High Speed Craft

Lex Keuning1 and Do Ligtelijn2

1 University of Delft, Delft, The Netherlands
2 Maritime Research Institute Netherlands (MARIN), Wageningen, The Netherlands

2 FUNDAMENTALS OF HIGH SPEED

1 Introduction
2 Fundamentals of High Speed Craft
3 Performance Prediction Methods
4 Cavitation Prediction Methods
5 Conclusions
Glossary
References
1 INTRODUCTION
In this chapter on resistance, propulsion, and propulsors,
several aspects are addressed concerning this field. This
ranges from prediction of the required propulsive power,
cavitation, propeller design and propeller manufacturing to
operational aspects. Much of what is presented and discussed
in the articles about these aspects is valid for both displace-
ment ships and high speed craft. However, some aspects are
different.
This article on high speed craft addresses the general
powering aspects of non-displacement ships, power predic-
tion methods for high speed craft in several design stages,
high speed propulsors, and specific cavitation aspects.
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition)
ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
1 CRAFT
1
4 2.1 Resistance and hull form
11
11 The resistance of a ship when moving through the water can
(roughly) be decomposed in two major components: the fric-
11
tional resistance and the residuary resistance. The frictional
12 resistance is proportional to the speed of the ship squared and
the area of the ship’s hull in contact with the water, that is,
the wetted area. The residuary resistance is directly propor-
tional with the amount of water being displaced, and so to the
volume of displacement, and, to a lesser extent, related with
the shape of hull, that is, the length, the L/B ratio, the LCB,
the Cp, the Cb, and so on. The residuary resistance increases
with the forward speed and with an ever increasing power,
that is, v3 or v4 or even higher powers of the forward speed,
as illustrated in the example in Figure 1.
Attaining high speeds with waterborne craft is always a
challenge: in particular, this residuary (wave making) resis-
tance is increasing very rapidly with increasing forward
speed, in particular above a Froude number of 0.4. For
commercial application generally spoken, attaining higher
speeds is economically not very interesting, unless for partic-
ular applications such as patrol boats, SAR boats, naval
vessels of all kinds, and, very much so, fast ferries.
The best way of overcoming this challenge, at least partly,
is by reducing the wetted area of the hull or the displaced
volume of the craft. This can be achieved using very slender
hull forms or by lifting the hull out of the water when the
speed increases by means of the so-called hydrodynamic lift.
2 Marine

Another way of reducing the wave-making resistance is by

80 reducing the displaced volume of water when at speed. This
LWL = 10.40 m may be achieved by lifting the hull (partly) out of the water
70 BMAX = 3.70 m by making use of hydrodynamic lift. This hydrodynamic lift
T = 1.35 m can be generated by a special design of the hull shape, that
60
Engine power in kw

∇ = 11 m3 is, that of a hard chine planing hull (PH), which generates

50 lift on their flat bottom due to an inclination angle of the
planing bottom with respect to the undisturbed flow (the
40 trim angle) and forced flow separation at the chine and the
transom by featuring sharp trailing edges or spray strips at
30
Wave resistance the chine and transom.
20 Yet another method to generate hydrodynamic lift is
achieved by adding more or less horizontal foils under
10 visc. resistance water, that is, hydrofoil boats (HB). Although at low speeds
when the hull is not yet lifted out of the water, these foil
0
4 5 6 7 8 9 systems generate substantially more drag, at higher speeds,
V-Knots they lift the hull entirely out of the water and so completely
reduce the resistance of the hull to zero. The drag of the foil
Figure 1. Example of basic decomposition of hull resistance as a system, however, remains but this is marginal compared to
function of ship speed.
the resistance of the otherwise waterborne hull (Figure 3).
Another possible solution for reducing the wave-making
resistance of surface craft is found in placing an air cushion
underneath the hull with overpressure with respect to the
environment. This air cushion is held in place by either a set
of flexible seals around the bottom of the hull or the side hulls

Figure 2. Example of a catamaran hull form. (Reproduced with WL

permission from Damen Shipyards. © Damen Shipyards, 2016.)

Long and slender hulls, that is, high L/B ratio and high (a)
L/Δ ratios, generate less waves and have therefore less resid-
uary resistance. So a slender monohull (SMH) is a way
forward. When taking this to the extremes, however, the
transverse stability of the craft becomes an issue, since this is
proportional to the transverse moment of inertia of the water
plane area. So multihulls come into play: catamaran (CAT),
trimaran (TRI), and so on. These have long, very narrow, and
slender hulls and by placing these sufficiently apart, while
connected by an above water cross deck, sufficient trans-
verse stability may still be achieved. An example is shown
in Figure 2. These multihulls have relatively small displace-
ment and a large deck area, which makes them quite popular (b)
as fast ferry. With multihulls, however, the wetted area to
displacement ratio is significantly increased, which leads to Figure 3. Example of a hard chine mono hull (a) and a hydrofoil
higher frictional resistance. In the lower speed range, this is boat (b). ((b) Reproduced with permission from van Oossanen
an obvious disadvantage. (1982). © Van Oossanen & Associates, 2016.)

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2

themselves, which is held under constant overpressure by
means of engine-driven air pumps (additional power!). When
the boats have a complete flexible seal all around the air
cushion, they are called air cushion vehicles (ACVs) or when
the air cushion at the sides is held in place by two very slender
hulls, they are called surface effect ships (SES). Since the hull
itself is completely lifted out of the water, the conventional
resistance components, that is, friction and drag, do no longer
exist. The air cushion itself, however, leaves an “impression”
on the free surface, which with forward speed still generates
wave-making resistance.
These craft types are depicted in Figure 4.
Typical resistance curves of a planing boat are depicted in
Figures 5 and 6 in which the total resistance and the trim
angle at speed are depicted for a planing boat with L/B of 2.0
and a L/B of 7.0. This clearly shows the influence of the L/B
ratio of the hull on the resistance and trim. It also shows for
the lower L/B ratio a known phenomenon with planing boats,
that is, the hump in the resistance curve. The reduction of
the resistance above a certain speed through the introduction
of the hydrodynamic lift on the ships bottom can only be
attained by overcoming the hump.
It also shows that the resistance is strongly dependent on
the trim angle: a higher trim generates not only more lift but
also a higher resistance because the lift force, being normal
to the hull surface, has a component in the X-direction. It is
only when the lift generated lifts the hull out of the water that
the actual reduction in resistance starts.
2.2 Propulsion
In this section, propulsion systems suitable for high speed
craft are discussed. More extensive descriptions of them are
provided in Propulsor Types.
If there is limited space under a (small) ship, power
densities can become too high for conventional propellers.
Rear bags
Outer skirt
Landing pads
Rear cones
Stability bags
Keel
Fingers
(a)
Figure 4. Example of an ACV (a) and a SES (b). (Reproduced with permission from van Oossanen (1982). © Van Oossanen & Associates,
2016.)
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
High Speed Craft 3
Especially in combination with low immersion of the
propeller, unacceptable cavitation behavior and loss of
efficiency (e.g., thrust breakdown) can be the result. Power
densities of conventional propellers are in practice limited
to values in the range of 1.5–2 MW/m2 for controllable
pitch propellers (CPPs) and up to about 3 MW/m2 for fixed
pitch propellers (FPPs) (van Beek, 1992). Depending on
the combination of high specific loading and low cavitation
number, the application of either conventional propellers,
supercavitating propellers (SCPs) and surface-piercing
propellers (SPPs), or water jets can be considered for high
speed craft. Indicative limits of power densities, as proved
by van Beek (1992), are up to about 6 MW/m2 for SCPs and
about 1.5 MW/m2 for SPPs. Power densities of water jets
depend on the ship speed and vary from some 1 MW/m2 at
10 kn to about 8 MW/m2 close to 70 kn (van der Vorst, 1995).
A SCP (Figure 7) outperforms both the conventional
propeller and the water jet in terms of propulsive efficiency
in very specific (and limited) ranges of combinations of
propeller loading and cavitation number like shown in
the indicative diagram in Figure 8, reproduced from van
Oossanen (1982).
The efficiency of an SCP, when operating at sub- or partly
cavitating condition, is less good than that of a conventional
propeller. When applied to fast craft, care has to be taken
that the SCP is capable to propel, for example, a planing
hull beyond its main hump, or, for example, a hydrofoil craft
beyond its take-off speed.
In a specific speed range, it can be advantageous to apply
semisubmerged propellers or SPPs. An SPP (Figure 9) is an
FPP type of propeller, which is only partially submerged.
The SPP takes advantage of drawing air from the surface
so that air cavities are formed. These decrease friction and
avoid cavitation erosion. SPPs are applied on high speed
craft, especially when there is a distinct hump in the hull
resistance to be overcome.
Sidewall
Gow Seal
Cushion Lift fan
ion
beam Cush
length
Pedder on
Steam seal ventral fin
(b)
4 Marine

12.0 0.280

11.0 0.260
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 7.0, Ap/ ∇2/3 = 7.0,
α = 25° α = 25°
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 7.0, 0.240 Ap/ ∇2/3 = 7.0,
10.0
α = 12.5° α = 12.5°
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 5.5, Ap/ ∇2/3 = 5.5,
α = 25° 0.220 α = 25°
9.0 Ap/ ∇2/3 = 5.5, Ap/ ∇2/3 = 5.5,
α = 12.5° α = 12.5°
0.200
8.0

0.180
7.0

0.160
6.0

R/Δ
θ°

0.140

5.0
0.120

4.0
0.100

3.0
0.080

2.0
0.060

1.0 0.040

0.0 0.020

−1.0 0.000
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25

(a) FΔ (b) FΔ

Figure 5. Example of resistance/weight ratio (b) and angle of attack (a) versus volumetric Froude number, L/B = 2; Ap = horizontally
projected planing bottom area (at rest). (Reproduced with permission from Keuning and Gerritsma (1982). © IOS Press, 1982.)

Another advantage of the SPP is that most of the shafting is
out of the water, so that the resistance of the boat is substan-
tially reduced. The shaft leaves the boat’s stern just above the
waterline. The SPP can be lowered into the water by inclining
the shaft downward, and the amount of immersion can be
adjusted according to the ship speed and running trim.
High speed craft can also be fitted with water jets. Their
specific internal arrangement allows higher power densities.
Water jets can be applied in a rather wide range of ship
speeds. In a water jet intake, the average flow velocity in
front of the impeller is reduced to values below the ship speed
(Bulten, 2006). Consequently, the pressure in front of the
impeller is increased, and the cavitation behavior becomes
less critical. Moreover, since the impeller is inside the ship,
there is more freedom to select its dimensions, compared to
a conventional propeller that has to fit under the ship.
Instead of applying specific high speed propulsors, also a
hybrid system can be considered, for example, the combi-
nation of conventional propellers with water jets. This is in
particular applied for ships that have an operational profile
such that they spend considerable time at a moderate cruising
speed, but from time to time have to operate at high speed as
well. The solution can then be to operate the (twin-screw)
ship at moderate speeds on the conventional propellers and
to use a booster water jet, located in between the propellers
for the high speed conditions, see, for example, Figure 10.
Finally, for vessel types like SES or Hovercraft, the propul-
sion consists usually of air propellers, either open or ducted,
see also Figure 7.
3 PERFORMANCE PREDICTION
METHODS
3.1 Statistical prediction methods
In principle, the assessment of the calm water resistance of
a high speed craft is complicated due to the large number

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
 High Speed Craft 5

8.0 0.200

0.180
7.0 Ap/ ∇2/3 = 7.0,
α = 25°
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 7.0,
0.160 α = 12.5°
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 5.5,
α = 25°
6.0
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 5.5,
α = 12.5°
0.140

5.0
0.120

R/Δ
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 7.0,
θ°

4.0 0.100
α = 25°
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 7.0,
α = 12.5°
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 5.5,
0.080
α = 25°
3.0
Ap/ ∇2/3 = 5.5,
α = 12.5°

0.060

2.0

0.040

1.0
0.020

0.0 0.000
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25
(a) FΔ (b) FΔ

Figure 6. Example of resistance/weight ratio (b) and angle of attack (a) versus volumetric Froude number, L/B = 7; Ap = horizontally
projected planing bottom area (at rest). (Reproduced with permission from Keuning and Gerritsma (1982). © IOS Press, 1982.)

of physical phenomena and nonlinearities involved. Caused
by the forward speed, the pressure field around the boat is
changed and more so with increasing speed. Hydrodynamic
pressure is getting more and more important over the hydro-
static pressure prevailing at zero speed. An effect of this is
seen by generation of the wave system in the free surface
around the boat. In general, for speeds in access of Fn = 0.30,
this dynamic pressure also changes the position of the boat in
the water, known as running trim and sinkage (up and down).
This running trim and the sinkage of the boat becomes an
important factor, which strongly affects the resistance of the
boat. On top of that the hydrodynamic lift that is generated
may also have a component in the direction of the forward
speed and is therefore actually increasing the resistance. This
is demonstrated in Figure 11 in which the lift and drag of a
planing flat plate is depicted.
This implies that in most cases, the resistance of a high
speed ship can only be determined with reasonable accuracy
by model experiments in the towing tank. The maximum
attainable speed of the carriage is then often the determining
factor for the selection of the proper scale of the ship
models. New techniques such as CFD (computational fluid
dynamics) calculations for the high speed conditions (i.e.,
Fn > 0.70) often still lack sufficient validation and accuracy
up to now (2016).
This model test approach, however, is still rather expensive
and time consuming, in particular, when applied in the early
design stages. Therefore, quite a few assessment methods
have been developed over the past, based on regression
methods making use of the test results of large systematic
series of hulls. These databases, however, are generally only
available for the earlier design concepts such as the round
bilge hull forms (Marwood and Bailey, 1969; Kapsenberg
et al., 2015) or hard chine PHs (Savitsky, 1964; Clement and
Blount, 1963), Delft Systematic Deadrise Series (DSDS;
Keuning and Gerritsma, 1982; Keuning, Gerritsma, and
van Terwisga, 1993). For CATs, a rather limited amount of
systematic results is available in the public domain, as is the

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
6 Marine

Figure 7. Example of a propeller model in supercavitating mode. Figure 9. Example of typical arrangement of SPPs. (Reproduced
(Reproduced with permission from Marin. © 2015.) with permission from Arneson Surface Drives. © 2015.)

−8
Semi-submerged Shrouded
propeller
−7 airscrew

−6
Propulsor efficiency η0

−5
Water jet Open
airscrew
−4
Super-cavitating
propeller
−3
Transcavitating
propeller
−2
Conventional
propeller
−1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Vehicle speed V0 (knots)

Figure 8. Indicative ranges of efficiency of high speed propulsors.

(Reproduced with permission from van Oossanen (1982). © Van
Oossanen & Associates, 2016.)
case for ACVs, Hydrofoils, SWATHs, and the like. So in
general, assessment methods for these kinds of craft do not
exist.
Marwood and Bailey (1969) presented an assessment
method for the resistance of a round bilge hull based on
an extensive systematic series. These hulls are typically
used for frigate and patrol boat type hulls and luxury
yachts. A typical example is presented in Figure 12. They
present the “specific” residuary resistance of the hull with
specific L/B ratio at various forward speeds and various
length/displacement ratios as presented in Figure 13. In this
figure, the dimensionless speed is given as the so-called
volumetric Froude number in which the length on the water-
line (which varies at speed) is replaced by the third root of
Figure 10. Example of hybrid solution of CPPs and a water jet.
(Reproduced with permission from Wärtsilä Netherlands BV. ©
2015.)
the volume of displacement indicated by circular M, being
1.0083 L/Δ1/3. The figure shows the enormous importance
of the weight of the ship at the higher Froude numbers.
Savitsky (1964) developed a widely used method to assess
the resistance and trim of an arbitrary PH making use of a
large data base on these quantities of a large family of planing
prismas.
The method he uses is presented in the mentioned paper
and the parameters and quantities involved are depicted in
Figure 14.
On the basis of this, he developed an expression for the lift
of a flat plate, reading:

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
 High Speed Craft 7

Df In Figure 15, the contribution of the hydrostatic lift (i.e., the

D = Δtan τ + buoyancy) and the hydrodynamic lift in carrying the weight
cos τ
N
Df /cos τ of the craft at speed of a particular craft is presented at
Δ
Δtan τ increasing forward speed based on Savitsky’s results.
Savitsky’s method often lacks sufficient accuracy in what
V
is known as the hump region: the resistance at intermediate
speeds in between the displacement mode and the fully
τ planing mode. This is, however, the region in which a large
number of “working” boats operate.
Df
Therefore, the Hydromechanic Laboratory of the Delft
Viscous fluid University of Technology tested a large systematic series
of PHs with different L/B ratios, different displacements,
Figure 11. Schematic of forces acting on a flat plate moving at the
different LCGs, and four different deadrise angles, that is,
water surface. (Reproduced with permission from Savitsky (1964).
© SNAME, 1969.) 12.5∘ , 19∘ , 25∘ , and 30∘ , as an extension of the original
tests of Clement and Blount (1963) with the Series 62 hull.
In addition, the “twist” in the aft body planing bottom was
lift coefficient for a flat plate: investigated and assessed, because this is a common feature
√ in actual planing boats and Savitsky’s method is only based
⎛ 0.0055𝜆s 5∕2 ⎞⎟ on prismatic bodies (i.e., with constant deadrise over the
Δ 1.1 ⎜
CLo = = 𝜏 0.012 𝜆s + length) and the Series 62 hulls and her derivatives have a
1∕2𝜌V 2 b2 ⎜ Cv 2 ⎟
⎝ ⎠ constant deadrise aft body. This data base became known as
the delft systematic deadrise series (DSDS) (Keuning and
which is then corrected for a plate with deadrise by: Gerritsma, 1982; Keuning, Gerritsma, and van Terwisga,
1993), on which an extensive assessment method for the
lift coefficient correction for deadrise: resistance, sinkage, and trim of a PH is based. A typical
selection of the models tested with varying L/B ratio is shown
CLβ = CLo − 0.0065𝛽CL0.6 in Figure 16.
o

On the basis of this database, the coefficients of a series

By adding the frictional resistance based on the wetted area
with sinkage and trim, the total resistance may then be found.
This method can be used on a wide variety of PHs (within
the application range) and yields generally useful results, in
particular for the higher speed regions.
of polynomial expressions have been derived. These expres-
sions contain the most important parameters for determining
the resistance. The coefficients are speed dependent and
determined using a least square regression method on the
database results. They typically read like follows:

Approx. Deck Line

10
4 32 1 0
9½
9

L.W.L. 8
7
6
5
9.4′

15″
Model 320. D.

Proj. N°.41.2

Figure 12. Example of a typical hull form of the series of Marwood and Bailey (1969). (Reproduced with permission from Marwood and
Bailey (1969). © BMT Group, LTD., 1969.)

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
8 Marine

1.2
R/B = 4.55
FΔ =
1.1 1.5
2.0 2.1
1.4
1.0
1.3

0.9

FΔ =
1.7 3.0
0.8
2.9
2.8
0.7 2.7
RR/Δ 2.6
2.5
(k-N/ tonne) 2.4
0.6 2.3
2.2
2.1
2.0
0.5 1.9
1.0 1.8
1.7
1.6
0.4 1.5
1.4
1.3
0.3
1.2

0.2 1.1
1.0

0.1 0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0
0 5 M 6 7

Figure 13. Example of specific residuary resistance as a function of volumetric Froude number. (Reproduced with permission from
Marwood and Bailey (1969). © BMT Group, LTD., 1969.)

⎧ R ∕Δ ⎫ ( )2 ( )3 All these have been implemented in a computer model

⎪ t ⎪ Lc Lc L enabling a quick assessment of the trim, sinkage, and resis-
⎨ 𝜃 ⎬ = a0 + a1 B + a2 B + a3 c
Bc tance of an arbitrary PH.
⎪RCG ∕∇1∕3 ⎪ c c
⎩ ⎭ The MARIN Fast Displacement Series (FDS) results have
( ) ( ) been published in Kapsenberg et al. (2015). This book is also
Ap Ap 2 Ap 3
+ a4 2∕3 + a5 + a 6 + a7 LCG accompanied by a computer program that enables practical
∇ ∇2∕3 ∇2∕3 and quick assessment of that dataset.
Ap
+ a8 LCG2 + a9 LCG3 + a10 LCG 2∕3 3.2 Numerical and hybrid prediction methods
∇
L Ap L
+ a11 c 2∕3 + a12 LCG c For the prediction of the resistance of high speed craft,
Bc ∇ Bc it has been attempted to apply CFD techniques. Although

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
 High Speed Craft 9

Lc methods (see Hydrodynamic Analysis of Marine Propul-

Lcg Δ v sors). Some of the boundary element methods have been
f reported to be able to analyze water jet impellers as well. The
+ τ performance of SPPs can be analyzed by means of boundary
b tan β a Df
2 d element methods as well (Young and Kinnas, 2004).
c The application of CFD in the form of codes based on
ε N
b tan β T Nk the Reynolds Averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations is
4 becoming increasingly important. Especially for water jets,
the application of CFD is worthwhile; as it can be applied
Figure 14. Definition sketch according to Savitsky (1964). (Repro-
directly to full scale, it can take into account the interaction
duced with permission from Savitsky (1964). © SNAME, 1969.)
between the ship boundary layer and the water jet intake as
well as the internal flow in the water jet ducting, impeller,
sometimes promising results have been reported, extended and stators.
validation of these methods, especially in the higher speed More recent practice is to make hybrid performance predic-
range is needed before general application will be possible. tions for ships propelled by water jets. In this procedure, the
Predictions of the performance of conventional and super- resistance of the hull and its dynamic trim and sinkage are
cavitating propellers can be performed rather fast by means determined in a towing tank test with a scale model, and the
of lifting surface or similar methods or boundary element performance of the water jet is calculated by RANS CFD.

0.05
τ0 τ1.1 τ0 τ1.1
2 2.14 9 11.21
3 3.35 10 12.59
4 4.59 11 13.98
5 5.87 12 15.39
0.04 6 7.18 13 16.80
7 8.50 14 18.23
8 9.85 15 19.67

Cv = 1.0
2.0 3.0
0.03
4.0
6.07.0
Buoyancy 5.0 8.0
CLO/τ1.1

13.0

0.02

0.01
CLO = τ1.1(0.0120 λ1/2 + 0.0055 λ5/2/Cv2)

Dynamic

0
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
λ (mean wetted L/B ratio)

Figure 15. Lift coefficient of a flat planning surface. (Reproduced with permission from Savitsky (1964). © SNAME, 1969.)

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
10 Marine

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Model 188

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Model 189

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Model 190

Figure 16. Typical selection of models tested with varying L/B ratio, as used in the Delft Systematic Deadrise Series (Keuning and
Gerritsma, 1982; Keuning, Gerritsma, and van Terwisga, 1993). (Reproduced with permission from Keuning and Gerritsma (1982). ©
IOS Press, 1982.)

3.3 Model tests and extrapolation methods
Resistance tests for high speed craft are usually carried
out in a way similar to those for displacement ships (see
Propulsion Model Testing). The basics of extrapolation to
full-scale values is in principle similar as well (see Ship
Performance Prediction), but special attention is required
on some aspects, depending on the type of ship. Especially
hydrofoils and ACVs require special extrapolation methods.
Propulsion tests and extrapolation of their results are basi-
cally also similar to those for displacement vessels, as long
as the propulsors are conventional propellers and the ship is
not a hydrofoil or air cushion type. Tests with supercavitating
propellers should preferably be done under cavitating condi-
tions, so in either a depressurized towing tank or a (large)
cavitation tunnel, in both cases behind the model of the corre-
sponding ship, such that the propeller operates in the ship
wake. Extrapolation to full scale is then further basically
straightforward.
Testing SPP requires both a free surface and a low cavita-
tion number. This combination is only possible in a depres-
surized towing tank or a large cavitation tunnel with free
surface. In practice, the required speed of the ship model is in
many cases too high for such model test facilities, so that this
kind of propellers is often tested on full scale, or at a large
scale in a conventional towing tank or a lake.
Propulsion testing of water jets is not straightforward.
It requires special and very accurate instrumentation. A
complicating factor is that the total efficiency and the hull
resistance are depending much on the amount of ship hull
flow boundary layer taken into the water jet inlet. On model
scale, this boundary layer is in a relative sense too thick,
so this has to be corrected for. There are two basic test
procedures: either measuring the mass, momentum, and
energy flux through the system and deriving the required
thrust and power from that or measuring the thrust and
power directly. Details of both methods are described by van
Terwisga (1996).

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2

In addition, the extrapolation of water jet propulsion tests is
more complex than for conventional propellers. Descriptions
of water jet extrapolation are among others provided by van
Terwisga (1996) and Bose (2008), in which also reference is
made to the prevailing ITTC procedures. The hybrid perfor-
mance prediction solution mentioned in Section 3.2 is a more
recent option.
4 CAVITATION PREDICTION METHODS
4.1 Computational prediction methods
Cavitation predictions for conventional and for supercavi-
tating propellers can be performed by means of lifting surface
or similar methods, or boundary element methods. Some
boundary element methods can handle water jet impellers
as well.
Cavitation prediction for SPPs by means of computational
methods is not straightforward. The method described by
Young and Kinnas (2004) showed promising results though.
RANS CFD codes can be applied as well, although it
depends on the quality of the cavitation model implemented
in the CFD code. At least a good pressure distribution of
the wetted flow can be calculated for propellers or water
jet impellers to obtain a first indication of the cavitation
pattern. Especially for water jets, the application of CFD is
worthwhile, as explained in Section 3.2.
4.2 Model tests
Model cavitation tests for conventional or supercavitating
propellers can basically be carried out in the standard types
of cavitation test facilities, as long as the ship wake is
adequately modeled (see Propulsion Model Testing).
For SPPs, this is not easy, just like for propulsion tests with
them. Testing on full scale or at a large scale in a conventional
towing tank or a lake is an alternative.
Cavitation testing of water jets can be best done with the aid
of a cavitation tunnel. In such a case, the water jet is mounted
on top of the test section. The water jet inlet then takes in
the flow from the boundary layer of the tunnel ceiling. The
jet exit is connected to a piping system through which the
water that leaves the jet is returned to the cavitation tunnel.
The water jet ducting in way of the inlet and the impeller
and stator(s) is then made out of transparent material, so
that the cavitation on the impeller can be viewed, as well as
other interesting phenomena in the flow, just like cavitation
or possibly flow separation at the water jet intake (if any). An
unavoidable drawback of this solution is that the boundary
layer taken in by the water jet intake is different from the one
on the ship (model), see also Bulten (2006).
Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2
High Speed Craft 11
Like water jet propulsion model testing, also water jet
cavitation model testing is not straightforward. On the other
hand, most water jet impellers are of a standard design,
developed and tested by the manufacturer. Inlet and exit are
the main parts that have to be designed for each specific
application. Therefore, impeller cavitation testing is usually
not needed for each and every case. The cavitation properties
of the (standard) impeller are usually known already by the
manufacturer for a wide range of application parameters,
while cavitation of flow separation at the inlet can be
calculated by CFD.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The weight of high speed craft is not only supported by
buoyancy, but partly or entirely by hydrodynamic lift or
an air cushion. The contribution of the residuary hull
resistance to the total resistance is relatively high at high
speeds. For the propulsion of high speed craft, conventional
screw propellers, water jets, or combinations of those are
rather commonly applied, but at very high speeds, special
types of propulsors, such as supercavitating propellers or
surface-piercing propellers, are sometimes applied. For
hovercraft, air propellers are commonly applied.
There are several hull resistance prediction methods avail-
able for high sped craft, often based on the results of model
tests on systematically varied hull forms. Numerical predic-
tion methods are available as well, but often need further vali-
dation. Hybrid prediction methods (combination of model
test and numerical calculations) can also be applied. For
water jet propelled craft, this hybrid approach (hull resistance
and dynamic hull attitude by model test, water jet perfor-
mance by CFD) is rather mature.
Model testing of high speed craft and extrapolation of the
results to full scale can be quite demanding for some types of
craft and propulsors. Special testing techniques and adapted
or specific extrapolation methods are required for a number
of ship and propulsor types.
GLOSSARY
Air cushion Vessel of which the weight is carried
vehicle by an air cushion that is completely
surrounded by flexible seals.
Catamaran Ship consisting of two separate
slender hulls, connected by an
above water cross deck.
Fast High speed craft operating at Froude
displacement numbers between about 0.4 and
ship 1.0.
12 Marine

High speed craft Vessel operating at Froude number Bose, N. (2008) Marine Powering Prediction and Propulsors,
SNAME, ISBN 0-939773-65-1, Jersey City, NJ.
higher than about 0.4.
Hydrofoil craft High speed craft of which the weight Bulten, N.W.H. (2006) Numerical analysis of a waterjet propul-
sion system. PhD thesis. Technical University of Eindhoven, The
is carried by subsurface hydrofoils Netherlands, November 2006.
when at high speed.
Clement, P.E. and Blount, D. (1963) Resistance tests of a systematic
Planning craft High speed craft operating at Froude series of planing hull forms. Transactions SNAME, 71, 491–579.
number higher than about 1.0. Kapsenberg, G.K., Aalbers, A.B., Koops, A., and Blok, J.J.
Supercavitating Ship screw propeller largely covered (2015) Fast Displacement Ships, The MARIN Systematic Series,
propeller by cavitation that extends beyond MARIN, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
the trailing edges of the blades Keuning, J.A. and Gerritsma, J. (1982) Resistance tests of a series
when operating at high power planing hull forms with 25 degrees deadrise angle. International
density. Shipbuilding Progress, 29, 222–249.
Surface effect Ship of which the weight is carried by Keuning, J.A., Gerritsma, J., and van Terwisga, P.F. (1993) Resistance
ship an air cushion that is held in place tests of a series planing hull forms with 30 degrees deadrise
angle and a calculation method based on this and similar series.
by flexible seals fore and aft and
International Shipbuilding Progress, 40, 333–382.
very slender hulls at the sides.
Marwood, W.J. and Bailey, D. (1969) Design data for high speed
Surface-piercing Ship screw propeller of which the displacement hulls of round bilge form. NPL Ship report 99.
propeller vertical position can be adjusted
van Oossanen, P. (1982) Geavanceerde scheepstypen (in Dutch),
such that it can operate either just Lecture on the occasion of the 2nd Tideman day, September 1982,
below or partly above the water Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
surface. Savitsky, D. (1964) Hydrodynamic design of planing hulls. Marine
Water jet Axial or mixed flow pump inside a Technology, 1, 71–95.
vessel that propels it by van Terwisga, T.J.C. (1996) Waterjet-hull interaction. PhD thesis.
accelerating a mass of water taken Technical University of Delft, The Netherlands, April 1996.
in from below the ship hull. van der Vorst, H. (1995) High Speed Propellers or Waterjets? An
Update for Owners and Designers. Cruise and Ferry Conference,
London, UK, May 1995.
Young, Y.L. and Kinnas, S.A. (2004) Performance prediction of
surface piercing propellers. Journal of Ship Research, 48 (4),
REFERENCES 288–304.

van Beek, T. (1992) Application Limits for Propellers at High

Speed. Proceedings of MARIN Workshop on Advanced Vessels in
“Developments in Marine Technology”, Vol. 10, Elsevier, ISBN:
0-444-89468-3.

Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, online © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118476406.emoe540
Also published in the Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering (print edition) ISBN: 978-1-118-47635-2