0 Up votes0 Down votes

42 views10 pagesExperimental Assessment of Interference Resistance for a Series 60 Catamaran

Jul 01, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Experimental Assessment of Interference Resistance for a Series 60 Catamaran

© All Rights Reserved

42 views

Experimental Assessment of Interference Resistance for a Series 60 Catamaran

© All Rights Reserved

- Berkeley Catamaran
- MICHLET users manual (thin ship theory)
- Wave Restance for High-speed Catamarans
- Resistance Characteristics of Semi-Displacement Mega Yacht Hull Forms[1][1]
- CFD in Ship Design
- Engineering Mathematics Erwin Kreyszig Solutions Manual
- Numerical Simulation of Ship Stability for Dynamic Simulation ROLL MOTION
- Savitsky Brown 76[1]
- Dam Break
- Time-domain computations for floating bodies
- Multi-Hulls Crafts and SWATH by Dr. Yasser (UTM Skudai, Malaysia)
- Ten Commandments ship resistance
- Study of Algorithms of New Slender Ship
- 1212-UserManualSEAWAY
- form faktör
- Marine Hydrodynamics
- Catamaran
- 03 Practical Evaluation of Resistance of High-speed Catamaran Hull Forms
- Resistance Components of a Catamaran
- Armstrong, Schmieman - On the Added Resistance of Catamarans in Waves - 2005

You are on page 1of 10

Ocean Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

in free and xed trim-sinkage conditions

Antonio Souto-Iglesias n, David Fernandez-Gutierrez, Luis Perez-Rojas

Model Basin Research Group (CEHINAV), Naval Architecture Department (ETSIN), Technical University of Madrid (UPM), 28040 Madrid, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:

Received 24 February 2012

Accepted 3 June 2012

Editor-in-Chief: A.I. Incecik

Available online 10 July 2012

The interference resistance of multihulls taking into account the test condition (xed or free model) is

experimentally studied. Experiments have been carried out with a commercial catamaran model and

more extensively with a Series 60 catamaran. The inuence of the testing condition (xed or free)

together with the inuence of hull separation has been analysed. The relevance of these experimental

results in the separation optimisation techniques based on slender body ow solvers is discussed.

& 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:

Interference resistance

Interference factor

Series 60

Catamaran

Free trim

Fixed trim

Fixed sinkage

Free sinkage

Free model

Captive model

1. Introduction

A signicant body of literature analysing multihulls hydrodynamics (Chen et al., 2003; Insel and Molland, 1992; Migali

et al., 2001; Molland et al., 1996; Turner and Taplin, 1968; Yeung

et al., 2004), mainly considers slender body simplications and

focus on moderate and high speed regimes. Broglia et al. (2011)

and Zaghi et al. (2011) use instead a NavierStokes solver to

simulate multihulls, nding a good agreement for the resistance

values and describing complex interference effects at high Froude

numbers regimes.

Most of these analyses assume a xed model condition

consequently reducing the computational effort. This, combined

with the slender body assumption, allows for the simulation of a

wider range of congurations in terms of separation and velocity

for a reasonable computational effort. With these types of codes,

it is therefore feasible to set up a separation optimisation framework in early design phase (Moraes et al., 2007; Yeung and Wan,

2007).

In Souto-Iglesias et al. (2007), the interference resistance of

multihulls was analysed by assessing its relationship with the

n

E-mail addresses: antonio.souto@upm.es (A. Souto-Iglesias),

fg.david@gmail.com (D. Fernandez-Gutierrez),

luis.perezrojas@upm.es (L. Perez-Rojas).

0029-8018/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2012.06.008

shape and amplitude of the wave train between the hulls for a

specic commercial vessel design. The free model condition was

then considered making it more difcult to identify interference

effects due to substantially different dynamic trims and sinkages

between the monohull and the catamaran. This case study is

herein revisited by considering the xed model condition.

In addition to the commercial vessel, a Series-60 (S60) catamaran has been experimentally studied. Its hull shape signicantly changes from the former, expanding the geometry types

analysed. Although the S60 is a well known hull for experimental

and computational analyses (Todd, 1964; Kim and Jenkins, 1981;

Toda et al., 1988, 1992; Nakatake and Takeshi, 1994; Tarafder and

Suzuki, 2008), to the authors knowledge, its behaviour as a

multihull has not yet been experimentally described and such

knowledge may be useful for CFD practitioners working on

multihull hydrodynamics.

In Yeung et al. (2004) the interference resistance of a S60

catamaran was numerically studied neglecting trim and sinkage

inuences. They provided the value of the interference factor for a

wide range of separations and speeds and a signicant insight

into the complexity of the multihull wave interference phenomena. Their predictions have been contrasted with experimental

results in the present paper.

The paper is organised as follows: rst, aiming at presenting

the problem and the notation, the interference resistance is

dened. Second, the commercial vessel case that was studied

mh

Nomenclature

n

cat

cF

cT

cw

Dzbow

Dzstern

g

Fn

IF

L

catamaran

friction resistance coefcient

total resistance coefcient

wave resistance coefcient

variation of bow draft in free model condition (m)

variation of stern draft in free model condition (m)

gravity (m/s2)

Froude number

interference factor

length between perpendiculars (m)

revisited, this time, considering the xed trim condition effect on

interference resistance. Third, a S60 catamaran is analysed comparing the experimental data under xed and free trim test

conditions with the existing data found in the previously mentioned literature. Finally, a summary of the drawn conclusions

together with future works are provided.

2. Interference resistance

RWcat 2RWmh

2RWmh

small as possible, negative if achievable (Yeung and Wan, 2007).

To correctly calculate the interference factor, the friction

resistance has to be subtracted from the total resistance obtained

in the experiments. Air drag and correlation allowance are

considered negligible in the present analysis. The wave resistance

is obtained via the Hughes (Lunde et al., 1966) decomposition.

RT RW 1 kRF

monohull and the catamaran cases. RF is the friction resistance

of a at plate with equivalent wetted surface, computed from the

friction drag coefcient (CF) obtained via the ITTC 1957 correlation line formula:

cF

0:075

log10 Re22

monohull

kinematic viscosity (m2/s)

at plate friction resistance (N)

total resistance (N)

wave resistance (N)

wave resistance of monohull (N)

wave resistance of catamaran (N)

Reynolds number

Series 60

separation (m)

velocity (m/s)

the total resistance, since as aforementioned, friction components

cancel out in the numerator.

The value of the interference factor is investigated in the

present paper by looking at the inuence of the testing condition

for two vessels, namely a commercial vessel and a Series 60 (S60).

The characteristics of both models are presented in Table 1.

3. Commercial vessel

the wave systems generated by each hull. This interference can

either be favourable or unfavourable to the global resistance of

the hull. To properly characterise this effect, the interference

factor IF is dened as the ratio of the difference between the wave

resistance of the catamaran, RWcat , and twice the wave resistance

force of a monohull, RWmh :

IF

RF

RT

Rw

RWmh

RWcat

Re

S60

s

V

39

3.1. General

This vessel is commonly used in the transport of goods and sh

to and from a sea farm. The main dimensions of the model are

presented in Table 1. The reference system considered, the

notations describing the hull separation and the vessel geometry

are shown in Fig. 1. The separation (s) is dened as the distance

between each hulls centreline, and is made nondimensional with

the length between perpendiculars (s/L).

The free model condition studied in Souto-Iglesias et al. (2007)

was aimed at nding the relationship between the interference factor

Table 1

Main dimensions of the case studies.

Main features

Commercial vessel

S60

Units

Beam (mh)

Draft

Wetted surface (mh)

Displacement (mh)

Block coefcient

Lengthbeam ratio

Beamdraft ratio

2.208

0.238

0.120

0.885

84.35

0.653

9.28

1.98

2.500

0.333

0.133

1.062

65.70

0.600

7.51

2.50

m

m

m

m2

kg

the value set for the form factor. This signicantly affects the

extrapolation procedure but moderately inuences the value of

the interference factor IF while maintaining its sign, the reason

being that the frictional components of the resistance cancel out

in the numerator of Eq. (1). Therefore, establishing whether the

interference effects are favourable or unfavourable does not

depend on eventual uncertainties of the form factor computation

procedure.

The interference factor is sometimes dened considering the

total resistance (Zaghi et al., 2011). According to the Hughes

resistance decomposition, using the total resistance instead of the

40

and the amplitude of the wave system in between the two hulls.

The present study completes the previously mentioned work by

performing tests in xed model condition using this geometry, thus

eliminating the effects of sinkage and trim movements. A photograph

taken during the tests of this papers experimental campaign is

shown in Fig. 2. Further information about this hull is included in

Souto-Iglesias et al. (2007) including its 3D geometrical denition as

an IGES le, provided as a supplementary material.

The following tests were carried out:

Monohull, xed model

Catamaran, s/L 0.388, in free model condition

Catamaran, s/L 0.388, in xed model condition

interesting interference effects, as found in Souto-Iglesias et al.

(2007). A test matrix comprising of the speeds shown in Table 2

was initially devised. The speed range of main interest corresponds to Froude numbers between 0.2 and 0.4. For the Froude

number 0.375 the experiment was repeated 5 times in order to

assure that measurement uncertainties remain considerably

smaller than the interference effects to analyse. A collection of

extra velocities was run for the range 0.3 oFno0.4 in order to

Table 2

Froude numbers and velocities

considered for the commercial

vessel tests.

Point

Fn

V (m/s)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

0.300

0.350

0.375

0.375

0.375

0.375

0.375

0.400

0.450

0.500

0.550

0.465

0.698

0.931

1.164

1.396

1.629

1.745

1.745

1.745

1.745

1.745

1.862

2.094

2.327

2.560

experiments, provided as supplementary material, can be found

online at http://canal.etsin.upm.es/ftp/2012/S60/

3.2. Results

The resulting experimental curves are presented in Fig. 3.

It can be observed that there is a signicant difference in the

results for the xed and free model conditions, with the free

model resistance being larger than the xed model in all cases, as

in Kim and Jenkins (1981) for a S60 monohull and Moraes et al.

(2004) for the Wigley hull. With regard to the differences

between monohull and catamaran, the tendency in the monohull

resistance is monotonic whilst a clear hump can be appreciated

for the catamaran conguration. Focusing on the hump region,

these characteristics are discussed in detail in what follows next.

In order to adequately estimate the interference factor for a

continuous range of Froude numbers, the resistance curves were

tted with NURBS (Fig. 4 left and right). In these gures, the

markers correspond to the raw experimental data. The interference factor refers to a comparison between wave resistances

which have been obtained from the total resistance following the

procedure described in Section 2 and considering a form factor of

0.24. The form factor has been taken as the same for the

catamaran and the monohull. Fig. 4 left and right show the

differences in wave and total resistance in the hump region

(0.3oFno0.4) between the monohull and the catamaran for

the free and xed model conditions respectively. It can be seen

that the wave resistance and the total resistance follow a similar

trend, although as previously mentioned, the values remain lower

for the xed trim condition. Favourable interference regions

corresponding to those where the catamaran resistance is smaller

than twice that of the monohull can also be observed.

The interference factor is calculated from these data with the

results shown in Fig. 5. While it is apparent that the values are

different for 0.3 oFno0.34, a very similar pattern is obtained for

Fn40.34. Overall, the tendency of the interference factors for the

free and xed model conditions is similar, with some differences

in the IF values for the Froude numbers between 0.3 and 0.34.

This ts with what was expected from analysing the trim angles

of the monohull and catamaran congurations in free model

condition, as discussed in Souto-Iglesias et al. (2007).

Results regarding sinkage and trim are presented in Fig. 6.

They are made nondimensional using the typical length V2/g

(Eqs. (4) and (5)), as in Kim and Jenkins (1981).

Trim Dzbow Dzstern 2g=V 2

41

Fig. 4. Total and wave resistance, commercial vessel, free (left) and xed (right) conditions.

Fig. 7. S60 catamaran model.

Although the sinkage is signicant (o10% of the draft), its behaviour

is very similar for both the monohull and the catamaran. If we look at

the trim, absolute trim angles remain small (between 0.31 and 0.31,

equivalent to 70.06 in the nondimensional trim from Fig. 6) with

small variations. The trim angle reduction around Fn0.37 for the

catamaran may help in explaining the favourable interference found

in the free model condition for this velocity.

4. Series 60

4.1. General

The tests have been carried out with a Series 60 (Todd, 1964)

catamaran (g. 7). The model characteristics have been presented

in Table 1 together with those of the commercial vessel test case.

The dimension ratios are fairly similar for these two vessels but

Fig. 8. S60 (Todd, 1964) body plan (black) and present study (red). (For interpretation

of the references to colour in this gure legend, the reader is referred to the web

version of this article.)

1. The S60 has no cylindrical section compared to a long one for

the commercial vessel.

2. The S60 has a conventional cruise type aft body and the

commercial vessel has a transom stern.

3. The S60 has no knuckles while the the commercial vessel has a

hard chin.

Prior to the milling of the models, the hull geometry was

computationally redened starting from the IGES denition used

42

this refairing is that too many surface patches with not enough

quality matching were used in the latter. Furthermore, a vertical

extension of the model was required to cope with the generated

waves from high Froude number tests. The matching of the

updated geometry with the original S60 denition (Todd, 1964)

is good, as can be appreciated in Fig. 8. The IGES le used here is

provided as a supplementary material at http://canal.etsin.upm.

es/ftp/2012/S60/, with the aim to serve as a standard digital

denition for further studies.

The following separations have been tested:

a)

b)

c)

d)

s0.565 m, s/L0.226

s0.768 m, s/L0.307

s0.971 m, s/L0.388

s0.1174 m, s/L0.470

computational analysis of a Series 60 catamaran by Yeung et al.

(2004), s/L 0.226 was determined as the separation ratio for

which the largest favourable interferences take place. s/L0.388

is the separation ratio with the largest favourable interference

effects for the commercial vessel case studied in the previous

section. s/L0.307 is the mean value of 0.226 and 0.388.

s/L0.470 is larger than 0.388 and chosen to evenly space the

4 separations. Results are presented and discussed for each of

these 4 separations.

The form factor used for the computation of the wave

component of the resistance is taken as 0.0673. This value was

deduced by Min and Kang (2010) who undertook a very thorough

study on the dependence between the form factor and the

Reynolds number. As for the commercial vessel, it is assumed

that the form factor for the monohull and the catamaran is

the same.

The velocities presented in Table 3 were run for the monohull

and for the catamaran with all four separations in both free and

xed model conditions. On top of the points presented in Table 3,

a total of 5 extra runs were done for the regions of convexity

change in the resistance curves. These extra points are shown in

the resistance curves in the next section. Since it was previously

the range of Froude numbers is wider than the one used for the

commercial vessel (Table 2). The videos of these experiments,

provided as a supplementary material, can be found online at

http://canal.etsin.upm.es/ftp/2012/S60/. A photograph taken during the experiments is presented in Fig. 9.

The resistance curves for the monohull and the catamaran

with all 4 separations in xed and free model conditions are

presented in Figs. 10 and 11. There is a slight hump in the

resistance curves for both xed and free model conditions for

0.3oFn o0.4. In both conditions and as a general trend, the

resistance diminishes as the separation increases, tending to that

of the monohull. Let us point out that the monohull resistance has

been doubled for the comparison. The translation of these results

in the interference factor is later discussed.

Table 3

Froude numbers and velocities for the S60 catamaran tests.

Point

Fn

V (m/s)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.26

0.27

0.28

0.29

0.30

0.31

0.32

0.33

0.34

0.35

0.36

0.37

0.38

0.39

0.40

0.41

0.42

0.43

0.45

0.50

0.55

0.743

0.990

1.238

1.288

1.337

1.387

1.436

1.486

1.535

1.585

1.634

1.684

1.733

1.783

1.832

1.882

1.931

1.981

2.030

2.080

2.129

2.229

2.476

2.724

The graphs in Fig. 12 show the resistance curves for each

separation in xed and free model conditions, and compare them

43

the resistance is greater in the free model condition than in the xed

one for each separation. This is best appreciated when comparing the

data for the greatest speed. In Section 3.2, a similar effect is described

Fig. 12. S60, total resistance in xed and free model conditions. Top left: s/L=0.226, Top Right: s/L=0.307, Down left: s/L=0.388, Down Right: s/L=0.470.

Fig. 13. S60, total and wave resistance in free model condition. Top left: s/L=0.226, Top Right: s/L=0.307, Down left: s/L=0.388, Down Right: s/L=0.470.

44

differences are larger for the catamaran than for the monohull and

even larger for small separations compared to large ones. This effect

was also described for the Wigley hull by Moraes et al. (2004).

greatest speeds could not be reached due to the generated waves

entering the model. For s/L0.307 in free model condition,

the planning range for the catamaran conguration is reached.

Fig. 14. S60, total and wave resistance in xed model condition. Top left: s/L=0.226, Top Right: s/L=0.307, Down left: s/L=0.388, Down Right: s/L=0.470.

Fig. 15. IF for the S60. Top left: s/L=0.226, Top Right: s/L=0.307, Down left: s/L=0.388, Down Right: s/L=0.470.

curve for Fn0.55. For s/L0.388, the difference in resistance

values between the monohull and the catamaran grows smaller

for large Froude numbers both in xed and free model conditions.

This tendency is made clearer with the largest separation

(s/L0.470).

4.4. Wave resistance

In order to calculate the interference factor for a continuous

range of Froude numbers, the resistance curves have been tted

with NURBS. For each case, wave resistances have been obtained

from the total resistance following the procedure described in

Section 2. The curves representing these results are shown in

Figs. 13 and 14 for free and xed model conditions respectively.

In these gures, the markers correspond to the raw experimental

data. Data are presented for Fn4 0.3, where the rst behaviour

differences between the monohull and the catamaran start to take

place. We can conclude that for the free model condition and

smallest separation, there is no favourable interference region.

For the largest Froude numbers the catamaran and the monohull

resistances tend to converge. In the mid part of the graphs the

trends are more intricate and described through the IF in the next

section.

4.5. Interference factor

Using the wave resistance curves presented in the previous

section, the interference factors for both xed and free model

conditions and for all separations are presented in this section.

45

Results are compared with Yeung et al. (2004) and Yeung (2005),

who considered a thin-ship potential approximation to model the

problem, with a xed model hypothesis.

Interference factors for free and xed model conditions are

presented for all separations in Fig. 15. Focusing on s/L0.226, it

can be appreciated that the free model and xed model interference factors are signicantly different. Although according to

Yeung et al. (2004), where this last separation with Fn0.33

produces the most favourable interference effects, this does not

occur in the present experiments. For Fn 0.33 the interference is

unfavourable and the minimum is shifted to around Fn0.38. The

free model condition presents overall a more unfavourable

behaviour than both xed condition and theoretical model. This

is relevant since in real applications, the free model condition

applies. For the largest velocities there is a convergence between

the xed model condition results and those of Yeung et al. (2004).

For s/L 0.307, it can be appreciated that the free model

interference factor signicantly differs from the xed model one

in the range 0.35oFno0.4. With regards to the comparison with

Yeung et al. (2004), it is noticeable that the peak value of the

interference coefcient is shifted to 0.05 (from 0.38 to 0.43 in the

experimental results). This shift is also present in the minimum

value of the interference factor. For the largest velocities there is a

convergence between the experimental results and those from

Yeung et al. (2004) in free and xed model conditions. Furthermore, the interference effects diminish and the IF tends to zero, as

is the case in Zaghi et al. (2011).

Analogously to what happened for the commercial vessel, in

the S60 case, the strongest favourable interference effects are

found for s/L0.388. With regards to the comparison with Yeung

Fig. 16. Contour plot as function of Fn and s/L of the IF for the S60. Top: Yeung et al., (2004), Down left: Free model, Down right: Fixed model.

46

et al. (2004), the peaks and valleys in the experiments are delayed

with respect to the model. For the largest velocities, the convergence of the experimental results found in this paper to those of

Yeung et al. (2004) is clearly appreciated. More attenuated trends

are observed for the largest separation, s/L 0.470.

An interesting global representation of these effects across the

different separations is given. To do this, a contour projection of

the 3D graph for the IF is presented in Fig. 16. The tendencies

observed in the individual graphs for each separation (Fig. 15) are

now clearer. The colour scale in each graph is individualised due

to the range of the interference factor data from Yeung et al.

(2004) being signicantly shorter than the one found experimentally. Globally there are some similitudes in the interference

patterns but some differences can be appreciated.

Comparing the free model experimental data (which is the

realistic conguration to be found in full scale) with those of

Yeung et al. (2004) shows that the most favourable interference

takes place at a similar Fn (0.33) and with a similar IF (around

0.2) but at a larger separation (0.4 instead of 0.226). This Fn is

similar to that found by Zaghi et al. (2011) with a slenderer

model. The unfavourable interferences are stronger in the experimental case with a maximum of the order of 0.7 instead of the

theoretically calculated 0.3. It is signicant that this maximum

does not take place for the smallest separation, as is the case in

Zaghi et al. (2011). Also, in experiments, there is a smoother

transition between the favourable and unfavourable regions

compared to the theoretical model.

Now comparing free and xed model condition tests, other

differences can be appreciated:

1. The transition between favourable and unfavourable regions is

sharper for the xed model case. Such a sharp transition in the

xed model case is predicted by the theoretical model.

2. For the smallest separations and contrary to what happens in

the free model condition, there are favourable, although quite

mild, interference regions in the xed model condition results.

3. Although the unfavourable interference regions are similar in

size, the free model ones are more intense.

4. The most favourable interference factor in xed model condition is smaller than the free model one.

Looking at the trim (Fig. 18) and in all cases, the differences are

more patent for larger Fn. Between Fn0.38 and Fn0.45 a

signicant trim increase is appreciated. This shift requires further

investigation in order to evaluate a possible relation between

differences in the IF in free and xed model condition.

5. Conclusions

Summarizing, the free model condition tends to enhance the

favourable and unfavourable interference effects.

4.6. Sinkage and trim

The object of this section is to analyse the relationship

between the IF differences in free and xed model conditions

and the dynamic position (sinkage and trim) in free model

condition. It is also relevant to analyse differences in sinkage

and trim in free model condition between the monohull and the

catamaran; such values are presented in nondimensional form in

Figs. 17 and 18, following the denitions by Kim and Jenkins

(1981) presented in Eqs. (4) and (5).

When comparing the S60 data with those of the commercial

vessel (Fig. 6), sinkage seems to be of the same order but trim is

signicantly larger for the S60. Pending future work, we believe

this may have an inuence on the IF behaviour change between

xed and free model conditions.

When comparing the S60 monohull and the S60 catamaran in

free model condition, large differences in sinkage can be appreciated for 0.3 oFno0.42 (Fig. 17). For the shortest separation

(s/L0.226) the sinkage for the catamaran is around 50% greater.

Also for s/L0.226, as can be seen in Fig. 15, the differences in the

IF between free and xed model are signicant but not monotonic, unlike the sinkage differences, which are monotonic.

the testing condition (xed model or free model) has been

experimentally studied. Experiments have been carried out with

a commercial catamaran model and more extensively with a

Series 60 catamaran. For the commercial vessel, the inuence of

the model condition has been analysed for the separation in

which the strongest interference effects take place. In this case it

has been shown that the inuence of the model condition (freexed) is not substantial. This is consistent with the experiments

presenting moderate dynamic trim-sinkage values and small

differences in dynamic trim and sinkage between the monohull

and the multihull conguration in free model condition.

For the Series 60 model a range of separations has been studied

and compared with the xed model slender body theoretical results.

The differences between the free and xed condition experimental

results are signicant, with the free condition providing more

extreme cases in the favourable and unfavourable interference

regimes. The optimum interference factor ( 0.2) appears at a Froude

number of 0.33, agreeing with theoretical results. Nonetheless, this

optimum interference occurs for a substantially larger separation

ratio (0.40) than the theoretically predicted (0.226). The transition

between favourable and unfavourable regions is sharper for the xed

model case. Such a sharp transition is in accordance with the

theoretical model predictions. For the smallest separation and

favourable, although quite mild, interference regions in the xed

model condition. It has been described that for each separation there

is a shift in the maximum favourable and unfavourable interference

Froude numbers as compared to the theoretical model. In general, the

free model condition tends to enhance the favourable and unfavourable interference effects.

As a nal conclusion, we believe that the differences described

in this paper between experimental results and theoretical predictions and between the wave resistance in xed and free sinktrim conditions may be relevant at the decision-making level in

early multihull hydrodynamic design. In addition, and since the

hulls that have been treated are a standard and a fully dened

one, we hope this paper will be useful as benchmark data for

numerical analysis of multihull hydrodynamics.

Acknowledgements

The research leading to these results has received funding from

the Spanish Ministry for Science and Innovation with the Programa

de Acceso y Mejora de las ICTS, which provided funding for carrying

out the experimental campaign in CEHIPAR model basin. We thank

Elkin Mauricio Botia-Vera, Luise Draheim, David Feijoo de Azevedo,

Carlos Ariel Garrido Mendoza, Francisco Perez-Arribas, Roque

Velasco-Sopranis, Hugo Gee all from our research group, and Libor

Lobovsky from University of West Bohemia for their support in

different tasks during the research that has led to this paper.

References

Broglia, R., Zaghi, S., Di Mascio, A., 2011. Numerical simulation of interference

effects for a high-speed catamaran. J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 16, 254269.

Chen, X.N., Sharma, S.D., Stuntz, N., 2003. Wave reduction by S-Catamaran at

supercritical speeds. J. Ship Res. 47 (2), 145154.

Insel, M., Molland, A.F., 1992. An investigation into the resistance components of

high speed displacement catamarans. R. Inst. Nav. Archit. 134, 120.

Kim, Y.H., Jenkins, D., 1981. Trim and Sinkage Effects on Wave Resistance with

Series 60; cb 0.60. Techical report. David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research and

Development Center, Bethesda, Maryland.

47

Lunde, J.K., Shearer, J.R., Wieghardt, G.W., Lap, A.J., Landweber, L., Inui, T.,

Weinblum, G., Brard, R., 1966. Report of Resistance Commitee. Technical

report. International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC).

Migali, A., Miranda, S., Pensa, S., 2001. Experimental study on the efciency of

trimaran conguration for high-speed very large ships. In: Proceedings of the

FAST Conference, 2001, pp. 15.

Min, K.-S., Kang, S.-H., 2010. Study on the form factor and full-scale ship resistance

prediction method. J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 15, 108118.

Molland, A.F., Wellicome, J.F., Couser, P.R., 1996. Resistance experiments on a

systematic series of high speed displacement catamaran forms: variation of

lengthdisplacement ratio and breadthdraught ratio. R. Inst. Nav. Archit. 138,

5571.

Moraes, H.B., Vasconcellos, J.M., Latorre, R.G., 2004. Wave resistance for highspeed catamarans. Ocean Eng. 31 (1718), 22532282.

Moraes, H.B., Vasconcellos, J.M., Almeida, P.M., 2007. Multiple criteria optimisation

applied to high speed catamaran preliminary design. Ocean Eng. 34 (1),

133147.

Nakatake, K., Takeshi, H., 1994. Review of program 2, inviscid ow around series

60 with free surface. In: CFD Workshop, vol. 2. pp. 130159.

Souto-Iglesias, A., Zamora-Rodrguez, R., Fernandez-Gutierrez, D., Perez-Rojas, L.,

2007. Analysis of the wave system of a catamaran for CFD validation. Exp.

Fluids 42 (2), 321332.

Tarafder, M., Suzuki, K., 2008. Numerical calculation of free-surface potential ow

around a ship using the modied Rankine source panel method. Ocean Eng. 35

(56), 536544.

Toda, Y., Stern, F., Longo, J., 1992. Mean-ow measurements in the boundary layer

and wake and wave eld of a series 60 CB .6 model shippart 1: Froude

numbers .16 and .316. J. Ship Res. 36 (4), 360377.

Toda, Y., Stern, F., Longo, J., 1988. Mean-ow Measurements in the Boundary Layer

and Wake and Wave Field of a Series 60 Cb .6 Model ShipPart 1: Froude

Numbers .16 and .316. Technical report. IIHR report no. 352. The University of

Iowa, Iowa City.

Todd, F.H., 1964. Series 60 Methodical Experiments with Models of Single-screw

Merchant Ships. Technical report. David W. Taylor Model Basin.

Turner, H., Taplin, A., 1968. The resistance of large powered catamarans. Trans.

SNAME 76, 180213.

Yeung, R.W., Wan, H., 2007. Multi-hull conguration design: a framework for

powering minimization. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2007 26th International

Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering (OMAE2007), vol. 4,

pp. 833842.

Yeung, R.W., 2005. Interference resistance of Multi-hulls per thin-ship theory. In:

Proceedings of the International Workshop on Water Waves and Floating

Bodies.

Yeung, R.W., Poupard, G., Toilliez, J.O., 2004. Interference-resistance prediction and

its applications to optimal multi-hull conguration design. Trans. Soc. Nav.

Archit. Mar. Eng. 112, 142169.

Zaghi, S., Broglia, R., Mascio, A.D., 2011. Analysis of the interference effects for

high-speed catamarans by model tests and numerical simulations. Ocean Eng.

38 (1718), 21102122.

- Berkeley CatamaranUploaded byHabib Mukmin
- MICHLET users manual (thin ship theory)Uploaded bySam Samsam
- Wave Restance for High-speed CatamaransUploaded byKay Oosterwegel
- Resistance Characteristics of Semi-Displacement Mega Yacht Hull Forms[1][1]Uploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı
- CFD in Ship DesignUploaded bysameer
- Engineering Mathematics Erwin Kreyszig Solutions ManualUploaded bygaurav
- Numerical Simulation of Ship Stability for Dynamic Simulation ROLL MOTIONUploaded byWynne Luk
- Savitsky Brown 76[1]Uploaded byyauret123
- Dam BreakUploaded byLSoneyra
- Time-domain computations for floating bodiesUploaded byandevari
- Multi-Hulls Crafts and SWATH by Dr. Yasser (UTM Skudai, Malaysia)Uploaded bykim law
- Ten Commandments ship resistanceUploaded bynautapronauta
- Study of Algorithms of New Slender ShipUploaded byektanu1
- 1212-UserManualSEAWAYUploaded byninjanissa
- form faktörUploaded bybrsener
- Marine HydrodynamicsUploaded bySanjay Madaka
- CatamaranUploaded byAdrian Angulo
- 03 Practical Evaluation of Resistance of High-speed Catamaran Hull FormsUploaded byKay Oosterwegel
- Resistance Components of a CatamaranUploaded bySciencez
- Armstrong, Schmieman - On the Added Resistance of Catamarans in Waves - 2005Uploaded byTullio Opatti
- godzexam_090110Uploaded byjosefalgueras
- CatamaranUploaded bynecatiygt
- Doctors - A Numerical Study of the Resistance of Transom-stern MonohullsUploaded byweiner_muncher
- DITA1.2 Spec Chm ReadmeUploaded byjosefalgueras
- Temp Mlt806 VerificationUploaded byjosefalgueras
- catamaran analysisUploaded bybhuktha
- Savitsky - On the Subject of High Speed MonohullsUploaded bysearchile
- Resistance an Wake PredictionsUploaded byMarco Sotelo
- 2nd Order Differential EquationsUploaded byTahsin Tezdogan

- 5. Ship Behavior in Shallow WaterUploaded byTomas Grigolius
- Ship-to-Ship_Interaction_during_Overtaki.pdfUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- RingUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Download Document FileUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- 3-D Modeling of Axial Fans CFDUploaded bymatteo_1234
- Applications Diffrntl EqnsUploaded byMujeeb Abdullah
- 127-132.pdfUploaded byMuhammad Irfan
- Probabilistic Mechanics of Explosive FragmentationUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- init_val_problemsUploaded byMujeeb Abdullah
- Explosive Volcanic Eruptions -- II the Atmospheric Trajectories of PyroclastsUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Analytical Prediction of Trajectories for High-Velocity Direct Fire Munitions.pdfUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Airflow AnalysisUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Mathematical Model of Different Differential EquationsUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Versteeg H K , Malalasekera W Introduction To Computational Fluid Dynamics The Finite Volume Method (Longman, 1995)(T)(267S).pdfUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- PresentationUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Hull Form Hydrodynamic Optimization Based on Parametric ModelingUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- CFD Fluent en El Casco DTMB 5415Uploaded byklzsailing
- A Study of Spin Effects on Tennis Ball AerodynamicsUploaded byFabrizzio Valer
- A Practical System for Hydrodynamic Optimization of Ship Hull FormsUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Linear Programming With MatlabUploaded byBinod Dhakal
- A Study on the Design Optimization of an AUV by Using Computational Fluid Dynamic AnalysisUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Multiple Criteria Optimization Applied to High Speed CatamaranUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Eulers-method Best Example of Using Euler Method in Chemical ReactionUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Analysis of the Flow Around a Cruise Ferry Hull by the Means of CFDUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Mathematical Modeling and ODEUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- 19.2 First Order Differential EquationsUploaded bySalma Sherbaz
- Ap Matlab ODEUploaded byLaura Craig

- Thayer Vietnam’s Maritime ForcesUploaded byCarlyle Alan Thayer
- RS500 Rigging and Sailing GuideUploaded by奇哥
- Christophe Colaris Le HavreUploaded byConselho Nacional de Praticagem
- function 3 question setUploaded byNikhil Bhatt
- Parts of Boats and ShipsUploaded byCarlos Guarata
- FPSO_KIKEH_IMO7351812Uploaded bythlim19078656
- Viking Fp So PresentationUploaded byJym Genson
- gl_ii-3-3_eUploaded byAsif Hameed
- Local Study Cruise TerminalUploaded byErika Rafael
- OSJ Industry Leaders 2014_yuduUploaded byedmondo dantini
- Pipelay Equipment FamiliarisationUploaded byisidoro Villarreal
- Draft Survey Guidelines,January,2010Uploaded byBorislav Petrov
- Power Calculation of a Planing HullUploaded byNadia Quayyum
- DNVGL-Damage Stability and Damage ControlUploaded byndesigngmail
- CommercialsUploaded byCarel Mae Cabaron
- SNAME InsulationDesignUploaded byAllAmericanMarine
- Special AlloyUploaded bysss888
- ABS Surveyor - Winter 2003-2004Uploaded by1mmahoney
- Stellar Empires 2 Ship ConstructionUploaded byKadaeux
- Comfortably Sunk: Philip, the Battle of Chios and the List of Losses in Polybius - Stefan Panovski, Vojislav SarakinskiUploaded bySonjce Marceva
- Abbreviation.xlsxUploaded bydasad
- The Flag Officer Sea TrainingUploaded byjohnpressagh9301
- Russian nuclear forces 2017.pdfUploaded byLovac
- shipUploaded byhmthant
- Posidonia 2018 Íewsletter Issue 02Uploaded bygougougr8499
- masterpl (1) (1).pdfUploaded bysramalingam288953
- HLAW for ShipbuildingUploaded bymanasikarthik
- Full Scale Meas Sea TrialUploaded byLukman Tarigan Sumatra
- ISST2007_vol2.pdfUploaded byLeo Sembiring
- FPSO LayoutUploaded byAnonymous kYEiRgyf

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.