Proceedings of the ASME 2011 30th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering

OMAE2011
June 19-24, 2011, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore & Arctic Engineering
OMAE 2011
June 19-24, 2011, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
OMAE2011-50323
OMAE2011-50323

THE STABILIZING EFFECT OF U-TANKS AS PASSIVE ANTI-ROLLING DEVICES

Sergio Ribeiro e Silva Guillermo Vásquez
Centre for Marine Technology and Engineering Centre for Marine Technology and Engineering
(CENTEC), Technical University of Lisbon, (CENTEC), Technical University of Lisbon,
Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal

C. Guedes Soares Adolfo Marón

Centre for Marine Technology and Engineering Canal de Experiencias Hidrodinámicas de El
(CENTEC), Technical University of Lisbon, Pardo, El Pardo, 28048 Madrid, Spain
Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal

ABSTRACT ω Frequency of motion [rad/s]

t Time [s]
In this study a U-type tank, consisting of two lateral reservoirs ωτ Undamped natural frequency of the tank [rad/s]
connected by means of an horizontal channel, is considered as a aττ Inertia coefficient of the tank [Nm/(rad/s)2 ]
passive anti-rolling device for ships.
bττ Damping coefficient of the tank [Nm/(rad/s)]
Forced oscillation tests have been conducted at CEHIPAR for the
U-type tank on a moving platform for different frequencies and bττeq Equivalent damping coefficient of the tank [Nm/(rad/s)]
also for different amplitudes of the pure roll forced motions. The cττ Restoring coefficient of the tank [Nm/rad]
most important aspect was to obtain a large set of roll restoring aτ4 Added inertia of the tank due to roll [Nm/(rad/s)2 ]
moments, for this passive configuration, which gives a discrete cτ4 Restoring moment of the tank due to roll [Nm/rad]
distribution of the roll restoring moments along the entire range a44 Added roll inertia of the ship [Nm/(rad/s)2 ]
of wave frequencies of interest. Moreover, from free decay tests b44 Roll damping coefficient of the ship [Nm/(rad/s)]
an estimate of the U-tank internal damping was obtained.
c44 Roll restoring coefficient of the ship [Nm/rad]
A detailed account of model tests is presented and the method of
analyzing the experimental results discussed. Herein the Ixx Structural roll inertia of the ship [Nm/(rad/s)2]
experimental data of the U-type tank is compared with results ξt Internal damping factor of the tank [−]
from a linear frequency domain model, where the level of non- bττ1 Linear internal damping term of the tank [Nm/(rad/s)]
linear effects with the amplitude of the forced motions is bττ2 Quadratic internal damping term of the tank [Nm/(rad/s) 2]
thoroughly addressed. Fτ4 Stabilizing roll moment of the tank [Nm]
Fτ40 Amplitude of stabilizing roll moment of the tank [Nm]
Ω Tunning factor [−]
NOMENCLATURE
lt Tank length [m]

α Phase lag between the restoring moment and roll motion [º]
ε1 Phase lag between the angle of tank fluid and roll motion [º]
ε2 Phase lag between the tank roll moment and roll motion [º] INTRODUCTION
τ Angle of tank fluid [rad]
τ0 Amplitude of angle of tank fluid [rad] A ship encountering beam waves at certain frequencies would
φ Angle of roll motion [rad] experience responses with large amplitudes, which are
φ0 Amplitude of angle of roll motion [rad] undesirable and sometimes dangerous for the ship and the
ρ Density of fluid [Kg/m3 ] crew. Another dangerous scenario is parametric rolling in
g Acceleration of gravity [m/s2 ] longitudinal waves, where the frequency of encounter with

1 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

waves of length on the order of the ship’s length is comparable sway, roll, yaw and the dynamics of the tank.
to twice the ship’s roll natural frequency [1]. The most Chadwick [6] was the first to raise the issue of modern
vulnerable ships to parametric rolling are those having hull automatic control in ship stabilization, using transfer functions
forms with pronounced flare at fore and aft extremities, or a flat and block diagrams, where the ‘feedback’ control of the
transom stern, associated with wall-sided ship sides near the stabilizer was positioned in accordance with the ship motion
waterline amidships. Hence, in these resonant scenarios, one of signal. His idea was that in the case of active U-tanks having a
the widest reaching movements, which may even endanger the pump with controllable pitch impeller blades, the pump-blade
ship is roll, and, therefore, an effective reduction and control of angle should be controlled by roll acceleration.
this movement is still of great interest to researchers of this time More recently, it has been proposed by Honkanen [7] and
under different methods and techniques. Schumann and Pereira [8] to use control of the tank when the
It has been realized that a disturbance in the roll motion may be ships rolls with a period longer than the uncoupled natural
enough to avoid that a ship enters in parametric roll and thus it period for the fluid motion in the tank, where air-valves at top
can be important to use roll stabilizing tanks in ships that are of the two reservoirs are alternatively opened and closed.
prone to parametric roll motion. From a theoretical point of
view, it would be of interest to couple a code used for predicting
parametric roll [1] with a model representing the dynamic EQUATIONS OF MOTION
behavior of a stabilizing U-tank. This has motivated the present
work aimed at characterizing the motion of a U-tank. General Calculation of the M o t i o n o f Ship a n d
Although there are some limited experimental data published by Ta n k Fluid
Umeda et al. [2] on U-tank’s performance, these data are not
sufficiently detailed to be utilized in the present investigation. The problem of a ship encountering beam waves at certain
Hence, forced rolling oscillation tests have been performed on a frequencies is considerably simplified if the influence of
passive U-tank, in order to collect the required data. In this sway and yaw accelerations is neglected. Taking into account
paper the experimental stabilizing moments exerted on the ship the rotation of the system (ship plus U-tank) around the ships
by the tank fluid measured during the tests are presented, and longitudinal axis, which passes through the centre of gravity of
then compared to linear frequency domain numerical the system, Newton’s 2nd law can be applied. Accordingly, the
predictions. Finally, based on this study suitable configurations angular acceleration of the system is equal to the sum of the
are suggested for the next stage of this ongoing investigation moments of the external forces around the longitudinal axis
and for the general use of U-tanks as roll stabilization devices. divided by the inertia of the system around the same axis. The
In 1911 Frahm [3] suggested to install onboard a tank, having moments are formed by the acceleration of gravity acting on
w
two lateral reservoirs connected at the bottom by a water duct, the system, the roll wave exciting forces ( F4 ), the roll
and at the top by an air duct. In some later designs the air duct
damping between the ship and the surrounding water ( b44 ),
was removed and the tanks vented to atmosphere. The water
oscillation in each reservoir could be controlled by the air and the motion of the tank fluid.
connections, thus giving rise to the anti-roll U-type tanks. Frahm
tested a U-tank on two passenger steamers Ypiranga and
Corcovado and gained significant roll reduction by using tanks
having a mass of 1.3 to 1.5% of the ships displacement. He also
commented that the best location to place the tanks is above the
center of gravity, but they are now moved away from the center
of the ship.
In 1966, Stigter [4] developed a complete theory for passive U-
tanks with slightly inclining outside walls using Euler’s
equation. In that work Stigter verified his mathematical results
with experiments but the foremost purpose of his investigation
was to describe the performance of the U-tank itself. From
Stigter studies it was clearly demonstrated that natural frequency
of the tank has to be the same as the natural frequency of the
ship, and that the height of the U-tank has to be large enough to
avoid that the moving fluid touches the top of the tank.
In 1989, Lloyd [5] introduced some simplifications on Stigter FIGURE 1: Passive U-tank notation
formulation by assuming a U-tank having two lateral reservoirs
whose walls are parallel and perpendicular to the connecting Therefore, when the ship is rolling in regular beam waves
channel. On the other hand, the linear model proposed by both quantities φ ship rolling angle, and τ - water free-
Lloyd represented a further generalization of Stigter pioneering surface angle inside the U-tank vary in time with a frequency
studies by extending the formulation to four degree-of-freedom:

2 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

equal to that of the harmonic wave motion. As illustrated in bττ
Figure 1, in this simplified U-tank problem only two degrees- ξτ = (4)
of-freedom are being considered, and the following governing 2 cττ aττ
equations can be derived:
Assuming a sinusoidal roll motion of amplitude φ0 given by:
 I xx + a44 − a4τ  φ&& b44 0  φ& c44 − c4τ  φ 
 a  +  + = φ = φ0 sin (ωt )
aττ  τ&&  0 bττ  τ&  cτ 4 cττ  τ 
(5)
 τ4
F w  and that the resulting tank free surface inclination is given by:
= 4 
0 τ = τ 0 sin (ωt + ε1 ) (6)
(1)
Substituting equations (5) and (6) and their derivatives into
where, according to Lloyd’s [5], the coefficients of equation (1) equation (2), the amplitude of the tank free surface inclination
are given by: τ 0 for a given roll motion amplitude is given by:
ρ t wr w 2 xt
Qt = τ0 cτ 4 − ω 2 aτ 4
2 = (7)
φ0 (c ττ − ω aττ
2
)
2
+ ω bττ 2 2

a4τ = Qt (hr + hd ) = aτ 4
The stabilizing roll moment applied to the ship will be,
c 4τ = gQt = cττ = cτ 4 therefore, also a sinusoidal function of amplitude Fτ 40 , given
by:
 w h 
aττ = Qt wr  + r  Fτ 4 = Fτ 40 sin (ωt + ε 2 ) (8)
 2 hd w r 
Making the same substitution into equation (2), the amplitude
 w h  of the roll moment is given by:
bττ = Qtξτ wr  + r2 
( )
2
 2hd wr 
Fτ 40 = − ω 2 aτ 4 + cτ 4 τ 0 (9)

Using the coefficients of Appendix A and the tuning factor

Calculation of the Tank Fluid Motion
Ω = ω ωτ , the tank stabilizing roll moment amplitude to roll
The motion of the fluid in the tank is governed by equation (1), motion amplitude ratio is given by:
which may be rewritten in the form:
2
 a 
Qt g 1 − τ 4 Ω 2 
aτ 4φ&& + cτ 4φ + aτττ&& + bτττ& + cτττ = 0 (2) Fτ 40
=
(c
τ4 − ω 2 aτ 4 )
2

=  aττ 
This equation of the fluid in the tank has the form of a second
φ0 (cττ − ω 2 aττ )
2
+ ω 2 bττ
2
( 2 2
)
1 − Ω + 4ξτ Ω 2
2

order linear damping spring mass system, whose undamped (10)

natural frequency is given by:
and the phases are given by:
cττ 2 ghd
ωτ = = (3) − bττ ω − 2ξτ Ω
aττ wr w + 2hr hd tan α = tan ε1 = tan ε 2 = =
cττ − aττ ω 2
1 − Ω2
Moreover, the tank damping factor or decay coefficient, which (11)
can be determined with a simple free-decay experiment on a
fixed model of a tank, is given by: showing that tank roll stabilizing moment is always in phase
with the tank free surface inclination angle. Rearranging
equation (9) yields to:

3 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

 Fτ 4 = Fτ 40 cos(α )sin (ωt ) + Fτ 40 sin (α )cos(ωt ) (12)

Finally, it can be seen that the tank stabilizing moment depends

on the phase angle α, and this moment can be decomposed into
two components which will be in phase with the roll amplitude
and the roll velocity.

EXPERIMENTAL TESTS

Free-decay and forced rolling experiments on a U-type tank

model installed on a moving platform were conducted at the
facilities of CEHIPAR.

Experimental Apparatus

Prior to experimental tests, a U-tank model was manufactured

from wood and acrylic sheet at scale 1:12.625. This scale and the
radius of curvature imposed on the corners of the tank gives a
Keulegan-Carpenter number lower than 4, which allows to avoid
major scale effects and flow separation. Froude scaling was
adopted in scaling all the other parameters of interest.
The scaled model was driven by an harmonic excitation stand
(simulating wave induced ship motions) made of two hydraulic
vertical cylinders (although the central cylinder was permanently
fixed to produce pure roll motions).
The main characteristics of the model are shown in Table 1, and
Figure 2 corresponds to an illustrative photograph taken during
the tests.
TABLE 1: Main characteristics of the U-tank model
Duct width 1.220 m
FIGURE 2: Photograph of the U-tank model utilized at CEHIPAR
Several measurements were taken by the sensors installed on
the model and platform. These include the forces on vertical
cylinders, pressures along the tank wall, and the angular
position of the tank about the rotation axis (roll motion). More
specifically, the forces were measured by means of two load
cells (LC1 and LC2) and pressures were measured by means of
four pressures gauges (PG1, PG2, PG3 and PG4), whose
mounting locations can be observed in Figure 3. The
instantaneous tank positions was recorded by an optical
tracking sensor fixed to the moving tank, designated as Krypton
system, and, in addition, a digital video camera was also
utilised to record the free-surface elevation inside each lateral
reservoir.

wd Test Series

Reservoir width 0.190 m In total, 75 forced rolling tests were performed on a moving
platform for different frequencies and also for different
wr amplitudes of the roll motion.
Tank height ht 1.077 m

Reservoir height hr 0.539 m

U tank width w 1.600 m

Tank fluid density ρ 1.000 ton/m3
Duct height hd 0.026 m

Tank length xt 0.227 m

Mass of working fluid at the ht 65.180 kg

tank

FIGURE 3: Mounting locations of sensors at U-tank

4 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

 Empty Tank: The first series were realized with the tank
empty, involving 12 frequencies (ranging from 0.25 to 3 [rad/s]
at steps 0.25 [rad/s] at model scale) and three different roll
amplitudes (5º, 10º and 15º). During all these tests, the roll
moment produced by the structure of U-tank was continuously
measured. Table 2 shows a summary of all the forced rolling
tests series performed.

TABLE 2: Summary table of experimental forced rolling tests of a

passive U-tank model
Condition Freq. [rad/s] Amplitude N
[º] Test
5 12
Empty Tank from 0.25 to 10 12
3
15 12
5 12
Tank with from 0.25 to 10 12
Fluid 3
15 12
1.36 5-10-15 3

Tank Filled with Fluid: A second series of tests was per-

formed with the tank filled with fresh water up to 50% of the
water depth (0.539 [m]) involving exactly the same frequencies
and amplitudes as those utilized on the empty tank tests. During
all these tests, apart from the roll moment produced by the
structure of U-tank and the fluid inside, the pressure on each of
the four gauges was also continuously measured. Figure 4
shows a typical time record of the free-surface elevation along
the vertical axis, and the total roll moment obtained during the
third series of forced oscillation tests. In this experiment, the
imposed amplitude is 10◦ and the oscillation frequency is 1.36
[rad/s], which is very close to the theoretical undamped natural
frequency of 1.3 [rad/s], as given by equation (3).
Free-Decay Tests
In addition to forced rolling tests, free-decay model tests were
also conducted to assess the internal damping of the U-tank with
different air flowing configurations at the tank top. Free-decay
test with open top reservoirs was performed with the tank filled
with fresh water up to 0.539 [m] by imposing an initial heel
angle to free-surface. Figure 5 shows a time record of the free
surface elevation obtained during the free-decay test. From this
free-decay test, it was also possible to confirm experimentally
the theoretical value of the tank natural frequency of 1.3 [rad/s].
FIGURE 4: Typical time records of free-surface elevation and roll
moment obtained during the forced oscillation test at the U-tank
natural frequency
The energy method described below will be applied next to
obtain an estimate of the linear plus quadratic internal damping
of the U-tank. Assuming the tank is stopped while the fluid is
moving inside, dividing equation (2) by the tanks inertia
(I xx + aττ ) it is obtained that:
τ&& + p1τ& + p2τ& τ& + ωτ 2τ& = 0 (13)
If free-surface inclination angle maxima and minima are
extracted from each half cycle of a free-decay test, then mean
free-surface inclination amplitude decrease and free-surface
inclination amplitude decrement per half cycle can be
calculated from:
τ j + τ j +1
τm =
2 (14)
δτ j +1 = τ j − τ j +1

5 Copyright © 2011 by ASME


FIGURE 5: Time record of free surface elevation obtained during the
free-decay test
By integrating equation (3) over half period and equating the
energy dissipated by the tank internal damping to the work done
by the tank restoring moment, the following expression for the
decrement of the inclination of the fluid as a function of the
mean amplitude of the inclination of the fluid is obtained:
π 4
δτ j +1 = p1τ m + p2τ m = a1τ m + a2τ m
2 2
(15)
2ωτ 3 by means of a MatLab computer code. The aim of these tests is
where the Krylov-Bogoliubov’s solution of the linear and
quadratic damping coefficients p1 and p2 , see for example
Flower and Sabati [9], are given by:
bττ 1 2ω
p1 = = τ a1
(I xx + aττ ) π
(16)
bττ 2 3 values of φ0 , Fτ 40 , and α were obtained from the recorded
p2 = = a2
(I xx + aττ ) 4
As shown by Mathisen and Price [10], the undamped natural
frequency ( ωτ ) may be taken as the mean frequency of the
decay record. Then in order to determine the three unknowns in
the equations (14) and (15), τ m , bττ 1 and bττ 2 , at least three
inclinations of the fluid maxima or minima must be available
from a decay test to provide estimates for these three parameters.
A much larger number of maxima and minima will usually be
available in practice, and some form of curve fitting technique is
appropriate to minimize the effects of random error. Notice
should be given to the fact that this regressive analysis of the
energy associated with the inclination of the fluid as illustrated in
Figure 6, allows the inclusion of the theoretical point (0,0),
which has not been measured during the free-decay experiment.
Finally, according to Lloyd [5], equivalent linearized internal
damping coefficient is therefore related to the dissipated energy
and is given by:
8
bττ eq = bττ 1 + bττ τ 0ωτ = 0.168 (17)
3π 2
FIGURE 6 : Plot of δτ j +1 = f (τ m ) during free-decay test
DATA PROCESSING
Data Processing of Forced Oscillation Tests
The time series resulting from the experiments were processed
to obtain the roll stabilizing moment produced by the U-tank
for each oscillation frequency and roll amplitude imposed.
When a sinusoidal motion of amplitude φ0 and frequency ω
was imposed via the vertical force F2 exerted by the cylinder 2
onto the tank structure, the resulting moment of the form:
Fτ 4 = F2 d 2 (see Figure 3) was found to be largely sinusoidal
also, with the phase lag ranging from 0º to 180º. The mean
time histories for every frequency and desired amplitude used
in the tests. In fact, when the signal recorded for the analysis
was examined an important consideration was that larger
amplitudes of the motion lower the relative noise level in the
signal leading to more precise measurement. However, there
were no filtering techniques applied in an attempt to lower the
noise level since most of the filtering algorithms impose an
artificial delay changing the phase angles of the signals.
The curve fitting algorithm utilized to obtain the first harmonics
of the signals was satisfactory and the quality check was made
based on visual inspection. Figure 4 illustrates the quality of the
curve fitting technique applied, where a sample of the results of
the fluid's vertical displacement inside the lateral reservoir and
the roll moment are shown. There was a consistently high
coherence in the experimentally obtained data for all the cases
tested.
The measured tank moment consists of three components: the
moment produced by the motion of the empty tank, the moment
produced by the fluid `frozen´ inside the tank, and the moment
produced by the motion of the tank fluid. The data obtained are
6 Copyright © 2011 by ASME
shown in Appendix A, Tables A.1, A.2 and A.3 for amplitudes of
5, 10 and 15º , respectively. In these tables, each column from
left to right represents the tested frequencies, the ratio between
the amplitudes of the roll moment and of roll motion in the form
of an RAO in [Nm/rad], and the phase lag α of roll moment
with respect to forced rolling motion. From the measured tank
moment obtained above, the stabilizing moment produced by the
motion of the tank fluid,according to equation (9), is obtained by
subtracting the moment produced by the motion of the empty
tank with fluid `frozen´ inside.

COMPARISON BETWEEN NUMERICAL AND EXPERI-

MENTAL RESULTS

As defined in equations (10) and (11) the theoretical stabilizing

roll moments and phase lags in regular beam waves can be also
calculated in the form of a Response Amplitude Operator
(RAO) and Response Phase Operator (RPO), respectively.
Notice should be given to the fact that the equivalent internal
damping factor of the tank ξττ eq = bττ eq / 2 cττ aττ of 0.168
was utilized, which was taken from the open top free-decay test.
Theoretical results are shown in Figure 7. The continuous line
represents the theoretical stabilizing roll moment per unit length
of the tank in [kgm/rad/m], while the dashed line represents the
theoretical phase lag in degrees.
As it can be seen in Figure 7, for both theory and experiments,
the stabilizing moment is near a maximum at the tank natural
frequency of 1.3 [rad/s], and the phase lag at this frequency is
90º. Also it can be seen that a good agreement between
theoretical and experimental values for the oscillation amplitude
of 5º. Exception was found for the largest range of oscillation
frequencies (above 2.00 and below 2.75 [rad/s]), where the
measured values are slightly below the predictions. In these
frequencies range, it is believed that small differences are due to
large pressure fluctuations at PG1, which were induced by
heavy local vorticity observed during experiments that are not
considered by the theoretical model. As the amplitude of
oscillation increases to 10º and 15º, the tank moment appears to
be affected by a larger internal damping effect, which was not
captured by the free-decay test. On the other hand, it is recalled
that the formulation of the U-tank theoretical model adopted in
this study is based on the assumption of small roll motion
amplitudes. Hence, despite the fact the tank saturation is not
taking place, larger deviations can be therefore anticipated
between experiments and theory for larger roll amplitudes.
FIGURE 7: Comparison between theoretical and measured roll
moment and phase lag response operators of the U-tank model at
different oscillation frequencies
In general, it has been confirmed by means of forced rolling
experiments, that although there is a considerable stabilizing
effect at the resonance frequency, this effect was significantly
reduced at other frequencies. Therefore, it seems highly
recommended to install a controller on the tank to increase the
stabilizing effect when the ship rolls at other frequencies
distinct from the tank’s natural frequency.
CONCLUSIONS
In this paper a detailed account of forced rolling oscillation
tests on a U-tank model is presented and the method of
analyzing the experimental results has been thoroughly
discussed. A sufficiently accurate mathematical formulation,
where the fluid motion can be expressed in the moment exerted
on the ship can be derived, when the assumptions made are
relevant.
The results of calculations from this linear frequency domain
formulation were verified by means of experimental data for
the U-tank. It has been demonstrated that non-linear effects
associated with larger amplitudes of 10º to 15º will produce a
reduction of the moment exerted, which in practice would
degrade the performance characteristics of this anti-roll passive
device.
Moreover, it has been confirmed, that although there is a
considerable stabilizing effect at the resonance frequency, this
effect can be significantly reduced at other frequencies.
Therefore, it seems highly recommended to install a controller
on the tank to improve the performance characteristics of this
anti-roll device, especially when the ship rolls with a period
longer than the uncoupled natural period for the fluid motion in
the tank.

7 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work has been made with the financial support of the pluri-
annual funding of the Portuguese Foundation of Science and
Technology (Fundação para Ciência e Tecnologia) to the Centre
for Marine Technology and Engineering (CENTEC).

REFERENCES

[1] Ribeiro e Silva, S., Santos, T., and Guedes Soares, C.,
2005. “Parametrically Excited Roll Response in Regular
and Irregular Head Seas”. International Shipbuilding
Progress, 52, pp. 29–56.

[2] Umeda, N., Hashimoto, H., Minegaki, S., and Matsuda, A.,
2008. “An Investigation of Different Methods for the
Prevention of Parametric Rolling”, Journal of Marine
Science Technology, Japan, Vol. 13, pp. 16–23.

[3] Frahm, H., 1911. “Results of Trails of the Anti-rolling

Tanks at Sea”, Transactions of Institution of Naval
Architects, pp. 53, 183.

[4] Stigter, C., 1966. “The performance of U-tanks as a Passive

Anti-rolling Device”, Royal Institution of Naval Architects
(ISP-13 (144)), 249.

[5] Lloyd, A., 1989. “ Seakeeping: Ship Behavior in Rough

Weather”, Ellis Horwood Limited.

[6] Chadwick, J. H., "On the Stabilization of Roll,"

Transactions of Society of Naval Architects and Marine
Engineers, Vol. 63, 1955, pp. 237.

[7] Honkanen, M., 1990. “Heel and Roll Control by Water

Tank”, The Naval Architect, RINA, pp. 215-216.

[8] Schumann, C., and Pereira, R., 2006. “Non-linear Effects of

Roll Damping Tanks on Ship Motions”, Proceedings of
the 25th International Conference on Ocean and Arctic
Engineering, ASME paper OMAE-92244.

[9] Flower, J. O., and Sabati Aljaff, W. A. K., 1980. “Kryloff-

Bogoliuboff ’s Solution to Decaying Nonlinear Oscillations
in Marine Systems”, International Shipbuilding Progress,
Vol. 27, pp. 225-230.

[10] Mathisen, J. B., and Price, W. G., 1984. “Estimation of

Ship Roll Damping Coefficients”, Transactions of RINA,
pp. 295-307.

8 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Appendix A: Tables of Experimental Results from
Forced Oscillation Tests

TABLE A.1: EXPERIMENTAL DATA OF FORCED TABLE A.3: EXPERIMENTAL DATA OF FORCED
OSCILLATION TEST AT 5º OSCILLATION TEST AT 15º

Empty Tank Tank with Fluid Empty Tank Tank with Fluid
Freq. RAO α RAO α Total Freq. RAO α RAO Total α
[rad/s] Empty Empty Total [ ] [rad/s] Empty Empty [Nm/rad] Total [ ]
[Nm/rad] [ ] [Nm/rad] [Nm/rad] [ ]
0,25 72,368 -175,25 291,050 -3,51 0,25 73,201 -176,19 300,411 -4,00
0,50 65,559 -175,21 339,161 -8,03 0,50 66,251 -176,12 351,599 -10,05
0,75 54,525 -173,39 428,956 -17,19 0,75 54,892 -175,11 438,680 -22,88
1,00 38,380 -170,67 567,265 -39,67 1,00 38,679 -172,96 530,373 -49,25
1,25 18,375 -159,22 602,228 -75,75 1,25 17,809 -164,02 506,762 -80,35
1,50 10,667 -39,38 457,231 250,88 1,50 10,119 -31,61 377,401 -106,60
1,75 39,167 -10,98 251,429 -130,45 1,75 39,899 -8,49 214,085 -121,41
2,00 73,378 -6,64 74,876 -120,79 2,00 74,114 -5,21 78,001 -102,61
2,25 112,523 -4,92 97,621 -14,91 2,25 113,976 -4,22 105,504 -16,55
2,50 156,150 -4,35 209,979 -5,65 2,50 158,402 -3,57 215,841 -5,13
2,76 205,709 -3,81 316,418 -3,99 2,76 209,198 -3,34 321,780 -3,67
3,01 257,722 -3,51 414,125 -3,59 3,01 261,921 -3,34 421,814 -3,44

TABLE A.2: EXPERIMENTAL DATA OF FORCED

OSCILLATION TEST AT 10º

Empty Tank Tank with Fluid

Freq. RAO α RAO Total α Total
[rad/s] Empty Empty [Nm/rad] [ ]
[Nm/rad] [ ]
0,25 73,201 -176,19 300,411 -4,00
0,50 66,251 -176,12 351,599 -10,05
0,75 54,892 -175,11 438,680 -22,88
1,00 38,679 -172,96 530,373 -49,25
1,25 17,809 -164,02 506,762 -80,35
1,50 10,119 -31,61 377,401 -106,60
1,75 39,899 -8,49 214,085 -121,41
2,00 74,114 -5,21 78,001 -102,61
2,25 113,976 -4,22 105,504 -16,55
2,50 158,402 -3,57 215,841 -5,13
2,76 209,198 -3,34 321,780 -3,67
3,01 261,921 -3,34 421,8135 -3,44

9 Copyright © 2011 by ASME