessel is trimmed and naturally, the

propellerthrustwillchangealsoasthespeediskept

constant.However,therelationisnotconstant.

The thrust deduction changes with the trim and

sometimes a peak, when the propeller submergence

decreases to a critical level, can be observed. The

location of the peak depends also on the dynamic

sinkageandsternwave.

The changes in thrust deduction can achieve

values of up to 15% and can result in significant

changes in the propulsive power of up to 3%.

However, changes in the thrust deduction must be

seenrelativetochangesintheeffectivewake.

The effective wake fraction is a function of the

vesselspeedandthepropellerinflowvelocity VA .

V VA

(10)

Asthevesselspeediskeptconstant,changesinthe

effectivewakefractioncanonlyrelatetothepropeller

inflow velocity. As expected, the effective wake

fraction increases for bow trim conditions and

decreases for stern trim conditions. The increase of

wakefractionforbowtrimscanbeupto20%andthe

decrease for stern trims can be up to 10%. The

differencesinwakefraction can therefore change the

powerdemandofupto5%.

Both thrust deduction fraction and wake fraction

for bow trim balance each other and can result in a

powergainupto2%.

The propeller open water efficiency depends on

the advance ratio J , i.e on the water inflow

velocity to propeller VA and on the revolutions

n :

VA

nD

where

(11)

D isthepropellerdiameter.

Asalreadyconcludedthepropellerinflowvelocity

isaffectedbythetrim.Sincetheopenwatercurvefor

the propeller efficiency is inclined for the actual

advance ratio, even minor changes in the advance

ratio result in a changed propulsive power. These

changes can reach up to 2% of the even keel power

demand.

ratio between the open water propeller torque

coefficient KQ ow and the propeller torque

coefficientbehindtheship KQship .

rr

KQow

KQship

(12)

Itcanvaryupto2%fromevenkeelconditionand

thesamewayinfluencethepowerrequirement.

2.3 Totalpowergain

From the theory and percentage values presented

above can be concluded that the residual resistance

coefficient is the factor most affected by trim.

However,thepropulsionaffectstheresultsat a level

detectableinmodeltestsandshouldnotbeneglected.

3 TRIMOPTIMISATIONINPRACTICE

Taking into account the theory presented above,

several methods for determining the optimum trim,

which are based on different practical approach may

be used during optimisation process. The

experimentalmethodsingeneral can be divided into

threeoptions:

3.1 Fullresistanceandselfpropulsionmodeltests

Model tests performed in this method consist of full

set of resistance and selfpropulsion model tests for

eachtrimmedcondition.

Each condition is treated as an independent

propulsionpredictioncase,i.e.predictiontofullscale

is made according to FORCEs procedure. This

approach fully accounts for variation of form factor,

residual resistance coefficient and propulsive factors

(effectivewake,thrustdeductionandrelativerotative

efficiency)withdisplacement/trimvariation.Practical

drawback is the relative high experimental matrix

withassociatedincreasedcost.

3.2 Selfpropulsionmodeltestswithconstantformfactor

andconstantthrustdeductionfraction

In this method the resistance tests are performed for

reference conditions only, which in 90% of cases

means the even keel condition for each tested

displacement. Form factor and thrust deduction

fractionaretakenfromthereferencecaseandarekept

constant during trimmed conditions analyses. The

selfpropulsion tests performed for trimmed

conditions are the basis for calculation of wake

fraction and propulsive coefficients on a basis of

reverse approach. Advantages of this approach is

somewhat reduced experimental cost, but with the

disadvantage of losing the trim effect on form factor

andthrustdeduction.

389

3.3 Directpowermeasurements

The prognosis to full scale is made on the basis of

torque and revolutions measured during the self

propulsion tests at ship selfpropulsion point, i.e.

including the additional towing force for

compensation of frictional resistance between ship

andmodel.Thefullscaleprognosisismadeaccording

to Froude similarity law. This is the most

straightforward approach, simulating the full scale

ship trial procedure. There is no need of resistance,

form factor, propeller open water data, neither

propulsive factors measurement. In this approach,

however, the effective wake scaling is neglected,

which would influence propeller loading coefficient

and subsequently propeller thrust, torque and shaft

powerprediction.

resistance tests only at reference draught [const ff

constt].

Figure 1 presents markers representing thrust

deductionfractioninmethodwithfullresistance,self

propulsiontestsandasolidline,whichrepresentsthe

constant thrust deduction fraction in function of

vessel speed from method with resistance tests only

forreferencetrim.

4 CASESTUDYPRESENTATION

Below the results of trim optimisation for a large

cargo ship are presented. All three methods were

used and results of all methods are presented. Some

detailed analysis of form factor, residuary resistance

coefficient, wake fraction, thrust deduction fraction,

relativerotativeandopenwaterefficienciesismade.

Resultsoftrimoptimisationarepresentedintwo

ways,asamatrixofpossiblepowersavingsattested

trimmed conditions and as an optimum trim at

specificdisplacement.

4.1 Referencevessel

The vessel chosen for this study is a large container

vessel. The hull form represents a typical container

vessel with a pronounced bulbous bow, slender hull

andacentreskegwithonepropeller.

Figure1.Thrustdeductionfractionindifferentmethods

Itcanbeseenthatthethrustdeductionfractionfor

all tested trim conditions decreases with speed and

has rather large scatter. Furthermore, there is a

pronounced trim influence with deviations (relative

totheconstanttvalue)ofupto100%.

Figure 2 shows the relation between form factors

measured at different trimmed conditions and

constant form factor taken into account in method

with resistance tests made only at reference trim. In

that figure also the thrust deduction fraction from

bothmethodsfordesignspeedisshown

Table1.Mainparticularsofreferencevessel

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

Ship Model

Length,LPP 330.00 8.648

Breadth,B 42.80 1.122

Maxdraught(tested),Tmax 11.50 0.301

Volumeatmaxdraught,Vmax 104166 1.875

Blockcoefficientatmaxdraught,CB

max 0.654

0.654

_______________________________________________

Thevesselwaschosenduetoitswelldocumented

resistanceandselfpropulsionperformancebyseveral

modeltestsatFORCETechnology.Earlierithasbeen

testedinnumerouscombinationsofdraughts,speeds

and trims. In this study, only one partly loaded

draught and speeds corresponding to a Froude

number between 0.128 and 0.201 is described. Ten

differenttrimshavebeeninvestigatedrangingfrom

2.5mto2.0minstepsof0.5m.

4.2 Modeltestsresults

Figures 13 present the detailed comparison of form

factor, thrust deduction and wake fraction between

two methods, i.e full resistance and selfpropulsion

model tests for all trimmed conditions [act ff act t]

and selfpropulsion model tests with constant form

390

Figure2.Formfactorusedindifferentmethods

withthetrim,i.e.withmoresubmergedaftpart.The

deviationvariesbetween1.13and1.21.Howevernot

largeitisstillinfluentialonthefinalpowerprediction

becausetheymayleadtoeffectivepowervariationsin

therangeo67%.

Figure 3 presents the propeller open water

efficiency derived from analysed methods. The

efficiency is presented as a relation between

calculated from full resistance and selfpropulsion

tests at each trimmed condition and calculated from

constantthrustdeductionmethod.

Figure5.Predictedpowersavingsfromdifferentmethods

Likeincaseofoptimumtrim,thetrendofpossible

power savings received from analysed methods is

very similar. The difference in values of predicted

possible power savings between the highest and

lowest possible saving received from different

methodsisalmostconstantandequaltoabout2.7%.

methods

methodscanbeingeneraltreatedascomparable,the

maximum difference received is about 1.6% for the

trimtoaftanddecreaseswithtrimmingtobow.

Figure4presentstheoptimumtrimreceivedfrom

differentmethodsinfunctionofspeed.

Figure4.Optimumtrimfromdifferentmethods

similartrendregardingthevesselspeedandshowthe

optimumtrimreduceswithincreasedspeed.Itcanbe

seen however that the optimum trim for any specific

speed may differ, e.g. for 18 knots was found 1.7m

for the constant form factor and constant thrust

deduction fraction and 1.6m for actual form factor

and actual thrust deduction fraction, while for direct

powermethodtheoptimumtrimisabout1.5m.

Figure 5 presents the overall comparison of

predicted power savings received from three

analysedmethods.

5 CONCLUSIONSONTHEOPTIMISATION

METHODS

The final conclusions may be presented in two

aspects, i.e. showing the effect of the investigated

analysismethodonthedeterminationoftheoptimum

trim condition and showing the effect of the

investigated analysis method on the possible power

savings.

If taking into account the first aspect it appears

that in the low to medium speed range (14 to 18

knots) the methods with full resistance and self

propulsion tests (act ff act t) and the one with

resistance for a reference trim only (const ff const t)

give similar results (see Figure 4). For the top speed

range, however, the act ff act t method is preferable

foritsbetteraccountofthethrustdeductionand1+k

deviationwithspeed(seeFigure1).Thedirectpower

method follows the same trend as the indirect

methods giving however the values of trim with a

smalloffset.

Regardingthepossiblepowersavingsitshouldbe

concludedthatforthemediumspeedrange(16to18

knots) the two methods, i.e. act ff act t and const ff

const t indicate similar power savings, while for the

lowandtopspeedrangesdeviationsreachupto2%.

Thus, again, the actual t and (1+k) method could be

recommended for better power saving prediction in

the entire speed range. In the direct power method,

thepredictedpowerlevelsdonotconsiderwakescale

effectandcorrelationallowancecoefficient.Therefore,

thepredictedpowersavingsaregenerallylower, but

exhibitthesametrendasthetwoothermethods.

A general comment may be concluded that the

choice on which method to use is a compromise

between possible resources both in time, in facilities

utilisation or in software, when numerical methods

instead of model tests will be used, and a satisfying

levelofaccuracy.Howeverallthreemethodscouldbe

used to predict certain power savings coming from

trimoptimisation.

391

6 SEATRIMSOFTWARE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

tool, which is designed to provide a quick and safe

guidance in selection of the right trim in relation to

theloadingconditionandplannedspeed.

The Danish Maritime Foundation through Danish

CentreforMaritimeTechnology(DCMT)andFORCE

Technologyfrombasicresearchfund.

the influence of actual trim of the vessel and make

optimum trim suggestions. These parameters are:

Draught forward and aft (typically taken from ship

loading computer) and the planned vessel speed

(from vessel route planning). The program will then

advise the user about the trim situation and will, by

simplecolourcodesandreduction/increaseinpower,

advisetheuserifthetrimisoptimal.Shouldthetrim

notbeoptimal,thetoolgivesquickguidancetowhere

theoptimumtrimcanbefound.Theusercanthenuse

his cargo or ballast water to obtain the best possible

trimbeforeleavingtheport.

Figure6.SeaTrimsoftware

392

REFERENCES

[1]Lemb Larsen N., Simonsen C.D., Klimt Nielsen C., Re

Holm C. (2012), Understanding the physics of trim, 9th

annualGreenShipTechnologyConference,Copenhagen,

Denmark

[2]Hansen H., Freund M. (2010), Assistance Tools for

Operational Fuel Efficiency, 9th International Conference

on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime

Industries,COMPIT2010,Gubio,Italy

[3]Hansen H., Hochkirch K. (2013), Lean ECOAssistant

Production for Trim Optimisation, 11thInternational

Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the

MaritimeIndustries,COMPIT2013,Cortona,Italy

[4]HochkirchK.,MallolB.(2013),OntheImportanceofFull

Scale CFD Simulations for Ships, 11thInternational

Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the

MaritimeIndustries,COMPIT2013,Cortona,Italy

- Bridge-045-Taking Over the Watch ChecklistUploaded byMiha Mihaela
- Squat CalculationUploaded byAjay Singh
- Naca Report 775Uploaded byHarry Smith
- Five Months on a German RaiderBeing the Adventures of an Englishman Captured by the 'Wolf' by Trayes, Frederic GeorgeUploaded byGutenberg.org
- Optimized Design of the Prestress in Continuous Bridge DecksUploaded byMrAgidas
- Bio Data FormatUploaded bysummer07
- DESIGN OF VEHICLES USED FOR AMPHIBIOUS OPERATIONS.pptUploaded byGouthamVenkatesh
- The CRP Azipod Propulsion ConceptUploaded bynascosannascosan
- DC Motor -Propeller Characterization spl3.pdfUploaded byumunera2997
- Hovercraft Project ReportUploaded byshivam agarwal
- Design, Development & Optimization of a Quad-Copter for Agricultural ApplicationsUploaded byAnonymous kw8Yrp0R5r
- The Design HexacopterUploaded byM R Fajar Setiawan
- mid-sem question papersUploaded byPrasad Sn
- A Rising HordeUploaded bycarlos chiu
- Flight Performance and Stability Propeller CalculationsUploaded byumangdighe
- Young_et_al_(2010)_composite_reliability,_JCS.pdfUploaded bySaeed Javdani
- Corporate PresentationUploaded byNoorullah Patwary Zubaer
- ConstructiiNave.docUploaded byChioibasNicolae
- 1-s2.0-095183399290014G-mainUploaded byParthipan Jayaram
- Cost & RevenueUploaded byGolar
- rss15-diagnost Flow diagnostic.pdfUploaded byskywalk189
- Cashman R M.design of Marine Mac.1962.TRANSUploaded byManish
- IWSH-2017program (final).pdfUploaded byTu Tran
- Insights Launch Sequencing 12aug2013Uploaded byAlbert
- SEEM3470_tuto_02Uploaded bysalim
- The REscue MissionUploaded byDavid Boatright
- MSC.1Circ.1246Uploaded byval-ovidiu iordache
- SoftUploaded byTony Tigre
- PaperUploaded byvermatiet
- Goal Programming 1Uploaded byAnas Mostafa

- NOTES_for_EMT4801_2018Uploaded byRixizoNgobeni
- pharmamcqs1Uploaded bybklatha
- Chapter 1 Eqt203 RevUploaded bykhuzaimah
- Bio Lesson Plan - Terrestrial BiomeUploaded byJahlen Tuvilleja
- Snap Gk_qbank qUploaded byRitish Adhikari
- Class III Malocclusion With Unilateral Posterior Crossbite and Facial Asymmetry Oct 2010Uploaded byNat Alborés
- Causative Cosntructions in ZarmaUploaded byAmir
- The Ford Motors strategiesUploaded bysaba
- Cell DivisionUploaded byxjoerenox
- 2sc5902 de panasonic .pdfUploaded byRandall Chinchilla
- Gigaset c610_ENG FullUploaded byAnonymous 1I8hIE5
- Acer Computers Aspire Aod250 Acer Aspire Aod250 Service Guide 11ccbe5Uploaded bySergio Edgar Scalfaro Ponce
- Unit 3Uploaded bySriram J
- Proposal FypUploaded bynaien89
- Centrifugal CompressorsUploaded byAnoop Prajapati
- Poultry FarmingUploaded byShijil Vellekat
- Advancements in Perovskite Solar CellsUploaded byVigneshwaran Murugan
- Free Preview The Big Burn by Tim EganUploaded byHoughton Mifflin Harcourt
- Cheikh Anta Diop and the New Light on African HistoryUploaded byallisee7154
- ch13Uploaded byMushini Nagabhushan
- QSCALE I2 System Brochure MCS en Version 0813Uploaded byMgc Elektronik
- EcoliUploaded byExSktu
- 01 Spinal Cord InjuryUploaded byNurul Izzah Mat Sundari
- Ricoh 1135Uploaded byColesniuc Alin
- ONGC - Approved Vendor ListUploaded byAnonymous gr5Pr9AV
- Final project report - group 7.pdfUploaded byNhut Nguyen
- Animated Series HandbookUploaded byDavid Martin
- Sylast [Thread & Yarn Lubricant]Uploaded byL.N.CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
- Hc Chapters 8 & 9 Study Questions.docUploaded byJenn Aguilar
- Arduino PptUploaded bysugadev74