Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The paper presents a Velocity Prediction Program for hydrofoiling catamarans with solid wing sails.
Starting from a description of the mechanical model, suitable models are identified for the forces that
act on the boat components. The study is deliberately limited to means for restricted methods where
computational resources and budgets are limited. Enhanced lifting line approaches are described for
the wingsail and appendages. Windage is calculated from force coefficients and dynamic pressure
while hull resistance is determined by means of a potential flow solver. The description of the
implementation is followed by the presentation of the results including a comparison to measured
data. Additionally significant findings in terms of overall force composition and distribution as well as
loading on specific components of the catamaran are presented and discussed. Finally, some of the
challenges encountered during the study are discussed. It was found that the VPP predictions
compared favourably with measured data from the 34th Americas Cup in San Francisco in 2013.
NOMENCLATURE 1 INTRODUCTION
Total velocity vector [m/s] Americas Cup, comparatively little work has been
Total induced velocity vector [m/s] published on velocity prediction of catamarans. This
si, Local span/span vector [m] effect is amplified by the fact that, because an accurate
ci, Local chord/chord vector [m] VPP represents a competitive advantage, sailing teams
Vector between start of free vortex and design offices mostly keep their performance and
filament and collocation point [m] VPP knowledge a secret.
k Vortex strength reduction factor [-]
d perpendicular distance between vortex 2 FORCE DECOMPOSITION
filament and collocation point [m]
dcore diameter of viscous vortex core [m] The fundamental principle of each VPP is the
Re Reynolds number [-] equilibrium of forces and moments, as expressed in
Rt Total resistance [N] Eq.(1).
Rf Frictional resistance [N]
= = 0 (1)
Rw Wave-making resistance [N]
Rr Residuary resistance [N] Figure 1 illustrates the force decomposition applied in
this study. The aerodynamic force is split into windage
and rig forces in the longitudinal and transverse
INNOV'SAIL 2017
11
The Fourth International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France
INNOV'SAIL 2017
12
The Fourth International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France
=
, +
m, (10)
j=1 j=1
,n1 = sophisticated.
4 2
||
2 ||
2
2
1 + |
(|| |)(
2 1 )
2
+ b (5)
|||
1 |
2 (|||
1 |
2 + 1 )
2
1
1
||
1 |
|
1
1
The factors denoted k in Eq.(5) above has been
introduced to avoid the singularity in the Biot-Savart law
through gradual reduction of the vorticity for vortex
INNOV'SAIL 2017
13
The Fourth International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France
500
D [N]
400
300
200 z0 = 0.0m
z0 = 1.0m
100 z0 = 2.0m
0 LH + LV [N]
0.00E+00 5.00E+07 1.00E+08 1.50E+08
Figure 4 Geometry of appendages
Figure 5 Daggerboard drag as a function of lift squared
for BS = 6m/s
The selected dimensions are given in table 2. 4.2 HULL RESISTANCE
Table 2 Appendage dimensions
Following the suggestion of OLIVER [6], the
daggerboard chord [m] 0.80 wavemaking resistance of the hull is determined from the
rudder chord [m] 0.30 MICHELL formula, which is implemented into the
MICHLET research code [7]. It is based on slender ship
elevator chord [m] 0.25 theory and is thus ideally suited for analysing sailing
daggerboard span [m] 3.50 catamaran hulls. Frictional resistance is calculated as the
transition segment [m] 0.39 product of static wetted surface area, dynamic pressure
and friction coefficient derived from the ITTC57 friction
winglet span [m] 1.25
line.
rudder span [m] 2.25
elevator span [m] 1.25 The resistance predictions have been compared against
daggerboard cant [] 10.00 towing tank test data of a TORNADO class hull. The
results are presented in figure 6, which shows resistance
winglet dihedral [] 90.00 as a function of Froude number. It can be seen that there
is good agreement between both sets of data up to a
Froude number of about 0.8. The wavemaking resistance
4.3 DAGGERBOARD FORCES hump around Fn = 0.4 is well captured. The increasing
disparity can be explained by the lack of viscous pressure
The behaviour of the daggerboards has been analysed by resistance in the prediction data. Since viscous pressure
GRAF et al. [5] who found the square of the total lift to resistance is caused by friction, it is expected to be
be proportional to the drag. To investigate how the approximately proportional to frictional resistance.
results of the lifting line method presented above
compare to their RANS simulations, daggerboard forces 500
were calculated for a similar test matrix. The results are Rt pred.
Rt exp.
R [N]
INNOV'SAIL 2017
14
The Fourth International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France
cL [-]
Forces and Moments are evaluated for all six degrees of
freedom. Equilibrium is enforced for all components of 1
translation and the moment about the vertical axis. Upper
and lower limits are put in place for the heeling and
trimming moments. The heeling moment boundaries 0.5
cL real
result from the transversely moveable (crew) weight and
the assumption of the windward hull being just clear of cL modified
the water. The trimming moments are restricted by the 0
positions of the longitudinal centre of buoyancy for 0 5 10 15 20AoA []25
allowed trim extrema of 1.5. Trim is not explicitly
Figure 7 Example modified lift curve
modelled, but is taken into account by varying the rudder
elevator angle of attack, which then attains the meaning
of a target trim plus elevator angle. As the trimming 6 RESULTS
moment limits depend on the hydrostatic buoyancy force,
full equilibrium is enforced for the moment about the Figure 8 shows a polar plot of the velocities calculated
transverse axis for foiling states. by the VPP for true wind speeds (TWS) between 5.0 m/s
and 12.5 m/s. It can be seen that speeds generally
In total the VPP optimizes eight variables, which are increase with the wind angle and wind speed as would be
listed in table 3 with their corresponding bounds. Twist is expected. Peak speeds are reached at a wind angle of
defined as angle differential between the root and tip about TWA = 120. The transition to foiling can be
sections of the wing and varies linearly in-between. spotted as a sudden distinctive increase in speed for all
but the lowest windspeed. The angle for the beginning of
Table 3 Optimization variables with bounds
foiling varies between TWA = 60 and about TWA = 75
Variable Units min. max. with the lowest angle found for a windspeed of TWS =
10.0 m/s. It is not quite clear why the inception of foiling
boatspeed [m/s] 0 Infinity then goes back towards a higher angle for TWS = 12.5
sheeting angle [] -10 Infinity m/s. Due to this anomaly the potential boatspeed for the
windspeed of 10.0 m/s is higher than for TWS = 12.5
wing twist [] 0 45
m/s.
rake [] -10 10 The dotted lines show the results for running the VPP in
leeway angle [] -5 5 reverse, i.e. from large to small wind angles. It can be
rudder angle [] -5 5 seen that around TWA = 60 higher boatspeeds can be
achieved when turning upwind from higher wind angles.
Elevation z0 [m] 0 2.45 This is attributed to the fact that the yacht can stay on its
trim/elevator angle [] -1.5 1.5 foils once the drag of the hull has been overcome once.
The rig was originally modelled as a single element wing It can also be noticed that the lines plotted in the polar
and without the jib in this study due to a lack of data and end at different true wind angles. This is due to the fact
to reduce complexity. However, GRAF et al. [5] found that the VPP has been run until no feasible solution was
that the jib does add little if any additional driving force found anymore, which means that the optimizer was not
to the wing system for upwind sailing cases. able to find a solution that fulfils all equilibrium
Furthermore, COLLIE et al. [8] stated that a multi- constraints. For downwind sailing this typically occurs
element wing was only superior in (light-wind) when the minimum heeling moment required to lift the
downwind sailing. Therefore, accurate force predictions windward hull out of the water cannot be reached.
can still be expected at least for upwind and reaching
conditions from this much simplified model.
INNOV'SAIL 2017
15
The Fourth International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France
INNOV'SAIL 2017
16
The Fourth International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France
REFERENCES
INNOV'SAIL 2017
17
The Fourth International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHIES
INNOV'SAIL 2017
18