You are on page 1of 9

ISSN (Print) : 0974-6846

Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol 7(S7), 76–84, January 2015 ISSN (Online) : 0974-5645

­­Design of Fixed Pitch Propeller and Water Jet
Propulsion System for A Frigate
Y. Gopal Krishna*
Department of Naval Architecture & Offshore Engineering, AMET University, India; gopiyarabala@gmail.com

Abstract
The application of waterjets is rapidly growing and they are increasingly being chosen for propulsion in high-speed crafts.
In this paper we intend to design an integrated propulsion system which incorporates both the screw propeller and the
waterjet propulsion. Disregarding the possibility of paddlewheels or sail, the only practical alternatives for putting thrust
to the water are propellers and waterjets. Each has their own inherent strengths and weaknesses. Generally, waterjet
drives have found the most applications on semi planing or planing boats intended to go over 25 knots. Propellers are more
often applied to slower speed vessels with displacement or semi planing hulls. The parameters governing the design of the
screw propeller are 1. pitch distribution, 2. chamber distribution, 3. rake distribution, 4. skew distribution, 5. thickness
distribution. The parameters influencing the design of the waterjet are 1. Inlet, 2. Nozzle, 3. Pump. The design process will
be completed once we optimize these parameters for the desired thrust and power requirements. However, our design
method is purely numerical, and to be supported by experimental studies.

Keywords: B-series, Circulation Theory, Gawn Series, Holtrop & Mennen, Screw Propeller, Water Jet Propulsion

1.  Introduction ciency goes down. The distinguishing characteristics of a
waterjet-driven vessel at the waterjet are small diameter,
The desire to travel faster and further is probably as old as small propulsion system momentum, low water flow, high
mankind itself. The considerable development in the high flow velocity, and high waterjet RPM. Waterjet drives are
speed craft can be partly contributed to the application much more sensitive to varying wave and wind forces.
of waterjet propulsion systems. The jet drive is an axial As hull load varies due to wind and wave forces, water-
flow or mixed flow pump. The considerable development jet thrust varies and a constant vessel speed is harder to
in the high speed craft can be partly contributed to the maintain. Waterjet drives have little or no appendages, so
application of waterjet propulsion systems. The amount as vessel speed increases, there is no increasing append-
of thrust it develops is independent of the waterjet drive age drag affecting propulsive efficiency.
RPM. The distinguishing characteristics of a propeller- Propellers have been in use on commercial and mili-
driven vessel at the propeller are large diameter, large tary vessels for more than a century. Design theories have
propulsion system momentum, large water flow, low flow made dramatic progress and sophisticated computer
velocity, and low propeller RPM. Propellers are very good models or large model test facilities are now available.
at maintaining a relatively constant vessel speed when The changing demands in mission profiles and the wide
the vessel is being slammed by waves and gusting winds. range of available engines and propulsors open the way to
As hull speeds increase, the shaft support and rudder combined propulsion systems which optimize the vessel’s
appendages cause increasing drag and the propulsive effi- performance.

*Author for correspondence

pitch distribution maximum diameter and calculate the corresponding val-  II. I. The main parameters optimized are 2. Germany 2.82 to account for the designing a single screw propeller to propel the ship at losses due to the safety measures like grating at the inlet to the maximum speed is attempted. Develop a design method for integrated propulsion The minimum blade area ratio corresponding to the system for naval ships with particular focus on a spe- maximum diameter can also be estimated.3  Water Jet Optimization After the resistance is estimated using Holtrop and 2.500kW Once the number of blades.3  Optimization of Blade Geometry CODAG : 1 × gas turbine.1  RPM and Diameter 7. Nozzle system. Initiate design for booster water jet propulsion by Theory optimizing the areas and velocities at We design the propeller for the cruise speed of the vessel.75m and 120 rpm to 180 rpm for four bladed and five B : 17. chord distribution. camber distribution ues for the propeller within the range available. The diameter and Frigate Particulars rpm is decided based on the ideal efficiency of the propel- Design example: ler and the cavitation number at 0. Max. thickness distribution 2.2.1 Investigating the Possibility of Having radius of the blade.400kW each propeller is decided we can optimize the geometry of the propeller blade.44m main deck (16. Initiate the design for conventional screw propellers of designing a twin screw 3-bladed propeller using the by optimizing Gawn series data. 3.75 m water jet. Speed : 29 knots (18 knots on diesel alone) Propulsion: 2.2. We calculate δ for a prevent the incidents of sea weed getting in contact with range of rpms at the maximum allowed diameter. 23. The corre- cific frigate sponding values for the propeller from the Gawn series 2. Integrate the twin propeller system and the booster The diameter and rpm is varied from 3. Gopai Krishna The objectives are: corresponding values for the propeller from the B-series charts can be found.1  Inlet and Nozzle Efficiencies Mennen’s method at various speeds the possibility of We assume an inlet efficiency of 0. camber distri- bution.2.  Design Methodology thickness distribution. Collect basic particulars for a frigate data can be obtained. 1. Inlet The propeller is designed assuming a twin screw propeller   II. Y. skew distribution V.15m LDWL) 3. We select the following vessel: Sachsen Class (F124) Air Defence Frigates. 7.3.0m sidering factors like vibration and noise16. and 120 rpm to 180 rpm respectively. rake distribution IV.2  Number of Blades Basic Details: The propeller diameter and rpm is varied from 3. A Single Screw Propeller or A 3-Bladed Twin Screw Propeller 2. Estimation of the resistance and effective power In case the above mentioned methods do not give required for the selected frigate any satisfactory values we set out to find the possibility 4.2 Propeller Design Using Circulation 5. Pump 6.30 m to 3.30m to L : 143m LOA (132. III. We calculate the blade area ratio for the   I.indjst. diameter and rpm of the : 2 × diesel engines.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology    77 . The number of blades is decided con- T : 5.7R. Also we assume a nozzle efficiency of Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www. III. cavitation and Displacement : 5690 tonnes blade area ratio.68m BDWL) bladed propellers. Initiate design for twin propeller system 2. skew distribution and pitch distribution along the 2. The the pump impeller.

the hydraulic efficiency varies c15= -1.08 kN Rtotal= 704. The pump area is calculated using equations of waterjet optimization.8 c13=1 35 2635.2 c12=0.2 Investigating the Possibility of having circular in shape.64 20 768.2 n:120 c7= 0.0 kN and Nozzle Once the efficiencies and JVR is optimized calculate the We estimated the resistance of the ship using this method area at different points in a water jet can be calculated. The values are tabu- The inlet area is 1. Pump outlet.5 m 30 2002.89 and the impeller efficiency varies from m2= -0. to Bulten11.69 c16= 1.52 δmax =62.  Results Table 1.indjst.13 δmax =44.3 Water Jet areas: It includes Inlet. ­­Design o f Fixe d Pitch Propeller an d Wate r Jet Propulsio n Syste m fo r A Friga 0. The nozzle is assumed to be 3. The optimized values are selected based on RW= 448.10 CF= 0.975.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology . Gawn series data has been used for designing the propel- ler.66 times the area of the pump according lated (Table 1).02 n:140 c3=0 δmax =26.44 n:80 c1= 0.92 to 0.1 Resistance Estimation using Holtrop Speed in knots Resistance in kN and Mennen’s Method 18 704.49 32 2334. These efficiencies are assumed based on the experi.5 LR/L= 0. λ= 0. The propeller design was initiated assuming single screw propeller.0005 2.6 LR= 47.42 kN δmax =53.3 n:100 iE= 4.15 0.50 to 0. the vessel has been used in the calculations.0 CP= 0.1 cstern=0 for normal transom shape 34 2559. for speeds from 18 knots to 35 knots. c5=1 ments conducted by Fujisawa21. c4= 0.8 CWP=0.3.66 δmax =35. We vary these quantities for JVR values from d=-0.58 n:60 c2=1 Note: None of these δ values is listed in the charts.1 26 1148. Pump inlet. B-series and lated and values are provided.86 to 0.4  Velocities using Guld Hammer method for the maximum speed of Inlet.9 0.36 29 1806.32 2. 78    Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.30 ft.3. Nozzle outlet are calcu.2  Pump Efficiencies and Jet Velocity Ratio m1= -0.94. The resistance and effective power estimated 2.69 from 0. The nozzle area is calculated assuming a Single Screw Propeller or a 3-bladed volume conservation at the pump outlet and nozzle outlet Twin Screw Propeller using equation.71 24 913.3.03 28 1604.04 CA= 0.001510238 Table 2.5 LCB= -0. Dmax=3*T/4=12.58 According to Srinivasan18.70.4 V = 18 knots 22 832. Now we have: 3.  RF= 144.69 kN the pump thrust coefficient.1 1+k1= 1.  Estimate of resistance at different speed 3. Pump RA= 44.

64 ηm=0.indjst.85 J=0. AD= 9. Z=4 and Z=5.1 D=3.36 KT/J2=0.30rps n=4.  Blade area ratio vs diameter.75 m BAR= 4*AD/πD2 BARmin=0.81 P/D=1.64m ηm=0.  Ideal efficiency vs diameter for Z=4.21 n=3.615 J=0.75*T=3.36 @ D=3.bladed propeller cannot be used for this vessel.68 m/s Thrust per screw = 0.30 m to 3. Burrill cavitation criteria. ideal effi- ciency and blade area ratio are plotted (Figure 1-4).30 KT/J2=0. The calculations are repeated for Z=4 and Z=5. 3.875 m2 various rpms. we start the calculations again assuming twin screw propel- lers.81 P/D=1.64m D=3. Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.67 ηm=0.  Cavitation number vs diameter for Area of blades. Figure 2. Therefore the rpm is set at 180.89 Table 3 shows the values obtained from the Gawn series for 3-bladed propellers.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology    79 .75 m and the rpm from 120 to 180.12 (out of the range available for Gawn series) Now that the possibility of designing a single screw pro- peller for the maximum speed has been ruled out.64 J=0. From the graph we can deduce that only n=180 satisfy the Figure 3. Choosing the value within the range with maximum ηm KT/J2=0. Gopai Krishna For Dmax =3. The thrust need to be produced by a propeller will be equal to half the resistance of the vessel in this case.76rps n=4. Y. Even though it is desirable to increase the cavitation number to prevent cavitation 17. BARmin = 4. PT per screw = 10 MW VA = 12.22 P/D=1.33m. Dmax= 0.79 MN Pressure loading restriction = 80kN/m2 Figure 1.21 P/D=1.81 J=0.96m D=3.63rps = 226rpm = 258rpm = 278rpm Figure 4.8 BAR=0.  Ideal efficiency vs diameter for Z=5.38m KT/J2=0.3 Propeller Design using Circulation Theory The diameter is varied from 3.42 ηm=0.  Values obtained from the Gawn series for 3-bladed propellers BAR=0. the propeller shall satisfy the cavitation criteria given by Burrill17 at the same time.30rps=258rpm Observation 2: The rpm is very high that we have to conclude that 3. The variation of cavitation number.95 BAR=1.21 n= 4. Table 3.

03 0.316 1.7 4.9 0.283 –0.00 rpm 0.241 –0.0029 1.14 0.732 1 0.2 1.76 0.316 – .05 0.40 21.26E-01 λ 0.3 0.8 0.27E+00 -0.316 1.28 0.7 0.5 – Σfd(CTLi)/dx 27.9 0.70 kN/sq.6 1.001 9.26 14.  Optimized values The table obtained after the initial calculation is shown Table 6. Hence we set the rpm and diameter at the levels of vibrations according to Mercury Marine14.60E+00 -0.76 0.01 0.752 0.16 0.778 0.0016 1.503 0.indjst. The blade area ratio is better for Z=5 compared to Once we have the values (Table 4) we can start the Z=4.00047 9.04 0.23E-01 0.00244 5.902 80    Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.72E-01 Propeller rpm n 180.07 through integration using Simpson’s first rule.09 Ship Speed Vs 9.61 31.35 19.59 0.785 4 7.62 0.31 16.607 2 3.92 0.95 5 .669 1.  Goldstein factors Propeller Diameter D 3.06 0.04E+00 Pv 1.316 1.75 m Goldstein Factors     No of blades Z 5.1 0.41 22.33 18.55E-01 0.316 1.87E-01 AE/AO 0.267 –0.316 0.1 0.5 0.27 15.9 1.79 38.27E-01 Table 6.58 57. ­­Design o f Fixe d Pitch Propeller an d Wate r Jet Propulsio n Syste m fo r A Friga The ideal efficiencies increase as the diameter and the improves the acceleration and also suppresses higher rpm increases.7R) 0.325 4 5.34 0.00287 9.32 17.05 46. Table 4.172 –0.45 24.688 4 2.70E-02 0.2 1.05 –0.67E-01 0.1 – – – – – – 1 – 0. For this we have to first estimate the Goldstein factors along the radius of the propeller blade as shown Table 5.29 0.37 0.04 0.389 2 0.56E-01 CTL 0.028 –0.93 Ηi 0. optimized values are shown in the Table 4.56 kN Propeller Power PE 3305.55 0.04 0.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology .63 kW Table 5.39 0.00251 8.4 1.63 32.24 13.35 19.00169 9.316 0.61E-01 0.53 0.m σ(0.6 0. This helps in reducing the load on propeller and optimization of the geometrical parameters of the propel- hence plays a major role in preventing cavitation.014 0. The ideal thrust loading coefficient is obtained Wake fraction w 0.155 4 0.1 0.316 1.  Initial calculation of ideal thrust loading coefficient X tanβ β tanβI βI λI d(CTLi)/dx Simpson’s f(d(CTLi)/dx) Multiplier 0.49 25.007 2 2.00217 6.214 0.25 m/s Propeller Thrust T 384.03 0.7 0.00E+00 Pa 101.m 0.316 0. This ler.4 0.48 0.81 39. The highest values to obtain the maximum ideal efficiency.014 –0.24 0.8 3.89E-01 CTLi 0.316 1.30 0.66 0.5 2.9 0.00 m 0.063 –0.3 0.263 –0.366 2 2.08E+00 -0.052 CTLi .00 x A b c D κ Immersion of shaft axis h 3.53 27. Thrust deduction fraction t 0.6 6.58E-01 tanβ 0.33 kN/sq.22 50.56E-01 0.5 8.31 0.3 0.0 1.95 0.3 1.4 0.

9 0.318 1.98 CTLi 0. The hydraulic efficiency and the impel.828 1 0. ing the pump thrust coefficient we set the JVR at 0. The optimized values are respectively.4 0.95 0. Now the optimization of the thickness.318 1.9 0.9 0. Figure 6.27 15.4  Water Jet Optimization points for JVR=0.6 1.6 0.94 different points of the water jet.26 14. The value of k is changed from 4.7 0.61 31.5 0.158 4 0. The nozzle efficiency to 5.92 to 0.35 19. chord.318 .98. higher speeds can be reached by changing the velocities at ler efficiency is varied from 0.80 38.328 0.35 19.8 0.59 57.7 0.9 0.414 2 2.318 1.5 0.53 27. Also consider- done.5 The inlet efficiency is set at 0.4.indjst.50 to 0.34 18.318 0.2 1.5 0.1 0.40 21.49 25.932 Figure 5.710 4 2.22 50.3 0.82.7 0. It is better to have pump with smaller diameter taking skew and pitch distributions for the propeller blades are into consideration the weight constraints. .2 0.4 0. shown in Figure 5.55. camber.318 1.371 4 5.86 to 0.89 and 0.  Pump diameter vs JVR. The rpm is optimized from these values such that is set at 0.  Iterated calculations of Ideal thrust loading coefficient x Tanβ β tanβI βI λI d(CTLi)/dx SM f(d(CTLi)/dx) 0. 0.1 .632 0.318 0. .318 1.5 0.45 24.318 1.728 1.06 46. Now we optimize the velocities and areas at different 3.82 39. .24 13.55.64 32.  Pump thrust coefficient vs JVR. Figure 6.041 2 2.7 0. .7 0.70.848 4 7.082 0.9 0.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology    81 .318 0.5 0. Gopai Krishna Observation 3: After some iterations the initially The variation of pump thrust coefficient with JVR is calculated value and the value obtained through this inte. gration of CTLi matches. 0.392 0. Suction condition gives CS<13.0 1.401 2 0.93 m/s Table 7.5 2.1 0.31 16. At this stage the other values are The pump diameter variation with JVR is shown in as follows in Table 7. 1 - 0.32 17.592 0. The calculations are repeated for JVR from tabulated in the Table 8. .84 0.3 0.5 - Σfd(CTLi)/dx 27.484 0.41 22. Y.5 0. Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.802 0.664 2 3.

84 square meter blades.   6. which V nozzle 33.61 kN   3. We use the propulsion factors calculated using the n 1650 rpm Holtrop formulae since those equations are more reliable and recent compared to the other equations.86 with three blades has been ruled out after the calcula- ηimpeller 0.indjst.93 has better vibration characteristics compared to the V in 13.  Optimized values area of the bulbous bow as zero. V p in 9. The latter one can cause issues when the weight con- block coefficients are in accordance with the values cal. culated using the Watson-Gilfillan formula5 given by: 16. The waterjet is a booster system since it does not have 1  23 − 100 fn  any maneuvering capabilities.45. The delivered power PD. JVR μ 0. Silovic and Denny20. namely kC.82 needed to propel the ship at desired speed. The correction factors in the propeller blade geom- etry calculations.64 kN in the calculation of water plane area coefficient CWP.  Discussions the factors due to Morgan.8. The possibility of designing a single screw propeller ηhydraulic 0. The 15. 7.90 m value after several iterative calculations to attain the Dnozzle 1.07 Mennen’s method.09   4. calculated from the CP value The L/B ratio of the selected frigates is in the range of and using the ηD value are in good agreement. siderations come into picture. The diameter of the propeller is set to the maximum Anozzle 2.98 number of blades of the propeller as five because it CT pump 0. by changing the rpm of the pump. ues mentioned by D. 12. The water jet and twin propellers can be integrated   1.9 to 8.5 and their Froude numbers are in the range of 13. Ainlet 4.G.40 to 0. C B = 0.12 kN   5.91 m/s resistance due to bulbous bow as zero in Holtrop and wake w 0.53 kN series data have shown that it is not possible to design density of sea water 1.M Watson5. thrust deduction t 0.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology .19 m/s fectly satisfies the Burrill cavitation criteria.70 + tan −1   8  4  17. Proeller Thrust 769. 82    Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.86 m/s four bladed propellers. Also the B/T ratios 14. The rpm of the propeller was set to the present Dpump 1. This is in agreement with diameter since increasing the values derived from B/D and T/D by Watson5.55 Therefore we conclude that at least two propellers are ηinlet 0.52 of the hydrodynamic angle of attack of the propeller Apump 2. kt. 11.72 square meter   9. Therefore we assume the ηnozzle 0. The ship is assumed to have zero trim and therefore H 2. Since the frigate has a slender hull. Normal transom shape is assumed for the ship.65 m required thrust.   2.13 square meter allowed value in order to attain maximum efficiency. ­­Design o f Fixe d Pitch Propeller an d Wate r Jet Propulsio n Syste m fo r A Friga Table 8. The efforts to design a propeller using the methodical Thrust from water jet 1205. The propeller designed using circulation theory per- V p out 25.   8. V shape is assumed Total thrust required T 1974.92 tions based on Gawn series. It is desirable to change the pump rpm than the pump are in the range of 3. The water jet can be optimized to reach higher speeds 0.81 m/s   7.50 m/s the draught forward and draught aft are the same. This is in complete accordance with the val.2 to 3. Resistance R 1806. kα are calculated from 4.03 kg/cubic meter such a propeller within the diameter restrictions. We also assumed the V ship 14.4 10.68 m/s mean that we do not need to correct the distribution IVR 1. The frigate details do not give any specifications in a way similar to the integration done in SAN- about the bulbous bow and hence we assumed the Corvette22 as shown in the Figure 7. K 5.

Gopai Krishna Figure 8.5 in Figure 8.2 been concluded that it is not possible to design a single 32 2334. 24 913.1 screw propeller which can produce the thrust required to 34 2559.4 Mennen’s method over a range of speeds from 18 knots to 22 832. The waterjet has been optimized for its inlet. The sche- matic of the propeller is shown in Figure 9. Also the pump rpm has been opti- mized.5 The variation of resistance against the speed is shown 28 1604.  Resistance vs speed graph. adapted from23. 35 2635. Y.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology    83 . Table 9.8 propel the ship at 29 knots. The delivered power PD calculated using the CP value and the ηD value are in good agreement.0 The resistance of the vessel is estimated using Holtrop and 20 768. 5.  The integration of waterjet and twin propellers.1 26 1148. Figure 9.indjst. pump and nozzle diameters. 29 1806. The waterjet is capable of reaching higher speeds by altering the rpm of the pump. The twin propellers and the water jet can be integrated to the particular frigate under consideration as shown in the general arrangement schematic diagram in Figure 10. Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www. A twin screw propeller with five blades is designed using the Circulation theory which can produce the required thrust to propel the ship at 18 knots.1 From the calculations based on Gawn series data for 3-bladed propeller we conclude that even though it is pos- sible to design a twin screw propeller system which can produce the thrust required to propel the ship at 29 knots we have to neglect it because of very high rpm. Conclusions on Design Speed in knots Resistance in kN Example 18 704.  Propeller drawing.6 From the calculations based on B series charts it has 30 2002.8 35 knots. Figure 7.

Propeller Terminology. Silovic V. Ghose JP. Morgan WB. hydro-og aerodynamisk laboratorium Densmark. Olsson B. Advanced compact arrangement of the propulsion system. Advanced design of mega   2. 2008. Figure 10. 2007.  Scope of Future Work 16. 1988. Fujisawa N. 84    Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www. Energy and the afford. ­­Design o f Fixe d Pitch Propeller an d Wate r Jet Propulsio n Syste m fo r A Friga   3. our design method economy. Internat J Rotat   1. 2003.indjst. Basic ship theory. McCoy TJ. Denny SB. Schneekluth H. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Netherlands: Eindhoven University of Technology. Lewis EV. 15. is purely numerical. Gokarn RP. Society of Naval Architects & Marine Engineers. Ship design for efficiency and sion system for naval ships. 17. Tupper EC.  Schematic showing the possible general   9. In the absence 19. Pounder’s marine diesel engines and gas turbines eighth edition. Resistance and propulsion of ships. Nov. Bertram V. Holtrop J. Bertram V. Chapter-5. face corrections. Martin TW.698622 12. 2004. Doerry NH. 1-2003:15–7. The design performance with some experimental Axial).   5. 10. waterjet propulsion for high-speed ships. 7. 2001. of the standard procedure for the design and testing of 2010 Nov-Dec. p. Srinivasan KM. Final Report and CTL 0. Availaible from: http://mnvdet. Mennen GGJ. Gangler J-P. Watson DGM. Woodyard D. So it is imperative to conduct CFD 20. Benefits of CPP versus waterjets for high-speed workboats. Carlton J. The combination of waterjet and yachts and high performance frigates . Engelskirchen J. However. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. 2004. Principles of naval architecture.834 kW a waterjet propulsion system. Danielsen HE. Practical ship design.687956 13. able future fleet.984733 %20Definition. 1983. Cp 1. Ehrenberg HD.   4. 1995. Vol II. Basic ship propulsion. 14. water jet systems10. vol 2. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.916967 Recommendations to the 22nd ITTC. BUTTERWORTH-Heinemann. Lavis DR. Measurements of basic performances for water- jet propulsion systems in water tunnel. and to be supported by experimental 18.312538 11. Allied Publishers. 24–27. Purnell JG.com/Initial%20Hullform ηH 0. Rotordynamic pumps (Centrifugal and studies. Machin. Marine propellers and propulsion. 2006 May 16-19. Harvald SA. United States Navy. Numerical analysis of PD 4718. refined propeller propulsion. ηB 0.  References 21. 1968. PD 4805.   8.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology . 6. studies to be confirmed for confirmation. 22. Marine News. Ann Arbor. 1998. 2004.   6.   7. Burgers I.htm ηD 0. 2000. 2006. 9th International Marine Design Conference. Practical ship hydrodynamics.proven synergies. The Specialist Committee on Waterjets.002 kW determination of ship resistance. Ship and Boat International. Forstell BG. Elsevier Science. 1998. Propeller lifting-sur- analysis of the designed systems. Norbert Willem Herman Bulten. Mercury Marine. Rawson KJ. 2(1):43–50. An approximate power prediction method. MI: 2006 Table 10. We have presented a design method for integrated propul. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Eindhoven.