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

net/publication/308419484

Effect of Spray Rails on the Resistance of Planing Hulls

Conference Paper · September 1995

CITATIONS READS

8 497

2 authors, including:

Gregory Grigoropoulos
National Technical University of Athens
94 PUBLICATIONS   321 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Added resistance in waves via potential and viscous flow methods View project

Resistance of High-Speed Craft View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gregory Grigoropoulos on 22 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Effect of Spray Rails on the Resistance
of Planing Hulls

G. J. Grigoropoulos National Technical University of Athens Greece

T. A Loukakis National Technical University of Athens Greece

ABSTRACT

A new systematic series of planing hull forms possessing improved characteristics with
respect to both resistance and seakeeping is being slowly created at the Laboratory for Ship
and Marine Hydrodynamics of the National Technical University of Athens. Before the
selection of the parent hull, five "equivalent" models with the same main particulars and
different hull forms have been designed and tested for resistance, both with and without
spray rails. The existence of spray rails affects differently the various hull forms as discussed
in the paper.

1. INTRODUCTION
For several techno-economic reasons, which are not to be discussed in this paper, the
planing monohull vessel has emerged recently as the clear winner in the "fast category" of
both commercial and naval vessels of ever greater sizes. Thus, recent Italian and Spanish
designs of commercial car-ferries are the largest planing craft ever constructed with lengths
of over 100 m, displacements of over 1000 mt and speeds in the 40 knot range.

In this respect, the academic endeavour of creating a new series of planing hulls with
improved resistance and seakeeping characteristics, which was initiated some years ago at
the Laboratory for Ship and Marine Hydrodynamics of the National Technical University of
Athens, has become more important than initially expected.

On the way to the creation of the new systematic series, five preliminary models have been
designed and tested for both resistance and seakeeping in a comparative fashion. The five
"equivalent" hull forms have the same length and beam and can be described as follows :

33

-
(H1) Series 62 single chine, Clement and Blount (1963)
(H2) Deep-V single chine, Keuning and Gerritsma (1982)
(H3) Double chine based on Series 62, Savitsky, Roper and Benen (1972)
(H4) Double chine with wide transom, same as above reference
(HS) Rounded bilge variant of H4, Grigoropoulos and Loukakis (1994).

During the preliminary investigation it became obvious that the existence of spray rails
affected the resistance characteristics of the five hull forms seriously enough but in a
disimilar manner. Therefore, it had to be included in the investigation.

The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate in both a qualitative and quantitative manner, the
effect of spray rails, which can provoke effective flow separation even when large deadrise
angles and/or more rounded transverse sections are used, on the calm water characteristics
of planing hull forms and to discuss their area of application.

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE HULL FORMS

The length to beam ratio (UB) is the dominant parameter in the generation of a systematic
series of planing hull forms, when both their resistance and seakeeping characteristics are to
be examined. On the basis of the various existing systematic series and of many existing hull
forms, it was decided that an UB range between 4.0 and 7.0 was appropriate, with UB = 5.5
to be used for the parent hull form of the series. The most widely known single chine
systematic series, Series 62, created by Clement and Blount (1963), was selected to be used
for comparison purposes. In _order to select the parent hull form of the new series, single
chine, double chine and rounded bilge transverse sections, combined with mostly constant or
varying deadrise angles, were used.

In this fashion five hull forms, whose body plans are shown in Figures 1 a to 1 e, were
designed as stated in the Introduction. The first three of these hull forms, H1, H2 and H3, are
based on the Series 62 geometry and have the same form on and above the (upper) chine.
The deadrise angle at the stern is 12.5°, 25° and 10°, respectively, and is constant for about
60% of the length for H 1 and H2, whilst in the case of H3 the deadrise angle varies
continuously along the length from 10° to about 50°. The fourth hull form has a wider transom
and a varying deadrise angle distribution, from 10° to about 70° stern to bow, as suggested
by Savitsky et al (1972). The last hull form is quite similar to the previous one and differs only
in that the transverse sections above the lower chine are rounded.

34
Wooden models of the five hull forms, with an overall length of about 2.2 m, have been
constructed for the preliminary test. program and tested for speeds up to 5 mis model scale.

3. TEST PROGRAM
3.1 Testing Conditions
The five hull forms have been and are being tested extensively for both resistance and
seakeeping characteristics. The models, with respect to the width at the transom, form a
group of three with a narrow transom (H1, H2, H3) and a group of two with a wide transom
(H4, HS). As the last two models can support more weight, the two groups were not tested in
general at the same displacement!. Tests were done for both groups at three displacements
and three trimanqtes for the central displacement. The heavier displacement of the narrow-
transom group was the same with the central displacement of the wide transom group for
comparison purposes. The test conditions for the two groups are shown in Figure 2 and are
numbered C 1 to CS.

3.2 The Effect of Spray Rails

The models were tested without and with spray rails fitted at the (lower) chine. For the Series
62 and the deep-V models, H1 and H2, the rails were fitted as suggested by Clement and
Blount ( 1963, Fig. 1, p. 493). The two double chine models and the rounded bilge one, H3,
H4 and HS, were fitted with spray rails as suggested by Savitsky (private communication,
1993) and shown in Figure 1f. In Figures 3 to 7, the total model resistance, running trim and
C.G. rise are shown vs. the model speed for all five models.

The following comments can now be made (all tests are for the corresponding central
condition C3):

Hull H1: The effect of the spray rails is felt at speeds above 2.5 m/s. The rails cause the C.G.
to rise more consistently, while the running trim results are mixed. The combined effect
results in a resistance decrease of about 10%, when rails are fitted (Figure 3).

Hull H2: The effect of the rails is more pronounced for the deep-V hull form. At the higher
speed region the C. G. rises more, the running trim is higher and the resistance lower by up to
25% ! (Figure 4 ).

Hull H3: The same as above comments are valid for the double chine, narrow-transom hull
form. A resistance reduction up to 15% is observed (Figure 5).

Hull H4: For the wide-transom, double chine hull form, the effect of the spray rails is small. A
small increase in the C.G. rise is observed, while the running trim and resistance results

35
differ slightly only for all speeds (Figure 6). However, if all conditions are examined, Figure
13, the effect of the rails on resistance is mostly negative!

Hull HS: The results for the rounded bilge variant of the previous hull form are very similar.
Although C. G. rises comparatively more, the running trim angle and the resistance curves are
quite similar (Figure 7).

From the above, it is obvious that the narrow-transom group of hull forms has a lower
resistance when spray rails are fitted. The resistance of the three models at the same
displacement (C3) and with spray rails fitted is compared in Figure 8. The double chine hull
form has a slightly lower resistance for all, except the very high, speeds. The same
comparison for the two models with the wide transom is shown in Figure 9, with and without
spray rails. Again the double chine hull form has a lower resistance, except at the very high
speeds. But, for these models the effect of the rails is relatively small and usually not
beneficial.

Finally, the resistance of the two double chine models at the same displacement (H3 C2 with
spray rails and H4 C3 without spray rails, i.e. in their best condition, respectively) and static
trim angle is compared in Figure 10. Although the differences are small, the wide-transom
model has lower resistance for most of the speed range.

The effect of the spray rails on resistance for all five conditions tested (C1 to CS) and for hull
forms H1, H2 and H4 is shown in Figures 11, 12 and 13, respectively. From these figures and
for the narrow-transom hull .forms, it can be deduced that the use of spray rails is always
beneficial at the higher speed range and especially for the deep-V hull form. The same is not
true for the wide-transom double chine hull form, where the effect of the spray rails can be
negative, albeit on a small scale, throughout the speed range.

4. CONCLUSIONS
The effect of spray rails on the resistance characteristics of planing craft can be significant,
especially in the case of the traditional narrow-transom hull forms. In the case of the wide-
transom hull forms, either double chine or rounded bilge, the effect of the spray rails on the
resistance is small and can be either positive or, mostly, negative.

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Most of the tedious experimental work for the new series is being done by last (5th) year
students in the framework of their diploma theses. In this respect, the authors are indebted

36
to Mrs. S.Peppa and to Messrs. G. Halkias, E. Kritsinelis, C. Dousis, M. Pasalaris, and H.
Monokrousos. The same holds true for the carriage crew Messrs. M. Nounos and F. Kasapis.

6. REFERENCES
Clement, E.P. and Blount, D.L., 1963, "Resistance Tests of a Systematic Series of Planing
Hull Forms", Trans. SNAME, Vol. 71, p. 491

Grigoropoulos, G.J. and Loukakis, T.A, 1994, "Development of a Systematic series of High
Speed Craft for the Greek Seas", NTUA, Dept. of N.A & M.E., Lab. for Ship and
Marine Hydrodynamics, Techn. ,Rep. No. NAL 106-F-1994

Keuning, J.A and Gerritsma, J., 1982, "Resistance Tests of a Systematic Series of Planing
Hull Forms with 25° Deadrise Angle", Int. Shipbuild. Progress, Vol. 29, No. 337, p. 222

Savitsky, D., Roper, J.K. and Benen, L., 1972, "Hydrodynamic Development of a High Speed
Planing Hull for Rough Water", 9th Symp. Naval Hydrodyn., ONR, Paris, p. 419

37
a. Series 62 b. Deep-V

c. Double chine based on Series 62 d. Double chine with wide transom

b = beam of upper chine

e. Rounded bilge f. Spray rails form for models H3, H4 and HS

Fig. 1 Body plans of the five equivalent hull forms and cross section of the spray rail as fitted
on models H3, H4 and HS.

38
 Dispf.=20.66 Kp
C4 LCG=-0.024 m
trim::::1° by bow

Displ.=15.44 Kp Displ.=20.66 Kp Displ.=29.66 Kp

C1 LCG=-0.144 m C3 LCG=-0.144 m C2 LCG=-0.144 m
trirnetevel keel trim::::level keel trimelevel keel

Displ.=20.66 Kp
cs LCG=-0.264 m
trim::::1 ° bv stem

a. Narrow-transom models H 1, H2 and H3

Displ.=29.72 Kp
C4 LCG=-0.354 m
trim::::0.6° by bow

Displ.=21.51 Kp Displ.=29.72 Kp Displ.=36.19 Kp

C1 LCG=-0.294 m C3 LCG=-0.294 m C2 LCG=-0.294 m
trirnelevel keel tnmelevel keel trirnelevet keel

Displ.=2i·1'2.Kp
cs LCG=-0.204 m
trim::::0.9° bv stem

b. Wide-transom models H4 and HS

Fig. 2 Test conditions for the two groups of models

2.00 ..,....---,,,------
, -
, --�
I I . I '!.•�•..!''without •proy rail"
'Lo�o�1without spray roils u..!..!.! :with eprqy rclle I

:------r--- -
I I I I

� :with sprcy rails : ,.oo -----+------i-----

"i I I I

.! : : : �� .-•
4.00 - - - - - .I. - - - - - .J - - - - - -'- - - - - - L - - - - -
;r��-�-----
-
I • I � 0.00 .......... • .......... � .......... I
I I
I I I
: .� !
I I o 8 I

� I I /er' -1.00
-----+-----�-----�-----�-----
I ' � : I

::.:: I ,P I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I JJ I I I I
";3.00 -----,----- /1 I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I

ll:: /
I JI
Cl.l
C) 'I/
/
i::: ioo..,....---,:---�---,
,
-----T-----,----
,-----.-.

,!l 2.00
I ,A, I
�·�·.. !':�utlpr\l)'�rayraiJarai..
1

,- - - - - - r - - - - -
..rnrn.. .._
.
�lwfth I
1 I I I I

Cl.l I
! 2.00 -----f-----�----- !.-,,_...,
I
ll:: I
I ,.oo
I
I

-----�-----r-----
-----+----
I O I I

f
1.00
.......... T ..........
-I - - - - - _,_ - - - - - � - - - - - I I I I

'
I I I I
I I I I I
I I I
I
----- -----�------+------r-----
O I I
I 0.00
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
0.00 -t-,,..,....m...,..,...+,...--r.....-,..,.........+-,......,....,.....m....+��.....-......+.....-,......,......-� "'·�"1!"........'!'1!'........"!"!'�'"'i!T'........�...,t,..............,i
0.00 1 .00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Kadel epeed v. (m/eoc)
Model speed VM (m/sec)

Fig. 3 Model resistance, running trim and C.G. rise for the Series 62 model (H1) at
condition C3

39
 5.00 2.00 -,----,---:-
, ---
, -----�
,
I I I !..•.t.•J:w!thout $pray, rol�
0_21without spray raihs
q_o.2_ � 1with 1pr9Y rads I
I I I I I

� :with spr9y rails : I' .

1.00 -----+-----�----- :------�-----
1
I ' I I I
I I I I
I I I / I I I I I

4.00
----- -----,-----�- -- ,�
I I I
- - - - - i - - - - - ..J - - - - - -'- - - - __ L __ o - -
I I I I � 0.00 ' ' I

.. ,.:. _..... ., -t: ,,,..-" ::

- I I ! I
B

-
I
I I
6
�
&:l. '1
I
-1.00 -----·-----�-----...------�-----
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I ,f I I I I
3.00 I <f' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
21
c:i:: I /
(I)
I ef I
I / I
CJ I
I )'

S.
Cl ioo-,-----
, -----
, -----�
,
!z 2.00 I I
-----T-----,-----
I
-----r----- !..•..!. •J :without $proy rai�

....
Ill
Ill
I
I
rY 1 I /.
I 2.00
�1 with 1prQy rail• 1

---- -+--- - -�- - - ---:---- -r---- -

I 1 I I

(I) I I I
I
I
I
I
,
I

c:i:: I I
I
I I
I I

1.00 -----+----
I I ,JX>
-----T-----,- �---�-----r-----
I I .... I I

i
-i - - - - - -1- - - - - - f- - - - - - I I I I
I I I I
! I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i 0.00
I
�------t------�-----
I
I
,

I
I
I

I
I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I

0.00 1 JXl z.oo J.00 �.00

0.00 1 .00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Model speed v. (m/aee)
Model speed Vw (m/sec)

Fig. 4 Model resistance, running trim and C.G. rise for the deep-V model (H2) at
condition C3

5.00 2.00 ...----,---:-

, ---:-
, -----�
,
I I I !..•..!. •J:without
$pray roi',s
0_2 1 without spray rails
q_o..2_ �,with spr9y rails I
I I I

� :with sproy rails : 1JX> -----+-----�----- :------�--

' I I I
I I I ,....•
I I I I I I I _.

4.00
I I I .,,.•
- - i ..J _ - - - - -'- - - - - - L - - - - -
I ,I -----T ----,----- 7---r-----
I I .,-..-1

-:
� 0.00
... , I I

.(
/
8 t
I
I
, I

�
"<
• I
I
I
I
l
I

I
/ -1.00 -----·-----�-----�------�-----
I

'
I
I

I
I
I

I
I
I

I
I
I I ,I
,6-
I I I I

-:3.00 - - - - - -1- - - - - - I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

c:i:: /1
9'
(I) I

!z= 2.00
CJ I
3.00 ...-------
, ---
, -----�
,
I
-----T-----,------ '-.•..t.•...t:"'!thout $pray. rai�
....
11.)

11.)
1
I re 2.llO
�,With cpr+1

-----t------1-----:------ -----
I I
fOlla I
I I

I I I ,_ ..
(I) I I I I
c:i::
I
I I I
I
I
I
I
I

-----+-----
I I I 1.00
-----T-----� ----�------r-----
I I I I

i
1.00 - - - - - -1- - - - - - f- - - - - - I
I
I
I
,
I
! I I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I j 0.00
I
--�------+------�-----
I

'
I

I
I

I
I I I
I
I
,
I
I
I I
I
,
I
I
I
0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Model speed VM (m/sec)

Fig. 5 Model resistance, running trim and C. G. rise for the double chine model based on
Series 62 (H3) at condition C3

40
'
l

5.00 2.00 r----:----:-

, ---:-
, ---,----,
,
I I I !..•..t •..!t :w!thout $prey. rai�
0_0_0_0_21without spray roils p
�1w1th 11prqy roils I

-- - - -+- - - - -1-- - - - -:- - -- --r- - - - -

I I I I
� :with sproy rails : 1.00

_____ .L
I
.J
I I
I L 1 I

:
I

:
I

,,.,�·
4.00
----�------:-- ·-1-�----
-
I I A � o.oo
I I I '?ir"'
I I I 8
� I I -I.CO
� I I
-3.00
I
-----I----- 1------- I ____ I-----
1
::II
0:: I I I s,
I I
Q.)
I ;:( I
C) I
I /
s:: I I 9 I I ioor---7----,-
1 ----,-
1
---,----,
1

j 2.00 -----T------,7 - - - -1- - - - - - r - ---- !..•.! •..!I 'without

�:with spr9)' raiJa
tprcy roilp

....
{ll I II
I
I
I
I
I
I I

-----+-----1------'-----L .. - ..
I
I I

/1I
{ll
Q.) I I I
I
I
I
I
I
0::
f
I I
I
I
I
I
I

-----+--
I I I
r- - - - - -
1.00 -----T----- I
------r-----r-----
I I

1.00
l
- - -I - - - - - -1- - - - - - I I I
I I I
1 I I I I

'
I I
I fll I
I / Al 0.00 ----- !
I
-----�------�-----�-----
I

I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I

I I I I
I I I I
I I I I

0.00
0.00 1 .00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Model speed V:11 (m/sec)

Fig. 6 Model resistance, running trim and C. G. rise for the double chine wide-transom
model (H4) at condition C3

5.00 0
2.00 -,-------
, ---
, ------,
,
I I I !..·�·..t:w!thout
$pray, rai'r5
0_0_0_0_21without spray roils �,with spr9y roils I

- --- -+--- --1- - - -- -:- -- -- -t- -- -

I I I

!...!...!...!.. : with sproy rails : I

1.00
I I I I
I I I ..,,
I I I I ,( I .-

4.00 - - - - - .J.. - - - - - .J - - - - - _1_ - - - - - L., /1" ..

-2 -----T-----,-----,-- -�-r-----
: I I
I I I 0.00

-
1 ; I
/.

8
I I I I_,- I
: '\ ! �/ :
p.. -1.00 -----r-----�:;---�-----i-----
I \ ... • I I

�
..._, / , I I I
I I 11 I I I I

: 113.00 - - - - - I - - - - - I - - - - - - /- - - - - - - - - - - I
I
I
I
I
I

� I I /f
I I o I
Q.) I ,, I I
C)
I I I
s::

!.
I I " I I ioo-,-------
, ---
1 ----��
,

j 2.00 - - - - - T - - - - - -, - - - - -1- - - - - - r ----- '!.•.H.11wlthout $pray ralJ!I

....
{ll

{ll
I
I 2.00
�:with sprfy raiba

-----+-----1---- ... -====�

I I
I
I

Q.) I I r"'1
I
�
I I I

I
I I
I
I
I
I
I

1.00
I I I
- - - - - + - - - - - -I - - - - - -1- - - - - -
I
r- - - - - -
1.00 -----T----- -----,------r-----
I I I

j
I I I
I I I
I I I I I
I I I
I
o.oo ----- -----�------+------�-----
I I I

! I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I I
0.00
0.00 · 1.00 2.00 .3.00 4.00 5.00
Model speed V:u (m/sec)

Fig. 7 Model resistance, running trim and C.G. rise for the rounded bilge model (HS) at
condition C3

41
 5.00
I I I
� ,H1 with .sproy rails
� H2 with 'spray raps
1

�:H3 with :spray rails ,

_____ .L .J I __ - - - - L - - - - -
4.00

-
I I
I I
I I
i:>. I
::.::: I
I I I
-:3.00 ---- I-----,-------- I
� I I
I
(I) I I
CJ I I
Q
!J 2.00 I
-----T-----,----- I
- ----r----- I

..l1ll1l... 1

(I)
� I I
I I I
1.00 -----+---- - - - - - -1- - - - - - I- - - - - -

' I I
I
I
I
I

0.00 -+-,-,-,--,-,-,...,.....-,-+-,-,-,..,........,.......TT-11-r-T..,...,...T"'l""l""T"T+r-'l"'T"1..,....,...,.,..rt,..,....,...,.,..rrr-r-1
0.00 1 .00 2.00 .3.00 4.00 5.00
Model speed V1,1. (m/sec)

Fig. 8 Model resistance of the narrow-transom models H1, H2 and H3 at the central
loading condition C3, with spray rails
5.00 -,-���-,-���--,.---���..-���'"T""��-:--,
� .. .!. •-: 1H4 without spray1 rails
---,'HS without
a a" a a
'1 spray'l rails
� ,H4 with ,spray rails ,
� 1HS with 'spray rolls '
4.00 - - - - - .L - - - - - .J - - - - - -'- - - - - - L,I

- c,
::ii:: I

-:3.00 -----I-----'------
I I
�
(I)
CJ I
Q
!l 2.00
I I
- - - -,- - - - - - r - - - - -
.....l1ll1l
(I)
� I
I I I
1.00 - - - - - + - - -- -i - - - - - -1- - - - - - I- - - - - -
I I I
I I

0.00 -t-,-,-,-.,......,...,.....-,-+.,........,........,.,...,..,....1-r-T...,.......T"'l""l,...,...,.+-,-T'T"lrT"T'T"T"T"T"lrT"T..,.,..l"'T'T"'T-f
0.00 1 .00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
Model speed V1,1. (m/sec)

Fig. 9 Model resistance of the wide-transom models H4 and HS at the central loading
condition C3, with and without spray rails

42
 I I I
�, H3 at C2 , with sprcy rails
e 'l..!' 'l..!':
H4 at C3: without sway rails I
I

-r - - - - -
I I I I P
5.00 - - - - - + - - - - - ... - - - - - _,_ - - - - - "" - - -
I : : : ti' :
/ I
I 1
I I I I / I
-;;:4.00 - - - - - J. - - - - - . .J - - - - - _,_ - - - - - './'- - - - J. - - - - -
I I I I
� I
I
)'
I
I
I

rl
I I
I I d' I
I I / I I
Q> 3.00 I -- ,----- ;,----, -----, -----
(.)
!{ I

.....�
/ I I
,I' I I
....
Ill
Ill I o"
JI I
I I
I
I
� 2.00 - - - - -,- - - - - - r - - - - - T - - - - -
I I
I
I
I
I I I I I
1.00 -----+-- ---1------�-----1------+----- I I I
I I I
I I
I

0.00 .........���....1-.���..-1-,���.....l-���......���......+���....-l
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Model speed Vu (m/sec)

Fig. 10 Resistance of the double chine models H3 and H4 at the equivalent conditions C2
and C3, with and without spray rails, respectively.

6.00 --.----.,------,.----,----...------.----,
·-·-'-'..! :c1 withdut spray: roils
•-·-·-·� ,C2 withqut spray I roils I
•-•-•-•.!! ,c3 without spray, roils ,
5.00 _ "="="=",g !G.4- .Yt'Jtb�\d.t_ §.p_rgy_:_rgils � _
·-·-•-•.: ,CS without spray, rails ,
� ,c1 with ispray roils , ff�*'
�:c2 :1Yith :spray rojls i.,
� ,C3 with ,spray roils 1
1 , ,'
-�.i.G4- -w.lR...Jsprey--relle- - - z - '11- -

-
-;;:4.00
::.:: � :cs with :spray rolls / ' �
I I I
I
.'
b
y
It
,,..r'
r�
I

____
JI
fl:: I 11
/. p
I

Q> 3.00 -----I-----,-----

I I
I
o I

s..=..
I I
I ""
I
I
Ill
Ill
� 2.00

1.00

0.00 .+.,..m��+-,-,,��..-.-+���.....1-,��m+..,�m�i-,-,-m�-.-l
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Model speed V111 (m/sec)

Fig. 11 Model resistance of the Series 62 model (H1) at all five conditions tested (C1 to CS)
with and without spray rails

43
 5.00

ci: 4.00
�
rl
a, 3.00

...,=ca
C,)

ll'l
·;;
a, 2.00
�

I
1.00 -----+--

0.00 +..,..,...m.,..,....+,���..+,m.,..,...m..+m.,..,...m..+m.,..,...m..+m..,.,..�...-1
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Model speed V11 (m/sec)

Fig. 12 Model resistance of the deep-V model (H2) at all five conditions tested (C1 to CS)
with and without spray rails

·-·-•-•.: C1 without spray 1roils

•-•-•-•.! �2 witho�t spray :rails
•-•-•.!'.!' C3 withowt spray iroils 1 :.t
5.00 ..'.'-�-�-�� � 4 _ �!}h_o.s,tf _sp�a_y _;�aj1� � _ / ',. _
·-·-•-•.: �5 WllhOt,1 spray rOI s I ,' >I I
1

� C 1 with spray rails 1 / ,

� C2 with }pray rai� i'" , 1
� C3 with sprcy roils /'1 �
- -r1 J.1 - - - -

-
�4.00 -U..A.A.11- C4-with. .$p�-s:ojj'-" - !. -
:-= � �5 with �pray rail� ./ ,
,� '- I ,'
:a ,, )>'.; I I .P

"
41 3.00 -----,-----,-- r: _,, ..
I I ,� I .P'
I --
,' ,•
,-----,-----
I

s=
C,)
I I '/ ,4' "# d' / I I
I I ' ""' -' I I
I ..It, ,-' I I
ll'l
·;; I I I I

� 2.00 -----�----- 7p -- �:----�-----�-----

: '/t, ,,': : :
' I

' I I I
I I
I I I
1.00 � - - - - - -1- - - - - - I- - - - - - + -----
I I I I
I I
I
I
I
0. 00 -i-rTT"l"TT"m'T'T"!"TT.,..,..,r-rTTTir"TT"rTT'TT'M'TTT"lr"TT"TTT.,..,..,r-TTTT1"TT'TTTTT'r-rTT1
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Model speed V11 (m/sec)

Fig. 13 Model resistance of the double chine model (H4) at all five conditions tested (C1 to
CS) with and without spray rails

44
View publication stats