DangJ

© All Rights Reserved

28 views

DangJ

© All Rights Reserved

- Fluid Mechanics 2
- Wärtsilä 20 Product Guide
- Guide for power prediction.pdf
- wartsila20-project-guide.pdf
- Propeller Design Workshop Part I
- Lecture 1 1 Drag
- Design of the Dynamic Positioning System for the Drillship Glomar.pdf
- 835365.pdf
- Ch10 Solutionsk
- Flocculation
- Module 17 B1
- Chapter 15
- wake
- Advances in Applied Mechanics-Vol 7(B-ok.org)
- 1-s2.0-S1110016811000093-main.pdf
- All You Need to Know About Fans
- aerolab
- Experimental Investigation of Annular Wing Aerodynamics
- 7.5-02-03-01.1.pdf
- L10

You are on page 1of 19

the Wageningen Propeller C- and D-Series

Jie Dang, Joris Brouwer, Ren Bosman and Christiaan Pouw

(MARIN, 2 Haagsteeg, 6708PM Wageningen, The Netherlands)

m, ma

n

ABSTRACT

The Maritime Research Institute Netherlands (MARIN)

has recently started a Joint Industry Project (JIP) on

controllable pitch propeller (CPP) series called the Wageningen

Propeller C- and D-series, after the successful development of

the famous Wageningen B-series which are used by designers

and engineers worldwide.

The B-series comprise the open water characteristics of

conventional fixed pitch propellers (FPPs) designed for

merchant ships with various numbers of blades and blade area

ratios at different pitch. For several of these propellers, also the

four-quadrant characteristics were published by MARIN in the

sixties and seventies of the last century.

Today many ships are equipped with CPPs. Also used

widely are the ducted CPPs, both for ships and offshore

structures. The off-design performance of the CPPs is not only

of importance for ships powering performance, but also for e.g.

dynamic positioning and manoeuvring of those vessels. Due to

a lack of systematic information for the CPPs in such cases, the

B-series data are often used instead, both for the estimation in

an early design stage and also as the final data delivered for

specific new CPP designs, simply because there is no other

systematic data available rather than the B-series data.

However, the characteristics of CPPs differ substantially from

those of FPPs. There is a high demand for developing CPP

series with full off-design information - the complete twoquadrant open water characteristics at all possible pitch

settings.

In order to reduce the cost, a quasi-steady propeller open

water test technique has been developed and thoroughly studied

under support of this JIP, which reduced the tank test time by a

factor of 8 to 10. This method ensures the affordability of the

tests for the C- and D-series, and therefore the whole JIP.

In addition to the propeller thrust and torque, the propeller

blade spindle torque is also provided as systematic data in

propeller series for the first time.

NOMENCLATURE

D

propeller diameter [m]; drag [N]

I, Ia

mass moment and added mass moment of

inertia [kgm2]

k

reduced frequency[-]; Fourier harmonics [-]

P

Q

Qblade

R

T

Va

propeller shaft rotational rate [1/s]

angular acceleration [1/s2]

propeller pitch [m]

propeller shaft torque [Nm]

propeller blade spindle torque [Nm]

propeller radius [m]

propeller thrust [N]

test run period [s]

propeller advance speed [m/s]

linear acceleration [m/s2]

INTRODUCTION

The Maritime Research Institute Netherlands (MARIN),

former Netherlands Ship Model Basin (N.S.M.B.), started to

develop the well-known Wageningen Propeller B-series right

from the establishment of this institute in 1932 (Kuiper 1992).

The first series were published by van Lammeren (1936) and

Troost (1938 and 1940), followed by a long period of further

developments and expansions of the series over more than 40

years. A major review of the available data was given by van

Lammeren et al (1969 and 1970). The B-series had been further

extended to 6 and 7 bladed propellers in the 1970s. Totally, 20

series with more than 120 propellers were tested over that

period.

Systematic series have also been developed for ducted

propellers since 1954 (van Manen 1954). A major amount of

data of the Ka-series were published by Oosterveld (1970). In

the meantime, other systematic propeller series were also

developed worldwide, such as the Taylor, Gawn and MAU

series. However, none of the these series is so extensive as the

B-series which have found widespread applications.

Besides that the propeller characteristics (the thrust and the

torque) of the series in design operation conditions have been

made available by model tests between J=0 and KT=0, fourquadrant open water characteristics of some of the propellers in

the B-series and in the Ka ducted propellers series were also

made available in the 1980s (MARIN report 1984) for offdesign conditions. Table 1 provides an overview of the

propellers in the B-series where their 4-quadrant open water

characteristics are available. For the Ka-series, only Ka4-70

propellers in 19A and 37 ducts have been published.

water characteristics (pitch ratio P/D of the propellers are

listed in the table).

AE/A0 [%]

Z=3

40

55

Z=4

1.0

1.0

Z=5

Z=6

Z=7

65

1.0

70

75

80

1.0, 1.2, 1.4

85

100

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

pitch propellers (CPPs) are well-known for their advantage for

full power utilization at any circumstances: accelerating and

stopping; rapid manoeuvring; dynamic positioning (DP); etc.

For these reasons, CPP are widely used for multi-purpose

vessels where their propulsors are often used in off-design

conditions.

In order to predict the performance of a CPP in off-design

conditions, people have to either carry out dedicated and

expensive measurements for a specific propeller design, such as

often done for navy vessels (Hampton 1980, Queen 1981), or

rely on the estimated values from the existing four-quadrant

open water data from the B-series (Roddy et al 2006), which

were primarily designed for merchant ships with FPP blade

forms. Scarce information is available in the public domain for

the complete two-quadrant open water characteristics of CPPs,

especially when the propeller blades are deflected away from

its design pitch (Yazaki 1962, Chu et al 1979). In the

Wageningen series book (Kuiper 1992), off-design information

is only available for two CPPs in ahead and astern conditions,

one with a design pitch ratio of zero and the other of one.

With the booming business in oil exploration in recent

years, accurate prediction of the off-design performance of a

propulsor becomes more important than ever, especially in the

requirements for DP operations. Dedicated tests for each

propeller design is unaffordable for most of the projects, while

the existing limited information is far than enough. There is a

strong demand on developing new contemporary CPP series

with complete information of their off-design performance.

In addition to these, a CPP blade has a completely

different blade form as an FPP. This is because more practical

issues need to be considered for a CPP, such as: that the blades

must be able to pass each other from positive pitch to negative

pitch; that the blade has to sit on the blade foot between bolt

holes; that the blade overhang at the blade root is not preferable

to prevent stress concentration; that the blade tip must not touch

the inner side of a duct at any deflected pitch angles for the

ducted CPPs; etc. Within all of these, one of the important and

unique thing is the blade spindle torque of CPPs (Pronk 1980),

where very limited information can be found (Chu et al 1979,

Ito et al 1984, Jessup et al 2009, Koushan 2011). To the

knowledge of the authors, there is also no CPP series with

systematic information on the propeller blade spindle torque at

all possible blade pitch settings (from full positive pitch to full

negative pitch and over the complete two quadrants).

into account the fact that CFD calculations (Chen and Stern

1999) are not yet accurate enough and needs still to be

validated against model test results, from the beginning of 2011

MARIN started to consider, together with the universities and

the industries, the possibilities of developing a new CPP series.

In September 2011, a Jointed Industry Project (JIP) was

officially launched, which is called the Wageningen Propeller

C- and D-series for both open and ducted CPPs. Here the C

stands for controllable and the D stands for ducted.

Conducting propeller series tests for the complete two

quadrants, especially at different pitch settings for CPPs

(typically more than 10 pitch settings are needed between full

positive and full negative pitch), is not affordable at the present

economic situation. New test technology needs to be developed

in order to reduce the cost significantly. This is made possible

by the rapid development of sensor technology in the past

decades, which makes dynamic measurement possible at higher

frequencies with rapid response. This leads to the idea of a

quasi-steady test technique for propeller open water

characteristics.

Quasi-steady test techniques have been already used for the

propulsion tests in the towing tank of MARIN for some years

(Holtrop and Hooijmans 2002, Verhulst and Hooijmans 2011).

However, quasi-steady propeller open water test has never been

explored in the past. Under support of the Wageningen C- and

D-series JIP, a pilot study has been successfully carried out,

which proves that the quasi-steady test results are as accurate as

the conventional steady test results, while reduces the test time

by a factor of 8 to 10.

The results of the pilot study is presented in this paper,

with detailed discussions on the test set-up, the sensors, the test

procedure, the data analysis and the results, including also the

uncertainty analysis.

FACILITY, TEST SET-UP AND INSTRUMENTATION

The model tests for the study have been carried out in the

Deep Water Towing Tank (DT) of MARIN, which measured

250m long, 10.5m wide and 5.5m deep. The detailed

description of the facility can be found on MARIN web site.

An open water test set-up, as sketched below in Figure 1,

has been used for the present study. This test set-up has a very

slender POD body and a thin strut. The propeller shaft is driven

by a toothed-belt through the hollow strut, connecting the

propeller shaft to the electric motor shaft above on the towing

carriage.

Figure 1 A sketch of the open water test set-up with test cap.

measure the propeller thrust, the torque on the shaft and also

the blade spindle torque on one blade the key blade. The

blade transducer is special designed and capable to measure the

spindle torque on the key blade with a negligible disturbance of

the thrust and torque forces which provide bending moments on

the transducer at the same time. All the sensors are shown in

Figure 2.

After the placement of the strain gauges and soldering

lacquer threads for the blade transducer, the transducer is

coated with a special watertight coating which stays flexible to

avoid hysteresis and creep. When this process is done, the

transducer is tested in water for three days to check if the

transducer is still watertight. After three days, the insulation

value should be more than 500 M otherwise the

measurements can be disturbed.

The signals from the sensors are transmitted by cables

through the hollow shaft to the other end of the test set-up and

are sent to the carriage through slip-rings. This open water test

set-up is equipped with only an eight-channel slip ring set.

Normally this is enough for the thrust and torque measurements

- four channels for the excitation voltage of the two strain

gauge bridges and four channels for the signals. For the

present three sensors, the excitation voltage is shared. The other

six channels are used for the signals of the three sensors.

and mass moment of inertia on the measurements. Two photos

of the propeller with the blades fitted to the instrumented hub

are shown in Figure 3 where the key blade is bolted to the blade

sensor which can be easily identified on the photo by the gaps

between the blade foot and the hub (the blade facing the reader

in the photo on the left is the key blade).

the measuring hub with blade sensor, at design pitch.

The inside space of the hub has been fully used to

accommodate the blade spindle torque sensor and no shaft hole

with keyway is able to be made through the hub. The propeller

is hence mounted on one end of the hub by flange directly on

the thrust and torque sensors without any friction of sealing and

bearings. In order to have control on the accuracy of the blades,

the mounting method and the CPP pitch setting, the propeller

has been optically scanned at its design pitch. The results are

compared to the theoretical geometry and the deviations are

shown in Figure 4 and 5.

The major deviations are seen as a kind of small inclination

due to the structure of the two halves of the hub. The pitch at

0.7R is judged as accurate enough and attention needs to be put

on the adjustment of the pitch settings between test runs.

blade spindle torque sensor

A four-bladed controllable pitch propeller model No.

7216R from the stock of MARIN has been chosen for the

present study. The propeller model is made in such a way that

three of the blades are directly clamped by the two-halves of

the hub with four bolts (see Figure 2) while the key blade is

bolted to one end of the blade spindle torque sensor and the

other end of the sensor is clamped also by the two halves of the

hub. By loosening the bolts on the hub, the pitch of each blade

can be adjusted and set to different pitch settings, including the

key blade. This is usually done on the MARINs pitch

adjustment table.

This selected stock propeller is a typical controllable pitch

propeller (CPP) with contemporary blade design for high power

density and high speed vessels with comfort requirements. Both

the propeller blades and the hub are made of aluminium with

theoretical geometry, pressure side, results of optical scan.

hydrodynamic pitch angle is often used, instead of the

advance ratio J, to define the operation condition of the blades,

water characteristics of a controllable pitch propeller covers the

range -90o +90o.

A quasi-steady open water test is, in principle, an unsteady

model test by continuously varying the advance speed and/or

the rotational rate in order to obtain the steady state

performance of a propeller. For the present study, we have

proposed the following four test runs in order to cover the

complete two quadrants, as numbered in Table 2.

theoretical geometry, suction side, results of optical scan.

The test setup after mounting the propeller is shown by the

photo in Figure 6. During the tests, the shaft is immersed under

the water surface with a distance according to ITTC (2008)

standard procedure.

towing carriage before immersing into the water.

QUASI-STEADY TEST PROCEDURE & ASSUMPTIONS

In a conventional propeller open water test from J=0 to

KT=0, the propeller shaft rotational rate is often kept constant

while the advance speed of the propeller varies, as

recommended by the ITTC (2008). During propeller fourquadrant open water tests, both the advance speed and the shaft

rotational rate have to vary and change directions, because only

a finite towing speed of the carriage can be achieved. However,

most controllable pitch propellers will never rotate reversely,

except for some special applications e.g. a CPP connected to a

diesel-electric drive system. This practice has been also used

here during the model tests, where only one rotational direction

(positive rotational direction) has been tested. Therefore, only

two-quadrant (the first and the fourth quadrant) open water

characteristics have been studied and discussed in this paper for

the quasi-steady test technique. Extending this technique to the

full four-quadrant tests should be straightforward.

open water characteristics of a controllable pitch propeller.

run shaft rotational rate advance speed

range

1

2

3

4

constant +nmax

0 to +nmax to 0

constant +nmax

0 to +nmax to 0

0 to +Va max to 0

constant +Va max

0 to -Va max to 0

constant -Va max

0 o to ~+30o to 0 o

+90o to ~+30o to +90o

0 o to ~-30o to 0 o

-90o to ~ -30o to -90o

This proposal makes it possible to test the complete twoquadrant open water characteristics of a propeller in only 4 test

runs, using 2 runs by varying the towing speed of the carriage

and 2 runs by varying the shaft rotational rate.

From the first two runs - No. 1 and No. 2, the results in the

first quadrant for from 0 to +90 degrees can be obtained.

From the last two runs - No. 3 and No. 4, the results in the

fourth quadrant for from 0 to -90 degrees can be obtained.

Two forms of variations of the carriage (advance) speed

and the propeller rotational rate have been considered and

thoroughly investigated in the present study. They are the

sinusoidal variations and the trapezoidal variations as sketched

in Figure 7.

The advantage of the sinusoidal variations is that all of its

higher derivatives are smooth functions of time. However, it

has a high rate of change at its two shoulders. The trapezoidal

variations have the advantage of a () constant rate of change

for the speed or the rotational rate over the whole range of one

test run, but may suffer from the non-continuity of their

derivatives at the beginning and end, and also in the top region.

For the first quadrant (test runs No. 1 and No. 2), the

towing carriage is travelling in the normal towing direction,

which we call the positive direction as shown in the sketch in

Figure 8.

+n

+Va

valid, the following assumptions have been made. The basis of

the assumptions will be discussed in the following sections in

more detail. The test results will further prove the validity of

these assumptions.

An open or ducted propeller consists basically of lifting

surfaces (the blades and the duct). When varying the advance

ratio of the propeller, the angle of attack of the flow to the

propeller blades varies, resulting in a change of the strength of

the bounded vortex . The fact is that if the varying of the shaft

rotational rate or the towing speed is infinitely slow, meaning

that,

For the fourth quadrant (test runs No. 3 and No. 4), we

have studied the following two possibilities. One is shown in

the sketch in Figure 9 with exactly the same set-up used for the

first quadrant test but towed by the carriage in the reverse

direction. The advantage of this method is that the whole set-up

remains the same as for the first quadrant, except for the towing

direction of the carriage. The drawback is that the flow goes

first over the open water test POD housing and strut before it

reaches the propeller. The influence of the wake from the strut

needs to be studied carefully.

+n

-Va

option 1

The other way of carrying out the fourth quadrant tests is

to reversely install the propeller on the shaft (in fact, to fit each

blade with 180o deflection angle, see Figure 6) and to reverse

the shaft rotational direction too, as shown in the sketch in

Figure 10. By doing so, the propeller is in the upstream of the

POD and the strut. The drawback is that the test cap is in the

downstream of the propeller slip stream. The drag of the test

cap is not easily subtracted from the measured thrust on the

propeller shaft in order to obtain the pure propeller blade thrust

from the measurements. In addition, reversely-fitting the

propeller will result in more uncertainties to the system and the

test results. It also costs extra preparation time.

reversely fitted propeller

(each blade deflects 180o)

-n

+Va

option 2

then,

This means,

unsteady

steady.

towing speed of the carriage cannot be infinite slow. So we

need the following assumption with regard to the unsteadiness

of the flow.

Assumption I:

The variation of the shaft rotational rate and

the variation of the towing speed is so slow that the

hysteresis effect due to the unsteadiness of the flow is very

limited. Therefore averaging the increasing and decreasing

(Va and n) parts of the test results at the same value

represents the steady state test result at this value,

assuming the deviations are linear.

The viscous effects of the fluid should also be considered

during the tests. Around the propeller design condition, the

correct simulation of the viscous effects is ensured by a high

shaft rotational rate so that the Reynolds number of the

propeller blade is higher than a critical value, as we often do for

conventional propeller open water tests. At off-design

conditions, due to the high angle of attack and also the

separation of the flow on the blade, Reynolds effects become

less dominant, and thus a somewhat lower shaft rotational rate

would be allowed. The extreme situations are at +90o and -90o

of the hydrodynamic inflow pitch angle , where the rotational

rate of the shaft has to be zero.

The biggest influence of the viscous effects on the quasisteady test technique can be the hysteresis effect due to flow

separation and re-attachment at off-design conditions. The flow

separation and re-attachment usually do not occur at the same

advance ratio during increasing compared to decreasing the

towing speed or the shaft rotational rate. These effects can be

clearly seen in the later sections of this paper with the test

results. To make the quasi-steady test technique valid, we need

separation at off-design conditions.

Assumption II: In the instable regime where the flow

separates and re-attaches, the average of the increasing and

decreasing (Va and n) parts of the test results at the same

value represents the steady state test result at this value in

this regime.

HYSTERESIS EFFECTS

Three hysteresis effects have been identified during a

quasi-steady propeller open water test. They are the hysteresis

effect due to the mass and mass moment of inertia of the

propeller, including also the added mass effects; the hysteresis

effect due to the unsteady hydrodynamic flow around the

propeller, mainly the vortex shedding to the propeller wake,

both spanwise and also chordwise; and the hysteresis effect due

to flow separation and re-attachment.

Mass and mass moment of inertia

Since the way to increase the carriage speed or the shaft

rotational rate in the increasing part is the same as in the

decreasing part, both for sinusoidal and also for trapezoidal

variations, the rate of change (acceleration or deceleration) are

exactly the same, but with a different sign. The hysteresis

effects of this part cancels perfectly with each other. However,

large hysteresis effect should be prevented. This can be

achieved by using light materials for the propeller, such as

aluminium.

This part of the hysteresis effect is seen as the additional

thrust and torque on the shaft resulting from the acceleration

and deceleration,

where m and I are the mass and the mass moment of inertia,

respectively, where subscript p denotes the propeller and a

denotes the added mass effect. For stock propeller No. 7216R

and by using the maximum acceleration and deceleration

during the present tests, these additional thrust and torque are

estimated and listed in Table 3 for indication.

Table 3 Thrust and torque levels due to acceleration and

deceleration mass and mass moment of inertia effects.

Indicative values for Propeller 7216R

unit

~ 0.05

N

T

~ 0.01

Nm

Q

Compared to the hydrodynamic thrust and torque levels of

this model propeller during the tests, these values are rather

small although it is not negligible. Even if a bronze propeller is

tested by using the present test technique, no large hysteresis

effect is expected. Attention may need to be paid when a quasisteady test technique is used for open water tests of the total

unit performance of an azimuth thruster or a podded propulsor

(POD). Due to the total mass and the added mass of a thruster

or a POD, the hysteresis effect can be much larger.

Unsteady flow

Since an open propeller or a ducted propeller consists of

mainly lifting surfaces, the hysteresis effect due to unsteadiness

of the flow comes mainly from the memory effect of the wake

system. The hydrodynamic unsteadiness is governed by the

Strouhal number and can be expressed as the reduced frequency

for the present study,

where

is the period of one test run with sinusoidal or

trapezoidal variations.

For the present model tests with stock propeller No. 7216R

and with the achievable longest period of each test run in the

DT of MARIN, the reduced frequency k is around 0.0003 to

0.0030. These values are regarded as very small which will not

result in any significant unsteady force and moment to the

system that will finally be measured by the sensors.

Flow separation and reattachment

The largest hysteresis effect can be expected from the flow

separation and reattachment at off-design conditions because

the hydrodynamic forces and moments differ significantly for

flows with and without separation.

It is difficult to quantify the influence of the flow

separation and reattachment. However, experience from model

tests of e.g. oscillating fins (fin stabilizer) and unsteady

azimuthing tests of thrusters or POD shows that the average

values of the hydrodynamic forces and moments does represent

the steady state test values. Observation and analysis of the raw

data signals of steady tests also show that a strong oscillating

flow in the regime of separation and reattachment results in the

measured forces and moments jumping between the values of

flows with and without separation.

This effect will be clearly shown later in the section on the

test results of this paper (see Figure 23), which occurs mainly

in the area close to = +90o and around = -10 o to -60 o at

design pitch setting. When the pitch is deflected, the area will

also be shifted.

PROPERTY OF SENSORS AND CENTRIFUGAL FORCE

Natural frequency and sensor properties

Good sensor properties are important factors to guarantee

the quality of the measurements. Two requirements are often

working against each other - the static accuracy and the

dynamic response. For accurate static measurements, sensors

need to be elastic enough. However, the sensors must also be

enough to ensure that the sensors do measure physical

phenomena.

A sketch is shown in Figure 11 for a typical response of a

sensor system to the impact source which is shown as a step

function in the small graphs. Both the amplifying effect in the

area close to its natural frequency fn of the system and the

damping effect in the high frequency range should be avoided.

Source

Response

Value

Value

Source

Response

X

Response (log)

Time t

X

Time t

natural frequency, with assumed added mass of water.

Source

Response

Value

key blade

fn

Frequency f

Time t

values.

A sensor system is a mass-spring-damping system

(Hagesteijn et al 2012). The natural frequency of the system is

not only determined by the sensors itself but also the propeller

mass and mass moment of inertia, including the effect of added

mass. To determine accurately the effect of added mass of a

propeller is difficult. An approximation has been made by

adding a ball of water to the blades as shown in Figure 12. In

hindsight the added mass effect is likely over-exaggerated by

this method providing a conservative estimation on the natural

frequency of the system.

Some examples of the blade deformations are shown in

Figure 13 and Figure 14. The calculated natural frequencies of

the system for the first mode are listed in Table 4.

Since the shaft rotational rate is around 900RPM, meaning

15Hz, these natural frequencies of the propeller and its blades

are considered high enough to obtain reliable results.

(at 104.9 Hz).

key blade

MARIN stock propeller 7216R (made of aluminium)

Forces / moments

Propeller shaft thrust

Propeller shaft torque

Blade spindle torque

104.9 Hz

108.4 Hz

251.4 Hz

direction (at 251.4 Hz).

In order to remove the spindle torque induced by blade

centrifugal force and obtain the pure hydrodynamic torque, one

test has been carried out in air for each pitch setting of the

propeller by slowly varying the shaft rotational rate. The

measured results are filtered and fitted with a quadratic curve.

Figure 15 shows the spindle torque correction for the

centrifugal force. Because it is a low-pass frequency filter of

10Hz, the gravity effect is clearly seen in the low frequency

range from the shaft rotational rate of 0 to 600RPM, although it

is much smaller than the effect of the centrifugal force. This is

partly because of the light material, aluminium, which is used

for manufacturing the blades.

These measurements are also checked on every pitch

settings by using the CAD model of the blade. Good

agreements have been found.

force induced blade spindle torque) and the correction,

filtered at 10Hz.

plot) to the propeller disc (last plot), where Lpp is the total

shaft length of the open water test set-up.

TEST SET-UP WAKE FLOW AND HUB CORRECTIONS

Figure 16 Flow velocity field on the central plane of the

open water test set-up, towed reversely without operating

propeller.

For the fourth quadrant with test option 1, as proposed and

shown in Figure 9, the test set-up will be towed in the reverse

direction. The influence of the POD and the strut of the open

MARINs in-house RANS code PARNASSOS has been used

for these calculations. All calculations are carried out at -4m/s.

The results are shown in Figure 16 and Figure 17.

The strongest influence is on the central plan of the test setup behind the strut in the peak of the wake. Figure 16 shows the

development of the peak wake flow from the strut when there is

no propeller in operation. This is rather similar to the nominal

wake of a ship. It is seen that the wake peak reduces rather

rapidly after the end of the strut. At about 2 to 3 chord lengths

of the strut, the flow deficit is reduced to smaller than 10% of

the nominal velocity. In addition, the peak is very narrow as

shown in the plots in Figure 17, starting from the strut to the

propeller disc.

On the propeller disc, the flow deficit is less than 5% in the

narrow wake peak. Taking into consideration of the small over

speed resulted by the displacement effect of the shaft and the

hub, the mean advance velocity on the propeller disc is not

really affected by the strut. This concludes that no speed

correction is necessary to be applied to all of the reverse towing

tests with the present test set-up.

Test cap corrections

The hydrodynamic drag on the test cap must be subtracted

since there is no sensor to measure the force on the cap

separately. The drag is determined by a pre-defined drag

coefficient,

.

To determine the drag coefficient, tests have been carried

out by using a dummy hub with the test cap at both positive and

negative carriage speeds and at positive and negative shaft

rotational rates.

It is known that the drag coefficient changes with the

Reynolds numbers for difference towing speeds. It is found that

the drag coefficient for a negative carriage speed is higher than

that for a positive carriage speed, which are both not sensitive

to the shaft rotational rate. This can be explained by the fact

that the flow at the end of the cap is separated during the

reverse towing tests, which results in more pressure drag on the

test cap than that in the normal towing direction. Practically, a

constant drag coefficient is applied for the whole speed range.

For the present test set-up with the test cap, a value of 0.13 has

been found for the CD when towing in the normal direction.

During the reverse towing with operating propeller, the

situation becomes more complicated. When a propeller has a

positive pitch setting and rotates in the positive direction, the

propeller slipstream is working against the inflow, leaving the

test cap in the dead water area of the blocked flow behind the

propeller. Even if the propeller blade is set to negative pitch at

0.7R, it is often the case that the blade pitch at the root remains

positive.

In order to simulate the flow and to find out the influence

of the test cap, an additional CFD calculation has been carried

disc model. The results are shown in Figure 18.

Indeed, the flow behind the propeller is fully blocked by

the operating propeller, leaving a separation zone where the

complete test cap is inside. The calculated results also show

that the total drag force on the test cap is very small.

Based on the investigations above, it is decided to apply

the following drag coefficients for the test cap corrections as

listed in Table 4, when reverse towing is used.

open water test set-up, towed reversely with propeller

operating against the flow.

Table 4 Test cap corrections used for the data analysis

Towing condition

Drag coefficient CD

positive carriage speed

0.13

negative carriage speed

0.00

The measured propeller shaft thrust and torque, and the

blade spindle torque, are non-dimensionalized by the relative

velocity at 0.7R radius defined as,

torque and the blade spindle torque are shown in Figure 19. The

positive blade spindle torque is defined as the direction that

tends to drive the propeller to a larger pitch.

During each open water test run, 5 channels of signals have

been sampled and recorded. These are the speed of the carriage

Va, the shaft rotational rate n, the propeller shaft thrust T, the

propeller shaft torque Q and the blade spindle torque Qblade. All

channels have been sampled up to a frequency of 1kHz. Some

selected raw data samples are shown in Figure 20 to Figure 22.

the Fourier series coefficients have been determined up to 30

harmonics.

(12)

torque and the blade spindle torque.

Figure 20 shows examples of the sampled carriage towing

speed variations and the shaft rotational rate variations,

following the predefined sinusoidal form variations. It can be

seen that both the towing carriage speed and the shaft rotational

rate can follow the sinusoidal curve quite well.

In the first quadrant when the propeller blade is operating

around its design point, no severe flow separation is expected.

The measured data show rather stable values as can be seen in

the examples in Figure 21 for the thrust and the spindle torque.

When the propeller operates in the fourth-quadrant, flow

separation and reattachment occurs, resulting in a strong

oscillating flow. This is found in the sampled thrust and spindle

torque data, as examples show in Figure 22.

As the present study is not aimed at the dynamic response

of a propeller and its shafting system where higher frequencies

play an important role, it is decided to filter the raw data by a

low-pass filter with an upper-bound frequency at 10 Hz, which

is lower than the shaft frequency in the majority of time in

order to remove the possible noise coming from the bearing and

the toothed belt.

After the filtering of the raw data, the data was further

grouped and averaged over each degree of the hydrodynamic

pitch angle , forming a set of discrete data sets of 181

elements from -90 to +90 degrees. Thereafter, each set of the

data the propeller thrust coefficients, the propeller torque

coefficients and the blade spindle torque coefficients has been

(top) and shaft rotational rate (bottom), Va max = 4m/s, nmax =

1100RPM, sinusoidal variations.

10

Q [Nm]

Q [Nm]

blade spindle torque (bottom) during test run No. 1, at

design pitch, n=900RPM, sinusoidal variations.

blade spindle torque (bottom) during test run No. 3, at

design pitch, n=750RPM, sinusoidal variations.

and also for the shaft rotational rate, 4 test runs have been

carried out according to the procedure described in Table 2 for

the stock propeller No. 7126R at the design pitch, where the

reverse towing for the fourth quadrant has been used. The

sampled results are filtered at 10Hz, calculated into coefficients

as defined by Equation 9, 10 and 11 and their curves plotted in

Figure 23.

Also plotted in this figure are the conventional steady test

results by dots (circles, squares and triangles) with their 95%

occurrence intervals indicated by the +s. A 95% occurrence

interval is the interval where 95% of the sampled signals are

within this interval, while 5% are outliers. Also shown in this

figure are the dark and light coloured curves for each thrust or

torque, representing the accelerating (dark) and decelerating

(light) parts of the sinusoidal variations, respectively.

Hysteresis effect can be clearly seen between the dark and light

coloured curves for each thrust and torque. This occurs mainly

in the area close to +90o and the area around -10o to -60o for

this pitch setting.

technique, two-quadrant open water tests for MARINs stock

propeller No. 7216R have been carried out, both by the

conventional method as well as by the quasi-steady method.

Two typical pitch settings have been investigated, being the

design pitch setting and a negative pitch setting by deflecting

all blades with -35o from their design pitch.

For the conventional tests, the thrust, torque and the blade

spindle torque have been measured from -90o to +90o with a

step of 10o.

For the quasi-steady tests, both sinusoidal and trapezoidal

variations of the speed and the shaft rotational rates have been

studied in order to investigate the sensitivity of the results to the

test methods. Also done are the tests for the fourth-quadrant

with option 2 (Figure 10) where the propeller is reversely fitted

to the shaft and the shaft is rotating in the negative direction.

Sinusoidal variation at design pitch

11

from the conventional steady open water tests at discreet points

is rather similar to the fluctuation in amplitude of the measured

thrust or torque during the quasi-steady tests. In area where

most of the fluctuations have been measured by the quasisteady tests, the widths of the 95% intervals of the conventional

steady test are also larger.

in Equation 12, the complete two-quadrant propeller open water

characteristics are expressed by Fourier coefficients up to 30

harmonics. The re-generated thrust and torque coefficients from

the Fourier series are plotted in Figure 24, together with the

steady measurement points with their 95% occurrence intervals.

It is seen that the quasi-steady test results match the

conventional steady test results very well.

2

50CQBlade

10CQProp

1.5

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

Beta [deg]

15

30

45

60

75

90

Figure 23 Comparison of the filtered raw data from quasi-steady tests to the steady test results with their 95% occurrence

intervals, sinusoidal variations, at design pitch.

One of the most important observations of the results is

that only strong hysteresis effects have been found in the area

where flow separation occurs. This proves that the hysteresis

effects from both the mass, the mass moment of inertia and the

unsteadiness of the flow are very small, as analyzed in the

previous sections. In addition, the average of the test results in

the accelerating and decelerating parts of the tests, even in the

area where the flow separates and reattaches, equals to the

steady test results. These prove that Assumption I and II made

at the beginning of this paper are reasonable and valid

assumptions. The same observations were also found for the

other pitch settings, for the trapezoidal variations and for the

propeller reversely-fitted tests for the fourth quadrant.

Sinusoidal variations at negative pitch setting

Also investigated in the present study is the quasi-steady

tests for negative pitch setting by deflecting the blade pitch

angle by -35o from its design pitch angle. It should be

negative, the pitch at the blade root remains slightly positive.

The filtered quasi-steady test measurements are plotted in

Figure 25 together with the steady test results with their 95%

occurrence intervals. The dark and light coloured curves for

each thrust and torque represents the accelerating (dark) and the

decelerating (light) parts of the sinusoidal variations,

respectively. At this test condition, large fluctuations of the test

results are only seen for the blade spindle torque in the area

between -40o to -90o. No strong hysteresis effect has been

found in the whole range of the two-quadrant open water

characteristics.

After the Fourier fitting of the filtered raw data, the thrust

and torque coefficients are regenerated from the Fourier series

and plotted together with the conventional steady test results in

Figure 26. The quasi-steady test results agree perfectly with the

conventional steady test results.

12

2

50CQBlade

10CQProp

1.5

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

Beta [deg]

15

30

45

60

75

90

Figure 24 Comparison of Fourier series fitted curves to steady test results with their 95% occurrence intervals, sinusoidal

variations, at design pitch.

2

50CQBlade

10CQProp

1.5

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

Beta [deg]

15

30

45

60

75

90

Figure 25 Comparison of filtered raw data from quasi-steady test to steady test results with their 95% occurrence intervals,

sinusoidal variations, pitch deflected -35o from design pitch.

13

2

50CQBlade

10CQProp

1.5

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

Beta [deg]

15

30

45

60

75

90

Figure 26 Comparison of Fourier series fitted curves to steady test results with their 95% occurrence intervals, sinusoidal

variations, pitch deflected -35o from design pitch.

2

50CQBlade

10CQProp

1.5

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

Beta [deg]

15

30

45

60

75

90

Figure 27 Comparison of filtered raw data from quasi-steady test to steady test results with their 95% occurrence intervals,

sinusoidal variations, at design pitch, propeller reversely fitted to the hub.

14

water characteristics, as shown in Figure 9, has been used for

the fourth quadrant tests of the propeller at this negative pitch

setting.

Propeller reversely fitted for 4th quadrant

As also proposed for the fourth quadrant open water tests option 2 (Figure 10), fitting the propeller reversely to the shaft

and rotating the shaft in opposite direction can be used too. This

method has been tried, by keeping the hub as it is while rotating

each blade 180o on the CPP hub, as shown by the photo in

Figure 6. The test results are plotted in Figure 27.

When comparing Figure 27 to Figure 23 in the fourth

quadrant, a clear difference can be seen. This difference is seen

also at bollard condition although it is rather small. This

difference is believed to be caused by the test cap which is in

the slipstream of the propeller when the propeller is reversely

fitted. The flow in the slipstream of a propeller is so

complicated that the drag and torque on the test cap cannot

easily and accurately be subtracted. In addition, deflecting the

propeller blades by turning each blade 180 o may result in

additional uncertainties to the pitch setting of the propeller.

In general, reversely fitting the propeller on the shaft is not

advised unless the drag and torque on the test cap is able to be

measured by a separate sensor independently.

Trapezoidal variations

Until now, only tests with sinusoidal variations have been

discussed in detail. However, during the study, the same

amount of tests with trapezoidal variations have been carried

out as well. The test results at the design pitch setting are

shown in Figure 28 while the test results at the negative pitch

setting by deflecting the blades with -35o are plotted in Figure

29, together with the conventional steady test results.

By comparing Figure 28 and Figure 29 to Figure 23 and

Figure 25, respectively, it is seen that the test results are very

close to each other. Further investigations show that the only

deviations occur in the region where the derivatives of the

variations are not continuous. However, the deviations are

within the uncertainties of the test itself.

This concludes that the quasi-steady open water test is not

very sensitive to the variation in form of the towing carriage

speed and of the shaft rotational rate. Making a perfect

variation of the towing carriage speed or the shaft rotational

rate is therefore not necessary.

However, in order to prevent discontinuity of the variations

and their derivatives, smooth variations, e.g. sinusoidal

variations, are recommended rather than a method such as the

trapezoidal method.

2

50CQBlade

10CQProp

1.5

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

Beta [deg]

15

30

45

60

75

90

Figure 28 Comparison of filtered raw data from quasi-steady test to steady test results with their 95% occurrence intervals,

trapezoidal variations, at design pitch.

15

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS

In order to indicate the uncertainty involved in the

measurements performed, so-called occurrence intervals are

presented in most of the figures around the steady

measurements by + symbols. These intervals do not represent

the confidence of the mean value itself, but are a very good

indication of the stability of the flow and therefore provide an

indication on the validity of the presented values in various

regimes.

The interval denoted by the + symbols is the 95% occurrence

interval. This means that during a steady measurement of

approximately 10 seconds on model scale, 95% of all samples

are within this interval. Prior to establishing the 95%

occurrence interval, all signals are filtered using a 10 Hz model

scale low pass filter. This is done to subtract noise created by

bearings, the carriage and drive belt of the set-up. The signals

which are left after filtering contain only relatively low frequent

forces only, except for the blade spindle torque where the

centrifugal force effect will be subtracted later on.

Signals treated in this manner provide a lot of information.

For example in Figure 23, the regime from = 0o to 60 o shows

both a very smooth quasi-steady signal and a very small

occurrence interval. This regime spans from bollard pull to the

normal working area and beyond. The smooth lines and the

very small occurrence intervals tell us that the flow over the

propeller is very stable.

Starting from = 60o, a small hysteresis effect can be

identified in the quasi-steady measurement lines which starts to

grow rapidly beyond = 80o. The light coloured curves

indicate increasing during the test and the dark coloured

curves indicate decreasing during the test. The hysteresis

above = 80o is very likely due to the flow separation and

reattachment, locally over the blades of the propeller.

2

50CQBlade

10CQProp

1.5

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

Beta [deg]

15

30

45

60

75

90

Figure 29 Comparison of filtered raw data from quasi-steady test to steady test results with their 95% occurrence intervals,

trapezoidal variations, pitch deflected -35o from design pitch.

Below = 0o a small hysteresis effect seems visible as

well, but below = -10o the flow becomes rapidly unstable.

The quasi-steady measurements show very large fluctuations in

this area, especially around = -30o. In this region the advance

velocity is reversed while the rotation rates are relatively high,

resulting in flow reversal and large turbulence. Again the quasisteady measurements show a very good agreement with the

occurrence intervals of the steady tests.

In order to judge the accuracy of the results further, the

Fourier solution of the quasi-steady results has been compared

of the conventional steady test results. Variance analysis uses

the auto covariance of a signal to determine how likely that a

found mean value is in the neighbourhood of the actual mean

value. The actual mean value can never be found since the

measurement time for that needs to be infinite, neglecting other

sources of uncertainties (Bendat and Piersol 2010).

For now it is stated that the measured signal itself is

assumed to be true (ignoring calibration uncertainty sources

etc.) and the task is to find the true mean. To do this, the

16

interval for the calculated means. Comparing these values to

the Fourier fitted values gives Figure 30 and Figure 31 for two

diamonds in the figures.

50CQBlade

10CQProp

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

-45

-30

-15

Beta [deg]

Figure 30 Comparison of Fourier components versus 95% occurrence (+) and 95% confidence intervals () for turbulent

regime.

-0.2

50CQBlade

10CQProp

-0.4

CTProp

50CQBlade/10CQProp/CTProp

-0.6

-0.8

-1

-1.2

-1.4

-1.6

60

75

Beta [deg]

90

Figure 31 Comparison of Fourier components versus 95% occurrence (+) and 95% confidence intervals () for turbulent

regime.

17

presented. The large turbulent and low frequent motions cause

a relatively big uncertainty of the mean value. In general, an

increased measurement time would lead to a decreased

confidence interval. Since the steady measurements take place

for about 10 seconds and the quasi steady measurements sweep

through these points in a similar or slightly faster pace, one

might expect the quasi-steady measurements to be

approximately within these 95% confidence intervals or slightly

outside. As can be observed, this is the case, especially in the

most turbulent regions.

It has to be noted that the calculated value of variance of

the mean itself is very inaccurate in itself. Only changing the

calculation method (i.e. how the auto covariance is determined)

might alter the confidence interval by a factor 2 or 3 depending

on random factors. Variance of the mean by itself shows a lot of

scatter, only a large amount of these values indicate a reliable

result. In other words, a few intervals missed by the quasi-static

measurements might be random scatter rather than a bad result

from the quasi-steady measurement method.

However, in Figure 31 it can be seen that the points around

= 80o do miss the calculated interval. Here it seems no

random scatter, but a systematic deficiency occurs. The Fourier

fit likely has too few components to correctly fit the sharp bend

the actual data contains at is 80o.

The 95% occurrence intervals have shown very good

agreement with the raw data. In all regions the steady

measurements show an equally large 95% occurrence interval

comparable to the local fluctuation and/or the hysteresis found

during the quasi-steady tests. This indicates that the quasisteady measurement method contains the same information as

the steady measurements. On top of that, the raw data could be

used to judge what physical phenomena are occurring, random

turbulent events or hysteresis.

In summary, confidence intervals have been used to judge

the quality of the Fourier fit of the results. It is found that the fit

agrees very well with the 95% confidence intervals except

when the original data seems to contain sharp bends, which are

filtered out by the Fourier fitting, not the quasi-steady method.

CONCLUSIONS

A quasi-steady open water test technique has been

successfully and thoroughly investigated in the present study

for two-quadrant open water tests of a controllable pitch

propeller at various pitch settings. The method has been proven

to be a reliable and accurate test technique when proper

measures have been taken, such as the weight of the propeller,

the sensors properties, etc. The quasi-steady test technique

provides the same accuracy for the open water characteristics of

a propeller as the conventional steady test technique. In

addition, this method reduces the tank test time dramatically by

reducing the number of test runs.

For a typical two-quadrant open water test of a propeller,

only four test runs are required by using the quasi-steady test

technique. Compared to the conventional steady tests, with a

the tank test time by a factor of 8 to 10. This makes it possible

for the complete two-quadrant open water tests of the

controllable pitch propellers of the Wageningen C- and D-series

for a typical set of 12 pitch settings of each propeller, but still

within affordable cost.

In addition to this, the sampled signals in the normal

operational range from J=0 to KT=0 by using quasi-steady test

technique show very small fluctuations and almost no

hysteresis effect. The results are identical to that from the

conventional steady test method. This implies that the quasisteady open water test technique may replace the conventional

steady open water test technique in the near future for all

propeller open water tests. This may include also bronze

propellers, thrusters, PODs, pump jets, surface piercing

propellers, etc. as far as careful measures have been taken.

The study further shows that the test results are not so

sensitive to the form of the variations of the towing speed and

the shaft rotational rate. This means that perfectly following a

predefined variation form for the towing speed and the shaft

rotational rate is not really necessary. However, a variation

form such as a sinusoidal form is highly recommended due to

the continuity of all its higher derivatives.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful for the valuable support from all

participants to the Joint Industry Project (JIP) the Wageningen

Propeller C- and D-series.

REFERENCES

Bendat J.S. and Piersol A.G. (2010). Random Data:

Analysis and Measurement Procedures, fourth edition, Johan

Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Chen B. and Stern F. (1999). Computational Fluid

Dynamics of Four-Quadrant Marine-Propulsor Flow, Journal

of Ship Research, Vol. 43, No.4, Dec. 1999, pp.218-228.

Chu C., Chan Z.L., She Y.S. and Yuan V.Z. (1979). The 3bladed JD-CPP series Part 1, Proceedings of the 4th LIPS

Propeller Symposium, Drunen, The Netherlands.

Hagesteijn G., Brouwer J. and Bosman R. (2012).

Development of a Six-Component Blade Load Measurement

Test Setup for Propeller-Ice Impact, Proceedings of the ASME

31st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic

Engineering OMAE2012-84192, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Hampton G.A. (1980). Four Quadrant Open Water

Characteristics of Controllable Pitch Propeller 4739 Designed

for LSD-41 (Model 5367), DTNSRDC/SPD-0049-12.

Holtrop J. and Hooijmans P. (2002). Quasi-Steady Model

Experiments on Hybrid Propulsion Arrangements, Group

discussion A.1: New Experimental Techniques and Facilities,

Proceedings of the 23rd ITTC Volume III, pp. 751-752.

Ito M., Yamasaki S., Oku M., Koizuka H., Tamashima M.,

and Ogura M. (1984). An Experimental Study of Flow Around

CPP Blade (3rd Report): Measurement of CPP Blade Spindle

Torque, Journal of the Kansai Society of Naval Architects, No.

192, pp.81-91.

18

Guidelines: Testing and Extrapolation Methods Propulsion,

Propulsor Open Water Test, ITTC document No. 7.5-02-0302.1 revision 02, pp.1-10.

Jessup S., Donnelly M., McClintock I. and Carpenter S.

(2009). Measurements of Controllable Pitch Propeller Blade

Loads under Cavitating Conditions, Proceedings of the First

International Symposium on Marine Propulsors, Trondheim,

Norway, June.

Kuiper G. (1992). The Wageningen Propeller Series,

MARIN Publication 92-001, published on the occasion of its

60th anniversary, Wageningen, the Netherlands.

Koushan K. Spence S and Savio L. (2011). Ventilated

Propeller Blade Loadings and Spindle Moment of a Thruster in

Calm Water and Waves, Proceedings of Second International

Symposium on Marine Propulsors, Hamburg, Germany.

van Lammeren W.P.A. (1936). Resultaten van

Systematische Proeven met Vrij-varende 4-bladige Schroeven,

type A4.40, Het Schip 18, No. 12 pp. 140-144, N.S.M.B.

publication No. 21.

van Lammeren W.P.A., van Manen J.D. and Oosterveld

M.W.C. (1969). The Wageningen B-screw Series,

Transactions of SNAME, Vol. 77, pp. 269-317.

van Lammeren W.P.A., van Manen J.D. and Oosterveld

M.W.C. (1970). The Wageningen B-screw Series, Schip en

Werf, No. 5, pp. 88-103 and No. 6 pp. 115-124.

van Manen J.D. (1954) Open Water Test Series with

Propellers in Nozzle, International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol.

1.

MARIN (1984) Vier_kwadrant Vrijvarende-SchoefKaracteristieken voor B-series Schroeven, Fourier-Reeks

Ontwikkeling en Operationeel Gebruik.

Oosterveld M.W.C. (1970) Wake Adapted Ducted

Propellers, Thesis of Technical University Delft, N.S.M.B.

Publication No.. 345.

Pronk C. (1980). Blade Spindle Torque and Off-Design

Behaviour of Controllable Pitch Propellers, Dissertation to the

Technical University Delft, The Netherlands.

Queen C.G. (1981). Four Quadrant Open Water

Characteristics of Controllable Pitch Propeller 4837 Designed

for MCM (Model 5401), DTNSRDC/SPD-0983-04.

Roddy R.F., Hess D.E. and Faller W. (2006). Neural

Network Predictions of the 4-Quadrant Wageningen Propeller

Series, NSWCCD-50-TR-2006/004, April, West Bethesda,

Maryland.

Troost L. (1938). Open water Test Series with Modern

Propeller Forms, Transactions of North East Coast Institute of

Engineers and Shipbuilders, pp. 321, N.S.M.B. publication No.

33.

Troost L. (1940) Open water Test Series with Modern

Propeller Forms, Part 2, Transactions of North East Coast

Institute of Engineers and Shipbuilders, pp. 91, N.S.M.B.

publication No. 42.

Verhulst M. and Hooijmans P. (2010). Quasi-Steady

Model Propulsion Measurements for Complex Propulsion

Systems, Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on

pp.695-702, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Yazaki A. (1962). Design Diagrams of Four-Bladed

Controllable-Pitch Propellers, Journal of Zosen Kyokai, Vol.

112, November.

19

- Fluid Mechanics 2Uploaded bynaeema_58
- Wärtsilä 20 Product GuideUploaded bydaniel adam
- Guide for power prediction.pdfUploaded byrafael espinosa semper
- wartsila20-project-guide.pdfUploaded byGuy Effa
- Propeller Design Workshop Part IUploaded byMirac Aksugür
- Lecture 1 1 DragUploaded byAhmed A. Radwan
- Design of the Dynamic Positioning System for the Drillship Glomar.pdfUploaded byMaycon
- 835365.pdfUploaded byMina Youssef Halim
- Ch10 SolutionskUploaded byTensay Fekede
- FlocculationUploaded bySudhir Jadhav
- Module 17 B1Uploaded byscribd
- Chapter 15Uploaded byNo Al Prian
- wakeUploaded bysreenath_306588502
- Advances in Applied Mechanics-Vol 7(B-ok.org)Uploaded byMarilene Lobato
- 1-s2.0-S1110016811000093-main.pdfUploaded byBill Erick Castillo
- All You Need to Know About FansUploaded bygertibaj
- aerolabUploaded byJulian Felipe Guzman
- Experimental Investigation of Annular Wing AerodynamicsUploaded bymccor
- 7.5-02-03-01.1.pdfUploaded byidhoe81uh2132
- L10Uploaded byson quan
- Fluid Dynamis InggrisUploaded byluthfi
- Chang-Yue Xu, Li-Wei Chen and Xi-Yun Lu- Numerical Simulation of Shock Wave and Turbulence Interaction Over a Circular CylinderUploaded byWhiteLighte
- Angulo de Tiro Optimo en El FutbolUploaded byRocío Yañez Verdugo
- 2012_Rudders_Steering_gear_and_optimizers_Low_Res.pdfUploaded byClarence Pietersz
- 1- Ship Resistance ComponentsUploaded byhossam
- Dp Report FinalUploaded byrahulagarwal33
- JOURNAL-7.pdfUploaded byashoku2
- Bleed dragUploaded bymuthurajct
- Scale FactorsUploaded byCatherine Shaina O. Pasion
- Assignment 3 Chapter 3Uploaded byDanial Aiman

- Merlin Gerin Multi 9 SystemUploaded byCharles Yao
- Cu Dsub Cable Backshell 9 PinUploaded bysk&jt
- MX200 Series EnUploaded bysk&jt
- Ada 025284Uploaded bysk&jt
- PoUploaded bysk&jt
- Vitosol200 fUploaded bysk&jt
- How to Open Nfo FilesUploaded byAndres Quintero
- Burrills Cavitation DiagramUploaded by18847
- FAST Conference 2013 Paper ID 61 -The Wageningen C- And D-Series Propellers - Final VersionUploaded bysk&jt
- propellerUploaded bykharisabdullah
- Paper - Big Ball of MudUploaded byEstanislau Trepat
- Yiruma as You WishUploaded bysk&jt

- aqwa-ferUploaded byWojciech Szwabiński
- Estimation of Cost and main Characteristics of Air-Cushion Vehicles in the preliminary design stage.pdfUploaded byMaurizio Bernasconi
- 04.EvaluationUploaded byLeonardini
- Ice Proceedings Volume 23 Issue 3 1962 [Doi 10.1680%2fiicep.1962.10876] Davenport, A g -- The Response of Slender, Line-like Structures to a Gusty Wind.Uploaded byAnonymous yqVXztBCbB
- Worner - A Compact Introductions to the Numerical Modeling of Multiphase FlowsUploaded bystelasience
- Lab1_Viscosity_Sp07Uploaded byapi-3726707
- Inot BrasUploaded byKovacs Marius
- WinFoil User ManualUploaded byBrijendra Singh
- Cannondale SystemSix WhitepaperUploaded byAnonymous XYGRvVUE
- Course_file_ Fluid Mechanics_y m m ReddyUploaded byMadhu M Reddy
- dcd013.pdfUploaded bybillstephens
- Lazy AssignmentUploaded bythefoot39
- falling cat questionsUploaded byMubashir Hussain
- Aerothermodynamics of Generic Reentry Vehicle With a Series of AerospikesUploaded byKaleeswaran Einstein
- Hull SpacingUploaded byGraham Westbrook
- Test Module BansUploaded byCristian Casas
- Bluff Body - aerodynamics of bodyUploaded byKaushal Bhavsar
- Applied Physics in the 21Uploaded byrasajati
- CFD of NACA0012Uploaded bymehulkumarp_cfd
- Basic AerodynamicsUploaded byaerogem618
- final rocket reportUploaded byapi-251710818
- Advantages of Do-335Uploaded byikam290200
- FEMA 550_ch3Uploaded byerleenhat8056
- Torque And DragUploaded byBayu Ciptoaji
- Multiphase Modeling in Automobile IndustriesUploaded byJose Luis Martin Medina
- Blade Design-NRELUploaded byQuincy Sammy
- Boeing 737-700 DragUploaded bymadjican
- Hyperloopfinal 150505170541 Conversion Gate01Uploaded byNiyas Naseer
- 3 Full Lecture 2006Uploaded byhawkswimmer66
- External Aerodynamic Analysis of TATA Nano Using Numerical ToolUploaded byArif Munandar