0 views

Uploaded by hossam

Manoeuvring

- Books for IIT
- Trajectory Prediction Tool Comparisons for Spinning and Non-spinning Projectiles
- VesselManeuverabilityGuide_June06
- Aerodynamic Data of Space Vehicles.pdf
- Brian Grattan Mahatma i AMI II
- Parametric Study of Diaphragm Wall
- Thesis Brad - Vehicle Dynamics
- Stability
- AIEEE-2010_Answer2010
- Two Dimensional Universe - Bogoliubov Coefficients
- Control of Multiple UAV
- A Hook Test SimulationXpress Study
- Recommended Books
- Physics Paper
- Avionics - Systems and Troubleshooting Cap. 6
- 2005 11 21 Cameron John T MSThesis Final
- CHAPTER_5
- etoosindia.com-jee-main-2016-mock-test-Set-A-Sol.pdf
- 060_Sample Question Paper and Hints for Solution
- Ship's Movements at Sea[1]

You are on page 1of 68

MANOEUVRING

LECTURE NOTES

BY

Prasanta Sahoo

Semester 2, 2007

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1 .......................................................................................................................................................... 3

MANOEUVRING ................................................................................................................................................. 3

FORCES ACTING ON A VESSEL DURING MANOEUVRE........................................................................ 5

CHAPTER 2 .......................................................................................................................................................... 7

MOTION STABILITY AND LINEAR EQUATIONS ...................................................................................... 7

ASSUMPTIONS OF LINEARITY ............................................................................................................... 8

CHAPTER 3 .........................................................................................................................................................12

CONTROL FORCES AND MOMENTS...........................................................................................................12

STABILITY CRITERION ...........................................................................................................................14

CHAPTER 4 .........................................................................................................................................................19

THE DIEUDONNE SPIRAL MANOEUVER...................................................................................................19

TURNING PATH OF A SHIP .....................................................................................................................20

HEEL ANGLE DURING A TURN .............................................................................................................24

CHAPTER 5 .........................................................................................................................................................28

MODEL TESTS ...................................................................................................................................................28

CAPTIVE MODEL TESTS ................................................................................................................................29

ROTATING ARM TECHNIQUE................................................................................................................30

PLANAR MOTION MECHANISM............................................................................................................32

CHAPTER 6 .........................................................................................................................................................37

PREDICTIONS OF HYDRODYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS OF MOTIONS ................................................37

LOW ASPECT RATIO THEORY...............................................................................................................42

EMPIRICAL METHODS ............................................................................................................................47

CHAPTER 7 .........................................................................................................................................................49

STABILITY AND CONTROL ...........................................................................................................................49

DEFINITIVE MANOEUVRE .....................................................................................................................49

ZIG-ZAG, Z OR KEMPF OVERSHOOT MANOEUVRE .........................................................................49

ACCELERATING, STOPPING AND BACKING......................................................................................51

STOPPING DISTANCES ............................................................................................................................52

CHAPTER 8 .........................................................................................................................................................55

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION......................................................................................55

CHAPTER 9 .........................................................................................................................................................61

RUDDER DESIGNS ............................................................................................................................................61

RUDDER TYPES ........................................................................................................................................64

SPADE RUDDER ........................................................................................................................................65

SEMI-BALANCED RUDDERS ..................................................................................................................65

FLAP RUDDERS.........................................................................................................................................65

Manoeuvring Page No 2

Chapter 1

MANOEUVRING

Steering and manoeuvring is about the behaviour of a ship in a horizontal plane. It is the

response of the ship’s motion as a result of rudder action. This course will handle

manoeuvring aspects in a more general way since certain aspects are still not fully

understood.

The basic dynamics of manoeuvring and course keeping can be described and analysed using

Newtons Laws of Motion. Basic operations in the horizontal plane can be considered first

with reference to one set of axes fixed relative to the earth and a second set fixed relative to

the ship.

The ship’s path is normally defined as the trajectory of the ships centre of gravity. Heading

refers to the direction (ψ, angle of yaw) of the ship’s longitudinal axis with respect to one of

the fixed axes. The difference between the headings and the actual course (direction of

velocity vector at the COG) is the drift or leeway angle β. When the ship is moving along a

curved path, the drift angle is thus the difference in direction between the heading and the

tangent to the path of the COG.

In a right hand orthogonal system of reference x0, y0 directions are fixed with respect to the

surface of the earth. The positive direction of x0 axis is taken to be the general direction of the

motion, its precise direction may be arbitrary but fixed to the earth. Positive z0 is downwards

and positive y0 is towards starboard.

The motion of the ship at t = t0 is completely defined by xoG, yoG and the angle of yaw ψ.

Manoeuvring Page No 3

X 0 = ∆x0G (surge)

Y0 = ∆y0G (sway)

(1)

N = I zψ (yaw)

N = total moment about an axis through the COG and parallel to z0 axis.

∆ = Mass of ship

ψ = Yaw angle in the horizontal plane measured from the vertical xo z0 plane to the x-axis of

the ship.

In spite of the simplicity, it is sometimes convenient to express with respect to x, y axis of the

moving ship. The moving axes also form right hand orthogonal system but with the exception

that the origin is at COG at all times, t.

The x-axis along the centre plane is coincident with the longitudinal axis of inertia, which

may be assumed, with very small error, to be parallel to the baseline of the ship. The direction

of x-axis is referred to as the heading, hence ψ is the heading angle as well as the yaw angle.

The z-axis is also in the centre plane of the ship, but is normal to x-axis and positive

downward, y-axis is normal to x and z and positive to starboard.

In order to convert equations (1) from fixed areas in earth to areas fixed in moving ship the

total forces X and Y in the X, Y directions, respectively are expressed as:

X = XOCosψ + YOSinψ

Y = YOCosψ - XOSinψ

Likewise

yoG = uSinψ + vCosψ

where u and v are the components of the velocity vector V along x and y directions

respectively.

Then

xoG = uCosψ − vSinψ − (uSinψ + vCosψ )ψ

yoG = uSinψ + vCosψ + (uCosψ − vSinψ )ψ (4)

Manoeuvring Page No 4

X = ∆ (u − vψ )

Y = ∆(v + uψ )

So the pertinent equation of motion in horizontal plane, assuming zero roll, pitch and heave.

For completeness:

Surge:

Sway: X = ∆ (u − v ψ )

Y = ∆ (v + uψ )

Yaw:

N = I Zψ

The terms − ∆vψ and ∆uψ in X and Y are the so called centrifugal force terms which

exist when systems with moving axes are considered but do not exist when axes are fixed to

earth.

The forces and movements are built up of four types of forces that act on a ship during

manoeuvre:

a) Hydrodynamic forces acting on the hull and appendages, due to ship velocity and

acceleration, rudder deflection and propeller rotation.

The first two types of forces generally act in the horizontal plane and involve only surge,

sway and yaw responses, although rolling may occur. Hydrodynamic forces are due to hull

velocity through water (damping force) and those arising from hull acceleration (added mass

forces).

Effect of rudder on turning is indirect. Moving the rudder produces a moment that causes the

ship to change heading and assume an angle of attack (leeway angle β) to the direction of

motion of COG. As a result hydrodynamic forces on the hull are generated, which after a

time, cause a change of lateral movement of COG. The lateral movement is opposed by the

inertial reactions. If rudder remains fixed in a position, a steady turning condition will endure

with hydrodynamic and inertial forces and moments coming into balance.

There are several plausible scenarios in ships manoeuvoring. These could be:

Manoeuvring Page No 5

Interactions between vessels complicate the hydrodynamic and inertial force analysis.

Environment where wind, wave and current are prevalent may also complicate things:

relative velocities between the vessel and the water.

• Forces and moments due to wind are time dependent and generally

proportional to the above water area of the ship on square of the relation velocity

between ship and wind. May be affected due to direction of wind velocity relative to

the ship axes.

First order forces are important from seakeeping point of view. But the steady slowly varying

forces due to second order wave drift effects are generally more important for ship

controllability.

Wave drift forces depend primarily on ship’s length, relative magnitude of wavelength and

amplitude.

Finally the forces created by tugs and thrusters are effective at relatively slow speeds and

mostly external to hydronamic manoeuvre and treated as independent additions.

Manoeuvring Page No 6

Chapter 2

The concept of path keeping is strongly related to course stability. A body is said to be stable

in any particular state of equilibrium in rest or motion. If when momentarily disturbed by an

external force or moment, it tends to return after release from the disturbing force to a state of

equilibrium existing before the body was disturbed. In the case of path keeping the most

obvious external disturbing force would be a wave or gust of wind. For optimum path

keeping it would be desirable for the ship to resume its original path after the passage of

disturbance, with no intervention by helsman. This would depend on the kind of motion

stability possessed by the vessel.

The various winds of motion stability associated with ship are classified by the state of their

initial condition and are:

Manoeuvring Page No 7

Case I: Straight line path and final path is a straight-line after release from disturbance,

but direction has changed.

Case II: Directional stability, the final path after release of disturbance is also a straight

line attribute of the original path, its direction but a different position.

Case III: Same as II but ship passes on smoothly to the same final path.

Case IV: Positional motion stability, where ship returns to the original path with regard

to position, path and direction.

ASSUMPTIONS OF LINEARITY

The force components X, Y and the moment component N are assumed to be composed of

several parts, which are functions of ship’s velocity and acceleration.

X = F x (u , v , u , v , ψ , ψ )

Y = F y (u , v , u , v , ψ , ψ )

N = Fψ (u , v , u , v , ψ , ψ ) (6)

index of motion stability. So Taylor’s expansion is mdae use of.

The linearised form of the Taylor’s expansion of a function of two variables x, y is a simple

sum of three terms:

∂f ( x, y ) ∂f ( x, y )

f ( x, y ) = f ( x1 , y1 ) + δx + δy (7)

∂x ∂y

∂Y

∂u

+ (v − v1 )

∂Y

∂v

( )

+ .... ψ − ψ 1

∂Y

∂ψ (8)

Where subscript 1 refers to all cases to the values of the variables at the initial equilibrium

condition and where all of the partial derivatives are evaluated at the equilibrium condition. If

the initial equilibrium condition for motion stability is a straight line motion at constant speed,

it follows that:

u1 = v1 = ψ 1 = ψ 1 = 0 (8a)

Manoeuvring Page No 8

Since vessel is symmetrical about XZ plane and travel in a straight line with zero angle of

attack, v1=0 but may not be true for ships with odd numbers of propellers.

Because of symmetry

∂Y ∂Y

= =0 (8b)

∂u ∂u

since change in forward speed or acceleration will produce no transverse force for

symmetrical ships. Finally for a ship in a straight line motion there can be no Y force acting

on it, therefore:

F y (u1 , v1 , u1 , v1 ,ψ 1 ,ψ 1 ) = 0 (9)

Only u1 is not zero but equal to the resultant velocity V in the initial equilibrium condition.

∂Y ∂Y ∂Y ∂Y

So Y= v+ v+ ψ+ ψ (9a)

∂v ∂v ∂ψ ∂ψ

Similarly the surging force and yawing moment are given by:

∂X ∂X ∂X ∂X ∂X ∂X

X= u+ u+ v+ v+ ψ+ ψ (9b)

∂u ∂u ∂v ∂v ∂ψ ∂ψ

∂N ∂N ∂N ∂N

N= v+ v+ ψ+ ψ (9c)

∂v ∂v ∂ψ ∂ψ

∂Y ∂Y ∂N ∂N

Cross-coupled derivatives , , and usually have small non-zero values since ships

∂ψ ∂ψ ∂v ∂v

are rarely symmetrical about Y-Z plane.

∂X ∂X ∂X ∂X ∂Y ∂Y

But the derivatives , , , like and are zero due to symmetry.

∂v ∂v ∂ψ ∂ψ ∂u ∂u

∂X ∂X

So

X = u+ δu (9d)

∂u ∂u

where δu = u − u1

∂Y

= Yv

∂v

∂N

= Nψ

∂ψ

Manoeuvring Page No 9

ψ = r,

ψ =r

− X u (u − u1 ) + (∆ − X u )u = 0

− Yv v + (∆ − Yv )v − (Yr − ∆u1 )r − Yr r = 0

(

− Nvv − Nu v − N r r + I z − N r r = 0 ) (10)

The force terms are non-dimensionalised by ρ/2 L2V2 and the moment term by ρ/2 L3V2.

Furthermore a primed symbol will be need for non-dimensionalised form of each factor.

Nv

N v′ =

ρ 3

LV

2

Iz Yv Nv

∆ I z'= Yv′ = N v′ =

∆′ = ρ 5 ρ 2 ρ 4

ρ 3 L LV L

L 2 2 2

2

rL Yr Nr

v r′ = Yr ′ = N r′ =

v′ = ρ 3

V V LV ρ 4

2 LV

vL rL2 Yv

2

v′ = r′ = Yv′ = Nr

V2 V2 ρ 3 N r′ =

L ρ 5

2 L

2

If the surge equation is neglected then equation (10) becomes in non-dimensional form:

and

− N v′ v′ − N v′ v′ − N r′ r ′ + (I ′z − N r′ )r ′ = 0

where the main difference is that u1/V=1 for small perturbations.

Because Yv′ has entered the mass term it is known at the virtual mass coefficient. The term

Manoeuvring Page No 10

It is convenient to use a notation that distinguishes forces and moments according to their

origins. So Yvv will denote the Y-component of the force acting at the COG, that is

developed as a result of angle of attack β.

Manoeuvring Page No 11

Chapter 3

CONTROL FORCES AND MOMENTS

All terms of equation (10) and (11) must include the effect of the ship’s rudder held at zero

angle (centreline). If the path of the ship with controls washing is to be determined then

forces and moments created by rudder deflection should also be in equations (10) and (11) on

the right hand side.

The Y-component of the force acting at the COG of ship due to rudder deflection is YδδR and

moment is NδδR about Z-axis.

Equations (10) and (11) apply to small perturbations, only small deflections are admissible.

This implies that the terms Yv′ , N v′ , Yr′ , N r′ are evaluated at δR=0 and furthermore for

ship-shape Yr′ ≈ 0 and N v′ ≈ 0 .

Manoeuvring Page No 12

With these equations of motion including the rudder force and moment are:

Yaw Moment

n′z r ′ − N v′ v′ − N r′ r ′ = Nδ′ δ R (12)

Sway Force

Where

n′z = I z′ − N r′ ≅ 2 I ′z

∆′y = ∆′ − Yv′ ≅ 2∆′

Since equation (12) is a differential equation of first order, solutions, which leads to straight

line stability are:

V1, V2, R1 and R2 are constants of integration and σ1, σ2 are stability indexes with dimensions

of 1/t and t is time.

a) If σ1 and σ2 are negative v′ and r′ 0, which means ship will eventually resume

a new straight line direction (Case 1, Fig 3).

will increase with time and straight line

path will never be resumed and ship may have a steady turn.

Manoeuvring Page No 13

A σ2 + Bσ + C = O (14)

A = n ′z ∆ ′y

B = − n ′z Yv′ − ∆ ′y N r′

Where

C = Yv′ N r′ − (Yr′ − ∆ ′)N v′

And roots

2

B B C

− ± −4

A A A

σ1, σ2 = 2

(14a)

From as practical standpoint σ1 > σ2 for a surface ship. So σ1 itself is a quantitative measure

of the degree of stability.

STABILITY CRITERION

C

(i) If is negative then

A

2

B C B

−4 >

A A A

A

B C

b) If is negative and is positive the σ1 , σ2 will always be positive.

A A

C

So conditions of stability makes the requirement that B & , both must be positive.

A A

Manoeuvring Page No 14

Ship with a positive v acceleration taken at the midlength of the ship, where both bow and

stern experience v in positive y – direction. So inertial reaction of pressure of water being

accelerated by the hull produces forces in the (-)ve y-direction. So bow and stern effects

produce a large negative Y-force for a positive v . Slope of Yv at v = 0 would be a negative

value of large quantity.

The magnitude of N r is almost as large as Iz. In case of N v , bow and stern oppose each other

and N v is usually a relatively small quantity of uncertain sign. The sign and magnitude of A

can be shown by:

Manoeuvring Page No 15

A = n′z ∆′y = (I ′z − N r′ )(∆′ − Yv′ ) >0

In this figure the body velocity v is added to a forward velocity u, resulting in an angle of

attack β =-v/V on the body. Both bow and stern experience a lift force opposite to v. Hence

Yv is always negative.

However the bow contribution to the total force is considerably larger that that of stern, so

centre of action of total force in y-direction due to v is considerably forward of mid-length.

With origin at midlength Nv is usually a negative quantity on ships without fins/rudders.

In order to analyse the angular velocity r on Y and N locations B (forward) and S (aft) are

considered.

Manoeuvring Page No 16

When a ship is moving with a forward velocity V and an angular velocity + r is added, point

B at the bow has an angle of attack (for small r)

rd1

= V

producing a negative Y-force and negative N – moment on the bow. Similarly point S at stern

experiences an angle of attack

rd 2

= V

producing a positive Y-force and negative N moment.

Hence bow and stern add to give a large negative N-force mount for a positive r, where bow

and stern oppose each other to give either a small positive or negative Y-force, negative if

bow dominates.

2

B C

−4 we can say

A A

that B like A is always a large positive quantity for ships, independent of origin.

C > 0.

Manoeuvring Page No 17

Hence C is considered the discriminant of dynamic stability. So from equation 14

or

or

N r′ N′

> v (14d)

Yr′ − ∆ ′ Yv′

The solution can be viewed as a relationship between lever arm of forces due to yawing and

sway.

Manoeuvring Page No 18

Chapter 4

THE DIEUDONNE SPIRAL MANOEUVER

The Dieudonne’ spiral manoeuvre identifies the directional stability characteristics of the

vessel. The manoeuver consists of the following:

1. The ship is steadied on a straight course at a preselected speed and held on this course

for a minute. Once the steady speed is established no further power plant controls are

applied.

2. After a minute the rudder is turned to an angle δR of about 15o and held until the rate of

change of yaw angle maintains a constant value for a minute.

3. The rudder angle is now decreased by an amount, say 5o and held fixed again until a

new valve of ψ is achieved and is constant for several minutes.

4. Step 3 is repeated for different rudder angles by changing in small increments. The

angles need to be changed from large starboard to large port and back to starboard

again.

The numerical measures obtained from Steps 3 and 4 are the steady yawing rates a a function

of rudder angle → ψ = r = f (δR).

Fig 13 shows the plot of Dieudonne’ Spiral Manoeuvre for two ships A & B. If the plot is a

single line as in the case of Ship – A, the ship is said to be controls-fixed, straight line

stability; which implies that it has a negative directional stability index (σ1, σ2 noted earlier).

Manoeuvring Page No 19

However if the plot is a hysteresis loop as in the case of ship-B, the ship is said to be unstable

and has positive stability index.

The height and width of loop is a numerical measure of the degree of instability. The slope of

the yaw rate at zero rudder angles is a measure of stability or instability and can be predicted

from ship trial data.

It is essential during spiral manoeuvre to slow for sufficient time for condition to steady at

each rudder angle, otherwise spurious results may be obtained.

All ship manoeuvres involve turning. The response of a ship to deflection of the rudder and

the resulting forces and movements can be divided into two groups:

a) An initial transient one in which significant surge, sway and yaw accelerations occur.

b) A steady turning position in which rate of turn and forward speed are constant and

path of the ship is circular (in the absence of significant external force).

Manoeuvring Page No 20

Suppose a ship is advancing in a straight line path when its rudder is deflected and held at a

fixed angle. The resulting path of the ship can be divided into three distinct phases.

(i) First phase starts at the instant of rudder deflection and may be complete by the time

the rudder is held steady at a specified angle.

Due to this a side force YδδR and a rudder moment NδδR (yaw moment) produce accelerations

and are opposed solely by the inertial reaction of the ship, because there has not been

sufficient time for the hydrodynamic force to develop arising from substantial drift angle β, or

rotation r.

Using equation 10 the linearised equation of motion in the first phase of timing can be written

as:

(∆ − Yv )v − Yr r = Yδ δ R

(I z − N r )r − N v v = N δ δ R (24)

The values of the accelerations at this stage v, r , can be obtained from the equation 24.

Note: If δR, rudder deflects to starboards, the transverse acceleration v is negative and

directed to port and rudder force YδδR is also to port but ship will turn to starboard.

Manoeuvring Page No 21

The accelerations v and r exist in isolation only momentarily, for they quickly give rise to

drift angle β and rotation r of the ship.

With the introduction of these parameters the ship enters the second phase of turning. Here

the accelerations co-exist with the velocities and all of the terms of equation 10 along with the

excitation terms YδδR and NδδR .

Eventually the accelerations will have been reduced to zero and the ship will be in

equilibrium in a steady turn with the force and moment induced by the rudder angle balanced

by those induced by the sway and yaw velocity.

The second phase of turning ends with the establishment of the final equilibrium of forces.

When this equilibrium is reached the ship settles down to a turn of constant radius. This is the

third and steady phase of the turn. Here v, r are non zero values but v and r = 0.

− N v v − N r r = Nδ δ R (25)

These two equations can be solved for r and v provided the stability derivatives Yv, Yr, Nv,

Nr and the control derivatives Yδ and Nδ are known.

Thus to summarise:

second phase v ≠0 r ≠0 , v=0, r=0

Noting that

rL

r′ = ψ =

V

and

R=V/r steady turning radius

and r’=L/R and solving equation 25

L Yv′ (N r′ − ∆′xOG ) − N v′ (Yr′ − ∆′)

R=−

δR Yv′ N δ′ − N v′ Yδ′ (26)

v′ = − β = δ R

and Yv′ N r′ − N v′ (Yr′ − ∆′) (27)

Manoeuvring Page No 22

where β and δR are in radians and a positive R denotes a starboard turn.

rudder deflection angle δR and drift angle β is directly proportional to δR .

Equations 26 and 27 are useful to estimate the steady turning radius and drift angles of ships

with fairly large diameter turns of about 4 ship lengths. It would be useful to measure the

turning radius at less than maximum rudder angles.

Nδ′ is always negative for rudder at stern

But movement N is positive for negative δR or N is negative for a positive δR . Hence

derivative Nδ is always negative.

From Fig 22, force Y from negative δR is also negative and Y is positive for positive δR

Hence derivative Yδ is always positive and hence product is also positive.

b) Yδ′ is always positive, N v′ is almost always negative and hence subtracting their product

c) If N v′ is positive (rarely) its magnitude is really small so the larger positive Yv′ N δ′

will determine the sign of the denominator.

Manoeuvring Page No 23

HEEL ANGLE DURING A TURN

When a ship turns it can heel at first into the turn and then out of it. To understand this we

must first study the forces involved during the three phases of a turn.

In the first phase the rudder is providing the side force, YδδR, low down approximately

midspan of the rudder, which is contracted only by the mass of the ship ∆ (usually with its

centre above the WL) and the added mass of entrained water which has its centre about mid

draft.

Yδ δ R + Yv v + Yr r − ∆v = 0 (28)

directed to port.

Manoeuvring Page No 24

- Yv is always negative and v is negative in first phase of starboard turn.

28.

starboard.

In the third phase of the turn, the equation of motion as per equation 25 is:

− N v v − N r r = Nδ δ R (25) rewritten

If moments are taken about the centre of gravity of the ship it would be seen that the heel

angle φ is likely to be part (negative) since:

Thus between the first phase and third phase the heel angle φ has changed its sign.

Manoeuvring Page No 25

High speed planning craft with low, highly loaded rudders and low centre of gravity usually

heel into the turn throughout.

For simplicity with a conventional displacement craft it is possible to neglect the force on the

rudder in a steady turn. This will give a greater heel angle than actually would exist.

However, it would be the case if the rudder was returned to amidships – perhaps because of

concern that the heel angle was too large. Thus if the heel angle is too large it would be

prudent to reduce speed and not reduce rudder angle.

If H is the vertical distance between COG of vessel and the centre of lateral resistance, R is

the radius of turn and V is the velocity of ship (m/s) then heeling lever can be obtained from

the expression.

V 2H

Heeling lever = gR

The heeling lever should be plotted on the GZ curve and the intersection should give the

steady angle of heel.

GZ

HEEL ANGLE φ

V 2H

GZ = gR

V 2H

GM Sinφ = gR

or

V 2H

Sinφ = gRGM

If the centre of lateral resistance is assumed to be level with centre of buoyancy then

Manoeuvring Page No 26

H = BG Cosφ

V 2 BGCosφ

Sinφ = gRGM

V 2 BG

or Tanφ = gRGM

For passenger ships the heel caused by turning is not to exceed 10o and is calculated using:

V = Service speed in knots.

L = Length on watertline in m.

∆ = Displacement at the appropriate loading condition in tonnes.

T = Draft at midships for the towing condition in m.

KG = Height of COG above baseline correction for free surface in m.

Manoeuvring Page No 27

Chapter 5

MODEL TESTS

There are two types of model tests used in calculations of ship controllability:

Free running model tests are more direct and make use of a self-propelled model of the ship

fitted with appendages and remote control so that actual manoeuvres can be performed and

controllability evaluated.

This also requires a large basin for determining and recording Xo, and Yo coordinates of the

origin of the model, the model heading angle ψ and if desired the heel angle φ, all as a

function of time. Using instructions like those of a full-scale ship, the turning, zig-zag and

reverse spiral definitive manoeuvres can be carried out.

As per Martinussen and Linnerad (1987), five conditions are to be met at the start of a

manoeuvre:

revolution, rudder angle at neutral, sway and yaw velocities at zero.

(ii) Sometimes it is difficult to satisfy all five when testing large models of unstable

ships.

(iii) Priority is therefore given to forward speed, propeller RPM and yaw velocity over

rudder angle.

In order that free running model test results may be directly applicable to full scale ship,

following additional conditions, added to that of geometrical similitude should be satisfied:

identical to that of the ship.

b) The model rudder should be deflected to the same maximum angle as the ship rudders at

the time non-dimensional deflection rate as that of the ship, i.e.,

δ L δ L

′

δ RM = δ S′ = m m = s s

Vm Vs (m for model and s for ship values)

c) If the ship heel in manouvers is to be properly simulated, I ′x the of the model as well

as its non-dimentional metacentric height (GM) must be identical to that of the ship.

(Difficult to fulfil in practice)

d) Slip ratio of model propeller to be identical to full scale propeller ship ratio. This is

important if rudder is placed in propeller race.

e) If the speed loss in manoeuvres is to be properly simulated, the response of the motor

Manoeuvring Page No 28

that drives the model propeller to an augment in model resistance should duplicate the

response of the power plant of the full scale ship to a corresponding augment in ship

resistance.

To summarise Free Running Model Experiments:

• Gives the end product (the path record).

• Advantageous only when ship’s behaviour is required in a particular channel.

• Disadvantageous, due to the involvement of several factors and how these factors have

an overall influence on the manoeuvring characteristics.

• Possible to use System Identification Techniques to utilise the model experimental

data to obtain coefficients for a mathematical model.

Captive model tests in tanks are carried out using a planar motion mechanism (PMM) or a

rotating arm. The model is tested for:

a) Drift angle, β

b) Yaw rate, ψ

c) Sway acdeleration, v

d) Yaw acceleration, ψ

e) Propeller RPM

f) Rudder angle, δR

The velocity dependent derivatives Yv and Nv at any draft or trim can be determined from

measurements of a model of a ship, towed at a constant velocity V corresponding to the

required Froude number, at various angle of attack β, to the model path.

Manoeuvring Page No 29

From the orientation it is seen that a transverse velocity component along Y-axis is:

each β tested.

Results are plotted as function of v (Fig. 10) and slopes of the curves at v=0 gives numerical

values for Yv and Nv. These values are non-dimensionalised in the usual method. It is

however important that origin of dynamometer and COG of ship be located at the same

position.

This technique could also be used to determine Yδ and Nδ, where model is orientated to zero

angle of attack (β=0) to the flow but model towed down the tank at various rudder angles δR.

Plot of these values against δR will indicate the values of the derivatives Yδ and Nδ .

To measure the rotary derivatives Yr and Nr on a model, rotating arm is generally employed.

In this angular velocity is imposed on the model by rotating the arm about a vertical axis fixed

in the tank as shown.

The model is orientated with X-axis and Z-axis normal to the radial arm and attached to the

model, preferably at mid length. As a result of this orientation the model revolves about the

tank axis at rate r while the transverse component v is at all times is zero, along with yaw

angle of attack β=0, and its axial velocity component u1, is identical to its linear speed. The

model is rotated at a constant linear speed u1, and dynamometer measures the force Y and

moment N on the model.

Manoeuvring Page No 30

Since angular velocity

r=u1/R

Since the rotating arm tests are done with r = 0 , the results are independent of model radius

of gyration.

If the radial arm is attached to the model at its mid length, a distance xG from LCG of model

then dynamometer results would yield:

Yr − ∆u1

and

N r − ∆xG u1

since

Manoeuvring Page No 31

∆, xG and u1, are known quantities, Yr and Nr could then be obtained.

The rotating arm facility can also be used to determine Yv and Nv along with Yr and Nr. This

can be accomplished by varying β for each r value. The tests should include both plus and

minus values of r. By cross plotting the values of Yv, Nv obtained at each r value against r,

the values of Yv and Nv ar r = 0 could be determined.

• Model must be accelerated and date obtained within a single revolution, otherwise

model will run in its own wake and its velocity with respect to fluid will not be

known.

• To obtain value of Yr, Nr, Yv, Nv at r = 0, data points at small values of r are

required. This implies that radius of turn R to model length L ratio to be very large.

• Small models will also lead to scale effects.

Basically PMM consists of two oscillators, one of which produces transverse oscillations at

the bow and the other at the stern, while the model moves down the tank at a constant velocity

u0. The subscript 0 is now to designate the velocity at CL of tank along X0-axis fixed to the

tank. The resultant velocity vector V is strictly not constant but for small motions

V=u0

The set up has been shown in Fig. 34. Bow point B is situated at a distance xs forward of

origin O (taken at midships) is oscillated transversely with a small amplitude a0 and at angular

frequency ω. Point S near the stern is also at a distance xs from midships is also oscillated

with some amplitude a0 and some frequency ω. Phasing of the oscillation can be adjusted by

an amount ε. If ε = 0 then motion is sway with yaw = 0, as shown in Fig. 35.

Manoeuvring Page No 32

y0 = y = a0 cos ωt

dy

= v = −a0 sin ωt

dt

(45)

d2y 2

= v = −a0ω cos ωt

2

dt

Dynamometers located the B & S measure the oscillatory Y-forces experienced by the model.

Let these values be YB and YS.

The velocity v is a sine function and is 900 but of phase with displacement and the

acceleration v. Hence the measurements of YB and YS taken when time variable is 90o out

of phase with displacement are forces arising out of v and not from v as at these times v =

0.

So

Yv =

[

dY ± (YB )out + (YS )out

=

]

dv − a0ω

Nv = =

[

dN ± (YB )out − (YS )out x s ] (46)

dv − a 0ω

To obtain the coefficients of linear acceleration the terms of eqn(10), the in-phase amplitude

of YB, YS must be measured as shown in Fig. 36 and this corresponds to the times when v is

a maximum and v = 0.

Manoeuvring Page No 33

Yv − ∆ =

[

± (YB )in + (YS )in ]

− a 0ω 2

N v − ∆x G =

[ ]

± (YB )in − (YS )in x s

(47)

2

− a 0ω

Where ‘in’ indicates to the amplitudes of YB and YS taken in phase with the displacement.

To obtain the rotary derivatives Yr, Nr for planar motion test measurements must be made

when

r =0

v=0

v=0

Similarly for Yr and N r the measurements are to be taken at

Manoeuvring Page No 34

r =0

v=0

v=0

In order to impose an angular velocity and an angular acceleration on the body with v=0 and

v = 0 , the model must be towed down the tank with centreline of model always tangent to

its path.

In order to achieve the motion shown in Fig.37, Goodman (1960) proposes that the phase

velocity angle ε between bow and stern accelerators should satisfy

2

ωx s

1−

u0

cos ε =

2

ωx s

1+

u0

ε ωx s

tan =

which is equivalent to 2 u0

Manoeuvring Page No 35

ε

ψ = −ψ 0 cos ωt −

2

ε

ψ = r = ψ 0ω sin s ωt −

2

(48)

2 ε

ψ = r = ψ 0ω cos ωt −

2

Here r is out of phase with ψ and r is in phase with ψ. Therefore amplitudes of YB and YS

measured 900 out of phase with Ψ will determine the force and moment due to rotation r and

the amplitudes of YB and YS measured in phase with Ψ will determine the force and moment

due to angular acceleration r . The force and moment derivatives with respect to r and r are

then:

Yr − ∆u1 =

[

± (YB )out + (YS )out ]

− ψ 0ω

N r − ∆xG u1 =

[

± (YB )out − (YS )out x s ]

− ψ 0ω

Yr − ∆xG =

[

± (YB )in + (YS )in ]

− ψ 0ω 2 (49)

Nr − Iz =

[

± (YB )in − (YS )in x s ]

− ψ 0ω 2

Equation (49) depends on ship’s mass moment of inertia, radius of gyration and xG.

To determine the values of the derivatives at zero frequency from planar motion tests, it is

necessary to plot the derivatives against frequency and to extrapolate to zero frequency.

For motions in waves we are also interested in derivatives which are frequency dependent.

Van Leeuwen (1964) presents extensive plots of the hydrodynamic derivatives of series 60,

CB=0.70 model as a function of frequency of oscillation and speed.

Manoeuvring Page No 36

Chapter 6

PREDICTIONS OF HYDRODYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS OF MOTIONS

There are three methods of obtaining the coefficients without carrying out model experiments.

2. Low Aspect Ratio Theory

3. Empirical Methods

Hydrodynamic body forces results from the change of momentum (mass x velocity) of the

water near the ship. Most important is the transverse force acting upon the hull per unit

length in the x-direction. As per slender body theory, this force is equal to the time rate of

change of transverse momentum of the water in a ‘strip’ between two transverse plans spaced

one unit length. In such a strip the water near the ship’s side mostly follows the transverse

motion of the respective ship section. Whereas water farther from the hull is less influenced

by transverse ship motions. The total effect of this water motion on the transverse force is the

same as if a certain added mass per unit length m1 moved exactly like the ship section in

transverse direction.

1

m′ = πρTx2C y

2

Tx – Section draft

Cy = a co-efficient and found from Fig.5.2 shown below.

Manoeuvring Page No 37

Neglecting the influence due to heel velocity and heel acceleration the time rate of change of

transverse momentum of the “added mass” per length is”

∂ ∂

f ( x, t ) = −u [m′(v + xr )]

∂t ∂x

∂

= takes into account of the local change in momentum for fixed x with time t

∂t

∂

u = results from the convective change of momentum due to the longitudinal motion of the

∂x

water ‘strip’ along the hull with appropriate velocity -u (from bow to stern)

v+xr = is the transverse velocity of the section in the Y-direction resulting from both

transverse velocity v at midships section and the Yaw rate r.

The total transverse force is obtained by integrating the above expression over the underwater

ships length L.

The Yaw moment is obtained by multiplying each element with respective lever x and the

heel moment is obtained by using the vertical movement ZYm’ where ZY is the depth co-

ordinate of COG of the added mass. For Lewis section this quantity can be calculated

theoretically.

Manoeuvring Page No 38

Based on this we obtain the slender body contribution to the forces as

∂ ∂

f ( x, t ) = −u [m ′(v + xr )] = − m′(v + rx) + u ∂ [m′(v + xr )]

∂t ∂x ∂x

Now

L/2 L/2

Yv = f ( x, t )dx = − (v + rx )m′dx + u (v + rx )m′ ]bow

stern

−L / 2 −L / 2

L/2

So N = f ( x, t ) xdx

−L / 2

Manoeuvring Page No 39

∂ ∂

f ( x, t ) x = −u [m′(v + xr )]x = −(v + rx)m′x − m′(v + rx ) ∂x + u ∂ [(v + rx )m′]x

∂t ∂x ∂t ∂x

∂

= −(v + rx )m′x − m′(v + rx )u + u [(v + rx )m′]x

∂x

L/2 L/2

So

N =− (v + rx )m′xdx − u (v + rx )m′dx + u (v + rx )m′x ]bow

stern

−L / 2 −L / 2

We had expressed before

Y = Yv v + Yr r + Yv v + Yr r

And N = N v v + N r r + N v v + N r r

Yv = − m′dx

Yr = N v = − m′xdx

N r = − m′x 2 dx

Yv = −um′(xs )

Yr = −uxs m′(xs )

Assuming m′(xb ) = 0

1. The term involving ∂/∂t for the acceleration dependent parts of the forces, correction

factor K1, K2 should be applied. They consider the lengthwise flow of water around

bow and stern which is initially disregarded in determining the sectional added mass

m ’.

dimensional flow calculations for accelerated ellipsoids:

K1 = 1 − 0.245ε − 1.68ε 2

K 2 = 1 − 0.765ε − 4.41ε 2

Manoeuvring Page No 40

Where ε=2Tx/L

2. The slender body theory disregards longitudinal forces associated with the added mass

of the ship in the longitudinal direction. Can be obtained from the potential theory of

Newman (1977). The added mass mx for longitudinal motion may be approximated

by a formula which was also fitted to theoretical values for ellipsoids:

m

mx =

L3

π − 14

∇

∇ = volume of displacement

3. Because the slender body theory neglects flow separation in transverse flow around

ship sections an additional ‘cross flow resistance’ of ship sections has to be added.

The absolute value of this resistance component per unit length is

1

ρTx v x2C D

2

where vx = v+xr transverse velocity of section

CD = cross flow resistance coefficient

X 0

Y 1 −1

= ρ (v + xr ) v + x.r Tx C D dx

K 2 zD

L

N −x

zD = z coordinate (measured downward from COG of ships mass m) to the action line

of the cross flow resistance.

= KG-0.65T for cargo ships while for tugs KG-(1+/-0.1)T

CD = 1 for container ships & 0.5 to 0.7 for fuller ships.

CD Values

Manoeuvring Page No 41

LOW ASPECT RATIO THEORY

A ship’s hull can be considered to be a large low aspect ratio lifting surface. At low speeds the

water surface can be treated as a ground board.

v = u 1+ β 2 ≈ u

The Y force and N moment produced as a result of angle of attack are given by

Y = -Lcosβ-Dsinβ

Where L and D are the lift and drag forces.

dY dY dβ

Yv = =

dv dβ dv

dY dL dD

= L sin β − cos β − D cos β − sin β

dβ dβ dβ

dY dL

=− −D

dβ dβ

1

L= ρAv 2C L

2

and 1

D = ρAv 2 C D

2

dL 1 dC L

= ρAv 2

dβ 2 dβ

dY 1 dC L

= − ρAv 2 + CD

dβ 2 dβ

1 dC L

Yv = − ρAv + CD

2 dβ

dβ 1 1

since = ≈

dv u v

Manoeuvring Page No 42

For very low aspect ratios, the so called Jones formulae is adequate to describe the slope of the

life curve:

dC L π T

= AReff = π

dβ 2 L A Reff = Effective aspect ratio

Yv T

Yv′ = = −π + C D

1 L

ρLTv

2

Where CD is obtained at β = 0.

The moment on a slender body at a small angle of attack is made up of two parts. The first part

which would occur in an ideal fluid is the so called “Munk Moment” and second is the

correction for the real fluid.

The Munk Moment is due to the fact that in an ideal fluid a slender body with small angle of

attack experiences a couple tending to increase the angle.

Manoeuvring Page No 43

The magnitude of this moment as per Fig 49 is

(N )i = 2lYB

∂YB

So that (Nv)i = 2l where l is always taken positive and YB is negative if directed to port at

∂v

the bow and positive if towards starboard –

By non-dimensionalising we obtain

∂YB

(N v )i 2l

∂v

(N v′ )i = −(K 2 − K1 )∆′ = ρ 2

=

ρ 2

L Tv L Tv

2 2

where K2 = coefficient of accession to inertia in lateral y direction, as given by Lamb (1945)

N = 2YBl + xpYL

Where xp = distance from origin (taken at midship) to the point of application of the real fluid

lateral force YL (negative if YL is aft of O).

Manoeuvring Page No 44

Nv 2l∂YB x p ∂YL

So N v ′ = ρ =

ρ 2 ∂v

+

ρ 2 ∂v

L2Tv L Tv L Tv

2 2 2

x p ∂YL′

Or Nv′ = −(K 2 − K1 )∆′ + L ∂v′

xp

(Nv′ )h = −(∆′2 − K1∆′) + (Yv′ )h

L

stern

∆2 K2 L ρ

= πC s h 2 dx

∆’2 = ρ 2 ρ 2 T 2

LT LT bow

2 2

coefficient) determined for each section strip of width dx along x-axis. Refer

to Fig 50 for Cs.

Manoeuvring Page No 45

K1, K2 = as shown in Fig 48.

Manoeuvring Page No 46

EMPIRICAL METHODS

There are a number of different empirical methods for obtaining the linear coefficients. The

following 4 methods are all taken from Clarke, “The Application of Manoeuvring Criteria in

Hull Design Using Linear Theory”, TRINA (1982).

Wagner Smith

2 2

T T

Yv′ = −5 = −π (1.59)

L L

2 2

T T

Yr′ = +1.02 = −π (− 0.32)

L L

2 2

T T

N v′ = −1.94 = −π (0.62)

L L

2 2

T T

N r′ = −0.65 = −π (0.21)

L L

Narbin:

2

T C B

Yv′ = −π 1.69 + 0.08 B

L πT

2

T C B

Yr′ = −π − 0.645 + 0.38 B

L πT

2

T C B

N v′ = −π 0.64 − 0.04 B

L πT

2

T C B

N r′ = −π 0.47 − 0.18 B

L πT

Inoue et al

2

T C B

Yv′ = −π 1.0 + 1.4 B

L πT

2

T 1

Yr′ = −π −

L 2

2

T 2

N v′ = −π

L π

2

T 1.04 T

N r′ = −π − 4.0

L π πL

Manoeuvring Page No 47

and Clarke

2

Yv′ B B

− = 1 + 0.16CB − 5.1

2 T L

T

π

L

2

Yr′ B B

− = 0.67 − 0.0033

2 L T

T

π

L

Nv′ B B

− = 1.1 − 0.041

2 L T

T

π

L

N r′ 1 C B B

− = + 0.017 B − 0.33

2 12 T L

T

π

L

Yv′ B

− = 1 + 0.4CB

2 T

T

π

L

Yr′ 1 B B

− =− + 2.2 − 0.08

2 2 L T

T

π

L

Nv′ 1 T

− = + 2.4

2 2 L

T

π

L

N r′ 1 B B

− = + 0.039 − 0.56

2 4 T L

T

π

L

Manoeuvring Page No 48

Chapter 7

STABILITY AND CONTROL

Path keeping and path changing ability of a ship depends on:

a) The magnitude and frequency of any yawing moments and sway forces acting to disturb

the ship from the desired path.

b) The character of the response of the ship with controls fixed to these disturbances.

c) The rapidity with which the error between the ship’s path and the desired path can be

detected, and with which corrective action can be initiated.

d) The rate at which the corrective action is translated into movement of the rudder. This is

a function of the play between the third and fourth elements of the control loop and the

rate at which the steering gear can deflect the rudder.

e) The magnitude of the control force and moment applied to the ship by the rudder.

DEFINITIVE MANOEUVRE

The naval architect is mainly concerned with elements (b), (d) and (e). Therefore somee

definitive manoeuvres have been devised to demonstrate the efficiency of these element fo the

control loop and to exclude as much as possible the elements of (c). Essentially the basic

stability and control characteristics of a ship can be determined from:

The results of this manoeuvre are indicative of the ability of a ship’s rudder to control the

ship. The typical procedure for conducting the test is as follows (Gertler 1959):

b) Deflect the rudder at maximum rate to a preselected change in heading angle say 20o, is

reached.

c) At this point deflect the rudder at maximum rate to an opposite angle of 20o and hold

until the execute change of heading angle on the opposite side is reached. This completes

the overshoot test.

d) If a zig-zag test is to be completed again deflect the angle at maximum rate to the same

angle in the first direction.

Manoeuvring Page No 49

The numerical measures of control obtained from this manoeuvre are:

(ii) the overshoot yaw angle; and

(iii) the overshoot width of the path.

All of these are important operational parameters. The first is a direct measure of the ability

of a ship to rapidly change course.

The second and thirds are numerical measures of counter-manoeuvring ability and are

indicative of the amount of anticipation required of a helmsman while operating in restricted

waters. It has been shown that yaw-angle overshoot decreases with increased stability but

increases with increased rudder effectiveness. On the other hand overshoot width of the path

decreases with both increased stability and increased rudder effectiveness.

Manoeuvring Page No 50

The results of zig-zag manoeuvre are speed dependent. In general for any given ship the time

to reach execute decreases with increasing speed and the overshoot yaw angle and the

overshoot width of path increase with increasing speed. However, the non-dimensional time

to reach executes increases with increasing speed. However, the non-dimensional time to

reach executes increases with increasing speed because of the influence of the rate of rudder

deflection δ R .

R δ L

′

When δ R is non-dimensionalised δ R = V , it may be interpreted as degrees of rudder

deflection per ship length of travel.

At low speeds this non-dimensional rate is much higher than at higher speeds since δR is

essentially independent of speed.

Accelerating means increasing ship speed from rest or from a particular ahead speed to a

higher head speed.

Manoeuvring Page No 51

Stopping is decelerating the ship from any given ahead speed until the ship comes to rest.

Backing a ship is a manoeuvre of accelerating from rest to a given astern speed or distance.

A method for determining the acceleration of a ship is given by Peach (1963). The value is

the difference between the value of as ship’s net trust, Tφ available at that speed and the ship’s

resistance Rt.

So Rt + Tφ (l-t) = (∆ − Xu )u

Rt = ship’s resistance positive for positive ahead speed.

Tφ = is the ship’s net thrust +ve if thrust if thrust direction I ahead

Xù = Added mass in x direction

u = acceleration in the x direction.

dV

u=

dt

dV

dt =

u

dV

t=

u

S = Vdt

V = ships velocity

t = is any time

S = is the distance travelled by the ship in any time.

For a submarine Rt = kv2 where k is a constant determined from similar submarines. For a

given ship and propeller configuration and at a speed less than the maximum speed Tφ can be

calculated using a diagram combining the propeller characteristics and torque characteristics

as shown in Fig 60.

STOPPING DISTANCES

Stopping is a manoeuvre of interest primarily from the point of view of avoiding collisions,

ramming or groundings.

The distance in the original direction travelled by a ship in coming to a stop is called the head

reach.

A method for calculating head reach and time to stop was developed by Chase et al (1957)

based on theoretical and empirical consideration. This method considers the finite time for

the thrust to change from steady ahead to steady astern.

Manoeuvring Page No 52

Relationship between time velocity and distance are as follows:

This is applicable to any ship at any speed through use of an expression where

R = kVn

Chase showed that good correlation between calculated and measured values of head reach

and time to stop is obtained by assuming that the time required to achieve constant astern

Manoeuvring Page No 53

thrust is the same as that required to close the ahead and open the astern throttle. This time t

may be estimated from experience or 20 seconds used for modern vessels with automated

controls.

fig-62

TABLE

V CP 0.6 0.65

L

L/B 9.6 10.0

<0.70 2.0 2.0

0.7-1.2 2.3 2.5

1.2-1.3 3.9 2.5

1.3-1.5 3.9 3.9

1.5-1.8 2.1 2.1

>1.8 1.5 1.5

CV = ∇/L3

Manoeuvring Page No 54

Chapter 8

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION

A 18/Res. 751

22 November 1993

Original: ENGLISH

Agenda item 11

RESOLUTION A.751(18)

Adopted on 4 November 1993

THE ASSEMBLY,

Organization concerning the functions of the Assembly in relation to regulations and

guidelines concerning maritime safety and the prevention and control of marine pollutions

from ships,

approved interim guidelines for estimating manoeuvring performance in ship design, whereby

Member Governments were invited to apply the guidelines on a trial basis so that they may be

assessed in the light of practical experience gained with a view to their possible further

development,

concerning information on ship manoeuvring,

to the safety of navigation,

manoeuvrability, particularly to large ships and ships carrying dangerous goods in bulk, will

improve maritime safety and enhance marine environment protection,

Committee at its sixty-second session,

1. ADOPTS the Interim Standards for Ship Manoeuvrability, set out in the Annex to the

present resolution.

Manoeuvring Page No 55

2. RECOMMENDS Governments to encourage those responsible for the design,

construction, repair and operation of ships to apply the Standards;

3. INVITES governments to collect data obtained by the application of the Standards and

report them to the Organization;

4. REQUESTS the Maritime Safety Committee to keep the Standards under review on

the basis of the information and data collected;

ANNEX

1 Principles

1.1 The standards should be used with the aim of improving ship manoeuvring

performance and with the objective of avoiding building ships that do not comply with

the criteria.

1.2 The standards contained in this document are based on the understanding that the

manoeuvrability of ships can be evaluated from the characteristics of conventional

trial manoeuvres. The following two methods can be used to demonstrate compliance

with these standards:

can be performed to predict compliance at the design stage. In this case

full-scale trials should be conducted to validate these results. The ship

should then be considered to meet these standards regardless of full-scale

trial results, except where the Administration determines that the prediction

efforts were substandard and/or the ship performance is in substantial

disagreement with these standards;

.2 The compliance with the standards can be demonstrated based on the results

of the full-scale trials conducted in accordance with the standards, If a ship

is found in substantial disagreement with the interim standards, then the

Administration may require remedial action.

1.3 The standards presented herein are considered interim for a period of 5 years from the

date of their adoption by the Assembly. The standards and method of establishing

compliance should be reviewed in the light of new information and the results of

experience with the present standards and ongoing research and developments.

2 Application

Manoeuvring Page No 56

2.1 The standards should be applied to ships of all rudder and propulsion types, of 100 m

in length and over, and chemical tankers and gas carriers regardless of the length,

which are constructed on or after 1 July 1994.

2.2 In case ships referred to in paragraph 2.1 undergo repairs, alterations and

modifications which in the opinion of the Administration may influence their

manoeuvrability characteristics the continued compliance with the standards should be

verified.

2.3 Whenever other ships, originally not subject to the standards, undergo repairs,

alterations and modifications, which in the opinion of the Administration are of such

an extent that the ship may be considered to be a new ship, then that ship should

comply with these standards. Otherwise, if the repairs, alterations and modifications

in the opinion of the Administration may influence the manoeuvrability

characteristics, it should be demonstrated that these characteristics do not lead to any

deterioration of the manoeuvrability of the ship.

2.4 The standards should not be applied to the high speed craft as defined in the relevant

Code.

3. Definitions

.1 Length (L) is the length measure between the aft and forward perpendiculars;

.2 Midship point is the point on the centreline of a ship midway between the aft

and forward perpendiculars;

.1 The test speed (V) used in the standards is a speed of at least 90% of the ship’s

speed corresponding to 85% of the maximum engine output.

and port with 35° rudder angle or the maximum rudder angle permissible at the

test speed, following a steady approach with zero yaw rate.

.3 Advance is the distance travelled in the direction of the original course by the

midship point of a ship from the position at which the rudder order is given to

the position at which the heading has changed 90° from the original course.

.4 Tactical diameter is the distance travelled by the midship point of a ship from

the position at which the rudder order is given to the position at which the

heading has changed 180° from the original course. It is measured in a

direction perpendicular to the original heading of the ship.

Manoeuvring Page No 57

.5 Zig-zag test is the maoeuvre where a known amount of helm is applied

alternately to either side when a know heading deviation from the original

heading is reached.

either side following a heading deviation of 10° from the original heading in

accordance with the following procedure:

.1 after a steady approach with zero yaw rate, the rudder is put over to 10°

to starboard/port (first execute);

.2 when the heading has changed to 10° off the original heading, the

rudder is reversed to 10° to port/starboard (second execute);

.3 after the rudder has been turned to port/starboard, the ship will continue

turning in the original direction with decreasing turning rate. In response to

the rudder, the ship should then turn to port/starboard. When the ship has

reached a heading of 10° to port/starboard of the original course the rudder is

again reversed to 10° to starboard/port (third execute).

.7 The first overshoot angle is the additional heading deviation experienced in the

zig-zag test following the second execute.

the zig-zag test following the third execute.

.9 20°/20° zig-zag test is performed using the procedure given in .6 above using

20° rudder angles and 20° change of heading, instead of 10° rudder angles and

10° change of heading, respectively.

.10 Full astern stopping test determines the track reach of a ship from the time an

order for full astern is given until the ship stops in the water.

.11 Track reach is the distance along the path described by the midship point of a

ship measured from the position at which an order for full astern is given to the

position at which the ship stops in the water.

4. Standards

manoeuvring aids, which are not continuously and readily available in normal

operation.

to both port and starboard and at conditions specified below:

Manoeuvring Page No 58

.2 calm environment;

c. Criteria

The manoeuvrability of the ship is considered satisfactory, if the following criteria are

complied with:

.1 Turning ability

The advance should not exceed 4.5 ship lengths (L) and the tactical diameter

should not exceed 5 ship lengths in the turning circle manoeuvre;

With the application of 10° rudder angle to port/starboard, the ship should not

have travelled more than 2.5 ship lengths by the time the heading has changed

by 10° from the original heading;

.1 The value of the first overshoot angle in the 10°/10° zig-zag test should

not exceed:

- 20°, if L/V is 30 seconds or more; and

- (5 + ½ (L/V)) degrees, if L/V is 10 seconds or more but less

than 30 seconds,

.2 The value of the second overshoot angle in the 10°/10° zig-zag test

should not exceed the above criterion values for the first overshoot by

more than 15°;

.3 The value of the first overshoot angle in the 20°/20° zig-zag test should

not exceed 25°;

.4 Stopping ability

The track reach in the full astern stopping test should not exceed 15 ship

lengths. However, this value may be modified by the Administration where

ships of large displacement make this criterion impracticable.

5. Additional considerations

5.1 In case the standard trials are conducted at a condition different from those specified

in 4.2.3 necessary corrections should be made in accordance with the guidelines

Manoeuvring Page No 59

contained in the explanatory notes on the standards for ship manoeuvrability

developed by the Organization.

5.2 Where standard manoeuvres indicate dynamic instability, alternative test may be

conducted to define the degree of instability. Guidelines for alternative tests such as

spiral test or pull-out manoeuvre are included in the explanatory notes on the

standards for ship manoeuvrability developed by the Organization.

Manoeuvring Page No 60

Chapter 9

RUDDER DESIGNS

RUDDER

Rudders are hydrofoils pivoting on a vertical axis. They are normally placed at the ship’s

stern behind the propeller to produce a transverse force and a steering movement about the

vessels CG by deflecting the water flow to a direction of the foil plane.

Rudders are placed at the ships stern for the following reasons:

• The transverse force on the rudder and an oppositely acting transverse force on this

ship’s full acting near the bow create the rudder moment turning the ship. This

moment increases with distance between rudder force and the full force.

• Rudders outside the propeller ship stream are ineffective at small or zero ship speed.

Bow rudders not exceeding the draft of the hull are ineffective in ahead motion because the

hull redirects the oblique water flow generated by the turned rudder longitudinally. These

transverse forces on a bow rudder and on the forward moving hull cancel each other.

force acting on the rudder (within the range of rudder angles achievable by rudder gear).

• Increasing rudder area.

• Better rudder type (eg spade rudder instead of semi balanced rudder).

• Rudder engine, which allows large rudder angles than the customary 35°.

• Shorter rudder steering time.

The moment about a vertical axis though the leading edge (nose) of rudder (positive

clockwise) is turned QN.

The movement about rudder stock at a distance d behind the leading edge is

QR = QN + Ld Cosα+ Dd Sinα

AR

And mean chord length Cm = b

B = rudder height

AR = rudder area

C = chord length

D = drag

L = Lift

T = thickness

V = flow velocity

Manoeuvring Page No 61

b

z = vertical rudder co-ordinate at

z

α = ange of attack

δ = rudder angle

2

b

∧ = aspect ratio =

AR

Figure 5-12

Manoeuvring Page No 62

For low fuel consumption of the ship we want to minimize CL/CD for typical small angles of

attack as encountered in usual course keeping mode.

Angle of attach of typically 10 to 15° (with opposing sign below and above the propeller and

shaft) occur for zero deflected rudders.

The stock movement is zero if the centre of effort for the transverse rudder force lies on the

rudder stock axis.

The position of the centre of effort behind the leading edge (nose is)

cCQN

Cs =

C L cos α + C D sin α

CL, CD and CQN can be determined in wind tunnel tests or computations. Practically these

data allow rough estimates only of rudder forces and movements of ships because in reality

the flow to the rudder is irregular and highly turbulent and has higher Reynolds number than

the experiments.

∧(∧ + 0.7 )

C L = 2π sin α + C Q sin α sin α cos α

(∧ +1.7 )2

C L2 3

CD = + CQ sin α + C DO

π∧

∧ +2

CQN = −(C L1 cosα + C D1 sin α ) 0.47 − − 0.75(C L 2 cos α + C D 2 sin α )

4(∧ +1)

∧(∧ + 0.7 )

C L1 = 2π sin α

(∧ +1.7)2

C L 2 = CQ sin α sin α cos α

C L2

C D1 =

π∧

3

C D 2 = C Q sin α

0.075

C DO = 2.5

(log Rn − 2)2

CD0 refers to the rudder area which is about half the wetted area of the rudder. In addition a

form factor has been taken into account to account for 2.5.

RN =Vc/υ

The formulas for CL, CD and CQN do not take into account the profile shape. The profile

shape mainly affects the stall angle αS, the point of max lift co-efficient. The values are

generally valid for α < αS

Manoeuvring Page No 63

The stall angle αS depends primarily on:

-profile shape and thickness

-RN

-probably on the surface roughness

-the turbulence of the inflow

-the spatial distribution of the inflow velocity

Because of different stall angles αS and lift curve slopes of rudders of different aspect ratios it

would be advantageous to use an effective rudder angle δeff instead of the geometrical rudder

angle δ from rules.

2. 2 ∧

δ eff = δ

∧ + 2. 4

For aspect ratios ∧ < 3 which are typical of ship rudders, the vertical distribution of lift force

in homogenous, unbounded flow is practically elliptic.

2

L 4 z

Lift force per unit length = 1−

b π b/2

2

4C L z Lift force per unit length

C Ll = 1− =

π b/2 cq

Where z = vertical distance from the mean height between the lower and upper edge of the

rudder.

A simple global correction for the lift force of a rudder behind a propeller (to be added to the

lift computed by the usual empirical formula for rudders in free stream as given by (Soding

1998 a, b)

1

∆L = T 1 + sin δ

1 + CTh

1

∆D = T 1 + (1 − cos δ )

1 + CTh

RUDDER TYPES

Rudder with heel bearing (simplex)

The most common rudder type formally built was a rectangular profile rudder with heel

bearing. The heel has to have considerable width to withstand the horizontal forces. Flow

separation at the heel increases resistance and the non-homogeneity of the wake field at the

propeller plane which in turn induces propeller induced vibrations.

Manoeuvring Page No 64

SPADE RUDDER

This type of rudder is commonly applied on ferries, ro-ro ships and special crafts. Rudder

stock is subjected to high bending movements especially for high-sped and large rudder

height. Diameter of stock > 1m is to be avoided.

SEMI-BALANCED RUDDERS

A fixed guide head (called rudder horn) extends over the upper part of the rudder. This type

of rudder has the following properties:

-reduced rudder effectiveness. For steady turning circles the semi-balanced rudder produces

only approximately half the transverse force than a spade rudder of the same area.

FLAP RUDDERS

Consists of a moveable rudder with a trailing edge flap activated by a mechanical or hydraulic

system, thus producing a variable flap angle as a function of rudder angle. Flap rudders give

a much higher lift for rudder angle and a 60° to 70° higher maximum lift compared to a

conventional rudder of same shape, size and area.

Manoeuvring Page No 65

RUDDER DESIGN

The know recommendation give the rudder area as a % of the underwater lateral area LT as

per DNV is

2

AR B

≥ 0.01 1 + 25

LT L

This gives the rudder area of approximately 1.5% of underwater lateral area.

The rudder effectiveness depends on the rudder side force, the rudder force component

normal to the ship’s centre line.

AR = rudder area m2

Manoeuvring Page No 66

CYR = rudder side force coeff

w = wake fraction

Within the propeller slip stream the relative inflow velocity contains an additional jet

velocity:

( )

u j = U A k m 1 + CTh − 1

Where km = depends on the distance of leading edge of rudder to propeller plane

km .50 .79 .88 .94 .96

8 KT 2T

CTh = = = Thrust loading coefficient

2

πJ ρV A2 AP

D = propeller diameter

Manoeuvring Page No 67

So one obtains:

URS = UA + Uj

( (

= U A 1 + k m 1 + CTh − 1 ))

= UA . Cj

( (

= 1 + k m 1 + CTh − 1 ))

With regard to the rudder area in the propeller ship stream the rudder side force can be

calculated approximately by:

Relating the gradient of the rudder side force coeff CYR to speed and underwater lateral areas

of ship one obtains the rudder effectiveness CYδ.

CYδ = CYR

AR

LT

(

(1 − w)2 1 + ARP C 2j − 1

ARO

)

To realise certain rudder effectiveness the following need to be considered:

Mandel CYRδ = 1.8π ∧

∧ 2 +4 + 1.8

Soeding CYR = 2π ∧ (∧ +2 1)

(∧ +2)

2. The effective ratio ∧ determined from geometrical aspect ratio ∧G = b/c (b = height, c

= mean chord length).

3. The rudder area in the propeller ship stream should be calculated in consideration of

the propeller jet contraction.

[ (

1 + 0.5 CTh +1 − 1 )] ,

1 + [k m ( CTh + 1 − 1)]

ARP = DRc DR = D c = mean chord length

Manoeuvring Page No 68

- Books for IITUploaded byvenky2100
- Trajectory Prediction Tool Comparisons for Spinning and Non-spinning ProjectilesUploaded byyarara
- VesselManeuverabilityGuide_June06Uploaded byLegend Anbu
- Aerodynamic Data of Space Vehicles.pdfUploaded byMarcu Sorin
- Brian Grattan Mahatma i AMI IIUploaded byCristian Catalina
- Parametric Study of Diaphragm WallUploaded byIJSTE
- Thesis Brad - Vehicle DynamicsUploaded byJitesh
- StabilityUploaded byLemmor
- Two Dimensional Universe - Bogoliubov CoefficientsUploaded byAnonymous dJtVwACc
- AIEEE-2010_Answer2010Uploaded bypremsempire
- Control of Multiple UAVUploaded byDevi Archana Das
- A Hook Test SimulationXpress StudyUploaded byFirzan
- Recommended BooksUploaded byanandd12345
- Physics PaperUploaded byjohn mark
- Avionics - Systems and Troubleshooting Cap. 6Uploaded byRoberto Figueroa
- 2005 11 21 Cameron John T MSThesis FinalUploaded byBinda Mridulabalakrishnan
- CHAPTER_5Uploaded byAyrton Wagner
- etoosindia.com-jee-main-2016-mock-test-Set-A-Sol.pdfUploaded byManishKumar
- 060_Sample Question Paper and Hints for SolutionUploaded bySaravanan Atthiappan
- Ship's Movements at Sea[1]Uploaded byJoanagaya
- Assessment InstructionalUploaded byArif Rahmansyah
- 2 Thermal Physics _ Www.physicscosmosUploaded byDaljot Singh Kang
- Ship's Movements at SeaUploaded byRahul Mukund Manohar
- Albac GliderUploaded byJohn Raja RaviKiran Kopelli
- 033_Chapter 7_L23Uploaded bynanduslns07
- lec7Uploaded byTharusha Dassanayake
- Reference Note - Topic 10 Flight Stability Dynamics r1Uploaded byArief Sambest
- 1-s2.0-S1270963813001375-mainUploaded byyarara
- Dynamic Modeling of an Autonomous Underwater VehicleUploaded byMuhammad Yasar Javaid
- eth-8119-01Uploaded byAlexandreSidant

- Understanding FFTs and WindowingUploaded bySamruddha Thakur
- A Brief Description of NDTUploaded byxitta00
- MSTutorial2 - FairingUploaded bys4yekt1
- Sa Lecture2 Ship StructuresUploaded byGoh Yong Da
- Dynamic Mooring AnalysisUploaded byhossam
- Chapter 07Uploaded byhossam
- Gorski.pdfUploaded byAnonymous i7UXnz
- Ada 059958Uploaded byhossam
- oto01063[1]Uploaded byurmisharjah
- Trim Optimisation - Theory and Practice (2).pdfUploaded byhossam
- Weymouth 2005Uploaded byhossam
- CENT_PUM-NB-libre.pdfUploaded byhossam
- frequency analysis - fft.pdfUploaded byvenkatb7
- Ch5Uploaded byhossam
- 1- Ship Resistance ComponentsUploaded byhossam
- Ciobanu85-96Uploaded byhossam
- MIT2_019S11_SK3Uploaded byhossam
- Mooring SystemUploaded byhossam

- Al KynesUploaded byIqbal A Mir
- Serial & Parallel Robot Manipulators - KucukUploaded byJose FG
- Tippe TopUploaded bySwapnil Satardey
- Decoding Signalling Networks by Mass Spectrometry-based ProteomicsUploaded byRamiro Montero
- ch16.pptUploaded bysritaran
- Engineering Formula SheetUploaded byaaaachew
- Theory of Dislocations 2nd_ed_J._Hirth__J._Lothe (1).pdfUploaded byhuze_nedian
- 2016_04_13_18_37_40Uploaded byShivam Kumar
- Inverse Square Law ExperimentUploaded byAlejandro Sopena Gonzalez
- HandbookUploaded bythebravelittlemuon
- UniSim Thermo Reference GuideUploaded byapi-3750488
- Orientation Meeting for Chemical Reaction Engineering IIUploaded byHarshali Parab
- Design of Angles of High Speed Aerodynamic Cars.Uploaded byssdeka
- Iron ore PPTUploaded byAnimesh Sharma
- Waiting time paradoxUploaded bymelanocitos
- (6-3-2) NPTEL - Properties of Materials at Cryogenic TemperatureUploaded byuttam 7873056775
- reflnUploaded byDaniel Boenfie
- Geometry of Marine PropellersUploaded byDiane Trujillo
- Suspension 101Uploaded byGabriel Diodato
- MetallurgyUploaded byPandu Damay Putra
- Curved Bars Final EdUploaded byKRUBHA SHANKAR CHETTIAR
- A S Mishchenko, Yu.P.Solovyev, A T Fomenko-Problems in Differential Geometry and Topology-Mir Publishers (1985).pdfUploaded byPrashant Pandey
- Gravitational Field by Sathyaprakash .pdfUploaded bysurendramaharjan
- physics-exam-semester-1-2011.pdfUploaded byMarcelino José Veiguela Fuentes
- zeeshanmahdi lab reportsUploaded byZeeshanMahdi
- Lecture 5 Variational PrincipleUploaded bySOLee
- Physics F4 C2 Sasbadi Workbook-AnswersUploaded byRebecca Choong Xin Hui
- Saved by the Bay (2014) | Exhibition CatalogUploaded bymagnesmuseum
- Raoult s LawUploaded byLea Pesigan
- powerpointUploaded byapi-3775974