1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD

14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

CALCULATION METHOD FOR THE STEERING FORCES OF A POD IN HYBRID

PROPULSION

Pekka Ruponen, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

Jerzy Matusiak, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

A new calculation method for the steering forces of a pod propulsor is presented. This method is
also applied to a hybrid propulsion where a shaft-line-driven main propeller is located straight in
front of a contra-rotating propeller, powered by an electric pod.

In the calculations the pod unit is divided into four parts: a rotating propeller, a strut, a motor
housing and a fin. The forces are calculated separately for each part. Interaction between these
parts is estimated by using simplified methods.

The required input data consists of the open water characteristics of both propellers and a
simplified outline geometry of the pod unit. The method is developed to the first quadrant of the pod
propeller and applies only to steering angles that are less than the stall angle of the pod unit.

The calculation method has been validated by comparing its results with the results of an extensive
model test program. Transverse and longitudinal forces are estimated rather accurately. The
accuracy is significantly improved for a high loading of a propeller. The calculation method applies
better to a separate tractor pod. However, the results are good also in the hybrid propulsion case.

1. Introduction

During the past few years podded propulsion has become almost a standard in a variety of ship
types. There are several benefits of using pods. Hybrid propulsion combines these benefits with the
known advantages of the contra-rotating propellers; and does it without complex shaft
arrangements. This kind of propulsion arrangement can be very suitable for vessels with a high
power demand.

Probably the biggest difference in the action of a pod unit, when compared to a conventional
propulsion, is the fact that the pod propeller frequently operates in an oblique inflow. Besides, the
body of the pod acts as a rudder. The knowledge of the forces created by the pod unit in an oblique
flow is important when evaluating ship’s manoeuvring capability. In particular, stopping a vessel
may be conducted quite differently and faster than in the case of a traditional propulsion
arrangement.

In this paper we are mainly concerned with the steady forces acting on a pod unit in a steady
oblique flow. A rather straightforward calculation method for the steering forces of a pod unit in
hybrid propulsion has been developed. In this paper the applied methods and the example results of
the validation are briefly presented. A more detailed description can be found in reference [1]. The
investigated hybrid propulsion arrangement, attached to a ship model, is shown in figure 1.

263
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

Fig. 1 − Hybrid propulsion arrangement attached to a ship model.

2. Assumptions and the Co-ordinate Systems

It is assumed that above the pod unit the bottom of the ship is plane. Furthermore, the propeller
flows are assumed to be steady, inviscid and irrotational. Flow separation is not taken into account.
This limits the applicability of the method to the steering angles that are less than the stall angle of
the pod unit. The flow separation has only a minimal effect when the steering angle is small.
Furthermore, it is assumed that the body of the pod has no effect on the pod propeller, neither has
the pod propeller any effect on the main propeller.

The investigated pod in hybrid propulsion is presented in figure 2. The pod unit is divided into four
parts: a rotating propeller, a strut, a motor housing and a fin. The fin is optional. Forces and turning
moment are calculated separately for each part. However, the interaction between these parts is
taken into account. Additionally, an interference drag of the junctions of these parts is calculated
separately. Total forces are then obtained by summing up these force components:

FTOT = Fpropeller + Fstrut + F fin + Fmotor housing + Finterference . (1)

STRUT

MOTOR HOUSING

FIN

POD PROPELLER MAIN PROPELLER

Fig. 2 − The components of a pod unit in a hybrid propulsion.

264
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

Total forces are presented in a Cartesian co-ordinate system XYZ, fixed with the ship with the X-
axis pointing towards the bow of the ship and Y-axis pointing towards the starboard side of the ship.
The Z-axis is positive downwards. The origin of this system is at the intersection of the turning axis
of the pod unit and the shaft line of the main propeller. The steering angle δ and the turning moment
MZ are positive clockwise, when viewed from above. This co-ordinate system is presented in figure
3.

Several pod-fixed co-ordinate systems xyz are applied in the calculation of the force components.
These systems are selected on the basis of applicability and tradition of each applied method. These
are described later in the appropriate sections.

SHIP
MZ

Fig. 3 − The ship-fixed Cartesian co-ordinate system XYZ, a view from above.

3. Inflow to the Pod

In the hybrid propulsion and depending on the steering angle, the pod unit is working fully or
partially in the slipstream of the main propeller. The inflow to the pod unit is not uniform if the pod
propeller is only partially in the slipstream of the main propeller. Therefore, it is assumed that in
hybrid propulsion the inflow velocity to the pod propeller is an average of the slipstream velocity
and the uniform advance velocity of the main propeller, weighted by the area of the pod propeller.
Simplifications of the geometry are done in order to make the equations simpler.

The axial velocity, induced by the pod propeller, straightens the actual inflow velocity to the body
of the pod. Therefore, the effective angle of attack is decreased. As a result, the loading of the pod
propeller has a significant effect on the stall angle of the pod unit.

It is assumed that in the hybrid propulsion the pod propeller utilizes all of the rotational energy
induced by the main propeller. As a result, the rotational velocity behind the contra-rotating
propellers is taken as zero. This assumption applies only to comparatively small steering angles
when both propellers have almost equal rates of revolution. In the case of a separate pod unit, the
propeller-induced rotational velocity is taken into account by applying the theory of a perfect screw
propeller.

The velocities in the slipstreams of the propellers are calculated by applying the formulae presented
by Söding, see reference [2].

265
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

4. Calculation of the Force Components

4.1. Propeller in an Oblique Flow

Matusiak has presented a new method for calculation of the propeller forces in an oblique flow. A
more detailed description and some results of the validation can be found in reference [3].

The approach is quasi-stationary one; i.e. rate of azimuthal rotation of the pod unit is small. An
actuator disk represents the propeller and the body of the pod unit is disregarded. The rotational
velocity induced by the propeller is also disregarded. Propeller characteristics in the form of thrust
coefficient versus advance number are known. The propulsion unit is assumed to operate in an
undisturbed homogeneous inflow. Thus, possible interaction effects (pod-to-pod, hull-to-pod) are
not taken into account. However, in the hybrid propulsion case, the effect of the main propeller is
taken into account in the form of the advance velocity.

The momentum equation in integral form is applied to a control volume, which is bounded by the
total control surface comprised of the propeller disk area and extending to infinity at the water jet
surface. The water jet traverses steadily in the negative X-direction with the velocity of the ship.

The following equation for the force acting in the propeller plane is obtained:

Fpy = ρ Ap (V A + U A ) ⋅ V0 sin δ , (2)

where ρ is the density of water, AP is the area of the propeller disk, UA is the propeller-induced
velocity in the propeller plane and V0 is the inflow velocity to the propeller and is parallel to the X-
axis. Therefore, the effective advance velocity of the propeller is defined as:

VA = V0 cos δ . (3)

It should be noted that the steering angle δ decreases the effective advance velocity VA of the pod
propeller. The thrust of the propeller is obtained from the thrust coefficient KT, which is taken from
the open water characteristics and fitted by a fourth-order polynomial.

For comparison, also an earlier method, presented by Gutsche [4], was tested.

4.2. Forces of the Strut and the Fin

The cross-sections of both the strut and the fin are symmetrical wing profiles. The linear lifting line
theory and a vortex-lattice method [5] is applied to estimate the induced lift and drag forces created
by these lifting planes in a non-uniform oblique flow.

The flow is assumed to be inviscid, and therefore, the frictional drag is calculated separately by
applying the so-called ITTC-57 formula. It is assumed that the flow velocity is constant over the
chord of the profile and equals to the velocity used in the lifting line theory.

The inflow velocity and the angle of attack are not uniform in the vertical direction since a part of
the lifting plane is in the slipstream of the pod propeller. Furthermore, the actual angle of attack
depends on the loading of the pod propeller. Actually, at large steering angles, the strut and the fin

266
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

are directly in the slipstream of the main propeller. However, this effect has been disregarded since
the flow separation is expected to take place already at smaller steering angles.

Both tips of the strut are closed since it is attached to the motor housing and to the bottom of the
ship. Also the upper tip of the fin is closed. Therefore, the effective aspect ratios of these lifting
planes are greater than their geometrical aspect ratios. This effect has been taken into account by
mirroring the actual lifting planes in respect to the junction planes.

The lifting planes of both the strut and the fin, as well as the junction planes, are presented in figure
4 along with the lifting line representations of them. Equal spacing with 90 segments is used for the
strut and cosine spacing with 30 segments for the fin. A co-ordinate system xyz fixed with the pod
is applied. The x-axis is parallel to the symmetry axis of the profile and positive towards the trailing
edge. The y-axis is positive upwards. These co-ordinate systems are also presented in figure 4. The
lift is perpendicular to the local inflow velocity while the induced drag is parallel to the local
inflow. The flow velocities and angles of attack are calculated at the lifting line.

Bottom of the ship

y
Artificial Strut
plate
Motor x x
housing
Artificial
plate L.L.
Fin

L.L.

Fig. 4 − The effective lifting planes and lifting lines (L.L.) for the strut and the fin, mirrored parts
are presented with dashed lines.

4.3. Forces of the Motor Housing

Allen has presented a straightforward calculation method for the forces and turning moment of a
body of revolution in an oblique flow. A detailed description of this method and its validation can
be found in reference [6]. Again, the ITTC-57 formula is used for the estimation of the axial
frictional resistance.

A Cartesian co-ordinate system xyz fixed with the pod is used. The x-axis is pointing towards the
rear of the motor housing and the origin is in the leading point.

The hub of the pod propeller is assumed to be a fixed part of the motor housing. Furthermore, it is
assumed that the flow is uniform and the inflow velocity equals to the slipstream velocity of the pod
propeller in the propeller plane. The propeller-induced tangential velocities are disregarded since
the flow over the motor housing is assumed to be almost symmetrical. The effect of the main
propeller is restricted to the properties of the pod propeller as in the case of the strut and the fin.

267
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

The motor housing is not just a plain body of revolution since it is attached to the strut and to the
fin. These two parts have a significant straightening effect on the flow over the motor housing,
especially, when the steering angle is not small. It is assumed that the portion of the flow that
encounters the strut or the fin turns without any dispersion so that the outflow is parallel to the pod-
fixed x-axis. These additional forces are calculated by applying the momentum conservation
theorem.

4.4. Interference Drag

Hoerner [7] has presented the following formula for the interference drag of a junction between a
wing and a flat plate:

  t 
3

Dif =  0.8 ⋅   − 0.0003 ⋅ q ⋅ c 2 , (4)
 c 
 

where t is the maximum thickness of the profile, c is the chord length of the profile in the junction
plane and q is the dynamic pressure of the flow.

This formula has been applied to all the junctions between the pod components. As earlier, also the
junction between the motor housing and the strut is assumed to be a plane. Furthermore, it is
assumed that the interference force is acting on the midpoint of the chord and that it is parallel to
the inflow velocity.

5. Validation of the Method

An extensive set of model tests was conducted in the towing tank of the Ship Laboratory at the
Helsinki University of Technology in 2002. A detailed description of these tests is given in
reference [8].

In this paper all the results are presented in a non-dimensional form by applying the following
formulae:

F
CF = (5)
0.5 ⋅ ρ ⋅ V0 ⋅ Ap
2

M
CM = . (6)
0.5 ⋅ ρ ⋅ V0 ⋅ Ap ⋅ D
2

Here V0 is the speed of the towing carriage, AP and D are the propeller disk area and diameter of the
pod propeller and ρ is the density of water.

In the model tests, the pod unit was attached to a flat plate that represented the bottom of a ship.
Three different sets of model tests were performed at different steering angles: the body of the pod,
the separate tractor pod and the pod in hybrid propulsion. A dummy hub replaced the propeller in
the tests for the body of the pod. The open water characteristics for both propellers are presented in
figure 5.

268
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

main propeller pod propeller

1.6 1.6
1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
J J

KT 10xKQ η0 KT 10xKQ η0

Fig. 5 − Measured open water characteristics of the propellers.

Two loading cases of the pod propeller are considered in this paper. These are denoted as self-
propulsion and overloading. The actual loading condition of the pod propeller depends on the
steering angle. The values for the thrust loading coefficients CT of the pod propeller as functions of
the steering angle are presented in figure 6. The thrust loading coefficient is defined as:

T
CT = . (7)
0.5 ⋅ ρ ⋅ V0 ⋅ Ap
2

The rate of revolution was intended to be constant but due to the power limitations it slightly
dropped as a function of the steering angle. The main propeller had a constant rate of revolution that
corresponded to the self-propulsion point. Measured values of rates of revolutions were used in the
calculation.

self-propulsion overloading

0.8 5.0

0.7
4.5
0.6
4.0
0.5
CT
CT

0.4 3.5

0.3
3.0
0.2
2.5
0.1

0.0 2.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20

steering angle [deg] steering angle [deg]

separate pod unit hybrid propulsion separate pod unit hybrid propulsion

Fig. 6 − Calculated thrust loading coefficients for the pod propeller in the measurement points.

Measured and calculated values of the longitudinal and transverse forces for the body of the pod are
presented in figure 7 and the turning moment in figure 8. Corresponding results for the separate pod
unit are presented in figures 9, 10 and 11 and for the hybrid propulsion case in figures 12, 13 and
14. All forces are presented in the ship-fixed Cartesian co-ordinate system, described in section 2.
The turning moment is calculated in relation to the turning axis of the pod unit.

269
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

Body of the Pod, Longitudinal and Transverse Forces

1.5

1.0

0.5

CX measured
0.0
C X, C Y

CX calculated
CY measured
-0.5
CY calculated

-1.0

-1.5

-2.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
steering angle [deg]

Fig. 7 − Measured and calculated non-dimensional longitudinal and transverse forces for the body
of the pod.

Body of the Pod, Turning Moment

0.4

0.2

measured
CM

0.0
calculated

-0.2

-0.4
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
steering angle [deg]

Fig. 8 − Measured and calculated non-dimensional turning moments for the body of the pod.

270
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

Pod Unit, Longitudinal Force

2.5

2.0

1.5 self-propulsion,
measured
1.0
self-propulsion,
0.5 calculated
CX

0.0 overloading,
measured
-0.5
overloading,
-1.0 calculated

-1.5

-2.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
steering angle [deg]

Fig. 9 − Measured and calculated non-dimensional longitudinal forces for the pod unit.

Pod Unit, Transverse Force

4.0

2.0 self-propulsion,
measured

0.0 self-propulsion,
calculated
CY

overloading,
-2.0 measured

overloading,
calculated
-4.0

-6.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
steering angle [deg]

Fig. 10 − Measured and calculated non-dimensional transverse forces for the pod unit.

271
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

Pod Unit, Turning Moment

1.0

0.5
self-propulsion,
measured
0.0
self-propulsion,
calculated
CM

-0.5
overloading,
measured
-1.0
overloading,
calculated
-1.5

-2.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
steering angle [deg]

Fig. 11 − Measured and calculated non-dimensional turning moments for the pod unit.

Hybrid Propulsion, Longitudinal Force

2.5

2.0

1.5 self-propulsion,
measured
1.0
self-propulsion,
0.5 calculated
CX

0.0 overloading,
measured
-0.5
overloading,
calculated
-1.0

-1.5

-2.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
steering angle [deg]

Fig. 12 − Measured and calculated non-dimensional longitudinal forces in hybrid propulsion.

272
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

Hybrid Propulsion, Transverse Force

4.0

2.0 self-propulsion,
measured

self-propulsion,
0.0
calculated
CY

overloading,
-2.0 measured

overloading,
calculated
-4.0

-6.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
steering angle [deg]

Fig. 13 − Measured and calculated non-dimensional transverse forces in hybrid propulsion.

Hybrid Propulsion, Turning Moment

1.0

0.5
self-propulsion,
measured
0.0
self-propulsion,
calculated
CM

-0.5
overloading,
measured
-1.0
overloading,
calculated
-1.5

-2.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
steering angle [deg]

Fig. 14 − Measured and calculated non-dimensional turning moments in hybrid propulsion.

273
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

The stall angle of the body of the pod is between 17.5 and 20 degrees. For a high loading of the pod
propeller the stall angle is about 25 degrees. Therefore, the effect of the propeller loading is very
significant. As a result, the applicability range is increased with a higher loading since the stall
angle is increased. As expected, the calculation method cannot provide reasonable results for
steering angles that are larger than the stall angle.

The longitudinal and transverse forces are not calculated accurately for the body of the pod.
Especially, the transverse force is significantly underestimated. However, the results correspond
well with the typical lifting line solutions. However, the estimation of the turning moment for the
body of the pod is excellent. The estimation is not that good in the case of a working propeller. One
reason for that may be the disregarding of the turning moment, acting on a propeller in an oblique
flow.

For the cases with a working propeller, both the longitudinal and transverse forces are estimated
reasonably accurately for steering angles that are less than the stall angle. Furthermore, the accuracy
is increased with a higher loading of the pod propeller. Generally, the accuracy of the calculation
method is better for the separate pod unit than in the hybrid propulsion case.

Also an earlier method for the propeller forces in an oblique flow, presented by Gutsche [4], was
tested and compared to the new method. All other force components were calculated with the same
methods. The results are presented in figure 15 for the separate pod unit in self-propulsion.

Longitudinal Force Transverse Force

0.5 2.0

0.0 1.0

-0.5 0.0
CX

CY

-1.0 -1.0

-1.5 -2.0

-2.0 -3.0

-2.5 -4.0
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20

steering angle [deg] steering angle [deg]

measured momentum eq. Gutsche measured momentum eq. Gutsche

Fig. 15 − Comparison between two methods for the propeller forces.

It is obvious that both the longitudinal and transverse forces can be estimated more accurately by
applying the momentum equation for the calculation of the propeller force.

6. Conclusions

Usually, the lifting line theory underestimates the lifting force. On the other hand, the method for
calculation of the propeller forces in an oblique flow seems to overestimate the transverse force.
Therefore, it is very likely that these factors, at least partially, compensate each other. As a result,
the total calculated forces are very close to the measured values. For a higher loading of the pod
propeller, the accuracy of the calculation method is significantly improved. This is very likely due
to a better applicability of the applied theory of a perfect propulsor.

274
 1st International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion, T-POD
14th – 16th April 2004 University of Newcastle, UK

Furthermore, the applicability range of the calculation method is significantly increased with a
higher loading of the pod propeller. This is due to the fact that the axial velocity, induced by the pod
propeller, straightens the inflow to the body of the pod. Therefore, the effective angle of attack,
encountered by the body of the pod, is less than the actual steering angle.

The turning moment of the pod was calculated reasonably accurately only for the separate body of
the pod in an oblique flow. Therefore, it is likely that the acting points of some of the force
components are not estimated correctly. Furthermore, there is a turning moment in the propeller
plane due to the asymmetric distribution of thrust in an oblique flow. This has not been taken into
account in the present calculation method.

A more detailed modelling of the geometry of the pod or the use of more segments in the lifting line
method does not significantly increase the accuracy of the calculation method. However, the rather
simplified modelling of the main propeller’s slipstream tube might have some effect on the
characteristics of the pod propeller in hybrid propulsion.

The presented calculation method can be developed further by investigating the rotational velocities
in the slipstream of the contra-rotating propellers by using different combinations of rates of
revolutions at different steering angles. Furthermore, the interaction between both propellers and the
body of the pod should be studied more thoroughly. Moreover, the applicability of Hoerner’s
formula for interference drag should be validated separately with model tests.

The presented calculation method provides reasonably good results for the steering forces of a pod
unit in hybrid propulsion. Especially, when considering the rather simple form of the required input
data. Therefore, the method can be applied to simplified simulation of manoeuvring and to the first
estimations of the forces acting on the pod unit. However, the restriction to steering angles that are
less than the stall angle, somewhat limits the applicability of this method.

References

1. Ruponen, P., (2003), “Calculation Model for Steering Forces of a Pod in Hybrid Propulsion”,
Master’s Thesis, Ship Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, (in Finnish).
2. Söding, H., (1993), “Rudders – Fundamental Hydrodynamic Aspects”, in Manoeuvring
Technical Manual (ed. J. Brix), Seehafen Verlag, Hamburg 1993, 266p.
3. Matusiak, J., (2003), “Momentum Equation Applied to the Problem of a Propeller in Oblique
Flow”, Ship Technology Research Vol. 50 No. 5, pp. 103-105.
4. Gutsche, F., (1964), “Untersuchung von Schiffsschrauben in schräger Anströmung”,
Schiffbauforschung 3/4, pp. 97-122.
5. Katz, J. & Plotkin, A., (1991) “Low-Speed Aerodynamics – From Wing Theory to Panel
Methods”, McGraw-Hill, 632p.
6. Allen, H. J., (1949), “Estimation of the Forces and Moments Acting on Inclined Bodies of
Revolution of high Fineness Ratio”, NACA Research Memorandum A9I26.
7. Hoerner, S. F., (1965), “Fluid-Dynamic Drag – Practical Information on Aerodynamic Drag
and Hydrodynamic Resistance”, Sighard F. Hoerner.
8. Konsin, J., (2003), “An Experimental Study of Forces on a Pod Propeller in Hybrid
Propulsion“, Master’s Thesis, Ship Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, (in
Finnish).

275