You are on page 1of 10

See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283051392

Re-evaluation of Resistance Prediction for High-


Speed Round Bilge Hull Forms

Conference Paper · September 2011

CITATIONS READS

0 70

1 author:

Prasanta Sahoo
Florida Institute of Technology
47 PUBLICATIONS 80 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

An oblique 2D+T approach for hydrodynamic modeling of yawed planing boats in calm water View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Prasanta Sahoo on 05 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
11th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation
FAST 2011, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, September 2011

Re-evaluation of Resistance Prediction for High-Speed Round Bilge Hull Forms


Prasanta K Sahoo1, Heather Peng2, Jae Won1, and Dileepan Sangarasigamany3
1
Dept. of Marine and Environmental Systems, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, USA
2
Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial University, St. Johns, Canada
3
National Center for Maritime Engineering and Hydrodyanamics, Australian Maritime College, Australia
ABSTRACT Numerous studies have been carried out on predicting the
Predicting the resistance of a high-speed monohull has been resistance of high-speed round bilge vessels. Various
of interest to Naval Architects for several decades. Even methods, factors and assumptions were employed by
though considerable amount of research has been carried out various researchers at various times which have influenced
in this area, there remains a degree of uncertainty in the their analysis. Owing to different techniques, these methods
accurate resistance prediction in the early design stage. would have significant difference among their predicted
results for a particular vessel. Therefore, people who may
This research paper attempts to investigate a method for consider using one of the resistance prediction methods to
enhancing the accuracy of resistance prediction methods for predict a vessel’s resistance must carefully choose the most
high-speed round-bilge monohull form vessels for a wide appropriate method that suits the vessel’s geometrical
range of volumetric Froude numbers (Fn). While a number characteristics.
of systematic series are in existence, their data are either not
readily available or scattered in various internal reports and The aim of this paper was to investigate the NPL, S-NPL,
publications which makes it difficult for practicing naval SKLAD, and AMECRC series which have undergone
architects to exploit the knowledge base. In this paper the exhaustive tank testing and combine them in an attempt to
following high-speed systematic series hull forms have been find a superior solution in predicting the resistance for a
considered for regression analysis, namely: broad range of round bilge high-speed vessels parameters.
 NPL (1969) While this was not feasible while investigations were under
way, separate regression equations have been developed for
 S-NPL (1994) each of the series pertaining to their own unique geometrical
 SKLAD (1972-1980) and characteristics.

 AMERC (1984-2000) 2.0 ROUND BILGE MONOHULL SYSTEMATIC


Earlier objective of this paper was to obtain a common SERIES
regression equation for a wide parameter space which would Table1 presents some of the series’ parameters and list of
be encompassing all the above systematic series. As this original references. The performance of round bilge hulls is
was not feasible due to lack of data in areas that were strongly dependent upon the slenderness ratio, L/1/3,
considered crucial, hence separate regression analysis has Savitsky et al. (1973). Figure 1 illustrates the L/1/3 range
been carried out for each series. The new regression covered by each of the series while the Figure 2 presents the
equations have been proposed for a broad range of body plans of the round bilge hull systematic series
geometrical parameters so that a designer has an instant tool described in Table 1.
to make a decision regarding powering prediction in the
design stage.
KEY WORDS
Monohull, Resistance, High-Speed, Regression

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Fuel economy and environmental concerns are two
dominant factors in this century that demand that resistance
be accurately predicted in the early design stage, so that
there is no undue penalty due to high fuel costs throughout
the life of the vessel. This has its own implication in Fig.1: L/1/3 Ranges for Round Bilge Systematic Series
choosing the most appropriate propulsion system to suit the [Bojovic (1998)]
vessel’s resistance characteristics.

© 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers 311


3.0 NPL SERIES Table 1: Round Bilge Hull Systematic Series
Resistance data for high-speed round bilge form obtained at [Bojovic(1998)]
NPL were originally presented in 1969. The work was Series
                 
extended to examine the effect of the hull parameters on (No. of Models) 1/3
calm water resistance, Bailey (1976). Experimental L/ L/B B/T CB LCB Fn
investigations involved testing of 22 models where the bare Nordstrom 5.65- 4.83- 3.16- 0.373-
(12*) 7.72 6.94 3.57 0.41 0.9-2.0
hull models were bereft of any keel or appendages. The De Groot (31*) 5.23-
water line length LWL and the block coefficient CB of the 7.75 0.8-2.7
models were set at 2.54 m and 0.397 respectively, where the Marwood-
B, T and the displacement of the vessel were varied. The Silverleaf (30*) 5.2-8.2 .45-1.12
Series 63 (5)
model was also designed to have the LCB at 6.40% of LWL 4.5-6.4 2.5-5.75 0.9-2.2
aft of amidships. These vessels were divided in to 7 groups Series 64 (27) 8.04- 8.45- 3.0- 0.35-
according to their slenderness ratio, L/1/3. Figure 3 12.4 18.26 4.0 0.55 0.1-1.5
SSPA (9) 4.62- 3.0-
represent the parent hull form of NPL series and Figure 4 6.0-8.0 8.20 4.0 0.4 1.0-2.0
describes the distribution of geometrical parameters of NPL NPL (22) 4.47- 3.33- 1.5- 6.4% L
and S-NPL series. 8.30 7.50 2.5 0.397 aft Fn=0.3-1.2
S-NPL 1.5- 6.4%L
extended (10) 6.3-9.5 7.0-15.1 2.5 0.397 aft Fn=0.1-1.05
YP (3) 5.57- 3.97- 3.06-
4.0 SOUTHAMPTON EXTENDED NPL SERIES 5.72 5.17 5.05 Fn=0.1-0.6
Ten slender round bilge models were derived from the NPL SKLAD (27) 3.0- 0.35-
4.5-8.5 4.0-8.0 5.0 0.55 1.0-3.0
series and this extended series was deemed to broadly NRC (24) 6.62- 3.0- 0.35-
represent sleder hull forms suitable for catamaran 7.93 5.0 0.55 Fn=0.2-1.0
applications. The calm water resistance testing of the S-NPL D-Series (13) 6.3- 5.68- 3.0- 0.48- Fn=0.15-
has been described by Molland et al. (1994). The models 6.93 7.05 3.75 .52 0.80
were tested as monohulls and in catamarans configurations VTT (4) 5.41- 4.39- 0.45-
6.586 6.25 6.90 0.60 0.6-3.8
with different hull spacing. The body plan of the hull forms MARIN 4.3- 2.5- 0.35-
are shown in Figure 5. HSDHF (40) 13.1 4.0-12.0 5.5 0.55 Fn=0.1-1.2
AMECRC 2.5- 0.40-
HSDHF (14) 4.3-8.7 4.0-8.0 4.0 0.50    Fn=0.1-1.0

Fig. 4: Range of Parameters Covered in NPL and S-NPL


Series [Bojovic (1998)]
Fig. 2: Round Bilge Systematic Series- Body Plans [Bojovic
(1998)]

Fig. 3: NPL Series Parent Hull Body Plan [Bailey(1976)]


312 © 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers
Fig. 6: SKLAD Series Parameter Space [Radojcic et al
(1999)]

Fig. 5: Southampton Extended NPL Series [Molland et al


(1994)]

5.0 SKLAD SERIES


The research on SKLAD series of models were carried out
at the Brodarski institute, in the former Yugoslavia, over the Fig. 7: SKLAD Series Parent Hull Plan [Radojcic et al.
period from 1972 to 1980. Twenty seven high speed round- (1999)]
bilge, transom-stern, semi-displacement hulls were
developed and used for the research. The displacement Constant values were taken for the position of the
volume was kept constant at 0.230 m3, so that the length of longitudinal centre of buoyancy so that LCB = 8.8%, 9.3%
the models varied from 2.7 to 6m. The models were divided and 9.2% of the LWL aft of amidships for CB=0.35, 0.45 and
in to three groups each, according to their block coefficients 0.55 respectively. The round-bilge models had a stern-
CB, L/B ratio and B/T ratio. The ranges of varied parameters knuckle (chine) for approximately 20% LDWL and a built-in
are outlined in Table 2 and the series’ parameter space is spray rail for approximately 40% LDWL. The after body
illustrated in Figure 6. The parent hull form of SKLAD bottom was both flat (12 degree deadrise angle) and hooked
series has been shown in Figure 7. (wedge is incorporated) and provided enough space for
propellers, a low shaft angle, and low dynamic trim.
Table 2: SKLAD Series Parameters and Range Forward sections were of a deep V-form with a small angle
of entrance that ensured good seakeeping qualities and
[Radojcic et al. (1999)] reduced resistance. All models were without appendages
and were ballasted to even trim at rest and towed
Parameters Range horizontally at the centre of buoyancy.
L/B 4.0 – 8.0
B/T 3.0 – 5.0 Each group had a constant prismatic coefficient CP of 0.715
CB 0.35 – 0.55 and a maximum section-area coefficient of 0.621. The series
L/1/3 4.5 – 8.5 models were tested over the volumetric Froude number
LCB %LWL aft of 8.8, 9.3 and 9.2 range Fn form 1.0 to 3.0. A comprehensive regression
midship for each CB analysis have been performed by the authors, Radojcic et al

© 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers 313


(1999), to determine the residuary or total resistance
coefficients.

6.0 AMECRC SERIES


The AMECRC systematic series is based on the High-Speed
Displacement Hull Form (HSDHF) systematic series
developed at the Maritime Research Institute Netherlands
(MARIN). The HSDHF project was major research project
on combatant vessel design, jointly sponsored by the Royal
Netherlands Navy, the United States Navy, the Royal
Australian Navy and MARIN. It was initiated by the
growing belief that a significant improvement in the
performance of transom stern, round bilge monohulls could
be obtained, especially with regard to their Seakeeping
characteristics. Fig. 9: AMECRC Systematic Series Parameter Space
[Sahoo and Doctors (1999)]
The parent hull form of AMECRC series was based on the
parent hull form of HSDHF series and subsequently 13
more models were developed by systematic variation of L/B,
B/T and CB, Sahoo and Doctors (1999). Table 3 presents the
geometrical parameters range of HSDHF and AMECRC
series and Figure 8 depicts the parent hull form.. The
‘parameter space’ or series ‘cube’ of the AMECRC series is
given in Figure 9. All the 14 models have the same length of
1.6 m and the influence of change of the series parameters
on the hull shape are illustrated in Figure 10 and parameter
range in Table 4.

The models were tested in the Ship Hydrodynamics Centre


at the Australian Maritime College. All models were
constructed with a water line length of 1.6 m. Calm water
tests were conducted at speeds from 0.4 to 4 m/s,
corresponding to Froude Number (Fn) from 0.1 to 1.0. Fig. 10: Change in Hull Shape of AMECRC Series [Sahoo
During testing, the models were free to sink and trim, and and Doctors (1999)]
resistance, trim and rise of centre of gravity were recorded.
7.0 REGRESSION ANALYSIS
The general purpose of multiple regression is to analyse the
Table 3: Parameters for HSDHF and AMECRC relationship between several independent variables or
Systematic Series [Sahoo and Doctors (1999)] predictor variables, called x, and a dependent or criterion
variable, y. The experiment data model doesn’t have not
HSDHF AMECRC only several independent variables but also have several
L/B 4 – 12 4 -8 valid cases.
B/T 2.5 – 5.5 2.5 – 4.0
CB 0.35 – 0.55 0.396 – 0.50 It is easy to deal with data that have some linear or
nonlinear relationship between them. A straight or a curve
line can be fit through those points. From the equation of
that line the same parameter can be predicted within the
valid range. Simple regressions like this can be done with
the help of Microsoft Excel program.
Hull form parameters

 Analysed hull form parameters should be in non-


dimensional form.
 Data should give a uniform coverage of the space
Fig. 8: AMECRC Parent Hull Body Plan [Sahoo and defined by variations of the analysed hull form
Doctors (1999)] parameters. The density of the uniform coverage is
not vital factor, but it is desirable to obtain a full

314 © 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers


combination of at least three values of each varied variables, it is wrong to further include their
parameter. product them as an independent variable because it
 All the parameters that may have a significant will lead to some instability in the equation. And is
effect on the dependent variable should be included unnecessary as it will not add significantly to the
in the analysis, and any parameters that are not accuracy of the equation.
included should either be constant or should have  It is possible to have two highly correlated
an insignificant influence on the dependent independent variables which if one is included in
variable. the regression equation without the other is not
 The extreme values of all varied parameters should effective, but if both are included then the equation
be carefully defined. is more accurate.
 It also possible to have two highly correlated
Table 4: Systematic Series Parameter Range [Sahoo independent variables in a regression equation
and Doctors (1999)] which both have significantly non-zero
coefficients, but which predominantly explain the
Model L/B B/T CB Model L/1/3 variance of each other rather than the variance of
Disp.(kg) the dependent variable. Each of these could
become insignificant, if the other is removed from
1 8 4 0.396 6.321 8.653 the equation.
2 6.512 3.51 0.395 11.455 7.098
Production of Good Regression Analysis
3 8 2.5 0.447 11.454 7.098
 Each independent variable used in the regression
4 8 4 0.447 7.158 8.302 equation should have a high significance level,
5 4 4 0.395 25.344 5.447 generally not lower than 95%.
 It should not be possible to improve the accuracy
6 8 2.5 0.395 10.123 7.396
of the equation by introducing extra independent
7 4 2.5 0.396 40.523 4.658 variables.
8 4 2.5 0.5 51.197 4.308  It should not be possible to exclude an independent
variable from the equation without significantly
9 8 2.5 0.5 12.804 6.839 reducing the accuracy.
10 8 4 0.5 8.002 7.998  The regression equation should not contain more
11 4 4 0.5 32.006 5.039 than ten independent variables, Fairlie-Clark
(1975). Fung (1991) concluded that residual error
12 8 3.25 0.497 9.846 7.464 starts to stagnate after inclusion of 1 to 17 terms.
13 6 3.25 0.45 15.784 6.379 More terms in a regression equation may contribute
to a better fit to the data, yet give a poorer
14 6 4 0.5 14.204 6.606
interpolation result, Savitsky et al. (1976).

Assumptions Regarding Regression Analysis Application


8.0 REGRESSION ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE
 The principal parameters of the hull whose
performance is being predicted must fall within the Several other techniques have been tried to predict RR/ in
range of parameters’ values covered by the data. terms of L/B, B/T, L/1/3 and CB. The method used by
Radojcic (1997) has been adopted here. In his method
 All parameters that are constant in the analysed principal hull form and loading parameters were
data set, must have that same constant value in the transformed in to another set of variables with a range from
proposed design (comment: if a certain parameter -1 to 1.
is constant, it does not reduce the prediction
accuracy, only prevents the investigation of the The method has two sets of similar equations, one for
effect of that parameter). AMECRC and SKLAD series hull forms where the
parameter space has varying L/B, B/T, L/1/3 and CB; and
Selection of Independent Variables the other for S-NPL series hull form which has all but CB is
Independent variables are generated as functions of varied fixed. The equation developed for S-NPL is similar to the
hull parameters and/or speed. equation developed by Radojcic (1997) for NPL hull forms
 Independent variables should be in non- which have 27 terms, and the equation developed for
dimensional form. When there is theoretical AMECRC and SKLAD series have 48 terms. They are as
evidence as to the form that the independent follows:
variables should take, an attempt should be made to
utilise that form.
 When a regression equation has two highly
correlated variables as useful independent

© 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers 315


S-NPL hull series: 9.0 FORWARD STEPWISE REGRESSION
 L ( L / B) min  ( L / B) max  PROCEDURE
  
x1   
B 2 This is the method used in the paper for regression analysis.
 ( L / B) max  ( L / B) min  The method starts with a single independent variable in the
  (1)
 2  regression model. At each succeeding step, additional
independent variables are introduced based on significance
testing using the t-test. Those variables that possess the
 B ( B / T )min  ( B / T ) max 
   greatest statistical significance relative to the dependent
x2   
T 2
variable are added first. This procedure is repeated until no
 ( B / T ) max  ( B / T ) min 
  (2) significant independent variables can be found outside the
 2  regression model. Also, if a previously added independent
 L ( L / 1 / 3 ) min  ( L / 1/ 3 ) max  variable becomes insignificant due to the addition of new
 1 / 3   variables, the previously added variable is removed from the

x3   
2
regression model. The acceptance and rejection of each
 ( L / 1 / 3 ) max  ( L / 1/ 3 ) min 
  (3) independent variable is purely based on the F-test (criteria
 2  F-to-remove and F-to-enter in the software).
RR   a0  a1x1  a2 x2  a3 x3  a4 x1  a5 x2  a6 x3 
2 2 2

a7 x1x2  a8 x1x3  a9 x2 x3  a10x1 x2  a11x1 x3  a12x2 x1


2 2 2 This model has been used for all of the analyses described in
this paper. F-values, mentioned above, where selected so
 a13x2 x3  a14x3 x1  a15x3 x2  a16 x1  a17 x2  a18x3 
2 2 2 3 3 3

that the final regression model contains no variables with a


a19 x1 x2  a20x1 x3  a21x2 x1  a22 x2 x3  a23x3 x1  a24x3 x2 
3 3 3 3 3 3
statistical significance (p-level) greater than 0.05 (5%).
a25x1 x2  a26x1 x3  a27 x2 x3
2 2 2 2 2 2
Specifically, p-level represents the probability of error that
is involved in accepting observed results as valid.
(4) When conducting regression analysis results could become
unstable if highly correlated independent variables are
AMECRC & SKLAD hull series: included in the regression model. Control over this matter
 L ( L / B) min  ( L / B) max  was achieved by setting the tolerance level from 0 – 0.001
   (0% - 0.1%). That means that variables whose tolerance was
x1   
B 2
 ( L / B) max  ( L / B) min  under this level were considered redundant with the
  contribution of other independent variables already in the
 2 
equation.
(5)
 B ( B / T )min  ( B / T ) max  10. FINAL REGRESSION MODEL AND RESULTS
  
x2   
T 2 For the purpose of developing the regression equations,
 ( B / T ) max  ( B / T ) min  initially RR/ has been derived from the experimental data.
  (6)
 2  AMECRC and S-NPL systematic series had their own
published experimental data, where SKLAD systematic
 L ( L / 1 / 3 ) min  ( L / 1 / 3 ) max 
   series had a regression equation developed by Radojcic et
 1 / 3 2 
x3    al. (1999) based on CR.
 ( L / 1 / 3 ) max  ( L / 1 / 3 ) min 
  (7)
 2  Linear and non-linear interpolation analyses have been
  performed to arrange the results for the specific Froude
 (C )  (CB ) max  numbers where needed. Therefore an uncertainty is
 CB  B min 
x4   
2 expected in organizing the final experimental results for
 (CB ) max  (CB ) min  regression analysis. Thus assuming the uncertainty is very
  small, it has been ignored in this regression analysis.
 2 
(8) Regression equation has been obtained for a wide range of
RR   a0  a1 x1  a2 x2  a3 x3  a4 x4  a5 x1  a6 x2  a7 x3
2 2 2
Fn. The ranges of Fn are for AMECRC systematic series
 a8 x42  a9 x1 x2  a10 x1 x3  a11 x1 x4  a12 x2 x3  a13 x2 x4  1 to 2, S-NPL systematic series 1 to 2.5 and SKLAD
a14 x3 x4  a15 x1 x2  a16 x1 x3  a17 x1 x4  a18 x2 x1  a19 x2 x3 
2 2 2 2 2
systematic series 1 to 3. All three series have increments of
a20 x2 x4  a21 x3 x1  a22 x3 x2  a23 x3 x4  a24 x x  a25 x42 x2 
2 2 2 2 2
4 1 0.25 for Fn. The regression equation obtained for all range
a26 x42 x3  a27 x1  a28 x2  a29 x3  a30 x4  a31 x1 x2  a32 x1 x3  of Fn have a higher degree of accuracy with R2 = 0.9999 or
3 3 3 3 3 3
(9)
a33 x1 x4  a34 x2 x1  a35 x2 x3  a36 x2 x4  a37 x3 x1  a38 x3 x2
3 3 3 3 3 3
higher while obtaining the coefficients of the equations. The
 a39 x3 x4  a40 x4 x1  a41 x4 x2  a42 x4 x3  a43 x1 x2  a44 x1 x3  predicted values of RR/ for all the existing models are quite
3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2

a45 x1 x4  a46 x2 x3  a47 x2 x4  a48 x3 x4


2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
close to the actual experiment values. Regression equation
obtained by Bojovic (1998) for calculating the wetted
surface area coefficient (CS) has been reproduced.

316 © 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers


Table 5: AMECRC Series Regression Coefficients
It is to be noted that regression coefficients which do not Fn
play a significant role in the regression equation have been ai 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00
ignored in the equations as shown. Table 5 depicts the a0 0.021256 0.041582 0.057983 0.062536 0.064701
regression coefficients for the AMECRC Series which needs a3 0.010086 -0.052430 -0.018881 -0.047772 -0.052937
to be read in conjunction with final equation (10). Table 6 a4 0.000000 -0.004230 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
represents the regression coefficients for the SKLAD series a6 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.002433 -0.002000
as per the equation (11). a7 -0.090351 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
a8 0.000000 -0.000432 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
a10 0.000000 0.021886 0.000000 0.074728 0.021788
Equation for AMECRC Series: a13 -0.000362 0.000000 0.573707 0.297682 0.000000
a14 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 -0.012685
RR
 a0  a3 x3  a4 x4  a6 x2  a7 x3  a8 x42 
2 2
a15 0.000000 0.003119 0.011745 0.007869 -0.006719

a16 -0.033111 0.000000 -0.027641 0.000000 0.000000
a10 x1 x3  a13 x2 x4  a14 x3 x4  a15 x1 x2  a16 x1 x3  a17 x1 x4
2 2 2

a17 0.000000 0.010262 0.007585 0.007979 0.008686


 a18 x2 x1  a19 x2 x3  a20 x2 x4  a22 x3 x2  a23 x3 x4 
2 2 2 2 2
a18 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000392 0.000000
a25 x42 x2  a27 x1  a32 x1 x3  a33 x1 x4  a35 x2 x3
3 3 3 3
(10) a19 -0.001802 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
 a36 x2 x4  a37 x3 x1  a39 x3 x4  a40 x4 x1  a41 x4 x2  a20 0.000000 0.002726 0.000000 0.000000 0.007845
3 3 3 3 3

a22 -0.001931 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.007021


a43 x1 x2  a44 x1 x3  a48 x3 x4
2 2 2 2 2 2

a23 0.000000 -0.025257 -0.024854 -0.024806 -0.025552


a25 -0.000580 -0.000830 -0.004635 -0.002786 0.000000
a27 -0.001214 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Equation for SKLAD Series: a32 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 -0.067811 0.000000
RR
 a0  a1 x1  a2 x2  a3 x3  a4 x4  a5 x1  a33
2
0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.001858
 a35 0.000000 0.000000 -0.000525 0.000000 0.000000
a6 x2  a7 x3  a8 x42  a9 x1 x2  a10 x1 x3  a11 x1 x4
2 2
a36 0.000000 0.006008 -0.019674 0.000000 0.000000
 a12 x2 x3  a13 x2 x4  a14 x3 x4  a15 x1 x2  a16 x1 x3 
2 2
a37 -0.002368 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
a39 0.002357 0.002361 -0.008204 0.000000 0.038912
a17 x1 x4  a18 x2 x1  a19 x2 x3  a20 x2 x4
2 2 2 2

a40 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 -0.002973


 a21 x3 x1  a22 x3 x2  a23 x3 x4  a24 x42 x1 
2 2 2

a41 0.000000 0.000000 -0.549618 -0.293514 0.000000


a25 x42 x2  a26 x42 x3 (11) a43 0.000000 0.000000 0.003440 0.000000 0.000000
a44 0.108373 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
a48 0.000000 -0.007058 0.000000 -0.003685 0.000000
Equation for S-NPL Series:
Table 6: SKLAD Series Regression Coefficients
RR
 a0  a1 x1  a2 x2  a3 x3  a4 x1  a5 x2 
2 2
Fn
 ai 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00
a0
a6 x3  a7 x1 x2  a8 x1 x3  a9 x2 x3  a10 x1 x2
2 2 0.513250 0.032441 0.290520 -0.945600 0.154870 0.440900 -0.848500 -1.026700 -0.070970
a1 -3.306930 0.000000 0.459060 10.679900 0.000000 -2.522410 6.844500 8.281800 -0.151850

 a11 x1 x3  a12 x2 x1  a13 x2 x3  a14 x3 x1 


2 2 2 2 a2 -1.235130 0.000000 -0.408120 3.011100 -0.269920 -0.826620 2.113600 2.557500 0.000000
a3 5.562080 -0.060165 2.491560 -11.914900 1.349990 4.726010 -10.093300 -12.212900 -1.006460

a15 x3 x2  a16 x1  a17 x2  a18 x3


2 3 3 3 a4 1.124810 0.000000 0.681920 -2.018900 0.277620 0.919760 -2.041200 -2.469800 -0.358190
a5 0.108200 0.000000 -6.292570 -12.501300 -2.358710 -0.641400 -3.248100 -3.930200 2.069300
(12) a6 0.104930 0.002861 -0.354660 -1.193600 -0.007070 -0.236280 0.013600 0.016400 0.450970
a7 -0.390920 -0.187583 -3.807000 -7.143100 1.011810 2.478460 0.926100 1.120600 3.330640
Equation for NPL Series, Radojcic (1997): a8 -0.125760 0.004264 0.296720 0.981800 0.051650 -0.031980 0.179000 0.216600 -0.293710
a9 -0.332970 -0.000285 -3.444920 -6.180200 -0.985530 -1.335920 0.000000 0.000000 1.963290
a10 0.397760 0.123824 12.973620 24.520100 3.479220 0.000000 4.356800 5.271700 -5.405990
RR
 a 0  a1 x1  a 2 x 2  a3 x3  a5 x 2 
2 a11 0.172350 0.000000 1.101930 1.534300 0.615690 0.241520 0.914000 1.105900 0.394460
 a12 0.113140 0.048196 2.683190 5.922500 -0.045110 0.922390 -1.043000 -1.262000 -2.727690
a13 0.058230 -0.001019 0.002800 -0.039800 -0.031620 0.264600 -0.182300 -0.220600 -0.007310
a12 x 2 x1  a13 x 2 x3  a16 x1  a19 x1 x 2 
2 2 3 3
a14 0.124810 -0.037893 1.168150 1.892700 0.643570 1.017340 -0.476500 -0.576600 -1.168100
a15 -0.011950 0.000000 -0.162990 -0.285900 -0.177010 -0.155620 -0.261000 -0.315800 -0.178380
a 20 x1 x3  a 22 x 2 x3  a 23 x3 x1  a 26 x1 x3  a 27 x 2 x3
3 3 3 2 2 2 2
a16 0.042470 0.000000 -1.883950 -3.649800 -0.529810 -0.080960 -0.530500 -0.642000 1.088780
(13) a17 0.001910 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 -0.032470 -0.081400 -0.035400 -0.042800 -0.056290
a18 0.000000 -0.003115 0.168550 0.325700 0.027300 -0.049170 0.010700 0.013000 -0.160160
a19 0.037150 0.000000 -0.221780 -0.624300 0.007380 -0.016400 0.041700 0.050400 0.296080
a20 0.000090 0.000000 0.004360 0.003400 -0.004810 -0.014400 -0.008300 -0.010100 -0.012530
a21 0.078230 0.000000 0.556630 0.879400 0.180780 0.416740 -0.083700 -0.101300 -0.302420
a22 -0.000490 0.006592 0.172920 0.377300 0.104600 0.025110 0.218600 0.264500 0.121380
a23 0.043660 -0.009150 0.598090 1.080300 0.506520 0.777610 0.425400 0.514700 0.147860
a24 -0.031620 0.000000 -0.195200 -0.271500 -0.076720 -0.005090 -0.094400 -0.114200 0.000320
a25 -0.009960 -0.001581 -0.012480 -0.013000 0.006180 -0.025520 0.031000 0.037600 0.015740
a26 0.018660 -0.003189 0.274470 0.506000 0.078040 0.068100 0.087800 0.106200 -0.068550

© 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers 317


Table 7: S-NPL Series Regression Coefficients For NPL and S-NPL Series, the coefficients ci are shown in
Fn Table 12:
ai 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2/3 2 1 2 2/3 2/3
L B L B B  L B B
a0 0.145663 0.248405 0.334126 0.391436 0.266540 0.464022 0.525205 C S  c 0  c1      c 2      c3    c 4      c5  
B T   B T  T  B T  T 
a1 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
2 2/3 2/3
(17)
a2 0.000000 0.001822 -0.010633 0.000000 -0.155760 0.000000 0.000000 L B L B
a3 0.121710 -0.112798 -0.136986 -0.146568 0.257630 -0.179423 -0.188960
 c 6      c 7    
B T  B T 
a4 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 -0.100553 1.657930 -0.183378 -0.004029
a5 0.000000 0.020294 0.023584 0.029722 0.071770 0.035417 0.037020
a6 -0.466263 -0.001685 0.044714 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
a7 0.071608 0.000000 0.000000 -0.009405 0.606780 0.000000 0.000000 Table 9: AMECRC Series – CS Regression Parameters
a8 0.588435 0.000000 0.000000 0.150517
a9 0.142337 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
-1.104850
0.000000
0.349322
0.000000
0.236978
0.000000
and Coefficients
a10 0.092976 0.000000 -0.006864 0.000000 0.264390 0.245393 0.435946 ci
a11 0.000000 0.000000 -0.040654 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 -0.794819
a12 0.000000 0.024790 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.046974 3.328344
a13 0.057891 -0.271027 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.023702 0.000000
2/3 -2/3
a14 0.000000 0.000000 -0.006026 0.019188 0.000000 -0.239572 0.000000 (L/B) CB 0.744941
a15 0.000000 -0.106479 -0.013507 0.019186 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
-2/3
a16
a17
-0.038131
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.367524
0.000000
1.008678
0.000000
(B/T) CB 0.352265
a18 0.000000 0.167585 0.000000 -0.028958 -0.082020 0.000000 0.000000 2/3 -1
(L/B) (B/T)CB 0.046307
4/3 -1
(L/B) CB -
0.037945
(B/T)1/3CB-1/3 -
Table 8: NPL Series Regression Coefficients (Radojcic 1.367162
1997) R2 0.999543
Fn
ai 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0
a0 0.012677 0.031092 0.057789 0.070863 0.080384 0.092592 0.105658 0.113350 0.118892 0.123105 0.120589 0.115058 St. error 0.02013
a1 -0.008102 0.000000 0.008445 0.004134 0.000962 0.005733 0.010769 0.007299 -0.001703 -0.014977 -0.041899 -0.077104
a2 0.000061 -0.041840 -0.042841 -0.044967 -0.041259 -0.043200 -0.046379 -0.042913 -0.039950 -0.034003 -0.017179 0.005255
a3 -0.002725 0.007983 0.015331 0.013614 0.014880 0.022856 0.031878 0.031266 0.023441 0.008990 -0.022888 -0.067378
a5
a12
-0.001185
0.004254
0.002904
-0.003601
0.010337
0.000000
0.043687
0.005111
0.009803
0.012468
0.008203
0.012205
0.007646
0.010455
0.013292
0.000922
0.026694
-0.018860
0.043975
-0.043354
0.057718
-0.046133
0.071086
-0.048405
Table 10: SKLAD Series – CS Regression Parameters
a13 -0.025702 0.000000 -0.000655 -0.013832 -0.038512 -0.043373 -0.050962 -0.050318 -0.036356 0.000000 0.051148 0.057769 and Coefficients
a16 0.001395 0.000062 0.000000 0.002578 0.004118 0.005143 0.006964 0.008068 0.009177 0.009824 0.009804 0.008532
a19 0.004913 0.005626 0.004361 0.004098 0.004899 0.004763 0.010023 0.012955 0.012276 0.006514 -0.008769 -0.034102
a20 -0.005901 0.002059 0.010917 0.001183 0.000667 0.002649 0.002493 -0.003659 -0.018867 -0.033644 -0.057179 -0.101116
a22 0.015476 0.000000 -0.003984 0.011616 0.030670 0.033934 0.044572 0.047574 0.025806 -0.015288 -0.047272 -0.062657 ci
a23 -0.008887 0.002059 0.006095 0.001874 -0.004834 -0.006093 -0.009345 -0.010929 -0.015162 -0.020789 -0.019478 -0.051664
a26
a27
-0.008427
-0.033521
0.005375
0.010811
0.016808
0.008090
0.006989
-0.023857
0.001094
-0.057101
-0.001804
-0.064610
-0.010127
-0.081529
-0.017531
-0.080688
-0.033868
-0.063470
-0.050023
-0.014102
-0.060285
0.040157
-0.118198
0.073258
2.456288
)-2/3 2/3 2/3
(L/B (B/T) CB 0.434391
11. WETTED SURFACE AREA COEFFICIENTS (L/B )-4/3
(B/T) CB-1
-
(BOJOVIC (1998)) 0.013612
Since the wetted surface area determination has already (L/B)-3 0.000188
been carried out by Bojovic (1998), these are also being
R2 0.99862
reproduced in Tables 9 to 11. The regression model for the
wetted surface area coefficient would have the following St. error 0.04145
form as shown in the following equations. The wetted
surface area coefficient is given by: Table 11: NPL & S-NPL Series – CS Regression
S
CS  (14) Parameters and Coefficients
2 / 3
For AMECRC Series, the coefficients ci are shown in Table
10: ci
4.445787
)2/3
L
C S  c 0  c1  
2/3

C  2 / 3 B L
 c 2  C B   c 3  
2 / 3
2/3
B
 C B 
1 (L/B (B/T) 0.252716
B
B T  B T  )-2 -1
4/3 1/ 3 (L/B (B/T) -
L B
 c 4   C 
B
1
 c5   C  B
1 / 3
(15) 186841481
B T 
(B/T)-1 -
14.463151
For SKLAD Series, the coefficients ci shown in Table 11: (L/B)-2(B/T)-2/3 131.22276
2 / 3 2/3 4 / 3 1
L B L B
C S  c0  c1     C  B
2/3
 c2     C B  (B/T)2/3 23.016071
B T  B T 
L
3 (16) (L/B (B/T) )2
-0.008127
 c3  
B )2/3 2/3
(L/B (B/T) 0.528452
2
R 0.99892
St. error 0.03395

318 © 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers


12. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Jin, P., Su, B., Tan, Z., A Parametric study on High-Speed
Round Bilge Displacement Hulls, High-Speed Surface Craft,
The purpose of this study is to provide a set of regression
September, 1980.
models for various round bilge high-speed hull forms at a
glance, which would be of immense benefit for a practicing
Lahtiharju, E., Karppinen, T., Helllevaara, M., Aitta, T.,
naval architect. As the results are based on pre-existing
Resistance and Seakeeping Characteristics of Fast Transom
model test results of the various series, it has been shown
Stern Hulls with Systematically Varied Form, Transactions
through this study that the developed regression equations
SNAME, Vol.99, 1991, pp.85 - 118.
are able to give relatively accurate predictions of resistance,
with little input data about the hull and minimal time for the
Mercier, J.A., Savitsky, D., Resistance of Transom-Stern
calculation process. It is therefore assumed that the
Craft in the Pre-planing Regime, Davidson Laboratory
regression equations would provide viable first estimates of
Report 1667, Stevens Institute of Technology, June, 1973.
the resistance characteristics of hull-form in early design
stages. The regression models are to be used with due care
Molland, A.F., Wellicome, J.F., Couser, P.R., Resistance
with regard to type of hull form used in monohull
Experiments on a Systematic Series of High-speed
configuration.
Displacement Catamaran Forms: Variation of Length –
displacement Ratio and Breadth-Draught Ratio, Ship
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Science Report 71, University of Southampton, 1994.

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Radojcic, D., Princevac, M., Rodic, T., Resistance and Trim
The Australian Maritime College, Australia (specialist Prediction for the SKLAD Semi Displacement Hull Series,
institute of University of Tasmania) and Florida Institute of Oceanic Engineering International, Vol 3, No.1, 1999, pp.
Technology, Melbourne, USA for their support, 34 - 50.
encouragement throughout the course of this research work.
Radojcic, D., Rodic, T., Kostic, N., Resistance and Trim
REFERENCES Predictions for the NPL High-speed Round Bilge
Displacement Hull Series, RINA Symposium – Power,
Performance and Operability of Small Craft, Southampton,
Bailey, D., The NPL High-speed Round Bilge Displacement UK, Sept 15-16. 1997.
Hull Series, RINA, Maritime Technology Monograph No. 4,
1976. Sahoo, P.K., Doctors, L.J., Hydrodynamics of AMECRC
Systematic Series – High – Speed Displacement Monohull
Bojovic, P., Resistance Prediction of High-speed Round Forms, Australian Maritime College, 1999.
Bilge Hull Forms, Australian Maritime College, 1998, n.p.

© 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers 319

View publication stats