Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Energy
Available
Available Procedia
online
online 00 (2018) 000–000
atatwww.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Energy
EnergyProcedia
Procedia156 (2019) 000–000
00 (2017) 463–468
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

2018 5th International Conference on Power and Energy Systems Engineering, CPESE 2018,
2018 5th International Conference on Power2018,
19-21 September and Energy Systems
Nagoya, Japan Engineering, CPESE 2018,
19-21 September 2018, Nagoya, Japan
Warp-chine on pentamaran hydrodynamics considering to reduction
Warp-chineThe
on15th
pentamaran hydrodynamics
International Symposium on Districtconsidering
Heating and Cooling to reduction
in ship power energy
in ship power energy
Assessing the feasibility of using the heat demand-outdoor
Wiwin Sulistyawati, Yanuar*, Agus S. Pamitran
temperatureDepartment
function for a long-term
Wiwin Sulistyawati, Yanuar*, district heat demand forecast
Agus S. Pamitran
of Mechanical Engineering, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia
I. Andrića,b,c*, A. Pinaa, P. Ferrãoa, J. Fournierb., B. Lacarrièrec, O. Le Correc
a
AbstractIN+ Center for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research - Instituto Superior Técnico, Av. Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal
Abstract b
Veolia Recherche & Innovation, 291 Avenue Dreyfous Daniel, 78520 Limay, France
c
Département
The proper shape of the ship was Systèmes Énergétiques et Environnement
resulting lowering - IMTthat
shear stress Atlantique,
caused 4reduction
rue Alfredon Kastler,
energy 44300
lossesNantes,
in theFrance
boundary layer,
The proper shape of the ship was resulting lowering shear stress that
vortices and flow separation which prevent an increase pressure in the aftbody. Multihull had a much caused reduction on energy losses in thelower
boundary layer,
resistance
vortices
components and(shear
flow stress
separation which prevent
and pressure) with theanresult increase pressuresignificantly
that requires in the aftbody. Multihull (power
less horsepower had a much energy)lower resistance
than monohull.
components
The (shear stress
total resistance and pressure)
of multihull not onlywith the result
the sum of thethat requiresresistances
individual significantly less horsepower
of each (power
hull. There were energy) than
interactions monohull.
between main
Abstract
The totalside
resistance of multihull not clearance
only the sum
hull and hull related to stagger, andof the individual
speeds. resistances
This research was toofinvestigate
each hull. characteristics
There were interactions
of pentamaranbetween main
based on
hull and side
Michell's thin hull
shiprelated
theory to and
stagger,
be clearancewith
adjusted and the
speeds. This research
experimental on was to investigate
towing test for characteristics
several configurationsof pentamaran
on basedand
clearance on
District heating
Michell's shipnetworks
thinpentamaran theorywith are be
and commonly
adjusted addressed in the literature
with theconsist
experimental as one oftestthefor
most effective solutions on for clearance
decreasingand the
stagger.
greenhouse The gas emissions from anthe
arrow formation
building sector. These of mainon
systems
towing
hull
require represents
high
several
a hard
investments
configurations
chine
which recommended
are returned from Savitsky
through the heat
stagger.
model andThe sidepentamaran
with V shape,withwhich
an arroweach formation
of two and consist
side hulls of maininhull
located the represents
same a hard chine
longitudinal. recommended
Changing of side hullfrom Savitsky
on clearance
sales. and
model Dueside to with
the changed
V shape,climate
which conditions
each of two side building
hulls renovation
located in the samepolicies, heat demand
longitudinal. Changingin the future
of side hullcould
on decrease,
clearance
strongly
prolonging affects
the the resistance
investment characteristics
return period. than stagger. The configuration of pentamaran with centerline of the main hull to
strongly
each of affects thehull
front-side resistance characteristics
approximately 15 o
-18 o than stagger. The configuration of pentamaran with centerline of the main hull to
could be an effective manner to reduce resistance. In general, thin ship theory from
The of
each main scope of
front-side thisapproximately
hull paper is to assess
15o-18 theo could
feasibility
be an ofeffective
using themanner
heat demand
to reduce– outdoor temperature
resistance. In general, function
thin for theory
ship heat demand
from
Michell
forecast. to prediction coefficient component resistance of model with warp-chine yields quite good results with the experiments
Michell
at Fn > to The
0.4.
districtcoefficient
prediction of Alvalade, located resistance
component in Lisbonof(Portugal),
model withwas used as yields
warp-chine a case quite
study. Theresults
good districtwith
is consisted of 665
the experiments
atbuildings
Fn > 0.4. that vary in both construction period and typology. Three weather scenarios (low, medium, high) and three district
renovation scenarios were developed (shallow, intermediate, deep). To estimate the error, obtained heat demand values were
© 2018
©compared
2019 TheThe
ThewithAuthors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Ltd.
©
This2018
is an open
results
Authors.
access Published
article by Elsevier
from a dynamic
under the
heatLtd.
Elsevier
CC
demand model, previously developed and validated by the authors.
Ltd.
BY-NC-ND license
This
The is an
resultsopen access
showed article
that when under
only the CC
weather BY-NC-ND license(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
change is considered, (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
the margin of error could be acceptable for some applications
This is an and
Selection openpeer-review
access article under
under the CC BY-NC-ND
responsibility of the license
2018 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
5thInternational
International Conferenceonon Power and Energy Systems
Selection
(the error and
in peer-review
annual underwas
demand responsibility
lower than of20%
the 2018
for 5th
all weather Conference
scenarios considered). Power and
However, Energy Systems Engineering,
Selection andCPESE
Engineering, peer-review2018, under
19–21 responsibility
September of theNagoya,
2018, 2018 5thJapan.
International Conference on Power and after
Energyintroducing
Systems renovation
CPESE
scenarios,2018, the19–21
error September
value 2018,
increased Nagoya,
up to Japan.
59.5% (depending on the weather and renovation scenarios combination considered).
Engineering, CPESE 2018, 19–21 September 2018, Nagoya, Japan.
The value
Keywords: of slope pentamaran;
warp-chine; coefficient reduction
increased on average
energy; withinwave
experimental; the characteristics
range of 3.8% up to 8% per decade, that corresponds to the
decrease warp-chine;
Keywords: in the number of heating
pentamaran; hoursenergy;
reduction of 22-139h duringwave
experimental; the characteristics
heating season (depending on the combination of weather and
renovation scenarios considered). On the other hand, function intercept increased for 7.8-12.7% per decade (depending on the
coupled scenarios). The values suggested could be used to modify the function parameters for the scenarios considered, and
improve the accuracy of heat demand estimations.

© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +62-818-897-518; fax: 021-727-0033
Cooling.
* Corresponding
E-mail address:author. Tel.: +62-818-897-518; fax: 021-727-0033
yanuar@eng.ui.ac.id
E-mail address:
1876-6102 © 2018 yanuar@eng.ui.ac.id
The Authors. Published bychange
Elsevier Ltd.
Keywords: Heat demand; Forecast; Climate
1876-6102 © 2018
This is an open Thearticle
access Authors. Published
under by Elsevier Ltd.
the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an and
Selection openpeer-review
access article under
under the CC BY-NC-ND
responsibility license
of the 2018 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
5th International Conference on Power and Energy Systems Engineering, CPESE
Selection
2018, 19–21andSeptember
peer-review under
2018, responsibility
Nagoya, Japan. of the 2018 5th International Conference on Power and Energy Systems Engineering, CPESE
2018, 19–21 September 2018, Nagoya, Japan.
1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
1876-6102 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the 2018 5th International Conference on Power and Energy Systems Engineering,
CPESE 2018, 19–21 September 2018, Nagoya, Japan.
10.1016/j.egypro.2018.11.082
464 Wiwin Sulistyawati et al. / Energy Procedia 156 (2019) 463–468
Wiwin Sulistyawati et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

1. Introduction

The multihull configuration in placement of individual hulls are an attempt to minimize wave resistance that will
be reduced the total resistance. Off course it related to the power energy required to propel the ship, which it’s
directly related to fuel consumed. [1] had note the total resistance of multihull could be minimized by the shape of
hull and the proper configuration from outriggers. According to [2], longitudinal and transverse configurations
between the hulls need to optimum placement due to affected to frictional resistance, stability and seakeeping
performance. Research of [3] showed symmetrical chine had the lowest resistance and highest propulsive efficiency.
[4] showed chine forms have better dynamic stability at high speeds. Then [5] obtained catamaran with chine form
on deadrise angle until 20o lift coefficient force increased in line with the increasing of deadrise and Fn, and short
distance of outriggers.
Research that has been done on pentamaran mostly used Wigley's hull as in experiments by [6-8]. This research
focus on wave resistance of pentamaran with warp-chine hull form that shown in Fig. 1 at speed ranges
corresponding to high wave resistance. Where the model was assembled as an arrow as trimaran formation in
various configurations suggested from optimum hull of multihulls. Analysis was using experimental on towing test
and calculated computational by “Michlet” for wave and total resistance.

Nomenclature

A() amplitude U ship velocity

Aj() amplitude for multi hull with j numbered of hull dRW/d free wave spectrum
Cw wave coefficient  angle and a propagating wave
Rw wave resistance  displacement
F() interference between the hulls j total displacement fraction of multihull
k0 =g/U2, basic wave number  water density
k() = k0 sec2, wave number at angle  Øy linearized of hull boundary condition
(k+1) form factor y=Y(x, y) hull surface
z=Z(x, y) wave elevation

2. Multi-Hull “Michell’s” Wave Resistance

Based on studies by [9], [10] about optimum of warp-chine, the model researches were specified on deadrise
angle (): 20o for main hull, and side hulls 35o. Each of two side hulls located on portside and starboard with as
arrow as a trimaran formation are presented in Fig.1 and its parameter in Table 1.

a b

Fig.1. (a) body plan model (b) set up trimaran-pentamaran configuration

The first clearance (CL1) of forward side hull are 1.05 and 1.2 of the main hull beams, (Bmh); second clearance
(CL2) of after side hull are 1.2 and 1.5 of the main hull beam (Bmh); and stagger (ST) a distance from transom of
side hull to transom of main hull: 0.36, 0.42 and 0.5 of the main hull length Lwl.
 Wiwin Sulistyawati et al. / Energy Procedia 156 (2019) 463–468 465
Wiwin Sulistyawati et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

Table 1. Parameter of pentamaran

Forward After
Main Dimension Main hull
Side hull Side hull
LOA (mm) 1500 414 414
B (mm) 150 30 30
T (mm) 24 12 12
H (mm) 90 78 78
4 3 3
WSA (mm2) 23.63 x10 20.06 x10 20.06 x10
5 4 4
mm3 23.13 x10 13.80 x10 13.80 x10
Deadrise (deg) 20 35 35

The research of [11], [12] had agree that wave resistance of high-speed mono and multihull as given by Michell's
integral was quite good with computed values from towing test. The wave resistance based on stream energy
(Michell’s) far from the ship explain the wave heights induce the actual wave resistance by free-wave spectrum
integration to the angle of propagation .


 2
 2
2 2
Rw  U A ( ) cos3  d (1)
2

The flow quantities of wave resistance represent wave elevation z = Z (x, y) which create by hull Y (x, y). Integrated
with transom, hence:

2i 2 0 ik x sec ik0 zsec 2 0 2

 Y ( x , z )ek0 z sec  dxdz
2  3
A ( ) 
 ( k 0 sec  )
  
Y ( x, z )e 0 e dxdz  ( k 0 sec  )
 (2)

where k () = k0 sec2 ; k0 = g/U2, g is gravity. A non-dimensional wave resistance coefficient according to (3).
Then, prediction of the total resistance as the sum of viscous was determined using ITTC-57 line and the form factor
(k+1) used Prohaska method by utilizing test data at low Froude numbers (0.12 < Fr < 0.24).

Cw  Rw (3)
0.5 V 2 S

For multihull with N hulls, j numbered of hull located at (x,y)=(xj,yj), Aj() wave amplitude, then modify of
amplitude function A() from the expression (2) to

N
A ( )   A j ( ) eik ( )[xjcos  yjsin  ] (4)
j 1

A( )   j A0 ( ) (5)

N
F ( )   j1  j eik ( )[ xj cos  yj sin  ] (6)

Where j represents the fraction of the total displacement of multihull, F () as interference between the hulls and
total resistance of multihull G () determined by individual outrigger displacement , stagger s; clearance w:

2 2 2
G ( ) (1  2 )  4 (1  2 ) cos( ks cos  ) cos( kw sin  )  4 cos ( kw sin  ) (7)
466 Wiwin Sulistyawati et al. / Energy Procedia 156 (2019) 463–468
Wiwin Sulistyawati et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

3. Experimental set-up

The calm water experiments were conducted in the Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS) towing tank. The
main dimensions of the tank of 50 m, 3 m and 2 m for length, width and depth. The tank was equipped with 3
cameras mounted on the front of the right side (starboard), middle between mainhull and sidehull, as well as on the
middle side of the back (after stern). The tests at ranging of Froude number, Fn = U/(g.L)0.5 from 0.1 to 0.65
corresponding to model speeds between 0.58 m/s to 2.30 m/s which was adjusted the length of towing to the total
length of ship model. While for computation was calculated at Fn 0,39 - 0,68 with 8 speeds. And in accordance with
Fig. 1 there are six variations of towing tank test hull configurations which detailed test schemes and hull spacings
are described in Table 2.
Table 2. Test configurations
Stagger Clearance 1 Clearance 2
Test configuration
(m) (m) (m)
A 0.36L 1.20Bmh 1.20Bmh
B 0.36L 1.05Bmh 1.50Bmh
C 0.42L 1.20Bmh 1.20Bmh
D 0.42L 1.05Bmh 1.50Bmh
E 0.50L 1.20Bmh 1.20Bmh
F 0.50L 1.05Bmh 1.50Bmh

4. Comparison of all configuration

The comparison between calculated computational and towing test of wave resistance and total resistance are
presented in Fig. 2 to 4. All the results show the trends of all configurations were basically consistent with the tested
at Fn>0.5. This corresponds to [3] that in range Fn<0.4 would be get a relative accuracy value. Therefore, this
investigation is concerned with speed ranges corresponding to Fn 0.4-0.7. The average percentage on 3 staggers and
2 modifications clearance for wave and total resistance are summarized in Table 3. Negative is indicated an
increasing and positive is a decreasing. Increasing of stagger generally will be decrease on wave and total resistance
that equal with clearance of the forward-side hull closer to the main hull or not in line with the after-side hull.

Table 3. Comparison results on average percentage between test and computational

Towing tes Computational Towing tes Computational
Stagger Total Total Clearance Total Total
Wave Wave Wave Wave
Resistance Resistance Resistance Resistance
A-B 15.137 0.879 -1.739 -0.375 A-C 0.985 10.188 1.090 0.344
CL1=CL2
C-D 19.766 -7.793 1.193 0.188 C-E 4.521 2.609 3.798 0.879
E-F 21.663 -1.600 2.037 0.443 B-D 6.386 2.332 3.942 0.903
CL1≠CL2
D-F 6.778 8.204 4.619 1.132

a) 7.5x10
-3
Cw_Michell b) 7.5x10
-3
Cw_Michell
Model A CT_Michell Model B CT_Michell
-3 Cw_test Cw_test
6.0x10 6.0x10
-3
CT_Test CT_test
Nondimensional coeff.

Nondimensional coeff.

-3
4.5x10 4.5x10
-3

-3 -3
3.0x10 3.0x10

-3 -3
1.5x10 1.5x10

0.0 0.0
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Fn Fn

Fig.2. Comparison of wave coefficient and total resistance between test and computational (a) model A; (b) model B, on stagger 0.36L
 Wiwin Wiwin
Sulistyawati et al. / Energy
Sulistyawati Procedia
et al. / Energy 00 (2018)
Procedia 156000–000
(2019) 463–468 467

a) b)
-3
-3
7.5x10 7.5x10 Cw_Michell
Model C Cw_Michell Model D CT_Michell
CT_Michell
Cw_test -3 Cw_test
-3
6.0x10 6.0x10

Nondimensional coeff.
Nondimensional coeff.

CT_Test CT_test

-3
-3
4.5x10 4.5x10

-3
-3
3.0x10 3.0x10

-3
-3
1.5x10 1.5x10

0.0 0.0
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Fn Fn
Fig.3. Comparison of wave coefficient and total resistance between test and computational (a) model C; (b) model D, on stagger 0.42L
a) 7.5x10
-3 Cw_Michell b) 7.5x10
-3 Cw_Michell
Model E CT_Michell Model F CT_Michell
Cw_test Cw_test
-3 -3
6.0x10 6.0x10 CT_test

Nondimensional coeff.
CT_test
Nondimensional coeff.

-3 -3
4.5x10 4.5x10

-3
3.0x10 3.0x10
-3

-3
1.5x10 1.5x10
-3

0.0
0.0
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Fn 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Fn
Fig.4. Comparison of wave coefficient and total resistance between test and computational (a) model E; (b) model F, on stagger 0.5L

5. Conclusion

The agreement of reports computations wave resistance and total resistance with the measurement test had a
similarity trend. There are some discrepancies in range Fn 0.4-0.5 regarding the values of wave and total resistance
that possible at all due to viscous factors are still influential at low speed. The obtained reduction percent especially
in high stagger with clearance near to the main hull. And aligning placement of main hull to side hull with formation
arrow tri-hull near to Kelvin angle would be effective in reducing wave resistance. In general, thin ship theory from
Michell to prediction coefficient component resistance of model with warp-chine yields quite good results with the
experiments. Further work should be considered optimizing of clearance and stagger to verify the predicted the best
minimum resistance and validate the results by experimental data. In order to less resistance can be reducing
horsepower (power energy) requirement means that fuel consumption will reduce rapidly.

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by Indonesian Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP). We acknowledge the support by
head of Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember’s towing laboratory, IKAP Utama and his assistances for test support
of this research.

References

[1] Ikeda, Yoshiho, Emiko Nakabayashi, & Ai Ito. Concept design of a pentamaran type fast RoRo ship. Journal of the Japan Society of Naval
Architects and Ocean Engineers; 2005: 1:35-42.
[2] Oller, Erik, Vasilios Nikou, & Konstantinos Psallidas. Focused Mission High Speed Combatant. DTIC Document. 2003.
[3] Tuck, Ernest O, & Leo Lazauskas. Optimum hull spacing of a family of multihulls. Ship Technology Research-Schiffstechnik, 1998: 45.4:
180.
[4] Blount, DL, & JA McGrath. Resistance characteristics of semi-displacement mega yacht hull forms. Trans. RINA, Intl. J. Small Craft Tech;
2009. 151.
468 Wiwin Sulistyawati et al. / Energy Procedia 156 (2019) 463–468
Wiwin Sulistyawati et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

[5] Bari, Ghazi S, & Konstantin I Matveev. Hydrodynamic modeling of planing catamarans with symmetric hulls. Ocean Engineering; 2016: 115
p. :60-66.
[6] Yanuar, Gunawan, Kurniawan T. Waskito, and A. Jamaluddin. Experimental Study Resistances of Asymmetrical PentamaranModel with
Separation and Staggered Hull Variation of InnerSide-hulls, International Journal of Fluid Mechanics Research; 2015. p. 82-94.
[7] Yanuar, Ibadurrahman, Kurniawan T. Waskito, S. Karim and M. Ichsan. Interference resistance of pentamaran ship model with asymmetric
outrigger configurations, Journal of Marine Science and Application; 2017: vol. 16, Issue 1, p. 42–47.
[8] Yanuar, Ibadurrahman, M.H Faiz and M.H. Adib. Experimental Analysis of Diamond Pentamaran Model with Symmetric and
Asymmetric Hull Combinations, Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences; 2017: 12 (13): p . 3434-3440.
[91] Savitsky, D., DeLorme, M.F., Raju, D. Inclusion of whisker spray drag in performance prediction method for high-speed planning hulls.
Journal of Marine Technology 2007: 44 (1), 35-56.
[10] Schachter RD, Riberio HJC.: Dynamic equilibrium evaluation for planning hulls with arbitrary geometry and variable deadrise angles-The
virtual prismatic hulls method, Ocean Engineering; 2016, vol. 115, p. 67-92.
[11] Day, S., Clelland, D., Nixon, E. Experimental and numerical investigation of arrow trimarans, In Proc. FAST 2003, ed. P. Casella, Vol. III,
Session D2, p. 23–36, Naples: Dipartimenta Ingegneria navale,Universt`a di Napoli.
[12] Yeung, R. W., Poupard, G. and Toilliez, J. O. Interference Resistance Prediction and Its Applications to Optimal Multi-Hull Configuration
Design, SNAME Trans; 2004: vol. 112, p. 142–169.