ISSN (Print) : 0974-6846

Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol 7(S7), 76–84, January 2015 ISSN (Online) : 0974-5645

­­Design of Fixed Pitch Propeller and Water Jet

Propulsion System for A Frigate
Y. Gopal Krishna*
Department of Naval Architecture & Offshore Engineering, AMET University, India; gopiyarabala@gmail.com

Abstract
The application of waterjets is rapidly growing and they are increasingly being chosen for propulsion in high-speed crafts.
In this paper we intend to design an integrated propulsion system which incorporates both the screw propeller and the
waterjet propulsion. Disregarding the possibility of paddlewheels or sail, the only practical alternatives for putting thrust
to the water are propellers and waterjets. Each has their own inherent strengths and weaknesses. Generally, waterjet
drives have found the most applications on semi planing or planing boats intended to go over 25 knots. Propellers are more
often applied to slower speed vessels with displacement or semi planing hulls. The parameters governing the design of the
screw propeller are 1. pitch distribution, 2. chamber distribution, 3. rake distribution, 4. skew distribution, 5. thickness
distribution. The parameters influencing the design of the waterjet are 1. Inlet, 2. Nozzle, 3. Pump. The design process will
be completed once we optimize these parameters for the desired thrust and power requirements. However, our design
method is purely numerical, and to be supported by experimental studies.

Keywords: B-series, Circulation Theory, Gawn Series, Holtrop & Mennen, Screw Propeller, Water Jet Propulsion

1.  Introduction ciency goes down. The distinguishing characteristics of a

The desire to travel faster and further is probably as old as
mankind itself. The considerable development in the high
speed craft can be partly contributed to the application
of waterjet propulsion systems. The jet drive is an axial
flow or mixed flow pump. The considerable development
in the high speed craft can be partly contributed to the
application of waterjet propulsion systems. The amount
of thrust it develops is independent of the waterjet drive
RPM. The distinguishing characteristics of a propeller-
driven vessel at the propeller are large diameter, large
propulsion system momentum, large water flow, low flow
velocity, and low propeller RPM. Propellers are very good
at maintaining a relatively constant vessel speed when
the vessel is being slammed by waves and gusting winds.
As hull speeds increase, the shaft support and rudder
appendages cause increasing drag and the propulsive effi-
waterjet-driven vessel at the waterjet are small diameter,
small propulsion system momentum, low water flow, high
flow velocity, and high waterjet RPM. Waterjet drives are
much more sensitive to varying wave and wind forces.
As hull load varies due to wind and wave forces, water-
jet thrust varies and a constant vessel speed is harder to
maintain. Waterjet drives have little or no appendages, so
as vessel speed increases, there is no increasing append-
age drag affecting propulsive efficiency.
Propellers have been in use on commercial and mili-
tary vessels for more than a century. Design theories have
made dramatic progress and sophisticated computer
models or large model test facilities are now available.
The changing demands in mission profiles and the wide
range of available engines and propulsors open the way to
combined propulsion systems which optimize the vessel’s
performance.

*Author for correspondence


The objectives are:
1. Develop a design method for integrated propulsion
system for naval ships with particular focus on a spe-
cific frigate
2. Collect basic particulars for a frigate
3. Estimation of the resistance and effective power
required for the selected frigate
4. Initiate the design for conventional screw propellers
by optimizing
  I. pitch distribution
 II. camber distribution
III. rake distribution
IV. skew distribution
V. thickness distribution
5. Initiate design for booster water jet propulsion by
optimizing the areas and velocities at
I. Inlet
  II. Nozzle
III. Pump
6. Initiate design for twin propeller system
7. Integrate the twin propeller system and the booster
water jet.
Frigate Particulars
Design example:
We select the following vessel:
Sachsen Class (F124) Air Defence Frigates, Germany
Basic Details:
L : 143m LOA (132.15m LDWL)
B : 17.44m main deck (16.68m BDWL)
T : 5.0m
Displacement : 5690 tonnes
Max. Speed : 29 knots (18 knots on diesel alone)
Propulsion: 2.2.3  Optimization of Blade Geometry
CODAG : 1 × gas turbine, 23,500kW
: 2 × diesel engines, 7,400kW each
2.  Design Methodology
2.1 Investigating the Possibility of Having
A Single Screw Propeller or A 3-Bladed
Twin Screw Propeller
After the resistance is estimated using Holtrop and
Mennen’s method at various speeds the possibility of
designing a single screw propeller to propel the ship at
the maximum speed is attempted. We calculate δ for a
range of rpms at the maximum allowed diameter. The
Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.indjst.org
Y. Gopai Krishna
corresponding values for the propeller from the B-series
charts can be found.
The minimum blade area ratio corresponding to the
maximum diameter can also be estimated. The corre-
sponding values for the propeller from the Gawn series
data can be obtained.
In case the above mentioned methods do not give
any satisfactory values we set out to find the possibility
of designing a twin screw 3-bladed propeller using the
Gawn series data. We calculate the blade area ratio for the
maximum diameter and calculate the corresponding val-
ues for the propeller within the range available.
2.2 Propeller Design Using Circulation
Theory
We design the propeller for the cruise speed of the vessel.
The propeller is designed assuming a twin screw propeller
system.
2.2.1  RPM and Diameter
The diameter and rpm is varied from 3.30 m to 3.75 m
and 120 rpm to 180 rpm respectively. The diameter and
rpm is decided based on the ideal efficiency of the propel-
ler and the cavitation number at 0.7R.
2.2.2  Number of Blades
The propeller diameter and rpm is varied from 3.30m to
3.75m and 120 rpm to 180 rpm for four bladed and five
bladed propellers. The number of blades is decided con-
sidering factors like vibration and noise16, cavitation and
blade area ratio.
Once the number of blades, diameter and rpm of the
propeller is decided we can optimize the geometry of
the propeller blade. The main parameters optimized are
thickness distribution, chord distribution, camber distri-
bution, skew distribution and pitch distribution along the
radius of the blade.
2.3  Water Jet Optimization
2.3.1  Inlet and Nozzle Efficiencies
We assume an inlet efficiency of 0.82 to account for the
losses due to the safety measures like grating at the inlet to
prevent the incidents of sea weed getting in contact with
the pump impeller. Also we assume a nozzle efficiency of
Indian Journal of Science and Technology    77
 ­­Design o f Fixe d Pitch Propeller an d Wate r Jet Propulsio n Syste m fo r A Friga

0.975. These efficiencies are assumed based on the experi- c5=1

ments conducted by Fujisawa21. λ= 0.69
c16= 1.32
2.3.2  Pump Efficiencies and Jet Velocity Ratio m1= -0.58
According to Srinivasan18, the hydraulic efficiency varies c15= -1.69
from 0.86 to 0.89 and the impeller efficiency varies from m2= -0.15
0.92 to 0.94. We vary these quantities for JVR values from d=-0.9
0.50 to 0.70. The optimized values are selected based on RW= 448.69 kN
the pump thrust coefficient. c4= 0.04
CA= 0.0005
2.3.3 Water Jet areas: It includes Inlet, Pump RA= 44.08 kN
Rtotal= 704.0 kN
and Nozzle
Once the efficiencies and JVR is optimized calculate the We estimated the resistance of the ship using this method
area at different points in a water jet can be calculated. for speeds from 18 knots to 35 knots. The values are tabu-
The inlet area is 1.66 times the area of the pump according lated (Table 1).
to Bulten11. The pump area is calculated using equations
of waterjet optimization. The nozzle is assumed to be 3.2 Investigating the Possibility of having
circular in shape. The nozzle area is calculated assuming a Single Screw Propeller or a 3-bladed
volume conservation at the pump outlet and nozzle outlet Twin Screw Propeller
using equation.
The propeller design was initiated assuming single screw
propeller. The resistance and effective power estimated
2.3.4  Velocities using Guld Hammer method for the maximum speed of
Inlet, Pump inlet, Pump outlet, Nozzle outlet are calcu- the vessel has been used in the calculations. B-series and
lated and values are provided. Gawn series data has been used for designing the propel-
ler. Dmax=3*T/4=12.30 ft. Now we have:
3.  Results Table 1.  Estimate of resistance
at different speed
3.1 Resistance Estimation using Holtrop
Speed in knots Resistance in kN
and Mennen’s Method 18 704.0
CP= 0.64 20 768.4
V = 18 knots 22 832.8
CWP=0.71 24 913.1
26 1148.5
LCB= -0.03
28 1604.5
LR/L= 0.36 29 1806.6
LR= 47.5 m 30 2002.2
c12=0.49 32 2334.1
cstern=0 for normal transom shape 34 2559.8
c13=1 35 2635.1
1+k1= 1.10
CF= 0.001510238 Table 2. 
RF= 144.42 kN δmax =53.2 n:120
c7= 0.13 δmax =44.3 n:100
iE= 4.66 δmax =35.44 n:80
c1= 0.52 δmax =62.02 n:140
c3=0 δmax =26.58 n:60
c2=1 Note: None of these δ values is listed in the charts.

78    Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology
 Y. Gopai Krishna

For Dmax =3.33m,

BARmin = 4.12 (out of the range available for Gawn series)
Now that the possibility of designing a single screw pro-
peller for the maximum speed has been ruled out, we
start the calculations again assuming twin screw propel-
lers. The thrust need to be produced by a propeller will be
equal to half the resistance of the vessel in this case.
PT per screw = 10 MW
VA = 12.68 m/s
Thrust per screw = 0.79 MN
Pressure loading restriction = 80kN/m2 Figure 1.  Cavitation number vs diameter for
Area of blades, AD= 9.875 m2 various rpms; Z=4 and Z=5.
Dmax= 0.75*T=3.75 m
BAR= 4*AD/πD2
BARmin=0.89
Table 3 shows the values obtained from the Gawn
series for 3-bladed propellers.
Choosing the value within the range with maximum ηm
KT/J2=0.36 @ D=3.64m
ηm=0.64 J=0.81 P/D=1.21
n= 4.30rps=258rpm
Observation 2: The rpm is very high that we have to
conclude that 3- bladed propeller cannot be used for this
vessel.
Figure 2.  Ideal efficiency vs diameter for Z=4.

3.3 Propeller Design using Circulation

Theory
The diameter is varied from 3.30 m to 3.75 m and the rpm
from 120 to 180. The calculations are repeated for Z=4
and Z=5. The variation of cavitation number, ideal effi-
ciency and blade area ratio are plotted (Figure 1-4).
Even though it is desirable to increase the cavitation
number to prevent cavitation 17, the propeller shall satisfy
the cavitation criteria given by Burrill17 at the same time.
From the graph we can deduce that only n=180 satisfy the Figure 3.  Ideal efficiency vs diameter for Z=5.
Burrill cavitation criteria. Therefore the rpm is set at 180.

Table 3.  Values obtained from the

Gawn series for 3-bladed propellers
BAR=0.8 BAR=0.95 BAR=1.1
D=3.96m D=3.64m D=3.38m
KT/J2=0.30 KT/J2=0.36 KT/J2=0.42
ηm=0.67 ηm=0.64 ηm=0.615
J=0.85 J=0.81 J=0.81
P/D=1.22 P/D=1.21 P/D=1.21
n=3.76rps n=4.30rps n=4.63rps
= 226rpm = 258rpm = 278rpm
Figure 4.  Blade area ratio vs diameter.

Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology    79
 ­­Design o f Fixe d Pitch Propeller an d Wate r Jet Propulsio n Syste m fo r A Friga

The ideal efficiencies increase as the diameter and the improves the acceleration and also suppresses higher
rpm increases. Hence we set the rpm and diameter at the levels of vibrations according to Mercury Marine14. The
highest values to obtain the maximum ideal efficiency. optimized values are shown in the Table 4.
The blade area ratio is better for Z=5 compared to Once we have the values (Table 4) we can start the
Z=4. This helps in reducing the load on propeller and optimization of the geometrical parameters of the propel-
hence plays a major role in preventing cavitation. This ler. For this we have to first estimate the Goldstein factors
along the radius of the propeller blade as shown Table 5.
Table 4.  Optimized values The table obtained after the initial calculation is shown
Table 6. The ideal thrust loading coefficient is obtained
Wake fraction w 0.07
through integration using Simpson’s first rule.
Thrust deduction fraction t 0.09
Ship Speed Vs 9.25 m/s
Propeller Thrust T 384.56 kN
Propeller Power PE 3305.63 kW Table 5.  Goldstein factors
Propeller Diameter D 3.75 m Goldstein Factors    
No of blades Z 5.00 x A b c D κ
Immersion of shaft axis h 3.00 m
0.2 1.60E+00 -0.31 0.05 –0.0029 1.04E+00
Pv 1.70 kN/sq.m
0.3 1.27E+00 -0.16 0.028 –0.0016 1.00E+00
Pa 101.33 kN/sq.m
σ(0.7R) 0.37 0.4 1.08E+00 -0.06 0.014 –0.001 9.87E-01
AE/AO 0.59 0.5 8.55E-01 0.063 –0.01 0.00047 9.72E-01
Propeller rpm n 180.00 rpm 0.6 6.56E-01 0.172 –0.03 0.00169 9.56E-01
CTL 0.92 0.7 4.61E-01 0.267 –0.05 0.00287 9.26E-01
λ 0.24
0.8 3.23E-01 0.283 –0.04 0.00251 8.58E-01
tanβ 0.03
0.9 1.67E-01 0.263 –0.04 0.00217 6.89E-01
CTLi 0.93
Ηi 0.76 0.95 5 .70E-02 0.241 –0.04 0.00244 5.27E-01

Table 6.  Initial calculation of ideal thrust loading coefficient

X tanβ β tanβI βI λI d(CTLi)/dx Simpson’s f(d(CTLi)/dx)
Multiplier
0.1 – – – – – – 1 –
0.2 1.22 50.6 1.58 57.66 0.316 0.155 4 0.62
0.3 0.81 39.0 1.05 46.48 0.316 0.389 2 0.778
0.4 0.61 31.3 0.79 38.3 0.316 0.688 4 2.752
0.5 0.49 25.9 0.63 32.28 0.316 1.007 2 2.014
0.6 0.41 22.1 0.53 27.76 0.316 1.325 4 5.30
0.7 0.35 19.1 0.45 24.29 0.316 1.607 2 3.214
0.8 0.31 16.9 0.40 21.55 0.316 1.785 4 7.14
0.9 0.27 15.1 0.35 19.34 0.316 1.669 1.5 2.503
0.95 0.26 14.4 0.33 18.39 0.316 1.366 2 2.732
1 0.24 13.7 0.32 17.53 0.316 – .5 –
Σfd(CTLi)/dx 27.052
CTLi .902

80    Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology
 Y. Gopai Krishna

Observation 3: After some iterations the initially
calculated value and the value obtained through this inte-
gration of CTLi matches. At this stage the other values are
as follows in Table 7.
Now the optimization of the thickness, chord, camber,
skew and pitch distributions for the propeller blades are
done.
3.4  Water Jet Optimization
The inlet efficiency is set at 0.82. The nozzle efficiency
is set at 0.98. The hydraulic efficiency and the impel-
ler efficiency is varied from 0.86 to 0.89 and 0.92 to 0.94
respectively. The calculations are repeated for JVR from
0.50 to 0.70.
The variation of pump thrust coefficient with JVR is
shown in Figure 5.
The pump diameter variation with JVR is shown in
Figure 6.
It is better to have pump with smaller diameter taking
into consideration the weight constraints. Also consider-
ing the pump thrust coefficient we set the JVR at 0.55.
Now we optimize the velocities and areas at different
points for JVR=0.55. The value of k is changed from 4.5
to 5.4. The rpm is optimized from these values such that
higher speeds can be reached by changing the velocities at
different points of the water jet. The optimized values are
tabulated in the Table 8.
Suction condition gives CS<13.93 m/s

Table 7.  Iterated calculations of Ideal thrust loading coefficient

x Tanβ β tanβI βI λI d(CTLi)/dx SM f(d(CTLi)/dx)
0.1 - - - - - - 1 -
0.2 1.22 50.6 1.59 57.9 0.318 0.158 4 0.632
0.3 0.82 39.0 1.06 46.7 0.318 0.401 2 0.802
0.4 0.61 31.3 0.80 38.5 0.318 0.710 4 2.84
0.5 0.49 25.9 0.64 32.5 0.318 1.041 2 2.082
0.6 0.41 22.1 0.53 27.9 0.318 1.371 4 5.484
0.7 0.35 19.2 0.45 24.5 0.318 1.664 2 3.328
0.8 0.31 16.9 0.40 21.7 0.318 1.848 4 7.392
0.9 0.27 15.1 0.35 19.5 0.318 1.728 1.5 2.592
0.95 0.26 14.4 0.34 18.5 0.318 1.414 2 2.828
1 0.24 13.7 0.32 17.7 0.318 - 0.5 -
Σfd(CTLi)/dx 27.98
CTLi 0.932

Figure 5.  Pump thrust coefficient vs JVR. Figure 6.  Pump diameter vs JVR.

Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology    81
 ­­Design o f Fixe d Pitch Propeller an d Wate r Jet Propulsio n Syste m fo r A Friga

Table 8.  Optimized values area of the bulbous bow as zero. We also assumed the
V ship 14.91 m/s resistance due to bulbous bow as zero in Holtrop and
wake w 0.07
Mennen’s method.
  2. The ship is assumed to have zero trim and therefore
H 2.50 m/s
the draught forward and draught aft are the same.
Resistance R 1806.61 kN
  3. Normal transom shape is assumed for the ship.
thrust deduction t 0.09   4. Since the frigate has a slender hull, V shape is assumed
Total thrust required T 1974.64 kN in the calculation of water plane area coefficient CWP.
Proeller Thrust 769.12 kN   5. The efforts to design a propeller using the methodical
Thrust from water jet 1205.53 kN series data have shown that it is not possible to design
density of sea water 1.03 kg/cubic meter such a propeller within the diameter restrictions.
JVR μ 0.55 Therefore we conclude that at least two propellers are
ηinlet 0.82 needed to propel the ship at desired speed.
  6. The possibility of designing a single screw propeller
ηhydraulic 0.86
with three blades has been ruled out after the calcula-
ηimpeller 0.92
tions based on Gawn series. Therefore we assume the
ηnozzle 0.98
number of blades of the propeller as five because it
CT pump 0.93 has better vibration characteristics compared to the
V in 13.86 m/s four bladed propellers.
V p in 9.81 m/s   7. The propeller designed using circulation theory per-
V p out 25.19 m/s fectly satisfies the Burrill cavitation criteria, which
V nozzle 33.68 m/s mean that we do not need to correct the distribution
IVR 1.52 of the hydrodynamic angle of attack of the propeller
Apump 2.84 square meter
blades.
  8. The diameter of the propeller is set to the maximum
Anozzle 2.13 square meter
allowed value in order to attain maximum efficiency.
Ainlet 4.72 square meter
  9. The rpm of the propeller was set to the present
Dpump 1.90 m value after several iterative calculations to attain the
Dnozzle 1.65 m required thrust.
K 5.4 10. We use the propulsion factors calculated using the
n 1650 rpm Holtrop formulae since those equations are more
reliable and recent compared to the other equations.
11. The correction factors in the propeller blade geom-
etry calculations, namely kC, kt, kα are calculated from
4.  Discussions the factors due to Morgan, Silovic and Denny20.
12. The delivered power PD, calculated from the CP value
The L/B ratio of the selected frigates is in the range of and using the ηD value are in good agreement.
7.9 to 8.5 and their Froude numbers are in the range of 13. The water jet can be optimized to reach higher speeds
0.40 to 0.45. This is in complete accordance with the val- by changing the rpm of the pump.
ues mentioned by D.G.M Watson5. Also the B/T ratios 14. It is desirable to change the pump rpm than the pump
are in the range of 3.2 to 3.8. This is in agreement with diameter since increasing
the values derived from B/D and T/D by Watson5. The 15. The latter one can cause issues when the weight con-
block coefficients are in accordance with the values cal- siderations come into picture.
culated using the Watson-Gilfillan formula5 given by: 16. The waterjet is a booster system since it does not have
1  23 − 100 fn  any maneuvering capabilities.
C B = 0.70 + tan −1  
8  4  17. The water jet and twin propellers can be integrated
  1. The frigate details do not give any specifications in a way similar to the integration done in SAN-
about the bulbous bow and hence we assumed the Corvette22 as shown in the Figure 7.

82    Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology
 Y. Gopai Krishna

Figure 8.  Resistance vs speed graph.

Figure 7.  The integration of waterjet and twin

propellers, adapted from23.

Table 9.
5. Conclusions on Design
Speed in knots Resistance in kN
Example
18 704.0
The resistance of the vessel is estimated using Holtrop and 20 768.4
Mennen’s method over a range of speeds from 18 knots to 22 832.8
35 knots. 24 913.1
26 1148.5
The variation of resistance against the speed is shown
28 1604.5
in Figure 8. 29 1806.6
From the calculations based on B series charts it has 30 2002.2
been concluded that it is not possible to design a single 32 2334.1
screw propeller which can produce the thrust required to 34 2559.8
propel the ship at 29 knots. 35 2635.1
From the calculations based on Gawn series data for
3-bladed propeller we conclude that even though it is pos-
sible to design a twin screw propeller system which can
produce the thrust required to propel the ship at 29 knots
we have to neglect it because of very high rpm.
A twin screw propeller with five blades is designed
using the Circulation theory which can produce the
required thrust to propel the ship at 18 knots. The sche-
matic of the propeller is shown in Figure 9.
The twin propellers and the water jet can be integrated
to the particular frigate under consideration as shown in
the general arrangement schematic diagram in Figure 10.
The delivered power PD calculated using the CP value
and the ηD value are in good agreement.
The waterjet has been optimized for its inlet, pump
and nozzle diameters. Also the pump rpm has been opti-
mized. The waterjet is capable of reaching higher speeds
by altering the rpm of the pump. Figure 9.  Propeller drawing.

Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology    83
 ­­Design o f Fixe d Pitch Propeller an d Wate r Jet Propulsio n Syste m fo r A Friga

  3. Bertram V. Practical ship hydrodynamics. Oxford:

Butterworth-Heinemann; 2000.
  4. Rawson KJ, Tupper EC. Basic ship theory, vol 2. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann; 2001.
  5. Watson DGM. Practical ship design. Elsevier Science; 1998.
  6. Lewis EV. Principles of naval architecture, Vol II. Society of
Naval Architects & Marine Engineers; 1988.
  7. Woodyard D. Pounder’s marine diesel engines and gas
turbines eighth edition. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann;
2004.
  8. Carlton J. Marine propellers and propulsion. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann; 2007.
Figure 10.  Schematic showing the possible general   9. Lavis DR, Forstell BG, Purnell JG. Advanced compact
arrangement of the propulsion system. waterjet propulsion for high-speed ships. 9th International
Marine Design Conference; 2006 May 16-19; Ann Arbor,
MI: 2006
Table 10.
10. The Specialist Committee on Waterjets, Final Report and
CTL 0.916967 Recommendations to the 22nd ITTC.
Cp 1.312538 11. Norbert Willem Herman Bulten, Numerical analysis of
PD 4718.834 kW a waterjet propulsion system. Eindhoven, Netherlands:
Eindhoven University of Technology, 2006.
ηB 0.698622
12. Availaible from: http://mnvdet.com/Initial%20Hullform
ηH 0.984733 %20Definition.htm
ηD 0.687956 13. Harvald SA, Resistance and propulsion of ships, Chapter-5,
PD 4805.002 kW determination of ship resistance, 1983.
14. Mercury Marine. Propeller Terminology. 2004.
15. Holtrop J, Mennen GGJ. An approximate power prediction
method.
6.  Scope of Future Work 16. Ghose JP, Gokarn RP. Basic ship propulsion. Allied
Publishers; 2004.
We have presented a design method for integrated propul- 17. Schneekluth H, Bertram V. Ship design for efficiency and
sion system for naval ships. However, our design method economy. BUTTERWORTH-Heinemann; 1998.
is purely numerical, and to be supported by experimental 18. Srinivasan KM. Rotordynamic pumps (Centrifugal and
studies. The design performance with some experimental Axial). 2008.
studies to be confirmed for confirmation. In the absence 19. Danielsen HE, Olsson B. Benefits of CPP versus waterjets
for high-speed workboats, Ship and Boat International.
of the standard procedure for the design and testing of
2010 Nov-Dec. p. 24–27.
water jet systems10. So it is imperative to conduct CFD
20. Morgan WB, Silovic V, Denny SB. Propeller lifting-sur-
analysis of the designed systems.
face corrections, hydro-og aerodynamisk laboratorium
Densmark. Nov; 1968.
7.  References 21. Fujisawa N. Measurements of basic performances for water-
jet propulsion systems in water tunnel. Internat J Rotat
  1. Doerry NH, McCoy TJ, Martin TW. Energy and the afford- Machin. 1995; 2(1):43–50.
able future fleet. United States Navy. 22. Ehrenberg HD, Engelskirchen J. Advanced design of mega
  2. Gangler J-P, Burgers I. The combination of waterjet and yachts and high performance frigates - proven synergies.
refined propeller propulsion. Marine News. 1-2003:15–7. 2003.

84    Vol 7 (S7) | November 2014 | www.indjst.org Indian Journal of Science and Technology