# RESISTANCE AND PROPULSION COURSE WORK, PARTS I, II AND III.

DAVID A. LINES
STUDENT NO. 072139578
Summary Part I • • • The use of experimental data from a model to plot the total and viscous resistance coefficients over the ship Reynolds number range. The comparison of CT, CF, CV and CW over Rn relative to a VLCC at a series of speeds. The discussion of the CV/CT ratio for both ships.

Part II • Calculations for powering required of a new ship design. Resistance is calculated using Mumford indices; this involves scaling the ship to a standard length, using the BSRA block coefficient tables (provided in the appendix) and determining PE. Powering calculated for the same ship at the highest Froude number using the series 60 Mumford indices.

Part III • Lucy Ashton ITTC Form Factor Analysis – Total model resistance curve (CT over Rn) – ITTC ship model correlation curve over Rn (on the same graph) – The use of Prohaska’s method to estimate the form factor

Acknowledgments: Dr. Martin Downie (for explanations and advice during lectures)

1

Model tests for a product carrier give the following values of residuary resistance coefficients. Since total ship resistance is predicted theoretically this is an important value to find when considering the first part of total ship resistance (frictional) can also be calculated for full scale.091*10¯³ CT = Total resistance coefficient = Cv+Cw . Where: V = Velocity (m/s) = Speed (knots)*0.861 10 1. 1.130 14 1.095+25.6*(Cbl/(L/B)²*√B/) Cbl = Block coefficient Cw = Wave-making Coefficient = 1.251 16 1.514 L / Visc. Speed (knots) 10³ CT 8 1.870 12 1. this means that results from tests on a specific model moving with a given Froude number can be used to find the resistance of a full scale ship moving at the same Froude number. Ship Speed (knots) 10³ Cw 8 1. 2.4m.105 12 1. The table shows a clear increase in resistance for each increasing value of speed.490 18 2.1) in an excel worksheet. To show the total and viscous resistance coefficients they have been plotted against the ships Reynolds number range in chart 1.1 of the appendix.284 Using this data and the given ship particulars (Table 1.876 14 1. The following table gives a total resistance coefficient CT to speed relation for a VLCC of length 344.923 3 .PART I Residuary resistance is the second part of total ship resistance and scales with Froude number. the residuary resistance can be deduced as shown in Table 1.886 16 1. Cf = skin friction coefficient = 0.09 1 10 1.075/(LOG(Re)-2)² Coefficient = (1+k)*Cf Re = Reynolds number = V* Cv = Viscous k = Watanabe form factor = -0.2 of the appendix.

075/(LOG(Re)-2)². The resistance of the VLCC in (2. the patterns could be constructive (less resistance) or destructive (more resistance).3) it is reasonable to state that the percentage of resistance due to viscous resistance decreases as the ships move faster through the water. Using this table and previous tables (1.2). For this reason it is desirable to split ship resistance into two parts. where frictional resistance is obtained through the ITTC SMC line and subtracted from total resistance to give the residuary resistance.) known as ‘Ship 2’ on the same chart is calculated by the 3-D extrapolation procedure where a form factor of 1+k= 1. Cw = residuary resistance made up only of wave resistance components Table 1. Ship 2 has a steadier gradient and so would take a higher speed to increase the percentage drop. wave and total resistance can be deduced for the ships Reynolds number range (as shown in Table 1. Chart 1. aft shoulder and stern wave systems. forward shoulder. viscosity. Geometry that would change this can be considered as. This could partly be due to the ship being much larger thus the wave-making resistance has less effect (considering the ratio of wave length to ship length = Lw/Ls = 2π*V²/gLs). given by Cf = 0.4 shows the Cv/CT ratio for both ships at a range of speeds suitable to the ships service speeds.) the coefficients of friction.3 of the appendix as ‘Ship 1’ is calculated using the 2-D extrapolation procedure. this is because wave-making resistance increases exponentially. Part I Conclusion Viscous resistance and wave resistance obey Reynolds and Froudes scaling respectively.3. Based on a 2-D flow corrected for edges. the bow. Another reason the ships differ in this ratio gradient is that the wave pattern each ship generates could be very different. Using this table. if the speed increase were to continue then the percentage would drop by larger and larger amounts as the gradient becomes steeper in a negative fashion.3 where.Using similar calculations to (1. since it is more advantageous to have this correlation as one line the ITCC 1957 Ship-Model Correlation line is also plotted. this line gives an accurate curve similar to Hughes line. a chart can be plotted to show the ship and model results of the separate resistance coefficients (Chart 1. From general knowledge about ship geometry and looking at chart 1. For ship 1 this means the percentage of viscous resistance drops 10% over a speed increase of 8knots. unfortunately these scales are non-compatible. it is reasonable to assume that Ship 1 has a less destructive wave pattern than Ship 2.2 + 1. 3.223 is used with the skin friction coefficient to obtain a residuary resistance. frictional resistance coefficients (which scale with Reynolds number at full ship scale) and residuary resistance coefficients (relative to the same Froude number of the full scale ship as the 4 . The resistance of the ship from (1.3). A form factor of 1+k = 1.223 has been used. depending on their geometry.) known on Chart 1.

this is important when considering the effect of wave resistance for a vessel at a higher speed. Where. basis ship and scaled design can be found in Table 2.1 of the appendix. = volume = Cb*L*B*T CM = Mass Coefficient = L/Vol. ©D* = (©B)*(BD/BB)x-⅔ * (TD*/TB)Y-⅔ since ‘X’ and ‘Y’ vary with Froude number when L and CM are constant. LD* = (LD)*0. For the aid of calculations they have been included in Table 2. PART II Part II uses Mumford indices series 60 and BSRA (British Ship Research Association) data tables to calculate the influence that hull form has on evaluating required power for a new ship design.2. they are read from the BSRA data sheets.4+CM/2.model). A scale design of the same length as the basis ship is then used.86 ⅓ Cb Vol. Following Table 2.211x10¯⁶ mu = Kinematic With these values the Mumford indices can be applied to determine the resistance for the new design by calculating resistance for the scaled design. 5 . The use of ITTC ship-model correlation line allows for the ratio of Cv/CT to be shown clearly for varying speeds. = constant CS = Wetted Surface Coefficient = 3. where the scaled design (D*) and the new design (D) are geometrically similar. The particulars for the new design. 1. to calculate the total resistance coefficient (©). To simplify the equations. this ship is known as the ‘basis ship’ (denoted as B).86 TD* = (TD)*0.86 = block coefficient BD* = (BD)*0. X-⅔ and Y-⅔ are pre-calculated in the same table. The calculation of powering (PE) for a new ship design can be estimated using results gained from a similar form ship in methodical series tests.06 Viscosity = 1.2: ©B can be found for a range of Froude numbers and are used to find.

The total resistance and thus effective power can also be found using the series 60 Mumford indices instead of the BSRA ones.2). The method used in (1.175 this gives the total resistance coefficient for the new design ship at the original dimensions. 3. Table 2. The total resistance against the ship (RT) is greater by 9371. CKD* = CL*√CMD* scaled design RTD* = ©D* *CKD*2 *ρ*Vol. it is reasonable to assume that the larger of the two would be used e. In 1978 the ITTC Performance Committee showed that including this form factor can dramatically improve the accuracy of the ship to model correlation.g.81 Where. ρ = rho = 1000.) calculates resistance coefficients for both the ship and the model but do so without taking into account the form factor when transferring from model to ship. The terms needed for this (Table 2. With this knowledge the effective power can be re-calculated to give a better result as shown in Table 2.4 (using series 60 X and Y values).D *g/1000 CK = Circular K = CL*√CM.2) are explained below: CO = Circular O (Length dependant constant determined from tables) = 0.) and (2. g = gravity = Multiplying RT with the velocity of the new design gives the final values for PE at varied Froude numbers. series 60 PE values. this is known as Froudes friction correction. It is desirable to have these for velocity so V (m/s) = Fn *√(L*g).1 and Table 2.3 is a repeated calculation of (1. This is important because position of LBC can have a significant effect on the resistance of a ship. is given in the table (2. 9. 2.6 (a difference of 83240. RT = ©D * CKD2 *ρ*Vol.D**(g/1000) = total resistance for ReD* = ((Fn*√(LD**g))*LD*)/mu = Reynolds number for scaled design 6 . Where use of the ITTC 1957 ship-model correlation line leads to the following changes in formula. position of optimum LCB) using the Mumford series 60 (these values can be found on the same table as BSRA values). The BSRA values are simply a more recent methodical series for merchant ships while the series 60 values were derived in 1948 with the aid of SNAME (Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers) and ATTC. With the total resistance coefficient it is possible to deduce RT (total resistance against ship) which hence enables the calculation of the effective power (PE). Since the values of PE are used in further model testing and are themselves an estimate.To achieve the resistance for the original length (new design) a length correction must be made.(COD* .847 leading to a greater power requirement (PE) of 5074730.052).0741 CL = Circular L = Fn*2√π CS = as above CM = as above ©D = ©D* .COD)*CS*CL-0.) for the highest Froude number (for maximum aft.

The run in point is at low Froude numbers so for the sake of simplicity only a small range has been selected for chart 3. since it had been proved that the inclusion of form factors significantly improved the outcome of correlation. The inclusion of form factors when transferring from model to ship can greatly influence the required power and so proves a very important step in these calculations. CT is plotted in Chart 3.3723.0036306 where k = 0. the form factor is assumed to be independent of Reynolds number. there is a large amount of error in 7 . k.235 which is a difference of 25574.1 contains the model ship particulars of a ‘Lucy Ashton’ form. The introduction of scaled ship designs and similar form ships with various data sheets can be used to accurately and theoretically determine resistance on a new ship design. CTD = 0.D*(g/1000) = 568475.CfD*)) and since ©D* = 1000/8π*CS*CTD* rearranged to give CTD*= ©D* *(8π/(1000*CS)).33841. is independent. This holds true for the ITTC ship-model correlation curve where the form factor.2 where the trend line gives an equation of Y = 0. Part II Conclusion The use of Mumford indices is particularly useful in calculating an estimate for effective power. the addition of the total resistance coefficient to the skin friction coefficients multiplied by the form factor can give a new CTD with the form factor accounted for. CTD = (1+k)*(CfD+CfWD) and CTD* = (1+k)*(CfD*+CfWD*) substituting terms gives CTD = CTD* + ((1+k)*(CfD .09617 Ultimately changing RTD = ©D* CKD2 *ρ*Vol. showing that this more accurate method can reduce the risk of over estimating effective power and the need for a larger propulsion system than is required. PART III – Lucy Ashton ITTC Form Factor Analysis Table 3.ReD = (V*LD)/mu = Reynolds number for new designwhen. kinematic viscosity CfD* = 0. This is achieved from evaluating CFo (k*2-D frictional resistance) at the Reynolds number relevant to the ‘run in point’.1 with the ITTC correlation line over Reynolds number. This can be seen for the Lucy Ashton form model in Chart 3. Using the link between wave making coefficient and velocity it can be said that CT/CFO will give a straight trend line and intercept (1+k) on the Y axis when plotted on an X axis of Fn4/C FO.135 This value gives an adjusted ©D = CTD*CS*1000/8π where CS = 6.075/(log(ReD*)-2)² CfD = 0.061 from which the interception can be mathematically proven. Prohaska’s Method: A suggested way of determining form factor.216x + 1. The model is used to deduce the resistance coefficient Cv (for the model).2. multiplying with velocity (V) to give a new PE = 5049156.075/(log(ReD)-2)² mu = ITTC Correction: Some derivation of terms is required to achieve CTD since.

C.measuring resistance at low Froude numbers making the run in point difficult to determine by nature. charts and data sheets ever improving the ease of calculating for full scale ship resistance and other coefficients from early design stages. With technical innovations and improvements all the formula used here can be improved. Tupper Appendix – Tables Table 1.241 Knots 0.00000118 k 0. This being said.600 T 10. Part III Conclusion Prohaska’s method clearly works on a theoretical level and so it is up to the practical experiment measurements side to improve for greater accuracy. 13 – 15.177 Beam 29. by E.514 8 .415 Cbl 0. 17 – 18.1 L 173. the fuller form a ship then generally the higher Froude numbers can be used.757 visc 0. An introduction to Naval Architecture – 4th Ed. Bibliography Martin Downie – Lecture Notes No. there is still a large amount of resources put into compiling new tables. 1 – 3. However this can be said for every theory + practice based method.

00203 0.00150 0.1 Basis Ship (B) 121.554107728 6.86 0.001886 0.92 16.953 0.908 0.3 Lp 344.Cv/Ct 0.706 9.00228 CT 0. CM CS 10569.115 5.259 Re 599880463 749850579 899820695 1049790811 1199760927 1349731042 Cf 0.8878 17.001923 Table 1.8 Table 1.00125 0.115 5.00150 0.61142 5.00411 Table 1.812 8.2 9 .00152 0.00149 0.00183 0.00002939 0.0961688 16616.00008754 0.20852 New Design (D) 141.09539 5.00171 0.223 Re 1192992323 1491240404 1789488485 2087736566 2385984646 Cf 0.001870 0.2 V 4.00305 0.00189 0.173 7.984 0.00023781 CT 0.00143 0.Cv/Ct 0.630 0.00169 Cw 0.952 Scaled Design (D*) 121.930 0.230 9.001876 0.202 8.00163 0.00159 0.00192 0.00178 0.382 Scale Factor Cb g ρ k mu 0.00312 0.641 0.001861 0.00140 0.764 7.000001211 L B T Vol.00314 0.00138 Cv 0.00146 0.00174 0.00111 0.00113 0.650 0.00017400 0.202 8.601 0.73 19.555 Table 2.876 Ship 1 .00307 0.00186 0.03832 7.00183 Cw 0.81 1000 0.00148 Cv 0.135 0.00109 0.144 6.400 V 4.230 k 0.173 7.00155 0.00013225 0.554107728 6.00197 0.0961688 Table 2.4 knots 8 10 12 14 16 Ship 2 .00335 0.144 6.

2 (continued) CL 0.844397 01 ©D 0.866 X 0.714 0.32533 3 0.9 8 2750692.10366667 ©D* 0. 3 240296.01666667 -0.6 PE Difference 83240. 7 353810.527836 76 0.3 Fn 0.238 2 ©B 0.596 0.881926 08 PE 894073.992 0.552135 99 6.741879 63 1.0729 Table 2.633475 01 0.017 0.410 X .895 Y 0.148 9 0.4 (continued) Re D 1039500729 PE 5049156.866 X 0.2/3 0.2/3 0.07066667 -0.25667 ©D* 0.35033 3 0.6613982 19 0.178 7 0.22833 3 Y .665 0.0729 0.23 5 Cf D* 0. 3 Table 2.3 (continued) ©D 0.739113 26 0.2/3 -0.8 1 4991490.74 V 8.8926 2 CKD* 1. 4 561982.965 1.774481 9 8.3133 3 Y .2/3 -0.980 Y 0.866 X 0.99000 3 RTD* 366508 Re D* 829034254.410 X .7153570 83 0.2/3 0.208 5 0.0741 COD 0.001523 3 CTD* 0.001566 9 CfD 0.243961 04 1.87810566 3 COD* 0.2382 ©B 0.563 X .2382 ©B 0.492920 34 1.9900035 RTD 571354.8926 2 COD* 0.8705705 02 CKD 1. 9 V 5.372 3 V 8.12 3 1601170.00266667 -0.05238 Table 2.25667 ©D* 0.66932205 6 0.29833 3 0.84439701 5 Table 2.003630 6 RTD 568475.Fn 0.990003 49 RTD 161032.00368 ©D 0.2/3 -0.3133 3 Y .65 0.0729 0.88193 10 .0741 0.664 0.8819261 PE 5074730.72306991 4 0.0741 COD 0.663308 94 7.980 Y 0.0741 0.5 2 Table 2.643 0.88508848 CKD 1.64657359 8 0.072 9 CL 0.0729 0.0741 0.6383927 03 0.88062 8 CTD 0.4 Fn 0.

70 105.090802089 0.332483462 0.60 143.057385 0.807 1.589 1.68 35.003292279 0.215496585 0.207 8260558.085209 1.63 Re 23777420.149 3.985684 0.002671892 0.150974 0.43054 1.109026 2.042132 0.002594873 0.002759801 0.27 16951511.132431 1.277259 1.237035685 0.209776 1. 9.277791041 0.198078 0.005166032 0.00000121 1 rho 999.122371652 0.726 2.003309492 0.020992 0.961 2.472 1.86 17.064694 1.354126 0.53 11114754.31 23286619.002876291 0.005006615 0.073027 0.76 20583438.4 17963316.709384 4.003269445 0.2 Speed 3.124901 0.163 2.317836 3.003258354 0.004134538 0.003652462 0.002716547 0.002656421 0.32 22357872.066847 1.003413922 0.005384183 0.631 2.062133 Fn^4/Cf 4.002603639 0.074931 2.11 14618318.115508704 0.287821505 0.00318818 0.002945669 0.002694582 0.1 L B.692 1.003002513 0.003269393 0.084 2.003143058 0.499 2.037346 1.17864783 0.002786692 0.004498203 0.371152 1.54742 1.465379 1.649 5874510.228713 1.272521 0.099037627 0.054222 1.002844388 0.00263721 0.300913899 0.19078997 0.027 7082635.48 19866113.60 47.773878 0.216 7671597.109916 1.13915948 0.003854708 0.016 0.898452 1.318 1.02 19.82 15411151.312633703 0.030176 0.95 22.204410284 0.50 120.003238333 0.3 g 9.003070736 0.83 21519735.035225 1.75 9951933.228377812 0.005298992 0.003297705 CT/Cf 2.251183918 0.002907268 0.003278445 0.620974 0.139817 1.95 63.245 2.860 0.92 54.798718 1.056703 1.30 82.74 13644267.38 24.325620514 0.331669 1.082144215 CT 0.003724799 0.69 71.838 6493674.P.035 mu 0.15 16332346.00352498 0.70 252.155419389 0.167772697 0.936 1.322 Fn 0.003502602 Cf 0.379 2.094 1.52 28.465836 0.003321278 0.938 0.263853976 0.850 2.396 8751359.13060719 0.55 12775927.33 11998196.003307245 0.144 Wetted S.095848 0.693332 1.003035885 0.939 9340320.172477 1.00344478 0.00274277 0.013807 Appendix .19 14.041 1.778 Resistance 267.81 Table 3.1 11 .10 203.003334979 0.003401283 0.Charts Chart 1.583426 2.002811499 0.97111 1. 10.59 12.107273165 0.237 1.159 1.07118 1.70 92.66 10.236154 1.00325198 0.003102124 0.644996 3.002620874 0.06 41.Table 3.96 18869410.90 167.70 227.

2 Chart 1.1 Chart 3.3 Chart 3.2 12 .Chart 1.