ADVANCES IN EXPERIMENTAL METHODS AND FULL SCALE

PREDICTION METHODS FOR MARINE VEHICLES

Prof RP Gokarn

1. INTRODUCTION
The study of the hydrodynamics of marine vehicles using experimental methods
is said to have been first proposed by Leonardo da Vinci in the 15th Century. Benjamin
Franklin also suggested the use of ship models to understand the behaviour of ships.
Actual experiments using ship models were carried out by the Swedish naval architect
Frederick Chapman in the 18th Century. Others who interested themselves in this subject
included D’Alembert, who in association with the Marquis D’Condorcet and Bossut, was
awarded a prize by the French Academy for experiments with ship models, Major
Beaufoy who carried out experiments in a dock in London and the Hall brothers of
Aberdeen. Unfortunately, these early experimenters had no clear idea about how the
model experiments were related to ship performance. Moreover, their aim was to find the
shape of a “solid of minimum resistance” and not to actually predict the power required
to propel a ship at a given speed, since in the 18th Century ships were not mechanically
propelled.

The beginning of steam propulsion in the 19th Century made it necessary to

predict power for a given speed, and for a long time model experiments were unable to
do this successfully. The French naval constructor Edmund Reech first put forward the
idea in 1832 that the resistances of geometrically similar ships and models were
proportional to their displacements if their speeds were proportional to the square roots of
their lengths, but this did not improve the correlation between models and ships.
Experimental methods using ship models were on the verge of being discarded when
William Froude put forward his famous “Law of Comparison” in 1869, which was
identical to the law proposed by Reech except that it applied only to the “residuary
resistance”, i.e. the total resistance minus the frictional resistance. Froude proved the
correctness of his law and the method of correlating model resistance and ship resistance
through his “Greyhound” experiments in 1874, which involved towing H.M.S.
Greyhound by another ship, the “Active”, through a towline attached to an outrigger and
measuring the towrope pull. Before he could do this, however, he had to find a method to
determine the frictional resistance of ships and models, which he did through his plank
experiments and the concept of the “equivalent plank”.

Although Froude’s method of relating the resistance of a ship to the resistance of

a geometrically similar model was widely accepted and used in the years that followed,
there were always some doubts about its reliability, and various attempts were made to
check the correctness of the Froude method. In 1933, Admiral Hiraga of the Imperial
Japanese Navy carried out experiments with the ship “Yudachi”. In the period 1949-55,
the famous “Lucy Ashton” experiments were carried out in England. About the same
time, the Netherlands Ship Model Basin carried out experiments with a series of
gometrically similar models of the ship “Victory” as well as the ship itself. All these
experiments appeared to confirm generally the validity of the Froude method, but also
indicated that certain improvements were necessary. Nearly one hundred and twenty-five
years have passed since the death of William Froude in 1879, but the methods currently
in use to predict the resistance of a ship from the resistance of a model are still based on
Froude’s method, but with a variety of refinements.

In the mean time, methods to carry out experiments with model propellers,
manoeuvring experiments and seakeeping experiments have been developed, and
procedures have been devised to relate these types of model experiments with the
propulsion, manoeuvring and seakeeping characteristics of full scale ships.

2. MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES

Considerable advances have been made in the measurement of velocity and

vorticity in the flow field. Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) techniques are being widely
used for three-dimensional flow visualization, multi-point tracer images being recorded
by digital cameras. Instantaneous full field three-dimensional flow velocity
measurements resolved in space and time are required in experimental fluid dynamics as
well as for validation in computational fluid dynamics. Laser Doppler Velocimetry
(LDV) is necessary for studying a variety of propeller flow phenomena : three-
dimensional wake fields, trailing edge vortex roll-up, slipstream contraction and
turbulence diffusion. A high resolution of flow is necessary for studying turbulence.
LDV is also being used to study full-scale flow measurements. Hot wire anemometry is
an old technique. However, it is being used today to measure velocity and Reynolds
stress components using multiple hot wires. Five-hole pressure probes are used to
measure wake distribution. A new seven-hole pressure probe having a tip diameter of
less than 1 mm has been developed. Ultrasonic waves are being used for velocity
measurement.

Flow visualization over surfaces is conventionally carried out using tufts and oil
films. Soap bubbles filled with a suitable gas to give the bubbles neutral buoyancy are
also being tried out. Various PIV techniques have also been developed for flow
visualization. A new tracer technique using the injection of surfactant-polymer mixture
into a turbulent boundary layer has also been developed.

The determination of surface pressure fluctuations is important for studies of

turbulence and noise. Very small and thin pressure sensors (3 mm diameter and 28
micron thickness) have been developed that can be used in arrays to determine
instantaneous pressures on the surface of a ship model. Another new technique involves
the use of a pressure sensitive paint that emits luminescence proportional to the absolute
pressure. Calibration is necessary for using this technique.
 For the measurement of skin friction, indirect methods such as Preston tubes and
hot film gauges have long been used to measure quantities related to the skin friction.
Direct methods using a floating element also have a long history. A recent advance has
been the use of distributed “micro-sensors” consisting of floating elements of 0.1 mm
size. Another new technique utilizes the twist of a liquid crystal due to skin friction, the
twist being measured by the intensity of light coming through the crystal.

New optical techniques have been developed for measuring free surface waves.
In one technique, micro-lens arrays are used to measure spot displacements at the focal
plane and thereby to determine the surface profile. Another technique uses a laser light
sheet emitted from the bottom of the tank and the high contrast of the illuminated light at
the air-water interface to determine the free surface elevation. The free surface profile
may also be determined by measuring the deflection of the laser beams optically.

For cavitation studies, optical probes use the change in the refractive index when
water vaporizes to measure the shape and extent of cavities.

3. NEW FACILITIES

The development of new experimental facilities in recent times has generally been
concentrated in the areas of Coastal and Ocean Engineering, since techniques for dealing
with the hydrodynamics of ships and floating structures are reasonably well established
whereas techniques for dealing with such entities as risers and remotely operated vehicles
are yet to be established. MARIN has a deep water tank, 45 m x 36 m x 10.5 m, with a
pit 30 m deep and facilities to generate winds, waves and currents to simulate a realistic
environment. The National Maritime Research Institute in Japan has a new circular deep
water tank of 16 m diameter and 5 m depth with a pit 6 m in diameter and 30 m deep.
There is a towing carriage, a wavemaker and a current generator. The Port and Air
Research Institute, also in Japan, has a “Large Hydro Geo Flume”, 184 m long, 3.5 m
wide with a water depth of 5 m, in which 3.5 m waves of 6-8 seconds wave period can be
generated. There is also a square wave-current-wind tank at the same institute. This tank
has wave generators to produce multi-directional wave trains and current generators all
along the perimeter. Local inflow and outflow can be controlled in an arbitrary manner
to produce complex wave-current fields such as those found in coastal areas.

As sea lanes and harbours cater to more and more ships, the behaviour of ships in
confined and crowded waters becomes more critical. Flanders Hydraulics in Belgium has
a special laboratory for studying this, consisting of a tank 88 m long and 7 m wide but
only 0.5 m deep. This tank has a planar motion mechanism, a wave generator and an
auxiliary carriage for studying ship-ship interaction. Seakeeping tests in head or
following seas, manoeuvring in harbours and restricted waters (bank effects, muddy areas)
and ship-ship interaction can be carried out. The facility is fully computer controlled and
uses unmanned operation.
 A new cavitation tunnel, the largest in the world, has been set up in U.S.A. and
MARIN’s depressurized towing tank has been modernized to obtain higher towing
carriage speeds and to make it capable of unmanned operation.

An important development in conventional towing tanks has been the trend to

connect computers on towing carriages to local area networks through wireless Ethernet.
Numerically controlled ship model making machines using NURBS have been developed.
An optical non-contact six degrees of freedom ship motion measurement system has been
acquired by some tanks

The use of differential global positioning satellite systems (DGPS) for carrying
out ship trials is increasing. Such systems have an accuracy of 1 m compared to the 10 m
with normal global positioning systems. A comprehensive sea trials measurement system
has been developed which automatically measures and records a number of parameters
such as ship position, engine power and speed, rudder and heading angles, yaw rate, ship
speed, wind speed and direction.

4. PROPULSION

Scale effects on propellers are a major source of error in predicting ship

performance from model experiments. Difficulties arise in quantifying scale effects
because lift and drag vary differently with Reynolds number. Laminar flow and
boundary layer separation create significant discrepancies between model and ship
propellers. Attempts have been made to improve the consistency of model results by
roughening the leading edge of model propeller blades or by fitting a trip wire. This then
creates a problem with stimulator drag. Flow measurements over model propellers
indicate that at Reynolds numbers :
n D2
Rn = < 1× 10 6
ν
the flow is laminar on both sides of the blade. As the Reynolds number increases, the
region of laminar flow on the back of the blade decreases while the flow on the face
remains laminar until higher Reynolds numbers are reached. Depending upon the
geometry and loading of the propeller and the inflow conditions, the flow becomes
turbulent at Reynolds numbers between 1x106 and 1x107. Laminar flow promotes
boundary layer separation. A consequence of these phenomena is that small model
propellers (such as those used for self-propulsion tests) generally appear to have a higher
open water efficiency than larger propellers of the same geometry.

In a bid to reduce the magnitude of unsteady propeller forces, propellers are

sometimes designed with very large skew. This results in hydro-elastic effects : highly
skewed propellers suffer a change in pitch under load. If this pitch change is not
reproduced when carrying out model experiments, there may be a lack of correlation
between the model results and the performance of the ship. This pitch change can be
avoided if the propeller is given only a moderate skew or a “balanced” skew.
 In recent years, a wide variety of unconventional propulsion devices have come
into use giving rise to a need for techniques to carry out model experiments with such
devices.

One of the more popular unconventional propulsion devices is the surface

piercing propeller. A fundamental problem with surface piercing propeller models is that
there is no unanimity regarding the definition of the main non-dimensional parameters
such as Froude number. The characteristic length used for defining Froude number and
other parameters such as the thrust and torque coefficients has been taken variously as the
diameter, the depth of immersion of the propeller axis, the depth of the centroid of the
immersed propeller disc and the square root of the immersed disc area. There are
divergent views on the threshold values above which the Froude number and the Weber
number exercise negligible influence on surface piercing propeller performance. There
are questions regarding the influence of cavitation number. The effect of dynamic trim is
another problem. Knowledge of hull-propeller interaction with surface piercing
propellers is also lacking. There are very few reliable full-scale data to validate model
testing procedures and full scale prediction methods for surface piercing propellers.

With almost all unconventional propulsion devices, scale effects are a major
problem. Nevertheless, model experiments are widely used to study such devices.
Podded propellers have been developed using model experiments. Units of 21 MW
power at speeds up to 26 knots are already available, while units of 30 MW at 30 knots
are under development. The ITTC has recommended two procedures for dealing with
podded propellers. In the first approach, self-propulsion tests are carried out. In the other
approach, open water tests are carried out on the podded propulsion system as a unit, and
used with the resistance test of the ship to predict power. Details of how these tests are to
be carried out and of the extrapolation procedure are given.

5. MANOEUVRING

Captive model tests are normally used for determining the coefficients in the
equations for predicting the manoeuvring characteristics of a ship. However, there is no
standardized procedure at present for carrying out these tests. Some thought is being
given to develop an optimum procedure that will yield all the required manoeuvring
derivatives with the least effort. Captive model tests are generally carried out with the
model having three or four degrees of freedom. Some tests require all the six degrees of
freedom. For this purpose, a special six-component dynamometer has been developed
which uses a fully captive model. It has also been realized that the metacentric height
affects manoeuvring characteristics. Determining the roll dependent coefficients of a
submerged body has usually been a problem. This has been tackled using a special
device.
 Free running models are also used to study manoeuvring characteristics. For such
models, turbulence stimulation of both the hull and the rudder has been found necessary.
The model must be fitted with all appendages including bow thruster tunnels. The tow
force necessary to produce the ship self-propulsion point on the model is usually
generated by an air fan or an air jet. Computer simulation is also used as an alternative
method of dealing with this problem. If the ship engine characteristics can be simulated
on the model, it is possible to use the free running model to predict the stopping distance
of the ship.

6. SEAKEEPING

Seakeeping model experiments are the most difficult to carry out satisfactorily.
The ITTC has produced a quality manual for seakeeping tests. Among other things, this
requires that all experimental and measuring conditions be documented in detail and
complete uncertainty analyses be carried out according to a specified “validation
procedure”. So far, very few of the reported experiments fulfill these requirements. The
ITTC has recommended procedures not only for normal seakeeping tests but also for the
prediction of power increase in irregular waves from measurements in regular waves, and
experiments to study “rarely occurring events” (slamming, green seas on deck etc).
Future research and development of testing and extrapolation procedures are expected to
deal with structural loads on side shells of ships, total sectional loads on ships in waves,
impact loads on bow visors and slamming at the stern.

7. RESISTANCE

After more than a century of resistance experiments, the world still awaits the
formulation of an accurate two-dimensional friction line. The ITTC 1957 line was
initially introduced as an interim measure until a better formulation could be arrived at.
Despite the forty-five years that have gone by and notwithstanding all the improvements
that have occurred in experimental fluid dynamics as well as the rapid progress in
computers and computational fluid dynamics, an accurate two-dimensional friction line
remains elusive.

The Grigson formulation is said to be an advance on the ITTC line because of its
theoretical development. It also gives more consistent form factors. The Grigson
formulation involves a complex algorithm, but can be expressed in terms of a simple
formula :
C F _ Grigson = C F _ ITTC * G
where :
G = f 1 (log Rn ) for 1.5 x 106 < Rn < 20 x 106
= f 2 (log Rn ) for 20 x 106 < Rn < 6 x 109
Studies show that the form factor does not vary with Reynolds number when it is based
on the Grigson formulation instead of the ITTC line. A formula for the form factor based
on the Grigson formulation has been proposed by MARIN. However, an independent
statistical check is needed to verify the validity of the Grigson formulation.

The concept of the form factor is now well established in the extrapolation of
model resistance to the ship. Form factors are calculated by Prohaska’s method, which is
simple and straightforward. There is less chance of serious mistakes if in using this
method experience and commonsense are also be used. The determination of form
factors is normally based on an analysis of the data in the range 0.12 ≤ Fn ≤ 0.20 , but it
has been suggested that this range may be extended by about 0.02 on either side provided
a lower limit is placed on model speed to avoid problems due to accuracy of
measurement, laminar flow etc.

Nevertheless, the use of the form factor involves several problems. In any
particular case, the form factor is affected by laminar flow over the model or separation
behind it. Wave breaking, which may be of different intensities on the model and the
ship, also alters the form factor. It is generally assumed that the form factor does not
vary with Reynolds number and the Froude number, but it is obvious that this assumption
is almost certainly erroneous and has only the merit of simplicity. When power
predictions are based on self-propulsion tests, there is the further problem of the effect of
hull-propeller interaction on the form factor.

Experience has shown that some care is necessary in using form factors in special
cases. When hull form optimization is carried out by model tests, wrong results may be
obtained due to unreal variations in the form factor. If for example different bulbous
bows are being compared, any variation in the form factor observed in the model tests
may be due only to experimental errors at the low speeds involved. It is therefore
recommended that if the hull form modification is such that it does not affect those
resistance components that are independent of the Reynolds number, the form factor be
calculated assuming that these components are not affected by the modification.

In high speed vessels, the draught and trim of the ship and the model vary greatly
with speed. This then makes the use of a constant form factor (based on low speed tests)
for the full speed range completely untenable. High speed craft also generally have
deeply submerged transom sterns and comparatively large appendages. This also makes
the use of a constant form factor questionable.

In hull forms of large block coefficient or small length-breadth ratios, flow

separation occurs to a significant extent. The extent of flow separation is greater at lower
speeds. When the extent of flow separation is large, it is better to assume that the
separation drag coefficient is constant and does not scale with Reynolds number.

The form factor approach is widely used for scaling the resistance with
appendages. This is likely to lead to errors due to a number of causes. There may be
laminar flow over the appendages in the model. A greater part of the appendages may lie
in the boundary layer of the hull in the model than in the ship. Blunt appendages and
those not aligned with the flow behave differently from streamlined and well aligned
appendages. An approach which is recommended for minimizing these effects is to
determine the form factor from the resistance with and without appendages at higher
model speeds.

Finally, there is a proposal that the form factor be determined by using CFD!

8. CONCLUSION

The main objective of experimental ship hydrodynamics is to predict accurately

the behaviour of a ship in a seaway. It is evident that experiments will never be
completely accurate and without errors of various kinds. What is necessary is to
understand the limitations of model experiments and ship trials and to make allowances
for imperfections in experimental methods in such a way as to get consistent and
trustworthy results.

Some confidence in the results of experiments can be derived by carrying out the
same experiment at different times and if possible in different facilities and obtaining
identical results. However, some purists argue that this merely shows “repeatability”, not
“trustworthiness”. Trustworthiness in an experiment can be demonstrated by
“superposition”, i.e. by confirming the result of one experiment by another experiment
using a different approach or by a combination of experiments and theoretical
calculations. For example, the trustworthiness of seakeeping experiments could be
established by first carrying out forced oscillation tests in still water to determine the
potential flow coefficients and then motion measurements in regular waves. The results
from these two experiments would be used to compute motions in irregular waves. If
these “quasi-computed” motions fit the actually measured motions of the seakeeping
experiments in irregular waves, then the results could be regarded as trustworthy.

Such a convoluted effort can be made only in one or two cases, and for normal
experiments something less elaborate is required. Fortunately, the ITTC has produced a
series of Quality Manuals for a variety of ship model experiments. These manuals give in
detail the procedures for carrying out various tests, the organization required, the analysis
methods to be used and the documentation to be maintained. A feature of the
recommended analysis methods is the need to carry out detailed uncertainty analyses. It
is essential for every establishment that aims to produce trustworthy and consistent
results from ship hydrodynamics experiments to procure and follow the recommendations
and guidelines of these ITTC Quality Manuals.