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

net/publication/284020129

Dynamics of a Marine Propulsion System With a Diesel Engine and a Propeller

Subject To Waves

Conference Paper · May 2015

DOI: 10.1115/OMAE2015-41854

CITATIONS READS
6 1,871

4 authors:

Bhushan Taskar Kevin Koosup Yum

Technical University of Denmark SINTEF Ocean
26 PUBLICATIONS   159 CITATIONS    21 PUBLICATIONS   161 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Eilif Pedersen Sverre Steen

Norwegian University of Technology and Science Norwegian University of Science and Technology
88 PUBLICATIONS   704 CITATIONS    98 PUBLICATIONS   842 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Real-time hybrid model testing for extreme marine environments (Hybrid testing) View project

LEEDS - Low Energy and Emission Design of Ships View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kevin Koosup Yum on 17 November 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the ASME 2015 34th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic
May 31-June 5, 2015, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
DRAFT
DYNAMICS OF A MARINE PROPULSION SYSTEM WITH A
DIESEL ENGINE AND A PROPELLER SUBJECT TO WAVES
Bhushan Taskar
Department of Marine Technology, NTNU
Trondheim, Norway
Eilif Pedersen
Department of Marine Technology, NTNU
Trondheim, Norway
ABSTRACT
When travelling in waves, the efficiency of the propulsion
system is in most cases reduced, due to a variety of different
effects. Traditionally, the performance of propeller and engine is
analyzed separately. However, there might be important
interaction effects, which this paper attempts to explore.
Engine and propeller models have been coupled to obtain
realistic response of the propulsion machinery and to observe the
effect of interaction between engine and propeller. Experimental
wake data have been used in the simulations. The effects of
different factors affecting ship propulsion in waves have been
noted and their effects have been calculated separately to
analyze the influence of each of the factors on ship operation.
A ship travelling in three different wavelengths of three
different waveheights has been simulated. Influence of these
waves on engine power and fuel efficiency has been studied. This
paper is a step towards optimization of installed power through
better prediction of sea margin with improved insights into the
propulsion performance in waves.
INTRODUCTION
When a ship travels in waves, it is subject to increase in
resistance, as well as motions and a dynamically varying flow
field around the ship. This leads to changes in the working
condition for the propeller, both an increased average loading
and a changed flow field. Both, the change in average load and
the dynamic load will be carried to the engine to a varying
degree, leading to changes in engine operational conditions,
which in turns might change the fuel efficiency and the wear and
tear on the engine. The response of the engine to the load
OMAE2015
OMAE2015-41854
Kevin Koosup Yum
Department of Marine Technology, NTNU
Trondheim, Norway
Sverre Steen
Department of Marine Technology, NTNU
Trondheim, Norway
variations might also influence the propeller performance, so that
a real interaction occurs. This paper explores the interaction
between propeller and engine when the ship is travelling in
waves.
Nakamura and Naito [1] demonstrated the change in thrust
deduction and wake distribution due to waves and the resulting
ship motions. Effects of waves on wake in the propeller plane
were also observed in the RANS simulation carried out by Guo
et al. [2] where the nominal wake field was obtained in the
presence of waves. Since strong effect of waves was observed on
wake, a possible drop in the performance of the propeller should
be calculated. Full-scale experiments performed by Kayano and
Yabuki [3] found a discrepancy between the calculated and
obtained performance of the ship. This can be due to the inability
of prediction methods to take into account the effect of waves on
the propulsion performance.
Time varying wake in the presence of waves causes
fluctuations in thrust and torque of the propeller as observed by
Nakamura and Naito[1]. In addition, periodic change in the
propeller depth due to ship motion, surge motion of ship and
propeller emergence can contribute to these fluctuations in rough
weather. In severe waves, propeller emergence may lead to large
and sudden changes in the torque causing transients in the engine
operation. All these effects can lead to possible drop in the
engine performance. It is also important to observe, how the
engine reacts to these dynamic effects. Change in rpm due to
torque fluctuations can in turn affect propeller performance.
Therefore, for analysing the performance of propulsion system
in waves, engine and propeller should be studied as a coupled
system considering all the above-mentioned effects. As Kyrtatos
[4] has suggested that for the optimization of the control strategy
1 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
of the machinery, it is necessary to include ship and propeller The propeller particulars can be seen in Table 2 (more
dynamics when simulating the engine dynamic response. details can be obtained from [7]). Pitch of the original geometry
Currently, propulsion plants are optimized for calm water of KVLCC2 propeller has been altered to match the propeller
operation. To ensure sufficient power for operation in waves, a with the engine used in the model.
simple sea margin is added. This sea margin is typically 15 to
25% [5] of the power required in calm water. To optimize the
installed engine size, the required sea margin should be Table 2 Propeller Geometry
calculated based on the performance of the actual ship in the Diameter (D) (m) 9.86
worst intended operating conditions. This can be done by No of blades 4
separately observing the effect of added resistance, wake change Hub diameter (m) 1.53
and ship motions on the propulsion system of the ship. With this Rotational speed (RPM) 95
knowledge, installed power could be reduced while still ensuring
𝐴𝑒 / 𝐴0 0.431
the safety and speed of the vessel in waves.
In this paper, we report a study of the performance of the (P/D)mean 0.47
KVLCC2 ship in three different regular waves in head sea Skew (°) 21.15
condition in terms of fuel efficiency, speed loss and increase in Rake (°) 0
engine power. The transient response of the engine is observed
in time varying torque and its effect on shaft rpm. The effect of
wake variations and propeller emergence were studied. Results Wake contraction is required for the scaling of wake data
were compared with the operation in calm water to estimate the from the model scale to the full scale. According to ITTC [9], the
importance of different factors affecting ship propulsion wake scaling procedure given by Sasajima and Tanaka [10] is
performance in rough weather. most commonly used and gives reasonable results. In this
method, only viscous wake is scaled and a correction is applied
to the potential component. However, in the absence of potential
GEOMETRY AND WAKE DATA wake data, we have contracted the whole wake field towards the
Experiments with a 1:100 scale model of KVLCC2 were center plane by the ratio of viscous resistance coefficient
performed by Hosseini et al. [6] to obtain wake data in three between model and full scale. Hence, the difference between
different wavelengths in head sea condition at design speed. Ship potential wake component of model and ship has been neglected.
particulars are given in Table 1[7]. In these experiments, PIV Potential wake is almost constant in a horizontal section in
(Particle Image Velocimetry) was used to obtain the time varying the propeller plane as seen from the typical ship scale wake
nominal wake field in the propeller plane. CFD simulations were presented in [9]. In such cases, the same full-scale total wake
also performed and results were validated using existing data would be obtained by scaling the total wake or just the frictional
from PIV experiments. Since the CFD data show good component of the model-scale wake. The only error would be
agreement with the experiment, but are smoother and less noisy, due to the neglected correction in the potential wake.
we have used them in our calculations. These results were
𝜆
available for wavelength to ship length ratio ( ) of 0.6, 1.1 and
𝐿
ENGINE DETAILS
1.6 at 8, 12 and 6 time intervals respectively in one wave period.
The engine model selected for the simulation is Wartsila
Wake velocities have been interpolated to find the wake data at
8RT-flex68D. The engine particulars can be seen in Table 3.
the intermediate time intervals. Waveheight of these waves
correspond to the full-scale wave amplitude of 3m. Average
wake was estimated in case of other waveheights for which wake
Table 3 Engine Particulars
data is not available assuming average wake velocity
Model Wartsila 8RT-flex68D
fluctuations to be proportional to the wave amplitude [8].
Bore (mm) 680
Rated MCR (kW) 25,040
Table 1 Ship Particulars Speed at rated power (RPM) 95
Length beween perpendiculars (m) 320.0 Stroke (mm) 2720
Length at water line (m) 325.5 Mean Effective Pressure (bar) 20
Breadth at water line (m) 58.0 Number of cylinders 8
Depth (m) 30.0 Turbocharger 2 x ABB A175-L35
Draft (m) 20.8
Displacement (m3) 312622
Block coefficient (CB) 0.8098
Design Speed (m/s) 7.97

2 Copyright © 2015 by ASME


Vessel
model
Thrust Vessel speed
Propeller Engine
Propeller Shaft
torque Engine
torque
model model model
RPM RPM
Wake
variation data
Figure 1 Coupled model of engine and propeller
The detailed information of the engine can be found from
the project guide for the specific engine. Also the engine
performance in terms of fuel consumption, power, mass flow,
pressure and temperature are available from the manufacturer’s
website [11]. These performance data are used in order to verify
the engine system model.
SIMULATION MODEL
Engine and propeller model have been coupled using an
inertial shaft model in this study. Time varying wake and shaft
speed are the inputs to the propeller model, which computes
torque and thrust for the given conditions. Thrust is used to
update the speed of the vessel based on its total resistance and
inertia while torque is given to the inertial shaft model where
shaft speed is computed using torque inputs from both propeller
and engine sides. The engine model receives the rpm from the
shaft model and provides the corresponding torque produced. In
this simulation, the engine model also provides fuel consumption
data based on the operation profile of the engine. Therefore, total
fuel consumption in different environmental conditions can be
calculated. The overall model can be seen in Figure 1. Details of
propeller and engine modelling blocks are given below.
The simulation model is implemented in Matlab SimulinkTM
for overall integration of the submodels. A variable step solver
(ODE45) is used in order to capture transient dynamics of overall
system.
Propeller Model
The open source program Openprop based on vortex lattice
lifting line theory [12] has been used for analyzing the propeller.
Openprop requires blade section details, corresponding frictional
drag coefficient, advance coefficient, and axial and tangential
wake velocities at each radial location for the analysis. Blade
section details can be found in [7]. Javafoil has been used for the
calculation of frictional drag at each radial section for the given
Reynolds number.
It uses a panel method to calculate velocity profile and
pressure distribution over the foil section. Using these pressure
Efficiency (Openprop) KT (Openprop)
KT (Experiment) Efficiency (Experiment)
KQ (Openprop) KQ (Experiment)
0,7 0,6
Efficiency and KT
0,5 0,4
KQ
0,3 0,2
0,1 0
-0,1 -0,2
0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8
Advance Coefficient J
Figure 2 Comparison of Openprop and open water
data of KVLCC2 propeller
and velocity distributions, boundary layer calculations are
performed where drag is calculated using momentum loss in the
boundary layer [13].
As we know, a propeller operating even in calm water
condition faces time varying inflow due to spatial variation of
wake. Such cases should ideally be analyzed with unsteady
calculations. Gaggero and Brizzolara [14] have shown that a
quasi-steady approach also gives good results compared to fully
unsteady calculations. In their research, the quasi-steady
approach was seen to correctly predict the change in thrust,
torque and efficiency between propeller and its modified version.
Hence, we have used quasi-steady approach for our analysis.
Openprop analyzes propeller in a steady flow with only radial
wake variation, however, in reality there is angular as well as
radial variation of wake. Hence, performance of the propeller
with four blades facing different radial wake distribution has
been assumed to be the average performance of four hypothetical
propellers, each facing the radial wake distribution faced by each
blade.
Performance of Openprop with frictional drag obtained
from Javafoil was validated by comparing open water
characteristics with the experimental data for the original
geometry of the propeller. Thrust, torque and efficiency in open
water condition obtained using this approach match well with the
experimental data as seen in Figure 2.
KVLCC2 propeller has been analyzed in the time varying
wake in presence of waves at different ship speeds. Therefore,
thrust and torque coefficients were obtained as a function of
advance coefficient (J) at different times in three different wave
conditions. 2D surface fitting was used to create the polynomials
of KT and KQ with J and time as independent variables. These
polynomials have been used in the propeller model for the
computation of KT and KQ based on rpm, ship speed and the
location of the ship with respect to the wave.
Relative stern motion of the ship has been considered in
order to calculate thrust and torque lost due to the propeller
3 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
coming out of water or close to the free surface. Relative stern
motion was calculated using RAOs given in [15] for the
KVLCC2 hull. Thrust loss in case of propeller coming out of
water has been assumed proportional to the out of water area of
the propeller disk as considered by Faltinsen [16]. Wagner effect
also causes reduction of average thrust and torque due to time
taken for the lift to develop when emerged propeller blades re-
enter the water. It has been considered in terms of average thrust
and torque lost. Moreover, when propeller is operating close to
the water surface, waves are generated on the water surface due
to propeller action. Loss of thrust and torque due to this effect
has been calculated in the model using the thrust diminution
factor given by Minsaas [17] as follows-
   h 
1.258
h much as that of the engine ( J shaft  323000 kgm2 ). The dynamic
1  0.675 1  0.769     1.3
   R  R equation for the shaft is given as:.
  (1)
 h
1  1.3
R
where ℎ is the depth of the propeller shaft, 𝑅 is the radius of the
propeller.
All these effects have been considered in quasi-steady
sense. Thrust and torque fluctuations produced in blade passing
frequency and higher harmonics have been neglected. They are
produced due to propeller operating in spatially non-uniform
wake. These fluctuations are mostly filtered away by the inertia
of the shaft and propeller, and it is found that they do not affect
the engine operation.
Vessel Model
The following vessel model was used to simulate ship
dynamics:
 m  m x  1  t  T  0.5 SCT  x 2  R1  (2)
Where 𝑚 is mass of the ship, 𝑚′ is surge added mass, 𝑥 is
displacement, 𝑇 is thrust produced by the propeller, 𝑡 is thrust
deduction fraction, 𝜌 is the density of seawater, 𝑆 is wetted
surface area of the ship, 𝐶𝑇 is resistance coefficient of the ship,
𝑅1 is the 1st order resistance in waves.
Although thrust deduction may vary in presence of waves
[18], we have considered it to be constant, due to lack of
knowledge of the variation of thrust deduction with waves for
this particular ship. 𝑅1 and 𝑇 are time dependent inputs which
are updated on each iteration.
The vessel model computes the instantaneous speed of the
ship based on the total resistance of the ship, the thrust produced
by the propeller and the inertia of the ship. 1 st order resistance
was included to get correct surge motion which may have an
effect on the propeller inflow. It was calculated using surge RAO
with the help of surge equation of motion of the ship (1).
While calculating RAO, the fluctuating force of the
propeller is in most cases neglected. In our model, we have
included the propeller dynamics in surge motion response of the
ship.
All simulations have been performed in regular waves
without considering the effect of added resistance on the ship.
Added resistance has been excluded to observe the effect of
surge, wake change, out of water effect and engine dynamic
response. The effect of added resistance is also important for fuel
consumption and efficiency, but it was left out of the current
paper due to length restrictions.
Propulsion-Shaft Model
The shaft is assumed to be rigid and the quadratic friction
model is used. Mass moment of inertia is assumed to be twice as
JShaftShaft  m    TqEng  TqLoad
(3)
where m is a mechanical efficiency of the engine crank system
and the propulsion shaft, given as an empirical function:
m  1  a2 
a1
1  a2
 a2   2  (4)
Engine-System Model
The system model includes essential components of the
engine system, namely turbochargers, scavenge air coolers, an
exhaust receiver and engine cylinder blocks including
combustion model and crank mechanism converting pressure
into torque on the crank shaft. The engine system model follows
the assumption for filling and empty method and 0-D
phenomenological approach [19]. Such model is capable of
simulating pressure and temperature in the component where it
is modeled and flow between components. The resolution of the
output is in crank angle. The output of the simulator can also be
used for prediction of NOx formation by post-processing.
The engine system including a turbocharging system is
inherently a thermodynamic process with gas mixture as a
medium. Therefore, main variables of the system are pressure
(p), temperature (T), fuel-air equivalent ratio (F) which are
thermodynamic states. Also flow variables such as mass flow
( m ) of gas, enthalpy flow or rate of change in internal energy
( E ) and mass flow of burned-fuel within ( mb ) are necessary
in order to describe the dynamics of the system.
Filling and empty method is used for overall framework for
the engine system modeling. In this approach, the target engine
system model is constructed by arranging control volumes in a
4 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
 Figure 3 Implementation of the Engine System Model
(0-D Phenomenological)
series as it would be arranged in the real system. Then a flow
restriction model is set between adjacent control volumes. It is
assumed that the thermodynamic properties in control volumes
is homogeneous and that there is no accumulation of mass or
energy in the flow restriction.
In control volumes, mass, energy and constituents of the gas
are accumulated and thereby the thermal state is determined.
Therefore, the input for the thermal control volumes are always
flows of mass, energy, volume change rate and/or constituents.
The physical components modeled under this category are pipes,
receivers/accumulators, and engine cylinder volumes. A control
volume consists of two parts. The first one is a flow junction
where the net rates of change of mass ( mCV ), internal energy
( U CV ) and mass flow of burned-fuel ( mb,CV ) in a control volume
are calculated by mass balance and the first law of
thermodynamics. In the second part, the resulting rates of change
are integrated to give mass, internal energy and mass of burned
fuel. These three variables together with the volume are states of
the control volume.
mCV    mi dt
i
U CV   Q  W   mi hi dt
i (5)
mb,CV    mb,i dt
i
VCV   VCV dt
In order to calculate the thermodynamic state, a semi-empirical
correlation between p, T and F and the thermodynamic
properties, proposed by Zacharias [20], is used.
The flow restriction determines the flow of mass and energy
between the adjacent control volumes by governing physical law,
depending on the thermodynamic states of the control volumes.
In many cases, mass flow is determined by the isentropic nozzle
equation for compressible fluid [21]. Any valves, filter and heat
exchanger can be modeled similarly under this category.
Turbocharger also falls into the same category since it also
determines the flow depending on the thermodynamic states of
the adjacent volumes. However, a mechanical model should be
also included in order to observe transient response of the
turbocharger. The model used in this paper requires a
5 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
performance data map from measurement or a manufacturer. The 180
map represents the relationship between the pressure ratio across
the device (  ) and rotating speed of the rotor ( TC ) versus the
corrected mass flow ( mcorr,TC ) and the isentropic efficiency of the 175

BSFC (g/kWh)
process ( TC ). Having acquired the mass flow and the efficiency, ref,ref
ref,sim
the energy flow in and out can be calculated assuming the 170 design,ref
isentropic process. design,sim
specified,ref
 u 1 specified,sim
165
u
Tis  Tu 
his  his ( pd , Tis , Fu )  hu ( pu , Tu , Fu ) (6)
160
hcomp  his / is 20 40 60 80 100 120
Power Load (%)
hturb  hisis

Ref Design Specified

where, his is change in enthalpy in isentropic process. Then the
specific enthalpy of the gas flowing to the downstream is Ambient temperature (K) 298.15 318.15 308.15
calculated as: Coolant temperature (K) 303.15 309.15 309.15

hd  hu  h (7) Figure 4 Verification of BSFC for different power load

Energy flow from the upstream ( Eu ) and to the downstream
( Ed ) can be found respectively,
Eu  mhu Ed  Ehd
The torque (Tq) required or produced for the process is
mh
Tq 
TC
A dynamic equation is used for the mechanical rotation of the
turbocharger.
J TCTC  Tqturb  Tqcomp
For combustion model, a pre-defined function is used to
describe the rate of heat release due to combustion. A Wiebe-
function is most widely used for such purpose [22]. In this paper,
three Wiebe-functions are used to describe a combustion process
of a diesel engine. For heat loss from the cylinder, a basic
equation for convective heat transfer is used. The heat transfer
coefficient of convection is calculated by an empirical equation
proposed by Eichelberg [23].
A control system for the engine is implemented for the
simulation. In the controller, a user can choose the control mode
between vessel speed control and engine speed control. In both
modes, PID controller gives a fuel rack position from 0 to 1 to
the engine so that the desired control objective can be achieved.
The controller uses a low-pass filter so that the high frequency
variation of the speed ( f  0.5 ) does not affect the control
command.
under various boundary temperature conditions
The engine model is implemented into Matlab SimulinkTM
in order to be integrated with a propulsion system and a vessel
(8) model. The implemented model is shown in the Figure 3.
The implemented engine model is also verified against the
performance data provided in [11]. Figure 4 shows the
verification of the engine model for specific fuel consumption.
The target engine model is low-load-tuned which shows
(9) improved efficiency at lower load than standard tuning. In
addition, pressure, temperature, and mass flow at various loads
are numerically tested against the data provided.
SIMULATION CASES
(10)
Engine Simulation
Before simulating the coupled model, engine performance
in terms of fuel efficiency under load fluctuation was studied to
see if the engine system model gives reasonable results. The
engine was connected to the shaft model and the engine speed
was controlled to a constant value (95 RPM). The load is given
as an ideal sinusoidal torque with a mean value, an amplitude
and a period given as in the Table 4.
Table 4 Load Profile for Engine Stand-alone Case
Range Interval
Mean torque value (kNm) 1355.1
Amplitude (kNm) 112.925 ~ 903.4 112.925
Period (sec) 1~19 2
The result of the simulation has been presented in the
Figure 5. The specific fuel oil consumption (SFOC in g/kWh) for

6 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

 𝜆
Wake data was available in three different wavelengths =
𝐿
0.6, 1.1 and 1.6. Cases have been simulated for these
wavelengths with 3, 4 and 5 m wave amplitude; simulation of the
2
SF OC!SF OCref

0.12 ship travelling in calm water was used as a reference case. First
SF OCref

0.1 order resistance in different wave conditions has been included

0.08
to take into account the effect of surge motion of the ship. The
mean ship speed was kept constant at 7.55 m/s in all the cases by
1

0.06
applying PID controller. Keeping speed constant and not
SFOC Deviation

0.04 including the added resistance makes different cases comparable

0.02
0 run at a mean speed lower than the design speed in order to
0.4
20
0.3
15
1
0.2
2 10
T qamp 0.1
Amplitude T qnom 5 Period (sec)
0 0
Figure 5 SFOC Deviation for Dynamic Load
Response of the Engine System Model
constant mean load case was first evaluated by simulation and
then deviation ratio for each case in Table 4 was calculated.
The result suggests that there is a certain increase in the fuel
consumption under fluctuating load. The degree of increase
depends on both the frequency and the amplitude. The result
shows the peak at 5 seconds period at all amplitudes. This
corresponds the dominant transient effect due to a turbocharger,
normally called “turbo-lag”. The time scale of turbo-lag of the
model is found to be about 5 seconds. This result implies that the
engine system model is capable to capture the effect of transient
load on the fuel efficiency. For excitation period lower than or
equal to 1 second, the deviation is negligible. This is because the
speed variation less than 2 seconds is low-pass-filtered by the
controller. For higher period (T>5), the engine operates closer to
steady state, so the deviation decreases.
in terms of delivered power and fuel consumption. Cases were
operate within the possible range of engine rpm. In some cases,
propeller rotational speed has to be increased in order to keep the
vessel speed constant in waves.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
It was observed that both average wake and wake
distribution vary significantly in waves as compared to the calm
water wake. However, changes in the propeller torque are mainly
driven by average wake, and the effect of change in wake
distribution is minor. Changes in the wake distribution will
mainly affect vibration and cavitation characteristics of the
propeller, which is out of the scope of this paper.
Along with the fluctuations in the average wake, time
averaged value of this mean wake was observed to deviate from
the calm water wake. This alters the propulsion point of the
propeller along with change in the hull efficiency. Hence, in the
absence of the experimental wake variation in waves, it is
important to estimate this effect. The cause and the simple
formula of increase in wake velocities is given by Faltinsen [16].
The results of this formula have been compared with increase in
mean wake observed using experimental data Table 5. However,
changes in average wake velocities with respect to wave
amplitudes have not been included in the simulation.

Table 5 Comparison of increase in mean propeller inflow

Coupled Engine-Propeller Simulation using formula and experiments
As discussed above, sea margin is estimated based on ad- 𝜆 A % increase in mean wake velocities
hoc assumption to ensure safety and speed of vessel in adverse
𝐿 (Calculation) (Experiment)
weather. Added resistance, drop in engine performance, change 0.6 3 0.03 0
of propulsion point, change in propeller efficiency due to altered 1.1 3 2.70 5.0
wake are some of the culprits causing performance drop in
1.6 3 2.66 2.2
waves. Thus, for accurate estimation of sea margin, we need to
understand the contribution of each of these effects towards
performance drop. Among all the effects, it is relatively easy to
Due to increase in the mean propeller inflow discussed
calculate the added resistance and change of propulsion point
above, propeller rpm needs to be increased to attain the same ship
(although the accuracy of computed added resistance might be
speed. Percent increase in RPM excluding the case of propeller
questioned, but that issue is out of scope of this paper). While the 𝜆
influence of other effects is difficult to estimate. Therefore, coming out of water is found in case of = 1.1(Figure 6) which
𝐿
simulations have been performed to calculate the influence of corresponds to maximum increase in wake velocities.
other above-mentioned effects on engine power and fuel As mentioned in the propeller model, effects of the propeller
efficiency. coming out of water have been included in the simulation.
𝜆
However, this is found to occur only in case one case ( = 1.6
𝐿

7 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

 4 7

% increase in power
6
% increase in RPM

3 5
4
2 λ/L = 0.6 λ/L = 0.6
3
λ/L = 1.1 λ/L = 1.1
1 2
λ/L = 1.6 1 λ/L = 1.6

0 0
3 4 5 3 4 5
Wave Amplitude (m) Wave Amplitude (m)

Figure 6 Percent increase in the engine RPM in Figure 7 Percent increase in the engine power in
presence of waves as compared to the calm water RPM presence of waves as compared to that in calm water
(without added resistance) (without added resistance)

with 5m wave amplitude). Sharp increase in rpm was observed

(Figure 8) as compared to the other cases. Propulsion
performance was analyzed to be the worst in this case, which is
the result of much higher fluctuations in torque and rpm as
compared to the other cases.
𝜆
In case of = 1.6 with 4m wave amplitude, propeller is
𝐿
coming close to free surface causing loss in thrust and torque
because of the waves generated on the free surface due to
propeller action. In this case as well, increased fluctuations in
𝜆
propeller rpm and torque are seen. Therefore, in = 1.6
𝐿
percentage increase in rpm, power and fuel consumption show
stronger variation with respect to the wave amplitude as
compared to other conditions.
In the absence of added resistance, average resistance is
same in all the cases. However, in presence of waves, higher
power is required to keep the ship speed constant. Percentage
increase in power in different waves can be seen in Figure 7.
𝜆
Maximum power is required in wave = 1.1 when the propeller
𝐿 Figure 8 Propeller RPM variation in three
is fully submerged. Engine power changes with change in wavelengths with 5m wave amplitude
wavelength while it is hardly dependent on waveheight.
Increase in power is due to the combined effects of
fluctuations in propeller efficiency due to fluctuating advance
the mean load. Percentage increase in the fuel consumption per
coefficient, variation in the engine efficiency due to torque
mile (which is the performance indicator of the whole propulsion
variations and change in the mean inflow to the propeller leading
system) as compared to the calm water has been depicted in
to change in the propulsion point as well as shift in the hull
Figure 10. It shows the trends similar to those of rpm and power.
efficiency. Moreover, it was observed that the power variations
It can be said that torque fluctuations does affect the propulsion
and the fluctuations in the advance coefficient were out of phase.
performance, however, the propeller coming close to the free
Hence, more power is delivered to the propeller when propeller
surface or out of water has greater detrimental effect on the
is operating at lower efficiency resulting in the loss of energy as
propulsion system of the ship.
compared to average power being delivered at average propeller
Apart from the efficiency of whole propulsion system,
efficiency.
efficiency of the engine alone can be calculated based on the fuel
Fuel consumption does increase due to increase in the
consumption per work done by the engine as seen in Figure 9.
delivered power. However, in this case, more fuel is consumed
Engine efficiency decreases in presence of waves (i.e. increase
than the fuel consumption at increased power level due to the
in SFOC). It shows different trends than power, rpm and fuel
superimposition of the transient loads experienced in waves over

8 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

 4 10

consumption per mile

% increase in SFOC

% increase in fuel
8
3
6
2 λ/L = 0.6 λ/L = 0.6
4
λ/L = 1.1 λ/L = 1.1
1
λ/L = 1.6 2 λ/L = 1.6

0 0
3 4 5 3 4 5
Wave Amplitude (m) Wave Amplitude (m)

Figure 9 Percent increase in the SFOC in presence of Figure 10 Percent increase in the fuel consumption per
waves as compared to that in calm water mile in presence of waves as compared to that in calm
(without added resistance) water (without added resistance)

𝜆 ACKOWLEDGEMENT
consumption per mile. Since, in all the waveheights, = 1.6 has
𝐿 Authors would like to thank Professor Frederick Stern from
maximum increase in SFOC. This might be due to the presence
the University of Iowa for providing the wake data in waves used
of particular frequency in the torque fluctuation that is
as one of the inputs to our model.
detrimental to the engine. Sharper increase in SFOC in this case
This work is funded by the projects ‘Design to Verification
can be due to out of water and free surface effects.
of Control Systems for Safe and Energy Efficient Vessels with
Comparing Figure 9 and Figure 10, it can be observed that
Hybrid Power Plants’ (D2V, NFR: 210670/070), and ‘Low
the percentage loss of engine efficiency in waves is less than that
Energy and Emission Design of Ships’ (LEEDS, NFR
of total propulsion efficiency. This means, decrease in the
216432/O70) where the Research Council of Norway is the main
propulsion performance is caused due to reduced performance of
sponsor. This work is also supported by the Research Council of
both, the propeller and the engine; interaction between engine
Norway through the Centers of Excellence funding scheme,
and propeller plays and important role.
project number 223254 – AMOS.

CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
This work presents the effects of wake change, surge, out of
1. Nakamura, S. and S. Naito, Propulsive performance of a
water effect and engine dynamic response on ship propulsion in
container ship in waves. J. Kansai Soc. N. A. Japan,
presence of waves. Calculations of increase in power and
1975. No. 158.
decrease in fuel efficiency have been performed for one case
2. Guo, B.J., S. Steen, and G.B. Deng, Seakeeping
vessel. In most analyses, the increase of fuel consumption in
prediction of KVLCC2 in head waves with RANS.
waves is taken to be due only to added resistance. In this paper,
Applied Ocean Research, 2012. 35(0): p. 56-67.
it is shown that even when added resistance is neglected, the fuel
3. Kayano, J., et al., A Study on the Propulsion
consumption is increased by considerable amounts when the ship
Performance in the Actual Sea by means of Full-scale
travels in waves. Therefore, it is concluded that in addition to
Experiments. TransNav, the International Journal on
added resistance, wake change, surge, out-of-water effect and
Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation,
engine dynamic response should be taken into account in
2013. 7(4): p. 521-526.
calculations of power demand and fuel consumption in waves.
4. Kyrtatos, N.P., Engine operation in adverse conditions,
These methods can also help in prediction of fuel efficiency of
in The ACME Project.
the ship in different conditions thus helping weather routing.
5. ITTC, ITTC – Recommended Procedures and
Moreover, from this study it is clear that to calculate the
Guidelines, in Testing and Extrapolation Methods,
effect of waves on ship propulsion, it is important to simulate
Propulsion, Performance, Predicting Powering
coupled system of engine and propeller. Some of the effects can
Margins. 2008.
only be analyzed through a coupled system, since phase lag
6. Sadat-Hosseini, H., et al., CFD verification and
between fluctuations of different quantities plays a major role.
validation of added resistance and motions of KVLCC2
with fixed and free surge in short and long head waves.
Ocean Engineering, 2013. 59(0): p. 240-273.

9 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

7. SIMMAN 2008. Available from:
http://www.simman2008.dk/KVLCC/KVLCC2/kvlcc2_
geometry.html.
8. Ueno, M., Y. Tsukada, and K. Tanizawa, Estimation and
prediction of effective inflow velocity to propeller in
waves. Journal of Marine Science and Technology,
2013. 18(3): p. 339-348.
9. Specialist committee on scaling of wake field, in Final
report and recommendations to the 26th ITTC. 2011.
10. Sasajima, H., I. Tanaka, and T. Suzuki, Wake
Distribution of Full Ships. Journal of Zosen Kiokai,
1966. 1966(120): p. 1-9.
11. WÄRTSILÄ. netGTD Wärtsilä 2-stroke Marine Diesel
Engines. 2014 [cited 2014 12/12]; Available from:
http://www.wartsila.com/en/products/netGTD.
12. Epps, B., OpenProp v2.4 Theory Document. 2010.
13. Hepperle, M. JavaFoil. Available from:
http://www.MH-AeroTools.de/.
14. Gaggero, S. and S. Brizzolara, Parametric Optimization
Of fast Marine Propellers via CFD Calculations, in 10th
International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation.
2009: Athens, Greece.
15. Wu, P.C., A CFD Study on Added Resistance, Motions
and phase averaged wake fields of full form ship model
in head waves. 2013, Osaka University.
16. Faltinsen, O.M., et al., Prediction of resistance and
propulsion of a ship in a seaway, in 13th symposium on
naval hydrodynamics. 1980.
17. Minsaas, K., O.M. Faltinsen, and B. Persson, On the
importance of added resistance, propeller immersion
and propeller ventilarion for large ships in a seaway, in
The 2nd international symposium on practical design in
shipbuilding. 1983: Tokyo & Seoul.
18. Moor, D.I., The effect of EPH loading on propulsive
performance in still water, in 10th ITTC propulsion
committee, formal contributions. 1963.
19. Chow, A. and M.L. Wyszynski, Thermodynamic
modelling of complete engine systems—a review.
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, 1999.
213(4): p. 403-415.
20. Zacharias, F., Analytical Representation of the
Thermodynamic Properties of Combustion Gases. SAE
Technical Paper, 1967. 670930.
21. Heywood, J.B., Internal Combustion Engine
Fundamentals. 1988: McGraw Hill.
22. Ghojel, J.I., Review of the development and applications
of the Wiebe function: A tribute to the contribution of
Ivan Wiebe to engine research. International Journal of
Engine Research, 2010. 11(4): p. 297-312.
23. Finol, C.A. and K. Robinson, Thermal modelling of
modern engines: A review of empirical correlations to
estimate the in-cylinder heat transfer coefficient.
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, 2006.
220(12): p. 1765-1781.

10 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

View publication stats